The modern thinking Indian

Labels: Cheering for Pakistan, Cricket, Cricket match, India, Sedition, Sports, Supporting Pakistan, Treason

Labels: Court, Court judgment, Domestic violence, India, Laws in favor of woman, Misuse of law, Strong laws

Labels: Alimony, Court, Court judgment, Divorce, Equal status, Equality, High court, India, Separation

Labels: Advertisement, Celebrity, Clean, Filtering water, India, Rude advertisement

Labels: Court, Decision, India, Judgment, Marriage, Sex, Sexual relationship

First of all, it is difficult for an individual to really find out what the current state of the preparation for the Commonwealth Games is ? The current reality is that there is work needed to be done at various fronts - the Delhi Government has set in process a huge amount of infrastructure improvements to give the city a modern feel and look. This includes improvements to the transport infrastructure (new roads, modification of roads to reduce jams and increase speed of transport, more metro stations), improvements to the existing stadia to make them capable of handling huge international sports (for example, the Indira Gandhi Indoor stadium leaked a couple of years back when there was an international badminton event), provision of adequate power, housing, and water supplies.
There are multiple levels of responsibility in all this - there is an Organizing Committee of the Indian Olympic Association headed by Suresh Kalmadi, and of course the Delhi Government headed by Shiela Dixit is responsible for the progress of the various infrastructure initiatives. It is worthwhile to remember that one of the biggest problems quoted for infrastructural project cost over-runs in the past is poor project management. I stated in the beginning that it is difficult for an individual to assess, however, there are many other authorities who do take such assessments, and it is hard to determine whether we will follow the time honored method of Just in Time, or will there be a comfort margin before all these efforts are done.
There was a CAG report that stated that the efforts were behind schedule, the media does evaluations from time to time, and in most of them, the efforts are behind schedule, and in fact, from their own project plans, the effort is behind schedule. However, the duo of Suresh Kalmadi got seriously worried when a similar accusation was made by Commonwealth Games Federation President Michael Fennell. He wrote a letter in which he wanted the Indian Prime Minister to get involved to help get this effort on schedule (link to article):

Reacting to Fennell's outburst, Dikshit said she would use every means at her disposal to make it a success, while Kalmadi announced that he would facilitate the CGF chief's meeting with the Prime Minister. Exuding confidence that everything would fall in place, Dikshit said the Delhi Government would complete all work "well in time" although it was little "nervous" about the preparation.
On the recent criticism by the CAG about slow progress of the infrastructure projects, Dikshit said the audit body had prepared the report last month based on status of works six months back. "They have the right to criticise. But we are working very hard. We are looking at all alternatives. Nation's pride is involved with the event and we will do everything possible to make it a success," she said.

By the Delhi Government's own admission a couple of years back, there will be no augmentation of the power generated specifically for Delhi, so this would mean that the Government will have to buy power at that time to ensure that there is enough energy for the Games sites and the Games Village.
In addition to the above problems, there is also the problem of not enough capacity available for the expected inflow of guests. The Commonwealth Games are expected to pull in a huge number of tourists and there are not enough rooms as per the projected demand. And on this end, there are no details available either.
What is the solution ? The Government spent 5 years realizing that the pace of development of the country-wide network of roads had slowed down, so not sure whether there will be an increase in the intensity of work. My expectation is that in the last few months, there will be a escalation of the pace of work, and we will just make it in time, with a few loose ends in terms of infrastructure, and for the rest, in terms of better road connectivity for the participants, the Delhi Police will chip in terms of routing traffic so that the traffic is suitable for the Games, the normal man getting screwed will not matter.

Labels: Governance, India, Politics, Sports

The Congress Government, in its second 5 year term, wants to make a start with a bang. As a result, the Government had set an ambitious plan of kicking off many major initiatives in the first 100 days; part of which were some announcements by the education ministry. Human Resources Development Minister Kapil Sibal shocked a large number of politicians and state officials when he advocated for the abolition of the class Xth boards (and many other proposals). He faced criticism for the sudden announcement of such measures, but looks like he has done a lot more networking since that time.
When you look at today's world, with a huge amount of pressure and load on students, the Class Xth exams are a major contributor. Schools have been known to encourage students to leave or take a non-favorable option in XIth if a student does not do well in the Class Xth board exams. In addition, schools have an additional pre-boards that are used before the boards and which essentially mean that a student can go upto 3-4 months of heavy pressure. In order to reduce this peak pressure somewhat, the Government (which controls the CBSE board, but not state boards) has proposed that the Class Xth board be now optional for students, and they can instead opt in for a comprehensive year-round appraisal system. The year-round system will be valid from the current school year, while the boards becoming optional will happen from the next year (link to article):

Over eight lakh students appearing for their class X exams in March 2010 have to take Board exams for which the results will be declared through grading system. From 2011, the grading system will continue but the Board exams will become optional. "After the Board examination is abolished in 2011 (for class X), students will have choice to take the Board exam on demand for transfer (to another school) or entry into pre-university institutes," Sibal said.
Grading procedure, which was finalised by a high-level committee headed by CBSE chairman Veenith Joshi, will warrant students to secure more than 33 per cent marks to get a certificate. The nine-point scale will start from A1(with 91-100 marks, exceptional), A2(81-90, excellent), B1(71-80, very good), B2(61-70, good), C1(51-60, fair), C2(41-50, average), D(33-40, below average), E1(21-32, needs improvement) and E2(00-20, unsatisfactory).

The worry of course is that the system is now made in place, but schools are not properly instructed, or that schools decide to follow their own path and 'encourage' students to still give the boards. The enforcement of this policy needs to be carried through in letter and spirit in order for students to feel a sense of relief.

Labels: Education, Governance, India, Reform, School

It is always said that justice delayed is justice denied, the very fact that the criminal justice system in India takes decades to wind through and deliver justice. In that time, people either give up on justice, die, or implemented their own form of justice; conversely, it becomes easier to thwart justice by either witnesses being bought or scared away, their testimony becoming hazy, or witnesses simply not being present anymore. All these reduce the effectiveness of the judicial system as a way of delivering justice to society.
India has had a history of massive riots in the past, even starting from Partition where riots between Hindus and Muslims were horrendous in terms of casualties. After partition, there were cases of riots where the police and administration either were unable to control the riots, or played a partisan role. It is the cases where the administration played a partisan role that are a blot on society, and the inability to judicially address these crimes is actually criminal.
The 2 biggest such cases were the 1984 Sikh riots, and the 2002 Gujarat riots. In both cases, the administration let the riots happen (and it is accused with a lot of testimony and circumstantial evidence) that functionaries of the ruling party played a big role. In the 1984 riots, after Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her own bodyguards (who were Sikh), there were mobs of people (primarily in the city of Delhi) hunting down Sikhs (on the streets, and in their homes) and killing them by burning them or by cutting them down. Congress leaders (primarily HKL Bhagat, Sajjan Kumar, and Jagdish Tytler among the more well known) were accused of leading these mobs, and it was only after 2-3 days that the situation was brought under control.
By then, a community had been horrified, but this was not the only crime. The bigger crime was that this situation was never taken quickly through the criminal justice system, and the perpetrators of such a genocide were never brought to justice (even the Gujarat riots cases are having a tough time in being brought to justice, and it is many years now). It is only occasionally that you hear of a court decision in the 1984 cases, or you hear of the CBI deciding that there was no evidence against Jagdish Tytler, so that he could be rehabitilated.
Why all this ? Well, I read of a judgment where a sessions court sentenced 3 people to life imprisonment for their involvement in attempt to murder during the riots (link to article):

A Delhi court awarded life imprisonment to three people for attempting to murder members of a Sikh family here in 1984 anti-Sikh riots and came down heavily on ‘contrived inaction’ of the police and the Government of the day which led to loss of "priceless lives".
The court slammed the Delhi police and the Government for its inability to tackle the riots that followed the assassination of the then PM Indira Gandhi on October 31, 1984. "History would never forgive the police officials who were at the helm of affairs and the government of the day for their unprecedented slothful and quiescent role.

The court also criticized the role of the police, the administration, and the local Government of the day. However, the fact remains that these were all failures, but how can the court just not comment on the fact that this judgment is being delivered 25 years after the cases; where it is possible that family members of the victims may have died, where society is totally sensitized about the incidents that happened a quarter of a century back. I watched areas of Delhi burning from the top of a high rise, and can never forget the scene, but in the overall memory of society, I believe the 1984 riots are a forgotten incident.

Labels: 1984, Administration, Case, Congress, Delhi, India, Judgment, Justice, Police, Riots, Sikh Riots, Trial

Ever since June, there has been some amount of debate over whether the monsoon will be good this year. The met department was predicting a slight shortfall in the rains, and there was also news that another El Nino effect would be in place that would impact the amount of rains. As the months of June and July progressed, it became clear that the monsoon was late, and was not adequate. At the same time, the Government did not try to press the panic button, with the Minister of Agriculture claiming that there would be a marginal impact at best, and the Met Department predicting that things were not all that bad. The one time when the Department made a statement about the rains not being good, they were ticked off by the Government about creating a fear scenario, something that could lead to panic.
And now, we are in the situation where it is clear that the rains have failed all over the country; 31 of the 36 met zones in the country have reported lower rains that expected, in some cases, the shortfall has been much lower than the normal. Now, you are starting to hear stories from the Government that they will ensure that Indians do not go hungry, that there are adequate food stocks, and that they will take whatever measures are needed to save the remaining kharif crop, and to ensure that conditions (some amount of wetness in the soil) remains for the rabi winter crop. Towards this end, the Government mentioned something about diversion of electricity, more power for pumps, more installation of pumps.
However, it is pretty clear that this Government is a big picture Government, it is not for them to dirty their hands in details. So, there is no talk about what the Government did in the last couple of months when farmer's crops were wilting in the heat, no talk about how this greater focus on ensuring power for pumps will lower the water table even more (and there was a recent NASA report about how the water levels in India has been declining at an alarming rate, and that the natural methods of water recharging cannot overcome this decline), about how the Government will ensure that the farmers will be prevented from suffering at the hands of the money-lenders from whom they have taken loans and cannot repay.
The Prime Minister promises another Green Revolution, but do they have the necessary strength to take the detail level plan and execute? This is a Government that knows that dependence on the monsoon for cultivation is risky (as is obvious in the current situation), it knows that people can help get around this through such measures as creation of small check dams and water recharging (which provides water wherever it has been implemented) but is unwilling to take the required infrastructure steps to ensure more implementation of such schemes, and so on.
Now what will happen ? The Government will push for greater extraction of water (thus pushing down the water tables and increasing the salinity of water near the seas as the sea water replaces the natural water), will push for greater use of fertilizers (and the runoff from which will pollute water systems further). What is needed is a more comprehensive plan in which the Government makes a more details oriented plan, and includes measures to reduce dependence on the monsoon.

Labels: Agriculture, Faillure, India, Irrigation, Monsoon, Rain, Water

Taslima Nasreen does not find it safe in India, nor does the Government really want her to be here in India. Every time she comes to India, the Government is stuck as to what to do with her. Given the feelings of repulsion and hatred she inspires in a section of the Muslim community and the vociferous protests that are held, the Congress Government is certainly not going to give the impression that she is a honored state guest; or even worse, that the Government supports or condones her views. Instead, in the past, various spokespersons of the Government and the Congress party have sought to convey the impression that they are only doing something that they don't like; whether it is to give her a visa or provide her security.
In this feeling, except for the BJP (which supports her actions, but would not like to encourage the equivalent of Taslima for the Hindu community, MF Hussain), all other parties are the same way. They would not like to do anything which could be meant to believe that they are supporting the author in any way.
At the same time, it is unwise for the Government to actually reveal its desires, and prevent her from coming to India for renewal of her visa. India has a tradition of being a liberal country, and the concept of not supporting a lady who is being threatened by fundamentalists would expose the Government to severe and trenchant criticism, and severe indictment by the media and large sections of the middle class, a battle that the Congress Party would rather not fight. Consider what happened when the last time she came here (link to article):

Taslima had left India on March 18 last year for Sweden after she was kept in a safe house in the national capital for more than four months. Taslima, who had not been allowed to see any visitors during the period, had described her confinement as living in "a chamber of death". She had come in February earlier this year but was asked to leave immediately after visa was granted to her till August 17 because of the general elections in the country.
Recipient of various awards, Taslima was shifted from her Kolkata residence after violent protests marred parts of the metropolis over her controversial book "Dwihondito" (divided into two). Taslima was packed off from Kolkata and shifted to Jaipur. The Rajasthan government decided to shift her to Delhi after some Muslim organisations threatened state-wide protests against her stay there. Despite the writer's wish to return to Kolkata, the Left Front government in West Bengal did not pay any heed to her request.

Let us see whether things are going to change. I am however very skeptical that there will be any change in the ground situation, and she will be encouraged to leave the country and go back to Europe. The interesting point is, in her case, there are no protests in Parliament against the treatment being meted out to her, no support by feminist organizations, and so on.

Labels: Author, Congress, Controversy, India, Islam, Political, Taslima Nasreen

In India, private airlines have a tough field. They have to pay high rates for their fuel (ATF costs in India are higher than most places in the world), the conversion to new airports run by private operators are loading user convenience charges that passengers do not like to pay, and it is a cut-throat business with high fixed charges and a variable market that has been severely affected by the economic slow-down.
So, most private airlines are in the red, owing money to fuel companies, to airports, to their debtors, and they do not see a solution in sight. The Government in the past has not provided them any solution in the form of lower taxes on ATF, or any kind of monetary hand-out.
Eventually, the Federation of Indian Airlines, comprising of 5 of the private airlines called for something unprecedented, a one day strike on August 18th where they would stop all operations, and refund all tickets. This was primarily meant as a pressure tactic, and they must have got bold after seeing Anil Ambani take on the Government and not suffer any apparent problems. However, the Government response was swift and harsh. The Government threatened to take strict action, including reviewing their licenses.
The airlines were not prepared to take on such an onslaught and have finally withdrawn this proposed strike. However, a fundamental question that is there for the operators is that this is a known business model. It was known that India has a high amount of taxes on ATF (since these are state level taxes and the Center is unwilling to take a stand on this), it is also known that the model followed by airlines of reducing costs can lead to cut-throat competition and lead to a downward spiral of costs. At the same time, at any reduction of fuel prices, the Minister applies pressure on the airlines to get them to reduce their fares. They also have to fly on routes that are not very remunerative, but are part of their license.
So where will this lead us ? If we continue in the situation where fuel prices remain high, and the economy does not improve (which means the general market remains depressed), then there will be a shakeout of airlines, and one will see ticket prices increasing, and more of them either combining or dying in the dust. Not good, but little that can be done.

Labels: Airline, Bailout, Business, Fuel, Government, India

In the fight with terrorism, there is a thin line between what is justified for national security and what is a violation of human rights. Sometimes, this gets muddled up. An example is when sometime back, the UP police were shown to be shooting down a dacoit when he was coming out with hands in the air. There was a lot of protests and condemnation over the way the police shot him in cold blood. It was only when a second video was released (which showed that the dacoit had earlier offered to give himself up, but had shot the policeman who went to accept the surrender) that the reputation of the police was restored. In many cases, the police and security agencies have been accused of detaining suspects without proper records, and subjecting them to torture to get information. A law and order approach is that the police should document their arrest, and file for detention in front of the court.
One case that caused a huge amount of controversy was the Batla House case. In this case, the national capital got the news, that in a locality in South East Delhi, the police had raided a house and killed some suspects in a shootout, and in the encounter, a celebrated cop had also got killed. This was in the aftermath of the Indian Mujhaideen cases where serial bomb blasts were happening in various cities, and the Government was under huge pressure to show some progress in the case. Almost immediately, there was suspicion that this was a cooked up encounter, with certain aspects of the case causing questions.
Politicians of different hues jumped on the case, given that it involved police vs. minority issues, with even ruling party politicians jumping in to get the case investigated by all manner of agencies. The Delhi and Central Governments however stood firm on the stand that this was a genuine encounter, and the people killed were actually terrorists. Finally, in a court case, the High Court ordered an investigation by the National Human Rights Commission (something that the police still opposed). In what marks almost an end to the case, the NHRC has declared that the encounter was genuine (link to article):

National Human Rights Commission on Wednesday gave clean chit to Delhi police in Batla House encounter case. "We are clearly of the opinion that having regard to the material placed before us, it cannot be said that there has been any violation of human rights by action of the police", the NHRC said in its 30 page report on the encounter in September last year.
Encounter specialist Delhi Police Inspector M C Sharma was killed during the police action against suspected terrorists on September 19, 2008 in the aftermath of serial blasts in Batla House locality in the national capital. The court had directed the enquiry on a plea of the NGO, Act Now For Harmony and Democracy, that questioned the police version of the encounter. Two suspected Indian Mujahideen terrorists who were killed were identified as Atif Amin and Mohd Sajid. Two other IM suspects Mohd Saif and Zeeshan were arrested from the Batla House area.

This is certainly not the end of the controversy, since there was a report that some politicians and family members of the accused did not accept this report, claiming it to be false. However, the general public, which anyhow forgets things easily enough, will not remember the Batla House encounter for much longer.

Labels: Delhi, Encounter, India, Inquiry, Investigation, Murder, Police, Politics, Security, Terrorism, Violence

What does a deficit mean ? There are many terms such as fiscal deficit, monetary deficit, revenue deficit, but the differences between are them are relevant for people involved in the field of economics. For the normal person on the street, a deficit means that you are spending more than you earn. A normal person cannot do this without getting into serious money problems, but a Government can (and in almost every case the world-over), does do this. How can a Government spend more than it can earn ? A Government does this through means of a deficit, that it either finances by printing more money, or by borrowing funds from the market.
Both cases cause problems for the economy as such, since if the Government prints more money, this essentially means that more money is being put into the system. More money, but the same amount of production means in simple terms - if you wanted something, and many others want the same thing, then the thing you want gets more expensive. In terms of the economy, if more money comes into the system, then things get more expensive and inflation rises.
If the Government borrows more money from the market, that is less money that is available to private companies to get from their market to meet their funds requirement, or if they need loans for capacity repair or expansion. Such reduction in the availability of funds means that loans for companies get more difficult and has an effect on the ability of private sector to rise above these bad economic times.
Why did the Government need so many funds that it was willing to increase the fiscal deficit to a point where it would be pointed out by economists as a risk ? Well, these are bad economic times and it is at these times that Governments the world over are putting more money into the economy to try to get out of these struggling times. In addition, the Government realized that politically, it has benefited through such measures such as the National Rural Employment Scheme, and it wants to make sure that it is pumping money into the rural sector, the agriculture based sector.
Why did the market react negatively to the Budget, and why am I writing about it after so many days ? Well, the market had been expecting some relief measures, or at least token gestures such as the removal of the Securities Transaction Tax. Instead what it got was no new seemingly market or industry oriented measures and no removal of the STT. Instead it got a much higher fiscal deficit and a seeming reversion to populism. And hence the initial bad reaction to the budget.
However, every year, there are more voices gaining ground that industry should stop looking to the budget as an earth-shaking event, instead treating it as a simple Profit and Loss statement of the Government. In addition, the initial depression of the market has subsided as it looks like there are faint signs of revival, and the realization that the budget did not make things worse, and if rural consumers get more income, that is a new market.
What should you do ? Unless, there are some earth shaking events, the long term prospects look good and you should stay invested for the medium to long term in fundamentally safe companies. Avoid risky companies unless you know what you are doing and you know the risk involved.

Labels: Budget, Economy, Equity, Future, Growth, India, Indian, Market, Stock

The military forces in India have almost a separate life with a separate code of honor and law; their life is much more controlled than the lives of ordinary civilians. As a result, they have a separate process for justice, with a separate legal system that governs them. This includes offences they commit that are normally treated as criminal offences for the normal citizens of the country such as rape, murder, theft, etc; instead, these were normally handled through the military process of court-martials where military designated justices handle these offences. This would make sense if the crime was committed at a military owned location, or at the border of the country. However, in the past, it was argued that if a soldier was on leave and then committed a crime, even this was under the jurisdiction of military justice. This was because even under casual leave, the soldier was still under the jurisdiction of the army. However, a judge of the Madras High Court has ruled that such offences can also be handled in the civilian court system (link to article):

The Madras High Court Bench in Madurai has held that the armed forces personnel accused of committing murder, rape and other such crimes could be tried in a criminal court and not necessarily through court martial.
Justice A Selvam in his order yesterday said both the criminal court as well as the Army courts enjoyed concurrent jurisdiction to try criminal offences. Justice Selvam agreed that a soldier on casual leave could be considered to be in active service. However, he said that neither Army act nor the code of criminal procedure prevented a criminal court from conducting trial against servicemen.

This makes a lot of sense, since if a crime is committed under the laws of the country, it should be handled by the constitutionally valid legal system of the country.

Labels: Army, Crime, India, Judgment, Judicial, Law, Legal, Military

Airlines frequently overbook, given that there is always a number of people who will cancel, and hence there is a mathematics related to the number of people who overbook. Sometimes airlines land up in a situation whereby they find that this mathematics goes awry, and they find that there are more passengers than seats available. In such cases, the airline has to placate irate passengers, and decide who can go and who needs to be refused. Such cases typically cause a lot of unhappiness. However, it is not accepted that an airline boards more passengers than there are seats available. Even in these bad economic times, it is unacceptable to have more passengers on board than there are seats, given that these are paying passengers who have a right to proper treatment. Modern airlines have automated systems whereby boarding passes are issued which prevents extra passengers from getting loaded. However, if the airline wishes to violate such conditions, there is very little that can be done.
Further, after the terrorist incidents, the cockpits of planes are now high security zones where passengers are no longer allowed. So, if there is a case when a passenger is allowed inside the cockpit, that is against all security norms and needs to be thoroughly investigated.
We have a case, whereby all this happened. Air India, the national carrier of India, had a case whereby it was found that the airline had boarded 3 extra passengers; this case is now being investigated by the regulator, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). In order to ensure that this case is brought to its logical conclusion, the investigation needs to be thorough (link to article):

In these recessionary times, airlines globally are operating on half-empty seats. But Air India, which is passing through its worst ever financial crisis, is in fresh trouble for allegedly carrying extra passengers on a fully loaded flight. What adds to the irony is that the excess passengers were discovered in a probe into the aircraft's door falling apart when it started moving while attached to an aerobridge!
"Of these three, one woman passenger was accommodated in the cockpit and two others on the foldable seats where cabin crew sits during take off and landing," said sources. The DGCA can now take criminal action against AI for this violation. The cockpits in modern aircraft have three seats. While two are for the pilot and co-pilot, the third is called a jump seat which is usually vacant. Since the process of issuing boarding passes is completely computerized, the system stops generating passes once a flight is full. In this case, however, the probe has found that boarding passes were allegedly issued manually to enable the extra passengers to clear the different levels of pre-embarkation security checks.

This action by the airline was a gross violation of the air safety norms. In this case, the airline was caught because of another incident, and this fact came out during the investigation.

Labels: Airline, India, Investigation, Safety

The world over, different countries have different concepts revolving around homosexuality. There are states in the United States that have made marriage between homosexuals as having the same legal sanctity as that between a man and a woman, there are other states where this is a matter of huge debate and controversy (with the Catholic and Protestant churches being against it), countries in parts of Europe are liberal while those where the Church has a stronger influence are less likely, and there are the Islamic countries where the concept is abhorrent - forget marriage between homosexuals, even the concept of a relationship was unacceptable (for example, in Iraq, insurgents would target homosexuals for murder).
What about the thought of homosexuality in a country such as India, which has a long history, and where there is a lot of debate even among historians about whether homosexuality was prevalent in the past. India, till today, had a law called Section 377, that made homosexuality a crime (even among consenting adults). This law meant that even among groups with a higher risk pattern for AIDS (such as gays), it was difficult to really follow anti-AIDS programs since a number of people would hide their homosexuality, or not be open about it.
For the past several years, there has been a debate stoked by AIDS campaigners and gay rights groups about revoking this section of the penal code (it was introduced by the British in British ruled India in 1861, and is no longer prevalent in the Britain of today). However, attempts by the Government to do a debate on removing this section of the penal code runs aground due to opposition by religious groups (and there are enough people in each religious group to be outraged by the thought of homosexuality), so it would have seemed difficult by the Government to move fast on such a law. And then came this stunning judgment by the Delhi High Court (and interestingly, it uses the same argument as used by several US state courts, using the theory that such laws are violative of many of the equality and fundamental rights of citizens) (link to target):

In a breakthrough judgment, the Delhi High Court on Thursday legalised gay sex among consenting adults holding that the law making it a criminal offence violates fundamental rights. "We declare section 377 of IPC in so far as it criminalises consensual sexual acts of adults in private is violative of Articles 14, 21 and 15 of the Constitution," a Bench comprising Chief Justice A P Shah and Justice S Murlidhar said.
It further said that this judgement will hold till Parliament chooses to amend the law. "In our view Indian Constitutional Law does not permit the statutory criminal law to be held captive by the popular misconception of who the LGBTs (lesbian gay bisexual transgender) are. "It cannot be forgotten that discrimination is antithesis of equality and that it is the recognition of equality which will foster dignity of every individual," the Bench said in its 105-page judgement.

It is pretty much sure that there will be appeals to the Supreme Court by many sections of society, one only hopes that the Government will not try to get this judgment over-turned. At the same time, this is a judgment by the Delhi High Court, and is applicable in the capital city (even though it is a precedent that can be used by organizations all over the country); ultimately it is either the judgment of the Supreme Court or a law passed by Parliament that can ensure coverage across the entire country.

Labels: Court, Equality, Homosexual, India, Judgment, Sex

It is common knowledge that Dalits in India were a oppressed lot (and still are), being treated as a political base by the Congress party. It was the emergence of Kanshi Ram, who resigned from his Government service and setup the Bahujan Samaj Party for giving the Dalits a voice. In our modern word, it is hard to believe that a politician would not have ulterior motives for doing what he did, and it was not easy to understand fully the acts of Kanshi Ram, but his actions (including the fact that he did not actively seek any political power for himself) lead to a suggestion that he did in fact not hanker for power for himself.
It was Kanshi Ram who started the process of making the Dalits believe that they could wield political power, and as a part of taking this process forward Kanshi Ram handed over the actual power wielding to Mayawati (wikipedia). It has been Mayawati who has taken the party much further in its quest to become a major political power in the country, starting with the critical state of Uttar Pradesh. It is also true that among the urban class, there is a certain negative feeling against Mayawati. Mayawati projects that as an upper class-lower class divide, and there may be some truth in that; at the same time, there is also a deep feeling of rejection against the image that Mayawati projects. She flaunts her corruption, she flaunts her grab of power, she flaunts her image of wanting to make it big (the images of big diamonds, asking partymen to contribute money for election tickets and for her birthday party), all of these are images that people do not normally see in politicians. It would be that she is like any other politician in corruption, but she does not hide it like others do.
This is further exemplified by her fixation on setting up statues for herself, something that no other politician in India would encourage while they are alive, to the degree that she does:

Opposition parties on Friday slammed Mayawati for unveiling statues and parks of Dalit leaders ahead of schedule, saying it was aimed at pre-empting the Supreme Court from putting these projects on hold. “The manner in which the Chief Minister hurriedly unveiled the statues and parks yesterday is indicative of her guilt at misusing government funds for party work,” Congress spokesman Akhilesh Pratap Singh said in Lucknow.
Mayawati had unveiled the 15 statues, which included that of BSP founder late Kanshi Ram and her own, and parks at a hurriedly-organised function in Lucknow on Thursday, nine days ahead of schedule.

Mayawati does this statue making and naming of parks to an incredible degree, naming them primarily for Kanshi Ram and for herself. The level to which she does this, and the money and effort spent on these efforts is remarkable. Naming objects after leaders is not new, given that the Congress names almost all things after Nehru, Indira Gandhi or Rajiv Gandhi, but they do name projects; they do not destroy existing structures for this. Mayawati has destroyed existing green areas for setting up huge statues as for example in Noida, and tried to pull down sections of a stadium in Lucknow for the same reason. But who would stop her ? Do people expect her to spend effort on development, or to create memorials for herself ?

Labels: BSP, Congress, Governance, India, Mayawati, Memorial, Parks, Politics

When the results for the 2009 Indian Lok Sabha (Parliament) elections were out, everybody was surprised by the scope of the Congress victory. The Left would have been shell-shocked by the scope of their reduction in seats and dramatic bad run in both West Bengal and Kerala, but it was the BJP that was most badly affected. The BJP, which once ruled India for 5 years, had just lost its second general elections (and both of them were lost under the leadership of Lal Krishna Advani - this election was his last attempt to be the Prime Minister of India, since he would be too old the next time).
For the first few weeks after the election, it seemed like the BJP was literally in shell-shock, the party quickly resisted a half-hearted attempt by Advani to resign as the leader of the party (given that there is no clear demarcated second line leader - the presumed next generation leader, Modi, could not carry his state to a complete sweep (which was almost a rejection for him), and all the others are in full fighting mode, it would have been difficult for the party to select a new leader agreeable to all). Murli Manohar Joshi tried to stake a brief claim, but that was quickly thwarted.
Now the voices in the party are being heard loud and clear, and there is a demand for an accountability of the defeat of the party. After all, the party has lost badly in many of the states that were supposed to be good for the party (or had been in the past), such as Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Rajasthan, Uttrakhand, Delhi. For a party that was called the natural party of the middle class and the urban section, not being able to make a mark in Delhi and Bombay shows how much the party seems to have swayed away from being an effective contender for power.
In the last 2 days, there has been a sudden jump in the demand for accountability, and this seems to be related to the recent movements of Advani retaining the leadership of the party, Arun Jaitely becoming the leader in the upper house, and Sushma Swaraj being the deputy leader in the lower house. Other leaders who have been left out and who are seen as having been left out such as Jaswant Singh, Arun Shourie, and Yashwant Sinha have been demanding for more accountability and also that people who had a leadership role in the elections should have to bear the cross for the defeat (targeted at Jaitely, since he was the de-facto head of the campaign and the election effort).
If the BJP wants to come back to being taken as a serious contender for power, it needs to focus more on being an inclusive party. People, even those who were attracted by the earlier Hindutva campaign, are repelled by the hard-line stances on many areas such as the attack on people in a pub in Mangalore, the attacks on churches, the utterances of Varun Gandhi (and their not being condemned). The party needs to show how it can be seen as having a vision for the future, and needs to focus on development (and they have 2 chief ministers who are still there on the basis of their development platform - Modi in Gujarat, and Raman Singh of Chattisgarh).
The party also needs to be more realistic and pragmatic on their policies, as being seen on the side of the Left parties in opposing the nuclear deal was an idiotic posture that disillusioned many of their supporters, and their refusal to cooperate with the Government on accelerating some of the reforms after the exit of the Left parties was also a policy doomed to showing them in poor light. The party can still make good, but it requires a lot of inner look, and self-effort. There is discussion going around about problems in ties with the RSS, but the party needs to fine-tune those ties so that they can use the committed cadre of the RSS while not adopting the reprehensible policies of many of the sister organizations such as the VHP and the Bajrang Dal.

Labels: BJP, Election, Future, India, Politics, Responsibility

We are typically more sympathetic to the concerns and feelings of differently abled people (or who used to be called as handicapped people), and one expects that Government departments, who act as enablers for providing support and services to the citizenry of this country, would also act the same way for differently abled citizens. However, it is no surprise that Government departments are as unconcerned to these special citizens as they are towards normal citizens. But now, citizens have a weapon to get what they want, and that is using the power of RTI. The RTI Act enables citizens to get information on many aspects of the workings of the Government, and this includes the status of any item pending with the Government, and so it was in this particular case when the citizen used RTI to get the required action (link to article):

For almost a year, Rudrakshi Pandya, a differently-abled was pushed around when she demanded her right to a family pension after her father, a retired headmaster of a city-based school, died few years ago. Rudrakshi, was entitled by the government for a pension, under Gujarat civil services (pension) rules as she was unable to fend for herself. Interestingly, pension department had all the requisite documents, including Rudrakshi's medical certificate and even the clearance from the district education office.
It was here that Rudrakshi's mentor, Falguni Mehta, filed an RTI application under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act, which pertains to information being provided within 48 hours of the application with the pensions department. Mehta wanted to know reasons why Rudrakshi's pension was delayed, officers responsible for the delay, the grounds on which pensions for the differently-abled were rejected since 1980 and what punitive actions would be taken if the officers were found guilty. The case finally came up for hearing before state information commission. State chief information commissioner RN Das ruled in Rudrakshi's favour and directed pensions department to provide information within 48 hours.

One wishes that cases like not come up, since they show the bureaucracy in pretty bad light; however, this is also another depiction of the power of the RTI Act in getting the concerned Government departments to act. Also, recent punishments against officials for denying or delaying information should also act as a warning to Government officials in this regard.

Labels: Benefits, Governance, India, Information, Law, Policy, RTI

I wonder how many times people would have noticed things like this. It was just yesterday that I went to 2 different stores - one of them had advertised for a Flat 50% discount (this was a store called Fab Creations in the Cross River Mall in East Delhi), and the other store was the Reebok store in the same mall. The Reebok store had a similar offer, with the different being that the offer was described as 'Upto 50% off'.
First, we went to the clothes stores, there was no problem whatsoever, the clothes were indeed available at 50% off as a flat rate of discount, and the store was full of people willing to buy (and the people purchasing were not cribbing about the rate having been inflated earlier, a tactic that stores such as Cantabil, Priknit, and Kouton seem to have adopted (I wrote about this earlier - Priknit had jackets at 80% off, but the jacket that would normally have cost Rs. 1500 was priced at Rs. 5000 plus and I walked out in disgust at the horrible anti-consumer attitude of the store owners)). People were satisfied at the purchases, with the price and quality seeming right.
Next to the Reebok sale, the sale being advertised at upto 50% off. Last year, I had bought at a similar sale, but was apprehensive about the 'About' in the sale part this year. And to my disgust, this was exactly the case. The sale was only on the T-shirts (and the sign outside did not specify this; Reebok makes shows primarily, and the sale was not on shoes). Now, as a result, I am less likely to walk into a Reebok store when I see a sign about a sale, since I am slotting it into the same category as Woodlands (Woodlands has been in my constant no-go store list, since while I find the shoes fine, their thought process seems to be to hoodwink consumers - their sales are typically on almost discarded ranges of shoes, and the attitude they show when I ask about sale shoes is positively bad).
Is this normal behavior ? Is this right for a store to increase the expectations of consumers like this, and then let down so badly. Does it not seem that consumers will be less trusting of such brands later ?

Labels: Consumer, Discount, India, Retailer, Store, Trust