The Perarivalan judgment heeds federalism, but is there a danger of arbitrariness in remission?

The Governor’s powers of pardon or remission under Article 161 of the Constitution have been in the spotlight with the Supreme Court judgment ordering the release of A.G. Perarivalan, one of the seven convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. In 2018, the then Tamil Nadu cabinet had recommended to the Governor that all the seven convicts be released. The Raj Bhavan sat on the recommendation before forwarding it the President for advice. This month, the Supreme Court ruled that a Governor is bound by the State government’s advice in matters relating to commutation/remission of sentences under Article 161. The Court invoked its extraordinary power under Article 142 in ordering the release of Perarivalan, who had already spent over 30 years in prison. This has raised questions about the limits, if any, to a State government’s recommendation to the Governor to pardon or remit. In a discussion moderated byKrishnadas Rajagopal , P. Wilson and Kaleeswaram Raj discuss questions arising from the case, including those relating to the Office of the Governor, judicial delays and the Perarivalan judgment’s value as a precedent. Edited excerpts:

The Supreme Court judgment has been hailed as a victory for federalism and State autonomy by the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister. Will this line of reasoning not spur the tendency to endorse any arbitrary decision with respect to remission or pardon by a State cabinet in the future, even when it is vitiated by political or other considerations?

P. Wilson:You are talking as if Governors always act reasonably. We have seen that Governors have become agents of the party at the Centre. We have seen State governments formed by non-BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) parties facing difficulties with Governors who are obstructing the implementation of welfare measures by the popularly elected State governments. Governors are sitting on Bills passed by State legislatures without performing their duties under the Constitution. The decision of a State cabinet is binding on the Governor, according to the Constitution. The Supreme Court judgment in the Perarivalan case is a reiteration of that principle. The cabinet represents the people. So, people control the decisions. If the people do not like the cabinet’s decisions, they will vote the government out. The cabinet’s decisions are subject to judicial scrutiny. There is no danger of arbitrariness. In the present case, the apex court has approved the State cabinet’s decision to remit Perarivalan’s sentence by saying that the Governor should have acted on it. There can be no allegation of legal perversity in this case.

Kaleeswaram Raj:The verdict has underlined the imperative of federalism in the context of gubernatorial amnesty. Article 161 is more about the Governor’s duty, rather than power. It is in no way inferior to the President’s role under Article 72, nor is it replaced by the latter. The Governor is generally bound by the cabinet decision. This does not, however, mean that even an arbitrary decision by the cabinet, vitiated by non-application of mind or extraneous considerations, would bind the Governor. This position is well-settled. The device of judicial review is the most effective check against such aberrations. The present judgment does not alter this position of law. It rests on its own peculiar facts, and there is no room for apprehension.

The court invoked Article 142 and directed Perarivalan to be released. This, ideally, should have been an order the Governor should have issued. Would it have been proper and desirable for the court to remit the matter to the Governor? Can Article 142 be stretched to this extent?

PW:Not at all. The Governor had not done his duty under the Constitution. All authorities are bound by the decisions of the apex court. Gone are the days when we used to say the court cannot issue directions to Governors or even the President. Nobody is above the law. The Governor was given enough time, opportunity and warnings by the court. The Governor was blatantly disregarding the court’s observations. In such circumstances, the court is empowered under Article 142 to do complete justice. The judiciary is the final arbiter of the Constitution. If the Governor does not do his job, the court can pass appropriate orders.

KR:The invocation of Article 142 is justified in the peculiar facts of the case, which are almost unique. The delay on the part of the Governor in accepting the State cabinet decision was enormous. It impacted the liberty of a person who was legally and constitutionally entitled to be released. The case was fought for decades. The Centre contributed to the delay by invoking its usual litigation strategies. The court might have been conscious of this processual injustice meted out to Perarivalan and felt the only way to undo it was to invoke Article 142 and release the prisoner. A further remittance to the Governor would have prolonged the litigation, which had already crossed all imaginable limits.

In the past, given the instances where gubernatorial offices were used by the Centre for political purposes, many have questioned even the need for the office of the Governor. Do you feel that the admonition against the Governor in this case should persuade us to rethink the requirement to have nominated Governors?

PW:Certainly. See the Constituent Assembly debates on the manner of appointment of Governors. The makers of the Constitution never thought of giving Governors powers similar to those of elected representatives. Hence the post is a nominated one and not an elected one. It is dangerous when one man sits over the decisions of 234 elected representatives as it amounts to removing the basis of democracy. The powers of nomination should be re-considered.

KR:Many people think so. I am reminded of the opinion of Prof. R. Venkata Rao of Andhra University who hinted that the Governor’s post is “useless when inert and dangerous when active”. Ironically, in the Perarivalan episode, even the inertness of the Governor proved to be dangerous. Yet, I do not share the view that misuse of a position per se is a reason for abolishing it. There are many duties which the Governor must carry out in a federal system. The Justice Sarkaria Commission wanted the Governor to act as “a friend, philosopher and guide” to the Council of Ministers. It wanted the Governor to be a “detached figure and not too intimately connected with the local politics of the State”. The point is to ensure that the Governor acts within the constitutional framework. Abolition of the post could create more problems than those it intends to resolve.

In recent times, the Supreme Court has been criticised for its lethargy in deciding important cases, especially cases with political overtones. Cases on demonetisation, abrogation of the special status for Jammu and Kashmir, validity of electoral bonds, etc., are some instances in which the court deferred adjudication and invited criticism. Do you think that the Perarivalan judgment marks a welcome change in the approach of the court?

PW:Generally, these criticisms are unwarranted and made by people who do not know how hard the institution is working. Do you know that India has one of the lowest judge-to-population ratios in the world? The Union government is not appointing High Court and tribunal judges on time despite Supreme Court recommendations. During COVID-19, our country’s judiciary heard and disposed of an incredible number of cases. It functioned better than the judiciary in other countries. If not for the court’s orders, oxygen supply to the States would not have been equitable during the second wave. I see a court that is greatly sensitive towards violation of human rights. A person was kept in jail despite the state’s decision to release him. This is definitely a case that warranted the court’s interference.

KR:The court is not static. It is an ever-changing institution depending on multiple factors like the individuals who run it and the overall constitutional climate. There have been some good judicial interventions in recent times from the Supreme Court. It rejected the stand of the Centre in important cases like the Pegasus issue and the sedition law. It may not be an ideal Supreme Court. Yet, it is a Supreme Court of possibilities.

What exactly is the value of the Perarivalan judgment in terms of setting a precedent?

PW:First, the judgment holds that the duty of the Governor is to abide by the recommendations of the State cabinet while performing his functions, including the power to remit, suspend or commute sentences under Article 161. Second, an important finding is that the Governor need not have sent the matter to the President. Third, it is the duty of Governors to exercise their powers on time. Fourth, the judgment recognises the power of the state in matters of remission, commutation, etc. Fifth, the verdict upholds the human rights of prisoners.

KR:The judgment is precise and clear. It runs into a mere 29 pages. It resembles the Brexit verdict of the U.K. Supreme Court that interfered with Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue Parliament. Brevity is a universal virtue for constitutional analysis. The judgment shows a great amount of judicial discipline by adhering to the established principles of law. Yet, the court invoked Article 142 to do “complete justice”. The jurisprudential value of the judgment lies in the idea of “complete justice” applied in the given facts and circumstances. This is something unprecedented.

What are the lessons for our justice system from the Perarivalan case?

PW:Justice delayed is justice denied. Each organ of governance has to work towards the preservation and promotion of human rights. We cannot accuse courts of delay without giving them the necessary infrastructure. The Chief Justice of a High Court, during an informal interaction during a visit by my Parliamentary Committee on Law and Justice, mentioned the judicial vacancies in various High Courts. He asked whether we would allow Parliament to function on only 50% strength without conducting elections. Then, why are High Courts left to function with 50% strength? If you give the judiciary the infrastructure, it will work faster. We need to have Regional Benches of the Supreme Court to reduce the workload. Increase the retirement age of judges to 70. If these changes are made, I can assure you of the results.

KR:The judgment has multiple dimensions. It shows the importance of pursuit of the cause by litigants, their lawyers, the court and the media. It was a hard-won battle. At the end of the day, the judgment upheld the individual’s freedom and dignity, the basic promises of the Constitution. It is a judgment on fundamental rights, though it does not explicitly say so. It emancipates the individual(s) from the clutches of the mighty state while using the very apparatus of the state. That is itsbeauty and strength.

The Supreme Court of India must ensure the continuity of this doctrine of progressive realisation of rights

Those among Muslims who were opposed to a negotiated settlement in the Babri Masjid case had always believed that it would not bring a closure to the most discordant chapter in India’s interfaith history. Indeed, such a concession would be the beginning of unending demands for the handing over of hundreds of other “disputed” mosques in India. After all, the Muslim conservatives argued, one of the many unnerving post-demolition slogans since 1992 was, “Yeh toh sirf jhanki hai ,ab Kashi, Mathurabaaki hai (This is only the trailer, now Kashi and Mathura remain),” Kashi and Mathura being metonyms for the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura, respectively.

Before the judiciary

Their worst fears came true first in December 2019 when, a month after the pronouncement of the Babri Masjid verdict, a suit was filed in a local Varanasi court over the Gyanvapi-Vishwanath dispute; and then in April this year when a civil judge in Varanasi ordered the survey of the Gyanvapi mosque complex on a plea by five Hindu women demanding daily access to it for doing pooja.

This was followed by a Mathura court’s ruling a few days ago upholding the maintainability of a suit filed for the removal of the Shahi Idgah mosque. And on May 24, a fresh suit was filed before a civil court in Varanasi by Lord Aadi Vishweshar Viraajman through Kiran Singh, a devotee, seeking the removal of the Gyanvapi mosque and exclusive ownership of the property.

But what has surprised conservatives and legal scholars alike is the reluctance of the Supreme Court of India to stay such judicial interventions under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. On the contrary, on May 20, while transferring to the Varanasi District Judge, the petition challenging the maintainability of the suit filed by the Hindu side in the Gyanvapi case, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud orally observed that ascertainment of the religious character of a place may not fall foul of Sections 3 and 4 of the Places of Worship Act.

One fails to understand the reasoning behind thisobiter dictum . Section 3 of the Act bars the conversion of a place of worship of a religious denomination or any of its sections into a place of worship of a different section of the same denomination or of a different religious denomination. Section 4 declares, among other things, that the religious character of a place of worship existing on August 15, 1947 shall continue to be the same as it existed on that day, and any legal case pertaining to the conversion of the religious character of any place of worship pending as on August 15, 1947 shall abate.

Points to consider

Given the clarity of these provisions, how would knowing the religious character of the Gyanvapi complex benefit the Hindu side now when the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act prohibits altering its status quo by virtue of the Gyanvapi mosque having existed there unchanged as a Muslim place of worship from well before August 15, 1947?

Besides, what is the point in “ascertaining” Gyanvapi’s religious character when hardly any disagreement exists among historians on the fact that it was constructed on the ruins of the Vishwanath temple? In his monograph, Temple desecration and Muslim States in Medieval India, Richard M. Eaton writes that in 1669, Aurangzeb destroyed that temple when he suspected that its builder, Jai Singh, the great grandson of Raja Man Singh, had helped Shivaji escape from imperial detention.

More a show of power

According to Eaton, ruling dynasties in those days derived legitimacy from state deities (rashtra devta) installed in royal temples. Thus, for conquerors, desecrating or destroying such temples and occasionally replacing them with their own place of worship had the effect of detaching a defeated king from the most prominent manifestation of his dynastic sovereignty. It also sent out the dispiriting message that the king no longer enjoyed the protection of his deity because the victor had replaced it with his own.

However, temple destruction in medieval India was more a show of brute power than an act of religious bigotry because temples with no royal linkage were considered politically irrelevant and left unharmed, states Eaton.

Thankfully, intellectual evolution has taken us so far away from this period in history that we now reprehend the violent cold-bloodedness and acquisitive expansionism it normalised. But we do not seem to have progressed enough to equally avoid displaying the kind of atavism that tries to demonise, repress and politically emasculate vulnerable communities for the “crimes” of their imagined ancestors.

On non-retrogression

In modern societies, this primitiveness necessitated the principle of non-retrogression, or the doctrine of progressive realisation of rights. Article 2(1) of International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) — India is a signatory — seeks to “achieving progressively the full realisation of the rights recognised in the Covenant by all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of legislative measures”.

The Covenant states in its preamble that the ideal of free human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights.

A five judge Bench of the Supreme Court, in its September 2018 Navtej Singh Johar judgment (AIR 2018 SC 4321) offered, between pages 111 and 118, an excellent analysis of this doctrine. It stated that “in a progressive and an ever-improving society, there is no place for retreat”, and therefore, “the State should not take measures or steps that deliberately lead to retrogression on the enjoyment of rights either under the Constitution or otherwise”. The Court also warned that “the sustenance of fundamental rights does not require majoritarian sanction”.

In the November 2019 Babri Masjid verdict (2019 SCC OnLine SC 1440), another prominent five judge Bench reiterated this principle in a 10-page discussion on the Places of Worship Act, and reminded the nation that non-retrogression “is a foundational feature of the fundamental constitutional principles of which secularism is a core component”. The Act is thus “a legislative intervention which preserves non-retrogression as an essential feature of our secular values”.

The Bench, therefore, cautioned that historical wrongs cannot be remedied by people taking the law into their own hands because, through the Places of Worship Act, “Parliament has mandated in no uncertain terms that history and its wrongs shall not be used as instruments to oppress the present and the future”. This law, the Bench stated, imposes “a positive obligation to maintain the religious character of every place of worship as it existed on 15 August 1947”.

Interestingly, Justice Chandrachud was a member of both the Benches mentioned which took great pains to expound theratio decidendi behind their use of the principle of non-retrogression to permanently decriminalise consensual adult gay sex, and extol the significance of the Places of Worship Act in preventing our relapse into historicist primalism.

Maintain the harmony

One hopes Justice Chandrachud will reconsider — in light of the Supreme Court’s thought-provoking views on non-retrogression — his own opinion on the necessity of ascertaining the religious character of the Gyanvapi complex. For such an exercise could potentially create conditions opposed to those envisaged by the ICESCR and end up disturbing communal harmony across India at a time when it is most needed. For the same reason, the Parliament must retain the Places of Worship Act without amending or repealing it.

A. Faizur Rahman is Secretary-General of the Islamic Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought. E-mail: themoderates2020@gmail.com

There are special reasons why measles-rubella elimination can be achieved together by July-August 2023

Many would remember the school-based campaigns of measles-rubella (MR) vaccination of children from 5 to 15 years, conducted in all States, in 2017. Success was good in a few States, but not in others. School managements, teachers, children themselves and parents were not informed of the basis of this new programme, which was a deviation from the past. There were some unanswered questions: why was it up to 15 years while the Universal (childhood) Immunisation Programme (UIP) covers only those up to five years? Why administer the rubella vaccine that was not in the UIP list in 2017? Why should children who have had one dose of the measles vaccine get another dose? Why are schools instead of health-care centres used for vaccination?

Hurdle of poor information

The Government decided to eliminate measles and rubella from India by the year 2020 — having missed the earlier set target of 2015. So, in 2017 there was an urgency to accelerate efforts. The basic plan was to create a very high level of vaccination-induced immunity against both diseases, by inoculating MR vaccine. To cover immunity gaps after one dose of measles vaccine, a second dose was necessary. For epidemiological reasons (explained later), rubella vaccination had to cover children up to 15 years. School registration and attendance are high in all States and as a programme, it was easy to seize the opportunity to vaccinate children in schools. We knew that the MR vaccine was safe from any serious adverse event following vaccination/immunisation (AEFI); hence a school-based vaccination programme was very convenient for all. These were all excellent reasons, but due to a lack of information given to the public there was much anxiety —and even antipathy towards — in many places, about the programme, in the minds of parents and school authorities.

The COVID-19 pandemic stole two years from the programme. So the MR elimination target was re-set to 2023. Today, we are at the threshold of a new gargantuan project. We shall begin at the beginning and explain the details for all concerned to be well informed.

The basics

MR elimination is defined as zero transmission of measles and rubella viruses, evidenced by zero clinical disease, sustained over three years. The two arms of intervention are vaccination and surveillance. Surveillance helps identify places where either virus is still in transmission, so that vaccination can be pinpointed there to stop further spread. Two doses of the MR vaccine covering at least 95% children below five years — the first dose between nine and 11 months and second dose ideally in the second year of life — should suffice. The disease is basically fever plus a red rash on the skin. A fever-rash combination has several causes and a throat swab, urine and/or blood sample are collected and tested in the laboratory for identifying measles or rubella.

District as nerve centre

The ideal population-cum-administrative unit for efficiently implementing all activities towards MR elimination is the district; the whole country reaches the finishing line when all 773 districts achieve success. Clinical and laboratory surveillance and vaccination have to be sustained, as either virus, especially measles virus, could be imported from outside; that should be immediately detected and interrupted.

Every district has excellent infrastructure to manage the UIP. If the administration, under the active leadership of the District Magistrate or District Collector, activates the Task Force mechanism overseeing the UIP that is managed by the District Immunisation Officer, the MR elimination target can be reached within six to nine months from start. All districts in a State can be galvanised by the State Government, and all States can be supported by the Immunisation Division of the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

Long-term impact

Why should measles be eliminated? In the pre-vaccination era, while polio paralysed about 1% of all children before the age of five, measles actually killed 1% of all under-five children. During measles outbreaks, the case-fatality rate was about 10%-15%. Children who recovered would have lost weight as well as the steady momentum of cognitive development and scholastic performance. Measles affects the immune system rendering the child vulnerable to other infectious diseases, leading to high mortality over the next two to three years. Indeed, there has been much discussion among experts whether measles should have been targeted first for global eradication instead of polio.

Why should rubella be eliminated? The rubella virus is a slower transmitter and the risk of rubella is extended from childhood through adolescence into the reproductive age range. In most individuals, rubella infection is either without symptoms, or with a short fever and a skin rash that is less pronounced than that of measles. Unfortunately, if a pregnant woman gets infected, the virus has a tendency to cross the placenta and damage the developing fetus’s eyes, brain, heart and other tissues. Affected babies are born with severe birth defects such as cataracts, deafness, heart defects and developmental delay — this is ‘congenital rubella syndrome’ (CRS). Fortunately, CRS is preventable with vaccination if given prior to pregnancy. So, in the 2017 school-based vaccination campaign, 15 years was chosen to create immunity in girls for assured future protection, and in boys to prevent community spread.

There are special reasons why MR elimination could be achieved together. The MR vaccine is a combined product, targeting two diseases in one shot. Fever and rash surveillance covers both diseases. Measles elimination is of very high priority; piggy-backing rubella elimination is opportunistic.

We are in May 2022, with 19 months available to achieve the target. In spite of the pandemic, nationally, the UIP has maintained about 85% MR second dose coverage below five years. Thus, we are in a take-off position to reach the finishing line by July-August 2023, still leaving four to five months of buffer time to patch up any “last minute” shortfalls and challenges.

This project design is awaiting final approval by the Government of India. Using the cooperation of parents, health-care personnel at all levels, opinion leaders, influencers, the media, non-governmental organisations such as the Rotary and Lions, all can and must play a role in making this district-by-district programme a story of success.

Dr. T. Jacob John is Co-Chair of the India Expert Advisory Group on MR elimination (IEAG MR). Dr. Priya Abraham is Director, National Institute of Virology, Pune and Member, IEAG MR

There is worry that Hyderabad is possibly emergingas the primary conduit for drug trafficking in India

For elite pub hoppers in Hyderabad, a star hotel at Banjara Hills Road No 3 used to be a favourite haunt. Recently, while the kin of prominent filmstars, bureaucrats, politicians and rich businessmen were partying at this place, the Hyderabad police conducted a raid. Though the party-goers were brought to the police station straight from the dancing floor, some of their parents later expressed their happiness about the police action. The reason: they want their families to recover from drug abuse.

This once again led to discussions that the capital of Telangana was possibly emerging as a primary conduit for drug trafficking in the country. The police suspect that many high-end pubs and star hotels have become hubs for narcotic drugs, despite “strict surveillance” by them and the central anti-narcotics units.

The unearthing of drugs by different law-enforcement agencies in the city has caused concern among a section in the government that the actions of enforcement agencies, especially the Telangana police, will impact the brand image of Hyderabad. However, many senior officials, including of the Telangana police, feel that this is the right time to curb the drug abuse, which could become a menace in the future if not controlled now.

“Investors coming to the State will feel safer if the Telangana government deals with the issue with an iron hand. We all have seen how a few States in north India are now facing the consequences of going soft against drug usage. They are unable to control it because a huge population in those States have become drug addicts,” Hyderabad Commissioner of Police C.V. Anand said.

With a growing number of expats, visas are being issued easily, a Customs officials said. Investigators believe that Internet-based end-to-end encrypted messaging mobile applications have provided a secure communications network for the drug cartels, middlemen and the abusers. After the arrest of over half-a-dozen foreign national drug carriers, mostly Tanzanian nationals, and the seizure of huge quantities of heroin and cocaine, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) and Customs officials believe that the contraband smuggled from African countries was meant to be supplied to peddlers and abusers in Delhi, Jaipur and other major cities in north India, but not to Hyderabad.

In the last couple of weeks, enforcement officials at the airport seized a huge quantity of heroin valued at around Rs. 120 crore and cocaine worth Rs. 95 crore in the grey market. The foreign nationals either smuggled the cocaine by swallowing capsules or by concealing the powder material in their check-in or hand baggage. The city airport is being used as a safe transit point by the drug cartels in Africa as the surveillance “is low” when compared to other international airports in the country, said Customs officials.

Now Mr. Anand is trying to bring coordination among all the agencies which work against drug smuggling, including central agencies such as Customs, the Enforcement Directorate, the DRI, the Narcotics Control Bureau, the Central Industrial Security Force, and the Intelligence Bureau, apart from Telangana Police’s Counter-Intelligence Cell.

The officials of the NCB estimate that there are around 10 crore drug users in India, with a 70% increase in narcotic consumption in the past eight years. They said more than 70% of the drugs are smuggled into the country through international sea routes, while 20% comes through roadways and the rest by air.

Apart from law enforcement agencies, it is high time civil society and youth organisations also play a role in controlling this problem by educating people about drug abuse.

deshpande.abhinay@thehindu.co.in

Mr. Albanese’s decisions in the next three years will have far-reaching consequences

After nine years in the opposition, the Australian Labor Party, under the leadership of Anthony Albanese, is back in power. When 74.6% votes were counted, it won 75 seats in the 151-member House of Representatives; the conservative Liberal National Coalition secured 57 seats. More than a victory for Labor, which is still one seat short of absolute majority, this election will be remembered for the rout of the conservatives, who had 77 seats in the outgoing Assembly. The polls also saw a sizeable section of the Australian electorate voting for the Greens and independents, who campaigned on the planks of better environmental standards and anti-corruption policies. In an election where inflation and climate policy dominated the agenda, Scott Morrison, the conservative leader, failed to understand the public pulse. Even when the annual inflation number hit 5.1%, a 20-year high, the Morrison government took comfort in the argument that the unemployment rate was low. Mr. Morrison was also criticised for his inaction on climate challenges even after Australia witnessed repeated bushfires. His government’s handling of the COVID-19 crisis, with stringent lockdowns, and inaction over allegations of rape and sexual assault within Parliament and even within the Cabinet also triggered widespread public resentment.

Mr. Albanese, on the other side, tapped into this anger by running a carefully crafted campaign. On climate, an issue which 29% of the voters identified as the most important one, Labor made a slew of promises. It vowed to raise the share of renewable energy to 82% of the grid by 2030. Mr. Albanese is planning to reduce emissions by 43% this decade. He has also promised to index the minimum wage to inflation. Another key promise is to call a constitutional vote to set up a representative body to advise Parliament on legislation affecting indigenous peoples. Running a successful electoral campaign is hard, but heading a government that meets the campaign promise is harder. Besides tackling inflation and coming up with an ambitious plan to address the climate challenge, the Prime Minister faces a huge foreign policy challenge too. Mr. Morrison had given up Australia’s traditional middle path on China and joined an American-British alliance (AUKUS), specifically targeting Beijing’s influence in the Indo-Pacific. Mr. Albanese will have to decide whether he should follow the path laid out by his predecessor and take on the China challenge head on or take Australia back to the old school pragmatism and coexistence. The decisions he makes — domestic and foreign — over three years would reshape Australia’s position in the Indo-Pacific region.

The Quad can help reshape economic alliances and regional security architecture

The recent summit meeting of the leaders of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad, could not have come at a more critical juncture in world politics. Between Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that has destabilised accepted norms on respecting territorial sovereignty; its knock-on effects on commodity and input prices, fuelling inflationary pressures and impacting global supply chains; and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic that spotlighted deficiencies in public health infrastructure, the leaders of India, the United States, Australia and Japan are likely to have had a full and multidimensional policy agenda in Tokyo. For the leaders the obvious, if not always explicitly stated theme linking several global issues is the China factor and the unique strategic challenges that that country poses to the rules-based international order. While U.S. President Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida were blunt in their condemnation of Russia’s belligerence, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and newly elected Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese avoided any direct reference to Moscow, as indeed did the summit’s joint statement. On China, however, the four nations were on the same page, and the Quad joint statement called for continued cooperation towards maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific; championing adherence to international law as reflected in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and in maintaining freedom of navigation and overflight; and meeting challenges to the maritime rules-based order, including in the East and South China Seas.

The Quad leaders affirmed the Dialogue’s two core messages. First, they will continue to strongly oppose coercive, provocative, and unilateral actions by Beijing that seek to change the status quo and heighten tensions across the region, including through manoeuvres such as the militarisation of disputed territories, the dangerous use of coast guard vessels and maritime militia, and clandestine attempts to disrupt other nations’ offshore resource exploitation activities. To this end, military coordination between the Dialogue members will continue to provide strategic depth to the mission, including notably the annual Malabar exercise. The second message seeks to leverage Dialogue member resources in vaccine delivery, climate action, supply chain resilience, disaster response, cyber security infrastructure, and economic cooperation. Even though Beijing may consider the Quad to be an “Asian NATO”, the Dialogue can be about much more than a strategic pushback on China’s hegemonic intentions. At a time when the liberal consensus on globalisation has anyway run its course and across the Indo-Pacific, there is, post-pandemic, a strong appetite for deepening regional cooperation for trade and investment. In this context, the Quad is in pole position to shape economic alliances and regional security architecture towards a new world order based on national interest and realpolitik.

New Delhi, May 26: Jawaharlal Nehru’s intense interest in history and in science is being commemorated in a symbolic act of homage which is being performed at Shanti Vana to-morrow (Saturday), the eighth anniversary of his death. A capsule containing documents and articles connected with recent political and economic development of India will be lowered by the Prime Minister, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, deep into the ground a few feet away from the Nehru samadhi at 5-40 a.m. The Shanti Vana commemorative capsule consists of a container made of pure electrolytic copper which is encased inside a shell of a special variety of stainless steel. The documents and other articles are sealed inside specifically prepared pyrex glass tubes free from air and in an atmosphere of argon. The glass tubes are inside the copper container encased by stainless steel shell. The entire capsule is resistant to the action of water and all other soil conditions, including fungi and bacteria and expected to remain intact for more than a thousand years. This is the first time that such a capsule has been designed and fabricated in the country.

The President is believed to have expressed his displeasure to the Prime Minister. He told Mrs Gandhi that the governor's invitation to Bhajan Lal to form the government was not proper and constitutional.

The President is believed to have expressed his displeasure to the Prime Minister. He told Mrs Gandhi that the governor’s invitation to Bhajan Lal to form the government was not proper and constitutional. According to informed sources, the prime minister was “excited” when the president made these observations. The President used these words while describing his interactions with the PM to a Haryana delegation. He suggested to the PM that an early session of the assembly should be called to test the strength of both sides. The PM has since then also expressed similar views. This was a result of his interactions with her, the President said. He told the Opposition that he was equally unhappy with their role.

Sharmila Purkayastha, Uma Chakravarti write: It is not ‘habitual’ female conduct that obstructs fair and impartial inquiry into sexual crimes, but ‘habitual’ misogyny

The acquittal of two policemen on May 5, 2022, by a Raipur sessions court over the murder of 16-year-old Meena Khalkho in July 2011, is a sign of the times. The court observed that “despite sufficient suspicion of the accused having committed the offence” the duo was let off because of “improper investigation” and “lack of evidence”. With this, a decade-long battle for justice that Meena’s family initiated after they discovered her brutal death in a government hospital in Balrampur on the morning of July 6, 2011, has ended fruitlessly. It bears remembering that the 2015 Justice Anita Jha’s report had conclusively stated that Meena was shot by the police at close range in the intervening night of July 5 and 6, 2011. The report had debunked the police’s claim that Meena was a Naxalite and that she had been grievously wounded in an encounter that had happened that night near the Cherha nullah, a few kilometres from her village, Karcha, in Chhattisgarh’s Sarguja district. The report reiterated the family and the villagers’ claim that the police was guilty, and it was hoped that the CID would conduct a fair investigation. I

Instead, the present judgment has demonstrated how the police deliberately botches an investigation for protecting its guilty personnel, a point also noted in an editorial (‘Bring full closure’, IE, May 24).

Underlying the issue of subversion of justice is an obvious question that was obfuscated: Why was Meena killed? This stark question of intent which is logically related to the fact of the killing was never at the centre of any investigation, inquiry, or trial. The question remained unimportant even after the 2015 report established that the police had killed her knowing that she was not a Naxalite. If one returns to crucial points raised by the family and by the Chhattisgarh Bachao Andolan through its fact-finding in 2011, then it is obvious that there were serious tell-tale signs which were never picked up. For instance, it is known that Meena went off on a cycle in the evening to meet her friend but never returned. While her cycle was never found, and it was clear that she never went to her friend’s place, her post-mortem findings showed the presence of sperm and the possibility of sexual intercourse with more than one person. There were some other facts: That the police paid hush money for the funeral and Rs two lakh was given to the family even before proper investigations were undertaken. Since the villagers of Nawadih heard three gunshots in the early hours of the morning followed by threats from the police preventing them from venturing out, the discovery of a grievously wounded Meena suggests that she could have been gang raped by the police and shot at to pass her off as a Naxalite. More importantly, the discrepancy over her clothing, as to what she left home in and what she was seen wearing in the primary health centre, strengthens the suggestion of a cover up.

The police gave itself a clean chit a few months after the incident as the forensic examination could not match the DNA samples of the policemen with the smear slides of the deceased. Importantly, the 2015 report had urged that an inconclusive finding ought not to be treated as clinching evidence (para 45, Kumari Meena Khalkho Jaanch Aayog). The failure in probing Meena Khalkho’s possible gang rape and murder was not limited to the fact that the police acted as judge and jury over its own conduct; the problem was that the ghost of female conduct was raked up to divert attention from investigating a serious sexual crime. Meena’s supposed “friendship” with a truck driver, or drivers, became part of a political debate in which the then state home minister, Nankiram Kanwar, had said that she “had relations” with truck drivers and that the medical examination had confirmed her “habitual” status. He had also asked why she was away from her home at 2.15 in the morning. No inquiry was instituted to examine the “habitual” conduct of the policemen.

It needs to be remembered that it is not “habitual” female conduct that obstructs fair and impartial inquiry into sexual crimes, but “habitual” misogyny, found institutionally and socially, that routinely prevents the possibility of a level-playing field. As evident in this case, Meena’s “friendship” was a digressive tactic; it was meant to divert attention from the question of impunity of the police. Given the Herculean nature of the prevailing laws of evidence, providing “proof” is almost an impossibility. Consequently, institutional inquiries inevitably exonerate the guilty, which in turn, strengthens impunity. But it need not be so if one had paid attention to what Meena’s father stated in court: That his daughter had been detained by the police, that she was gangraped and when she fell unconscious, killed (State of Chhattisgarh vs. Nikodim Khes and others). The gang rape charges were dropped, and the Prevention of Atrocities Act was never applied even though it is known that Meena belonged to the impoverished Oraon community and that she was a Class V dropout.

Why was Meena killed and who killed her are questions we will never know the answers to, but it is imperative to ask for the truth. We owe it to the dead.

This column first appeared in the print edition on May 27, 2022, under the title ‘No one killed Meena Khalkho’. Sharmila Purkayastha is an activist and academic and Chakravarti is a feminist historian and filmmaker.

Ishan Bakshi writes: Revenue collections have been rising. The challenge for Centre and states is to ensure that this continues

There has been a remarkable upswing in GST collections in recent months. In fact, collections touched a record high of Rs 1.67 lakh crore in April. But the critical question is: Will GST revenues stabilise at a higher level or will the surge peter out? Equally pressing, what additional steps need to be taken to ensure that the indirect tax regime delivers upon its earlier promise of enhancing government revenues — a source of stress between the Centre and the states.

There are several possible explanations for this jump in collections. First, the sharp rise in inflation has played a significant role. After all, as output turnover increases, taxes paid per filing will automatically increase. And notwithstanding concerns over the unevenness of the economic recovery, in nominal terms, the economy grew by 19.4 per cent in 2021-22 as per the second advance estimates.

Thus there is a price effect. To tease it out there is a need to deflate GST collections. Doing so suggests that a large part of the recent increase in collections is driven by rising prices. However, even after stripping away the price effect, collections have grown at a pace faster than GDP, indicating an increase in buoyancy.

Second, part of the overall increase in collections can be traced to higher imports. But even if one is to exclude the revenue accruing from imports, the rise in GST collections has outstripped GDP growth, indicating higher buoyancy.

To what degree these drivers moderate over time is not clear. However, to the extent that these factors — high domestic and global inflation, and an increase in demand for high-end imported products — persist at current levels, their impact will continue to be visible in GST collections.

Third, in order to improve compliance levels, the GST Council has been tweaking the rules to tighten the system. This can be observed at multiple levels.

Earlier, filers could get away without submitting returns for a few months. But the screws have now been tightened. As a consequence, returns filed have gone up, while the number of non-filers and those who delay filing have fallen. Alongside, the administration has also taken steps to tackle the menace of fake invoices by placing restrictions on the quantum of input tax credit that can be used to pay of tax obligations. But going by recent reports on the continuing detection of fake input credit scams involving huge sums of money, there remains considerable scope for improvement.

The introduction of e-invoicing has also played a role. Until recently, this was being implemented for firms with a turnover of more than Rs 50 crore. There are around 91,500 such firms (or 1.1 per cent of GST registered firms) which account for around 38 per cent of all B2B invoices reported in GSTR1, 66 per cent of B2B supplies, and 72 per cent of the tax paid. From April, this process has been extended to firms above Rs 20 crore.

While extending e-invoicing to the remaining firms will tighten the system, the incremental gains from bringing smaller firms into its ambit, while consequential, are unlikely to be of the same order. After all, firms with an annual turnover of Rs 25-50 crore account for just around 6 per cent of B2B transactions and invoices, while those with a turnover of Rs 10-25 crore account for roughly 10.1 per cent of B2B invoices and 7.1 per cent of B2B supplies. The real challenge lies in improving compliance levels across the entire spectrum of industries where inputs/raw materials are sourced largely from the informal sector.

Fourth, some part of the revenue gains are likely to have accrued due to the changing structure of the economy. The formalisation of firms, the growing concentration of economic power in the hands of a few, imply that for the same level of output, the tax paid will be higher. This explanation also sits well with data that shows a rise in GST registrations, filings and tax paid per registration. However, to the extent that the informal sector claws back its share, this effect may moderate.

Thus, considering that some of these drivers are unlikely to sustain at current levels, tax rates will need to be raised to fulfil expectations of higher collections. But this requires careful consideration.

Around two-fifths of the taxable value (or turnover) falls under the 18 per cent slab as per research by some analysts. In comparison, the share of the taxable value under the 12 per cent slab is considerably lower. This implies that simply merging the 12 per cent and the 18 per cent slab as some have been suggesting would lead to a revenue loss. If the Council does indeed merge these two tax slabs it will have to raise the other tax slabs just to protect the current level of revenues.

But, before opting for such adjustments, the GST Council must first ascertain the potential revenue (net of cess and refunds) at varying levels of compliance, tax rates and exemptions afforded. After all, these have a bearing — lower compliance levels and greater exemptions will obviously require higher rates to garner the same level of revenues.
Now, as per some estimates presented to the 15th Finance Commission, with existing exemptions in place, the current tax regime should ideally yield revenues equivalent to 8.23 per cent of GDP. If, however, only exemptions for food are kept in place, then collections should rise to 8.57 per cent of GDP. In another scenario, even if existing exemptions are kept in place, and if a single rate of 14 per cent is levied, then collections should rise to 8.93 per cent. At a 16 per cent rate, they would rise further to 10.20 per cent. Understandably, these calculations are based on certain assumptions which are debatable. However, crucially, all these scenarios assume full compliance. In reality, though, the compliance level was estimated to only 70 per cent.

Considering the current economic situation, now may not be an opportune moment to raise taxes. But there is no getting around it. Both the Centre and the states need to work towards this.

This column first appeared in the print edition on May 27, 2022, under the title ‘Making sense of the GST Bonanza’. Write to the author at ishan.bakshi@expressindia.com

Pratap Bhanu Mehta writes: As is often the case in Kashmir, one act of closure may open up new and even more ominous questions.

Yasin Malik’s conviction in a 2017 case on financing terrorism, was a foregone conclusion, especially after he pleaded guilty. There is a parallel case involving him in relation to the brutal killing of four Indian Air Force officers. That case will, in all likelihood, also come to fruition at a convenient moment. From a purely moral standpoint, it was always quite a travesty that Yasin Malik had been indulged for so long. But as is often the case in Kashmir, one act of closure may open up new and even more ominous questions.

Malik’s political career exemplified the politics of bad faith all around. He was always sympathetic to secession. His radicalisation preceded the rigged election of 1987. He was accused of killing four Air Force officers. It is difficult to imagine any country indulging such a killing. But such is the depth of grievance and violence in Kashmir that he managed to convert that act into a narrative of retaliation against prior violence by the Indian state. The Indian state then arrested him, and ended up with the worst of both worlds. It never seriously sought to fairly convict him for his crimes. But it tortured him and created a political martyr. Malik then ostensibly read Mandela and Gandhi and renounced violence, though there does not appear to be any evidence from his organisational activity that he did so. This fighter for Kashmiri self-determination was also a front for Pakistan. The Indian state, then, on occasion elevated him to great political stature and sustained him as if he were a key interlocutor. If this negotiation had produced a lasting settlement, this indulgence might have been excusable.

But as it turned out, all that we produced was a protracted stalemate that collapsed every so often. The Indian government had no new framework to offer or was unable to follow up on its own commitments. The JKLF’s own positions were a tactical retreat more than a serious and imaginative attempt to think of a future of Kashmir, or a transition path to peace. Both sides had no compunction in using the worst forms of violence, even as they resorted to the language of human rights. With Kashmir under years of siege and occupation-like conditions, Malik became a symbol of freedom, a cult figure with a love story to boot. But it was never clear that he could command broad-based political support. He seemed both indispensable but unable to advance the cause credibly. He was a morally disturbing figure made to look plausible by a horrible political context.

The BJP radically changed course in J&K. Its oppressive tactics had the one virtue of ending the charade of bad faith that had characterised politics in Kashmir. Securing the conviction of Malik is one more step in that agenda. It is hard to argue with the conviction on its own terms: Malik has pleaded guilty, his public statements would be enough to indict him on many counts. But as always, this moment of political triumph will turn more of the spotlight on the Indian state than it is prepared for in two respects.

On its own terms, it is difficult to impugn the court’s findings in this case. But the challenge for the Indian state has not been partiality in particular cases; it is the perception of partiality of the justice system as a whole. In a context of immense legalised repression in Kashmir, where basic civil rights and democratic rights are not being protected by large sections of the judiciary, the case can easily be converted into a narrative of state partiality, rather than a victory for the rule of law. The conviction may be seen as an end of bad faith in Delhi. But we should be under no illusion that it will also be seen as an example of the Indian state’s bad faith in Kashmir. In some ways, the reaction of the so-called Gupkar group to this case was unfortunate: Rather than saying that injustice has been done in this case, its credibility would have been enhanced if it were to give a call to ensure that the civil and human rights of all Kashmiris, including the hundreds who are arrested and victims of violence, were protected by the judiciary.

Since the revocation of Article 370, this trend is evident. The previous governments may have engaged in a politics of bad faith, but at least there were some doors of political expression always open. Now Kashmir is politically suffocated, with mainstream politicians discredited and freedom of expression clamped down on to an unprecedented degree. India’s own democratic credentials are eroding. The net result is both a total political vacuum and an increasing sense of siege inside Kashmir.

In that context, the potential symbolic value of Malik’s martyrdom through imprisonment or possible death penalty in the killing of the Air Force officers is even greater. This is not good reason to refrain from pursuing justice in this case. But it would be politically myopic if we failed to understand that repression creates its own mythologies, as it did previously with Burhan Wani and Maqbool Bhat. The state will have to do a lot of political work to ensure that does not happen in this case. But all trends suggest it will be unable to do so.

We are now at a point where we refuse to even recognise Kashmir as a political problem. The problem is being framed as one that can be managed entirely by state repression or propaganda. This will not bring peace to Kashmir any more than it has brought security to Kashmiri Pandits. Malik’s case will become a reminder of the political vacuum in Kashmir, and the possibilities of greater radicalisation.

There is an aside in this case which might be of interest in the debate over the sedition law. Malik never renounced secession as an objective; he merely claimed to change tactics and become Gandhian. But the court found that his profession of Gandhism could not be taken with a straight face. But here is an interesting question. Should a sedition law cover ideologies that promote secession or only violence and conspiracy to violence? The judge seems to hint that advocacy of secessionism would be permissible, so long as it was done in a Gandhian way. But alas, politics — the activity of winning allegiance by persuasion and incentive — is the last thing we will see in Kashmir. Yasin Malik’s case might be a closure of sorts, but it is not moving past the tragedy that is Kashmir.

This column first appeared in the print edition on May 27, 2022, under the title ‘The conviction of Yasin Malik’. The writer is contributing editor, The Indian Express.

Even as a special NIA court in Delhi handed concurrent life terms to JKLF chief Yasin Malik for funding terror in J&K, Kashmiri TV artist Amreena Bhat was shot dead outside her home in Budgam district. Amreena’s death comes a day after an off-duty constable Saifullah Qadri was shot dead in front of his home in Srinagar. These are the latest in a spate of targeted killings in Kashmir that began around October last year. That the militants have targeted ordinary Kashmiri Muslims, Kashmiri Pandits, non-Kashmiri Hindus and Muslims, and individual security personnel shows a concerted attempt to sow fear, disrupt everyday life and challenge the attempts at attaining normalcy since the nullification of Article 370 in August 2019.

Targeted killings by their nature are extremely difficult to prevent. Security personnel have no way of knowing who the militants will target next. This is in contrast to big-ticket terror operations that can be tracked through effective intelligence gathering. In fact, over the last two years the joint security mechanism in J&K has been quite successful in neutralising cross-border terrorists. But targeted killings use hit-and-run tactics and can be carried out by local agents who may not be on the radar of security forces.

This is precisely why it is also possible that the militants are trying to bait the security forces into an overreaction and create conditions akin to the height of the Punjab militancy or the Naxal movement in Bengal. A similar situation in Kashmir today will represent a severe setback, something terrorists and their cross-border handlers will be delighted with.

To their credit, security forces have shown considerable restraint. The main challenge now is to curb extremist ideological networks that have proliferated, aiding terror organisations in recruiting locals. About 49 cases of local recruitment have been reported this year – this is the cadre terror-handlers use to keep low-level targeted killings going. This strategy also suits Pakistan, which is facing its own political problems and is under increased international scrutiny. The only way to counter this is to strengthen J&K civil society so as to shrink the space available to extremist elements. But that can only happen if the democratic process is fully restored in the region. Now that delimitation has been notified, J&K assembly polls need to be held at the earliest. The number of stakeholders for peace in J&K can increase only if the legislative-executive structure is rebuilt.

The longer students get school education the worse they can do, seems to be a brutal fact, going by the National Achievement Survey 2021. This large-scale assessment of Classes 3,5,8 and 10 conducted last November shows that average performance keeps declining up the class ladder. The average math score for example declines from 57% to 44%, 36% and 32%. Scores not only trend down as children go to higher classes, they have also come down in general since the last survey in 2017. The Class 3 national average of math scores which is 57% now, was 64% then.

One commonsensical explanation is that the higher the class the more complex the subject matter, and therefore more the need for advanced pedagogic skills to deliver lessons effectively. Without appropriate support and training, teachers will fall even more out of step with senior students’ learning levels and needs. But how much of all this is the pandemic effect? While 25% of sampled schools do suffer from lack of parental support in student learning, and 28% of sampled students lack access to digital devices at home, the key metric is that a thumping 80% say that they learn better in school where peers are there to help.  Almost perversely, an impressive 97% of teachers report job satisfaction, quite out of step with teaching outcomes.

A closer analysis of scattered success stories is needed, to replicate them. For example, it’s important to find out how Punjab students race ahead in every class and subject – averaging 46% in Class X science compared to the 35% national average. The pandemic caught teachers as unawares as anybody else. Many of them were leery of digital tools. But the NAS survey is pointing to a problem that is above and beyond specific pandemic challenges, particularly as it is designed to assess competency-based skills rather than rote learning. Young Indians’ future-readiness is at stake here.

A credit rating is an expression of an opinion in a standardised form. And the rating assigned to a given debt shows the agency's level of confidence that the borrower will honour the debt obligations.

Credit rating agencies are right to seek the intervention of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) to resolve the confusion following the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) new, stringent directive on ratings given on corporate loans. The directive says ratings on such loans can't be notched up based on 'guarantees' and 'letters of comfort' to help group companies raise money and bargain a lower interest rate on the back of such support from parent companies. However, Sebi's existing directive allows all these supports to lift the rating for non-convertible debentures. So, situations of the same issuer having a higher rating for non-convertible debentures and a lower one on a loan cannot be ruled out. Sebi and RBI must find a way to resolve this contradiction. Else, the Financial Stability and Development Council (FSDC) should resolve the turf tussle.

Almost 90% of the 50,000 debt ratings are reportedly on bank loans. Banks prefer rated loans due to a lower regulatory risk weightage on such assets that helps them save capital. A credit rating is an expression of an opinion in a standardised form. And the rating assigned to a given debt shows the agency's level of confidence that the borrower will honour the debt obligations.

Legal due diligence is all very fine. However, RBI's guidance also restrains rating agencies from deriving comfort from 'obligor-co-obligor' structures - common arrangements by infrastructure companies where multiple special purpose vehicles (SPVs) pool their cash flow to create a mechanism where funds of one SPV can be used to service the debt of another facing a cash crunch. RBI's concern that such structures are still untested for delinquency is understandable. But stringent rules may indirectly kill the structured products market. That is wholly avoidable.

<

Read in source website

Translating quality contemporary literature in Indian languages into other Indian languages, English, Mandarin, Spanish, etc - languages whose readers are appreciative of literature - can bring the soft power and prestige that native language speakers crave for.

Apart from being a language, English is also the most politically empowered language. The latest demonstration of this fact is the far wider recognition Geetanjali Shree has gained as a writer after being awarded this year's International Booker Prize. This prize, a companion award to the more popular Booker Prize given to works of fiction written only in English, is given to works in non-English languages translated into English. What makes it valuable, apart from the reach the host language (English) brings to the work written in the guest language (in this case, Hindi), is the push (read: branding) the prize itself bestows. Remember, the translation has to be published in Britain or Ireland to qualify. Shree's 2018 novel Ret Samadhi, translated into English by (American) Daisy Rockwell and published in 2021 as Tomb of Sand, brings the book - with the stamp of 'Booker aesthetics' excellence - to a non-Hindi-reading readership that includes Indian readers.

For English to wield the kind of 'visa-less' access it has today, it required a consistent overt and covert political push over centuries. Britain's colonial enterprise, of course, was a primal source and fuel of that longue duree proliferation. By the time the language of the British Empire was unhitched from the language itself, it had welded itself across the world both as lingua franca and high language of choice, with its regional manifestations (British English, American English, Indian English, etc). A language's reach is determined by its source users' economic and political heft. So, for a language to thrive, both in stature and reach, beyond its native terrain, the source society must have the commensurate heft.

With colonisation, thankfully, no longer an option, it is translation that now holds the key. Translating quality contemporary literature in Indian languages into other Indian languages, English, Mandarin, Spanish, etc - languages whose readers are appreciative of literature - can bring the soft power and prestige that native language speakers crave for.

<

Read in source website

Vinai Kumar Saxena was sworn in as the 22nd lieutenant governor (L-G) of Delhi earlier this week. He will take charge of the administration at a critical time for the residents of Delhi, which is battling extreme swings in weather induced by the climate crisis, creaky physical infrastructure and an annual pollution menace made worse by human factors. The city’s social fabric has been repeatedly disturbed since the 2020 riots, and the authorities have been found wanting in resolving systemic issues plaguing the city.

Owing to Delhi’s complex administrative architecture as a Union Territory with an elected assembly – the L-G has direct control over land, and law and order, which are outside the purview of the elected administration – Mr Saxena will have considerable influence on the running of the city. History is witness that this arrangement only works when both entities – which are controlled by rival political entities at the moment – work in tandem. In this respect, the warm welcome extended by chief minister (CM) Arvind Kejriwal to the new L-G and the scenes of bonhomie at the oath-taking ceremony augur well.

Every L-G confronts a different set of challenges. Mr Saxena will grapple with rising tensions between the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government and the Bharatiya Janata Party, which controls the Centre, over delayed municipal elections and the running of the unified municipal body. He will also have to fill hundreds of vacancies in the city-state’s bureaucracy in consultation with the elected government. Mr Saxena has promised to act as a guardian for the Capital and work on improving its air. The residents of Delhi will remember him gratefully if he can help craft a stronger action plan to deal with the annual bouts of toxic winter pollution, and bring the states concerned on board.

Mr Saxena’s tenure will also be marked by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2021, which gives primacy to the L-G over the elected government in the city and came into force last year. Under the law, the term “government” as referred to in any law passed by the Delhi assembly means the L-G and his opinion is mandatory for executing any decision of a minister or the council of ministers. While this remains under challenge in the Supreme Court, both Raj Bhavan and the CM’s office will have to adopt a consultative, not obstructionist, attitude to ensure that political expediency doesn’t mar schemes and projects that can improve the lives of Delhi’s citizens.

Over the past decade, Delhi has seen both confrontational and cooperative periods between the L-G and city government, with Mr Saxena’s predecessor, Anil Baijal, seen as more accommodative in his decision-making than previous L-G Najeeb Jung. To help Delhi become a truly world class city and ensure a minimum quality of life to all its citizens, it is imperative that both prongs of the Capital’s government work together.

The life term sentencing of separatist and terrorist Yasin Malik by a National Investigation Agency court under Section 17 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, after he pleaded guilty to all the charges, was very deserving.

The NIA court of special judge Parveen Singh was fair and just to both the spirit and word of the law in sentencing the chief of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front to two life terms for terror funding; it also gave five sentences of 10 years’ imprisonment, besides levying several monetary fines, including one of Rs 10 lakh, for other offences under the UAPA and the Indian Penal Code.

Justice Singh was also wise and humane in not, despite strong arguments otherwise from the prosecution, giving the rarest of the rare death penalty, and allowing for the imprisonment terms to run concurrently. India’s rule of law received another pat on the back for having ensured a fair trial and adequate representation for defence to the accused, and now guilty, Malik.

The court, also wisely, did not give much credence to the post-crimes transformation claims of the terrorist, who argued that he had subsequently taken the path of non-violence, and had been politically legitimised by several Prime Ministers, by recognising his crimes to be “very serious” and aimed at “striking a blow at the heart of the very idea of India”, and separating Kashmir from India. On his party, Malik pleaded guilty to all charges including sedition and criminal conspiracy.

The sentencing of Malik, after the death of several separatist leaders over the last several years, effectively ends the era of militant politics, wherein the separatist terrorist funded from across the borders were the only ones who had an effective voice in the politics of the troubled Valley, or would be allowed to play a role.

Even though the Gupkar Alliance, including the two major parties National Conference led by the Abduallahs, and the Ms Mehbooba Mufti-led People’s Democratic Party, have called the sentencing “unfortunate” and a setback to the process of restoring peace and normalcy, they should not be mistaken to be of the same makeup.

Indians need to re-invest in the hope, freedom and democracy of Kashmir, including a quick restoration of a popular government backed by the mandate of the people, and not prolong the writ of a nominated executive government.

The sentencing, coming not too long after the delimitation exercise was concluded, gives hope that elections are around the corner. Such hope must not be belied, and it is most likely, the Centre will soon push for elections in Jammu and Kashmir.

Kashmir is willing to move beyond the Maliks of the Valley, their guns and their separatist politics, but the rest of India must move fast to embrace them more than halfway. We must make the likes of Malik irrelevant, but for that to happen fully, we must focus on the democratic leaders of the PDP and NC, and everyone else who trusts the ballot over the bullet and are willing to swear by the supremacy of the Indian Constitution.

After all, in Kashmir, or elsewhere, with all our disagreements in place, there is much else to agree upon; and once agreed, do the rest of the disagreements matter significantly?

The departure of senior leaders has long stopped shocking the Congress but what could shock its observers is its response to the parting shot of Kapil Sibal, the latest to leave it. The party sought to dismiss it all, saying that it is a large organisation and people and come and go; and that Mr Sibal, in his letter to the party announcing his resignation, has said he still believed in the values of the Congress even in exit.

The party appears to have missed the import of Mr Sibal’s defection. Mr Sibal has joined not the BJP as most other deserters have but chose to ally with a formation which believes that majoritarianism in the country can be resisted only by secular forces. Reduced to the basics, the political foes of Mr Sibal and the Congress remain the BJP; those on whom they both bank are secular formations and their ideological weapons are still the same. Only the platform is different. Mr Sibal has said the present Congress does not reflect Congress values. He also believes there is an alternative to the Congress when it comes to the fight for secular values.

Although not a mass leader, Mr Sibal was in the forefront of the legal and parliamentary fight against several of the NDA government’s attempts to undermine the Constitution, as per the Congress. These include the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, the abrogation of Article 370 and the recent bid by the BJP-run Delhi municipal corporation to raze the homes of people based on allegations of being involved in communal clashes. His unequivocal stand on all these issues had earned him a lot of respect which finally accrued to his party. Now when he joins a new platform, the goodwill could get transferred with him. The Congress must worry about it.

The G-23 group of senior leaders calling for a change in the leadership and style of functioning of the Congress Party will now be a weakened force without Mr Sibal. They will have very few options if the party high command does not course-correct. It is up to the leadership of said party to decide if it will listen to voices from the ground or ignore these and get back to business as usual.