The modern thinking Indian

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

Image the situation; a private college in a state run by a political party; the college is owned by a member of the same political party who is now also a central minister of the Government of India. The same college demands money for admitting students (and not some small sum, but the sum of Rs. 20 lakhs). A media team plans a sting and shows the administrative officer of one of the colleges (the college is Shree Balaji Medical College owned by Union minister of state for information and broadcasting S Jagathrakshakan); in the other college, the registrar asks for Rs. 40 lakhs for students to be allowed admission into the medical college.
This seems perfectly realistic, inspite of Supreme Court judgments and Government policy, capitation based admission is a reality which the Government and the education ministry is perfectly fine to let happen. After all, for Governments that are able to sniff out the movements of opposition parties through their internal intelligence agencies, how hard would it be to find out which all colleges are charging capitation fees ? But when you consider that colleges are owned by politicians and important people, there is no effort that is going to happen to stop such practices from happening.
Why is it important to curb capitation ? Capitation means that a person will enter an important institution such as a medical college or engineering college without a validation of their basic ability to be capable of completing the course. These are colleges that will turn out doctors and engineers, all important elements of society (and if a college can charge Rs. 40 lakh for entry, it would charge a bit more and let these people also complete the course). In addition, poorer but capable students would not be able to pay these huge amounts. And if they took money from somewhere, the huge amount of repayment required would mean that they would bend corners to make the required money.
With this sting, the Government has sprung into action and promised all sort of actions (refer this article):

The Times of India's shocking expose of medical seats being put on sale for Rs 20-40 lakh by medical colleges in Tamil Nadu has triggered a probe into the scam by the Union government. Both HRD and health ministries on Wednesday said that they were examining the expose, and if found correct, would take action against these colleges, including their derecognition.
Union health ministry secretary Naresh Dayal said the two colleges would be derecognised if the veracity of the evidence is established. The Medical Council of India, the regulator for medical education, called the sale of medical seats an "unpardonable act" and has called a meeting of its executive committee next week to discuss the issue. Meanwhile, the Tamil Nadu health department decided on Wednesday to issue show-cause notices to Sri Ramachandra University (SRU) and Shree Balaji Medical College whose officials were caught on camera asking for capitation fees of Rs 20-40 lakh, for violating the Tamil Nadu Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Collection Capitation Fee) Act 1992 and Supreme Court rulings against capitation fee.

Sounds like action is immediate, right ? Well, one is really not sure. For colleges belonging to important people, especially those close to parties that are part of the Government, I am skeptical that the Congress will take this a step further and actually take action. After some time, the college would claim that the sting was a fake sting and then the case would move into different circles.

Labels: College, Education, India, Media, Medical, Money, Policy, Sting

In India, there are very few things most people dread higher than a sudden arrest by a police officer. And instances of policemen hauling away people to jail happen often enough (if you read newspapers, you will find enough stories of people being arrested and led to jail for being accused of various crimes). These powers of the police, typically without restraints or responsibility, have led to rampant misuse. The power of arrest is also used as a way to force people to take certain actions - so, for example, if they want to arrest a criminal, the police has in many cases arrested family members in order to force the accused to surrender; another case is the dowry and women laws, where the threat of police action forces settlements (and is in many cases used by women when they want to get settlements in their favor or harass their family members).
So, now there is a recent amendment to the law governing the power of police to arrest for crime where there is a sentence below 7 years (this includes a number of crimes such as outraging a women's modesty, the 498A, robbery, kidnapping, assaulting the President, and all offences where the applicable punishment is less than 7 years). What does this amendment actually do ? It prevents the police in normal cases from arresting the accused unless the crime was committed in front of a police officer, or if the police believe that the accused being out of prison could affect investigations. In all other cases, the accused will be presented with a notice to be present, and only if the person does not present himself / herself, then the arrest will happen:

Seven years or less is the maximum penalty for a host of offences, including attempt to commit culpable homicide, robbery, attempt to suicide, kidnapping, voluntarily causing grievous hurt, cheating, outraging a woman's modesty and death caused by negligence. The radical change in the CrPC has, however, drawn flak from a number of Bar associations across the country. Lawyers -- who also observed strike in various courts after the bill was passed in Parliament -- argue that the amendment (in Section 41) doing away with mandatory arrest provisions would remove fear from the minds of criminals who would misuse the provisions under the garb of personal liberty.
The law further says that a police officer arresting a person will have to bear his identification badge or tag. Besides, a memorandum of arrest shall be prepared, witnessed and countersigned. The person arrested shall be told that he has the right to inform a relative or friend.

Overall, this would be a good thing. It will remove the current ability of the police, when corrupt, to harass innocents. However, it is true that those who are powerful or wilful offenders will gain to some extent. And a resourceful police force can still utilize some of the discretionary authority they have under this amended law to decide whether a person should be immediately arrested or not.

Labels: Law, Parliament, Police, Policy, Punishment

It is a well known (and nightmarish scenario) that the groundwater levels in cities and the rural parts of the country are declining. In rural parts of the country, the promise of free electricity, and agriculture that is not well fed by canals (along with some wrong crop planting policies in which heavy water seeking plants have been planted) has caused a tremendous decline in the water levels. In some parts of Uttar Pradesh, there were recent reports that in some parts of the state, there has been a sudden cracking of the surface land crust due to a total absence of water underneath, causing a drying up of the surface.
In cities, the groundwater is pumped out by various authorities as well as individuals; all of this is done for satiating the growing water requirements of cities. On the contra side, water levels would normally get replenished through rain water seeping in from the normal watersheds and lakes inside a city, as well as through water seeping in from river-beds (most cities have some form of river running through them). However, both of these methods are in great decline. Rivers in cities are like drains, and water bodies are in a state of decline (recent reports from Delhi point to many of these water bodies being coveted by builders, or being used as a means to dump trash).
One possible solution that is being increasingly touted for cities is the use of groundwater harvesting by buildings. The reasoning goes that if each new building is forced to do rainwater harvesting all over its compound, then the water levels of the whole city will rise. Towards this end, the Bangalore Government is trying to bring in a low to enforce water harvesting in the city:

BANGALORE: Ensure your building is equipped with rainwater harvesting technology in the next few months. If not, local authorities will install one for you and collect the expenses later.
Even though the Act is applicable to the entire state, the government is concentrating on making rainwater harvesting equipment mandatory for all new buildings — residential and commercial — in Bangalore. Aimed at replenishing groundwater, the Act, once it becomes operational, makes it mandatory for users of groundwater through well or borewell to register with the Ground Water Authority within 120 days of its establishment.

This sounds very good, but in principle. In reality, this is already law in many places (including I believe in Delhi), and it has been a spectacular failure. Why ? Because builders do not do it, and they are hardly ever caught for it. Even if at some point they are asked, they do the great India money appearance trick, and presto, no more problems. This sort of law is only good when either people genuinely believe in this sort of welfare, or when inspection procedures are strict.

Labels: Bureaucracy, Community, Environment, Policy, Punishment, Responsibility, Welfare

Driving during the night is prone to accidents. After all, this is a time when the human body expects to get its rest (even if you sleep during the day), there is less light(in fact, a lot less); the factors that cause accidents are far more. For some time now, authorities in Tamil Nadu have been finding that the rate of accidents during the night has been increasing, and a number of factors have caused this - the most important being the sheer lack of attention of drivers caused by sleepiness. So, one way to get around this is by providing them some facilities at this time:

Bleary-eyed truck drivers on their way to Chennai wake up to piping hot coffee and crunchy biscuits these days. Worried by the high number of road accidents on the highways leading to the city, the collector of the adjoining district of Kancheepuram has initiated a welfare programme aimed at heavy vehicle drivers.
Transport officials have been instructed to serve drivers undertaking perilous night drives with biscuits and coffee, besides handing out lessons on safe driving. Truck drivers cruising down NH 4 (Bangalore-Chennai Highway) at daybreak are therefore being stopped at various points and asked to step out, stretch their legs and help themselves to refreshments. "Between 4 am and 5 am, the time when accidents usually happen, we stop the trucks and ask the drivers to wash their faces. We then give them water to drink, biscuits to munch and coffee or tea as they prefer,

This is a very welcome step, and shows a level of responsibility among the officialdom that is not seen often. One can only hope that other places adopt this method, and that it does not slow down as time passes.

Labels: Bureaucracy, Policy, Responsibility, Security, Traffic, Transport

A very sensitive subject indeed. Mercy killing, or allowing a person to take his own life (or a team of doctors to do so) is a dilemma that raises ethical questions all over the world. For a world that has derived many of its laws and regulations from religious backgrounds (Ten Commandments / The Gita / The Koran / etc..), mercy killing is something that raises the hackles of a large section of the world's population. It is only permissible in some countries, and that too under strict control. In many other countries (even one such as the United States), mercy killing has run against a moral hard rock and many physicians have been sentenced for helping in carrying it out. In a recent case of Terry Schiavo (Wikipedia), the case went through major conflict, with people at all levels (politicians, religious figures, family rights groups, etc) getting involved.
The basic premise for mercy killing is simple: There are many medical conditions that are terminal, and there is no established medical treatments that can cure the disease or prevent death. And unlike movies, people don't dance or sing till almost just before death, they go through horrible phases of steadily declining abilities - losing control of vital motor abilities, losing control of their mental faculties, unable to fend for themselves and being dependent on others, and a steadily increasing pain. In such cases, there has been the logic that given that their condition is terminal (that is, they have reached a condition where death is confirmed and they no longer have a life that seems meaningful in any way), they should be allowed an option to end their life when they still can command control of their life.

Taking the first step towards legalizing euthanasia or mercy killing, the Law Commission has decided to recommend to the government to allow terminally ill to end their lives to relieve them of long suffering. It allows those whose death is virtually certain to avoid their painful journey to the end.
The core of the recommendation to make euthanasia legal stems from several SC judgments which ruled that 'life does not mean animal existence’. "If a person is unable to take normal care of his body or has lost all the senses and if his real desire is to quit the world, he cannot be compelled to continue with torture and painful life. In such cases, it will indeed be cruel not to permit him to die," says the report, receiving final touches from Commission chairman Justice A R Lakshmanan.

However, aside from the moral and ethical problems that this issue comes up with, there are many other problems that arise when such a discussion comes up:
- There are a host of new treatments that are arising as we experiment more with genes and new areas such as stem cell technology, so is it right to assume that a condition that is treated as terminal now could not become one where a treatment is possible in a few years
- Who decides whether the condition is terminal ? If it is a team of doctors, who do you trust ? How do you prevent misuse, especially when we have seen so many new cases whereby elderly people are dumped because of the effort of taking care of them
- Will this become a poor vs. rich thing ? Suppose that a very expensive treatment is available abroad, and a poor person cannot afford to get this done for the terminal condition ?
- How will the actual logistics of carrying out the termination of a medically terminally affected patient be carried out ?
- In a country where there are many more needy people than hospital beds, would this become a misused thing ?
What do you people think ? Is India ready for something like mercy killing ?
I agree that we need to do this, subject to some stringent checks and balances.

Labels: Health, India, Law, Medical, Morality, Policy, Reform

Slowly, one can see a greater use of the RTI Act. The RTI Act had been pushed for long as the means to allow citizens to get openness from the bureaucracy (seen for long as a place where things were slow, and where citizens would always have to suffer). The RTI Act was meant to let citizens get information on just about any query under the sun (subject some state secrets, and some commercial secrets). It has been going through fits and starts, with many bemoaning the fact that the babudom is trying their best to thwart the implementation of the law; but as the below examples show, the Act is actually doing good in many cases. People are able to request information, and if the concerned official does not provide the information, then there are provisions of fines being levies for this non-compliance:

PATNA: State information commissioner Mohd Shakeel Ahmad, has imposed a fine of Rs 250 per day with a maximum of Rs 25,000 each against deputy collector, land reforms, Rajgir, and the circle officer of Rajgir for not providing information to an applicant, Sanjay Kumar, seeking information under the provision of Right to Information Act.

Now the fine itself may not seem like much, but the provision is that the fine is levied from the salary of the official, and also such fines are typically highlighted in the media, putting pressure on the officers to comply with the orders. Further, it is the provision of such fines that would encourage citizens to query for all the information that they want to obtain, safe in the assumption that either they will get the information, or the officer will be fined for not providing the information.

Labels: Citizen, Empowerment, Information, Law, Policy, RTI

The incidence of dowry in the country is a fairly high chance. Over a period of time, it has evolved from something that was supposed to be a gift given to the bride (and maybe the only thing given to the daughter of the house from the family property) to something that is seen as the right of the groom's family. The belief is that if the son is skilled or from a good family, or of the right caste, then it is the right of the girl's family to open their wallets and give umpteen amounts for the marriage. There are people who dispute the amount of dowry prevalent in today's society, but open the newspapers or see TV, and you will society temporarily idolizing the girl who stood up to the dowry seekers, or you will read more grisly tales of brides being subjected to torture or being killed due to problems with the dowry being paid. In many cases, it is not cash, but the demand is for a vehicle, or even more subtly, a loan (never to be returned), to help the boy do better in a business or some other need. I know a case where a boy's grandparents demanded a car at the last moment (within 10 days of the marriage), and the poor parents felt that they had no option other than to give in and mobilize the funds to buy and give the car.
So, there are a set of laws to even the scale; these laws would not actually pass the test of being totally lawful since they do weigh more in favor of the girl. Many would argue that this is right, since society is totally in favor of the demands by the groom. However, as always happens when there are a set of laws that are more in favor of one section, the misuse of these laws happen. So, for all the times when the dowry laws help a tortured or suppressed girl, there are numerous other cases where the same law is used to threaten the family of a groom where there has been no incidence of dowry. For a case where there has been marital discord, the threatened use of dowry can turn the tables, since the groom's family have learned to fear the use of dowry laws. The allegation of dowry can bring about unwanted media attention including vilification, closer attention by cops (maybe some days in jail as well), and a significant pressure level to settle the case.
Hence, over a period of time, there has been a lot of focus by many self-help groups to plead against the misuse of these laws and bring it to the notice of the government (not only the anti-dowry laws, but the recent domestic violence act that also has some harsh measures). Even many courts have pointed out the misuse of these laws in some cases and called for greater oversight to prevent misuse of these laws:

Following complaints about the misuse of dowry laws by women, the Centre has decided to look into the issue and will hold a consultation programme to get views and suggestions from NGOs and activists working for men. Acting on complaints about the misuse of dowry laws, the Union Ministry for Women and Child Development would organise a consultation programme where men from different walks of life would be invited to express themselves on June 25.
"The ministry has received complaints from men about the urgent need to amend Section 498(A) of the dowry law claiming that many women misuse the law to their benefit. After the consultation, the Ministry will examine how far this claim is right before deciding on any thing," Union Minister for Women and Child Development Renuka Chowdhary said.

Nobody doubts the need for laws to act against dowry misuse as well as warn people against the potential problems they face if they demand dowry and ill-treat women because of that; however, at the same time, a harsh law has a strong potential for misuse and there is an urgent need for reform. The main question right now is about whether there will be a proper review and necessary changes be brought in ?

Labels: Discrimination, Dowry, Law, Morality, Policy, Punishment, Reform, Welfare, Women

From time to time, Indian authorities detect many persons traveling on various trains of the Indian Railways using VIP coupons. These are coupons issued to many categories of people (such as railways employees, politicians, cultural figures, freedom fighters, etc). However, it has been found that many of them get misused - they are meant for the person to whom they are allotted, and for their immediate staff or family; a lot of them get used for the purpose of either being sent to relatives or friends, and in extreme cases, getting sold. Consider this case:

CHANDIGARH: The flying squad of the railways commercial control wing detected yet another misuse of privilege coupons allotted to various categories. Four persons travelling on coupons allotted to Varanasi's former MLA were nabbed in this connection on Friday night.
The coupons were issued to Rajni Kant Datta, a former MLA from Varanasi. The four identified as P Mishra, M Mishra, Sanjeev Verma and Atul, all residents of Varanasi, were penalized in accordance to the provisions of the railways Act. Inquiries revealed that acting on a tip-off, a team of travelling ticket examiners (TTEs) caught the four travelling on the Varanasi-bound 414 Jammu-Banaras Express in Ambala.

Such misuse is a direct loss to the railways, and besides increases the culture of corruption. It is incumbent on the railways to make sure that such people who are caught are penalized, and so is the person whose coupons are being used in such a manner.

Labels: Corruption, Governance, Law, Policy, Punishment, Railways, Reform

Ever since the RTI Act came into existence, it has been seen as a powerful instrument to clear out secrecy of movements of records within the bureaucracy, and of helping to explain as to what decisions are made on what basis. It could be seen as a powerful laser-strength light shines like a powerful sun on the cobwebs of the Government bureaucracy and exposes corruption; however, one of the main problems seen is the inability of normal street level people to make sure of it. This has been seen as one of the main problems of the Act, it is only as good as the ability of people to use it.
Well, it seems like people are slowly catching on, and this awareness, even if more pronounced in urban areas, will slowly move through the whole country. Even a slight increase in awareness and a reduction in corruption and stealth of Government operations will do wonders for the enhancement of citizens. Imagine the power of a villager being able to find out where the money alloted for improving a road went to ? In many cases, just the act of filing a RTI petition can cause the concerned officials to move much faster. Consider these examples of how the RTI Act seems to be catching on:

Armed with the Right to Information (RTI) Act, citizens are posing peculiar questions to the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) at an average of 10 applications per day. The questions range from appointments, service matters, building penalisation scheme etc. It's not the city folk but people from districts and even other states are demanding information.
Consider this. P Anand, a resident of Ashok Nagar in the city sought information on last November's appointment of additional commissioner (heritage) J Kedareshwari. This included whether she was posted in GHMC through an open advertisement and why her appointment was done in haste and the qualifications and eligibility for the post.

It is really heartening to see this movement catching up on; if this continues and becomes a mass movement, then we will finally see levels of corruption coming down and the influence of vested interests will start coming down.

Labels: Community, Corruption, Empowerment, Governance, Image, Law, Policy, Reform, RTI, Welfare

Citizens of the country have mostly bad thoughts about interacting with Government bodies; a lot of them come across officialdom who are not responsive and caring about their needs (as an example, making them come repeatedly even for small errors in the red tape process), and so on. There are babus (officials), who are friendly, but most are like hard faced officials, unwilling to come across as caring people. It would be nice for people to live in a gated community (and self-sufficient place) where one would not have to interact with the Government bureaucracy, but that is living in an ideal world. However, there are cases when official responses are such that you would be horrified to read about such cases, and wonder as to how the official structure of the country could be so insensitive to the problems faced by citizens, that too when the situation is due to a fault of the agency themselves. The Delhi Development Authority however has been roundly criticized from time to time over its openness, caring nature (lack of it), and inability to care about what citizens go through. Read this article for more information:

Wondering if DDA derives "some kind of sadistic pleasure" in harassing citizens, Delhi High Court has slammed the civic agency in a case of double allotment of a flat in 1991 due to which the rightful owner was deprived of its possession and had to wage a 17 year legal battle in court.
"Ignoring dictum of law the officials of DDA keep perpetuating their illegal acts giving an impression as if they derive some kind of sadistic pleasure to harass the citizens," HC observed while castigating the civic body for having the nerve to demand double the price of a flat which wasn't handed over to Gandhi in 1991 because of DDA's double allotment mistake.

This case really highlights as to how uncaring an agency can be. DDA double-allotted a flat in 1991, and when the lady in question tried to get the mistake corrected, the DDA did a fresh allotment to her after 10 years and charged her new prices, at double the original cost. In such cases, the Court should also assign individual responsibility and fine officials responsible (including fining officials of the rank of Chairman and Vice-Chairman if they had made such recommendations).

Labels: Court, Governance, Judicial, Morality, Policy, Punishment, Reform

It is an established fact that a significant majority of money devoted to social programmes, such as the National Employment Guarantee, Anti-poverty programmes, targeted food subsidy, and many others, are heavily flawed in terms of the actual money that reach the poor. There have studies over the past, there have been admissions by the Government in the past (such as Rajiv Gandhi's famous statement made way back in 1985 about only 15% of the money reaching the intended). Money is siphoned off through middle-men, local politicians, workers, and the entrenched mafia. This has happened for a long time now, and it would seem that people have accepted this as a normal thing.
However, this should not be so. From time to time, the Government announces (mostly falsely) that there will be much greater inspection of the implementation to ensure that leakages are stopped. But more than the Government, there are social activists who are encouraging villages and the logical recipients of such aid to be more vigilant, to use laws such as RTI, and other measures such as social audits. Going against entrenched measures will lead to backlashes from those who stand to lose out their ill-gotten gains. Such is to be expected. However, it is the duty of the state to protect such audits and awareness, to provide all security measures, from policy statements by ministers at all levels and messaging through the arms of the state (babus, local politicians), and act strictly and firmly against people who seek to subvert such acts. But consider this article, and see whether the Government is doing things in the right manner:

The thousand-strong gathering at the Theological College grounds in Ranchi on June 10 had no doubts over why Lalit Mehta was killed. The 36-year-old engineer turned activist, had no personal enemies or battles. All he had done was access National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) expenditure records for researchers verifying official records against field data. On May 14, a day before the planned Social Audit of those works, he was brutally murdered.
The NREGA has provided an entitlement for the first time. The RTI has given a tool to uncover corrupt practices. The Social Audit is a mandatory process, under the NREGA Act, giving the people a chance to establish the truth and push for change. For the first time a corrupt mafia is threatened by a legally mandated process, which looks at details and places irrefutable documentary proof in the public domain. The corrupt nexus is reacting with pre-meditated, calculated violence.

If you read the article by Aruna Roy and Nikhil Dey, this will leave you shaking in disbelief. There are incidents where the local administration (influenced no doubt by vested interests), is acting against people who are trying to create the awareness, and the Government, with all its statements for the 'aam admi', is standing still and refusing to take the measures that are subverting its own political campaigns. In the end, when people see corruption and do not see measures reaching them, they blame the political party. Does it not surprise the Congress that all these measures are not getting them political votes ?

Labels: Community, Corruption, Development, Education, Empowerment, Governance, India, Investigation, Law, Police, Policy, Politics, Reform, Review, RTI

It seems to be a story that keeps on repeating itself over and over; you hear of people being harassed by loan recovery agents for repayment of loans, or of somebody's vehicle being taken away from them anywhere where the vehicle can be found, and so on. In extreme cases, the pressure or violence of the recovery agents can lead to injury or death of the person having taken the loan. The financing company or bank having advanced the loan would take recourse to goons or musclemen and they would use or threaten force in this regard.
For the last 2-3 years, this practise has been challenged in court, and there have been a number of decisions in this regard. Here's another substantiating the same point that a loan recovery company cannot use force for loan recovery. Since a loan agreement is a civil contract, recovery of loan amount or the assets bought against the loan also can happen only when there is a court order:

Unless a bank or a financial institution is equipped with a court order to repossess a vehicle which it has given on loan, it has no authority to go to the residence of the borrower to take away the vehicle by force. This was observed by the state consumer commission in a recent order.
Taking strong exception to the method adopted by a finance firm to recover dues in the form of a few unpaid instalments from a consumer who took the money to purchase a vehicle, the commission headed by Justice J D Kapoor directed Citicorp Finance (I) Limited to pay Rs 50,000 to one Jan Mohammad, a resident of Mehrauli, for the mental agony, harassment and public humiliation he faced. It was observed by the commission that no financier or bank had the authority to forcibly take possession of the vehicle as the loan agreement or hire purchase agreement were civil contracts and therefore had to be enforced through civil remedy. In other words, through intervention of the court.

It may be argued that the judicial system in India is slow and cases take a long time to settle; however that cannot be an argument for using force or illegal means. A company needs to act in the constraint of the law, so they need to use greater discretion when deciding loans, or they need to go in for more out-of-court settlements in such cases.

Labels: Court, Governance, Law, Policy, Property, Responsibility

Sometimes the doings of the Indian Government is very mysterious, and many times the doings just don't make sense. Take this example: The deportation of Pakistani human rights campaigner and former Human Rights minister as soon as he arrived at the Indira Gandhi International airport in New Delhi (back to Dubai from here he had arrived). Deportation ? You normally expect that to happen when there is a criminal involved, or if somebody arrives in the country without a visa, and you really don't want to let him inside the country. For those who do not know about the doings of Burney in recent times, here is a bit of background:
The case of Indians in Pakistani jails (and vice-versa) is an emotional issue, one that affects plenty of families on either sides, and one that both Governments deal both as a prestige issue as well as one that is supposed to be of high priority (for reference: Indian diplomats are believed to be less caring about the plight of Indian citizens in foreign jails rather than the diplomats of other countries, specially of the West). A long standing issue has been the one of Indian prisoner of wars from the 1971 war (who are supposedly still in Pakistani jails, but which every Government of Pakistan has denied, and whom Indira Gandhi did not make an all out effort to get back when she released the thousands of Pakistani prisoner of wars from the 1971 war). Another recent issue, highlighted in the media has been the cases of specific Indian prisoners in Pakistani jails, many of whom have been there for some time.
A long background, but serves to highlight the doings of Ansar Burney. He has apparently made an effort to visit jails, and taken up the case of many Indians who have been in Pakistani jails for a long time. The 2 most recent such persons in the limelight have been Kashmira Singh, and Sarabjit Singh. Burney, as the term goes, batted for both of them, and played an active role in the actual release of Kashmira Singh. He even came in for criticism when Kashmira Singh foolishly stated that he was a spy (people in Pakistani criticized him for helping in getting a spy released), but he was unfazed, and has been making statements in favor of Sarabjit Singh.
And then compare the treatment he has suddenly received on arriving in India:

Seemingly intrigued by the deportation of Pakistani human rights activist Ansar Burney on Saturday night, the Ministry of External Affairs has sought details about the action from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). The MEA has asked the MHA to state why Burney, who has been fighting for the cause of Indian prisoners in Pakistan, was deported, sources said.
Burney, who came to New Delhi on Friday night to attend a conference on terrorism, was immediately sent back from the Indira Gandhi International Airport to Dubai from where he had arrived. MHA sources said the former Human Rights Minister of Pakistan was sent back because of a 'look-out notice' against him.

This is all the more surprising since Burney had only recently visited India, and met both the Home Minister, Shivraj Patil, and the Foreign Secretary; so such an action is very surprising. Could it because the new Pakistani Government did not like his actions and wanted to humiliate him and got the Indian Government to issue a look-out notice ?

Labels: Information, Investigation, Policy

Well, the real name of the amendment brought in by the Government at the urging of the DMK Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss was actually the AIIMS Amendment Act; it should have been called the anti-Venugopal Act since though the law fixed the upper age of retirement of the AIIMS Director to be 65, based on which the noted heart surgeon had to resign. However, since Parliament, in a new low for the Government, actually spent time in passing a law that was directed specifically at one person; it was very easily challenged in court as being discriminatory and meant only to retire him. Venugopal challenged the Act, and even during the initial discussions, the SC had some strong words to say to the Government.

The Central Government on Thursday received a major setback with the Supreme Court striking down the law that enabled premature retirement of noted cardiologist P Venugopal as the Director of All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) after a raging row with Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss.

The net effect of the Supreme Court action has been that the health minister has suffered a severe reversal in his battle with the AIIMS Director. And of course, questions must be asked of the Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, this was after all the Bill of his Government and the Government has suffered the setback.
In other steps, the Health Minister has lead a campaign against drinking and smoking, and he is justified to that extent since these 2 are a cause of a large number of casualties. However, there are far more severe problems that the Minister and the Government don't seem too enthusiastic to tackle, since they are not glamorous. Take a look at this cover page article of TIME magazine that blows a hole in the quality of India's health services:

It's not hard to find people caught in the gap between India's dreams of greatness and the awful reality of its broken health system. Most of the country lives there. Sixty years after independence, India remains one of the unhealthiest places on earth. Millions of people still suffer from diseases and ailments that simply no longer exist almost anywhere else on the planet. Four out of five children are anemic. Almost one in four women who give birth receives no antenatal care.
The truth behind the glossy advertising is less incredible: India remains the sick man of Asia, malnourished and obese at the same time, beset by epidemics of AIDS and diabetes, and with spending levels on public health that even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has conceded "are seriously lagging behind other developing countries in Asia." The sorry state of India's medical services might not matter so much if tens of millions of Indians weren't already so sick.

I would advise people to read the whole article, it is is no way complimentary and displays a state of health that a lot of us, who now depend on the private health care system, don't know about and don't care. And in the midst of this, we have successive Governments who care about things that make political logic; trying to spend the long time and effort to overhaul a broken health care system does not matter anymore.

Labels: BJP, Congress, Court, Development, Health, Medical, Policy, Reform, Responsibility, Welfare

People who drive in Delhi know the current bad case of Delhi's traffic obeying drivers - there is not a single rule that you can expect drivers or pedestrians to obey; whether this means stopping before the zebra crossing, no talking on the mobile when driving, no drunken driving, stopping at the red light and only crossing on the green, driving the wrong way, giving way to elderly people, and so on. All of these are meant to be broken, and are often broken down.
And why could they do this with impunity ? Well, because say for example, the fine for jumping a red light is only Rs. 100, so most people would calculate the chance of getting caught, or even of having to pay the fine, and they would be fine with doing so. After all, there is only so much that a Rs. 100 is worth nowadays; and mind you, this is only when you actually get caught.
In a classic case of why the judiciary starts to take on policy making powers, the Government dithered this way and that, and did nothing to make fines steeper so that people feel the pinch of the fine and are more careful the next time (as an example, friends who are caught speeding in the United States and have had to pay upwards of Dollars 150 as a fine are very careful from that time onwards; and trust me, in Singapore, you don't want to be caught speeding). No action at all from the side of the Government, till one fine day, the High Court added a minimum of Rs. 500 to every fine, so that even jumping a red light would charge at least Rs. 600. However, this is now a thing of the past:

Red light jumping, the most common violation for which motorists are challaned in the Capital, would cost you Rs 100 and not Rs 600 as the Supreme Court has put back the old penalty system for on-the-spot compounding of traffic offences. The Supreme Court has stayed the March 2007 judgment of the Delhi High Court directing the traffic police to slap an additional Rs 500 fine, over and above the existing penalty, on motorists violating traffic rules.
Though legal experts were unanimous in siding with the apex court's decision to stay the HC order, they also said that the present penalty system for traffic violations was very less and wanted the government to immediately take up measures to revise the amount of fine for the violations. "Otherwise, there would be a definite spurt in traffic violations, especially red light jumping which attract a penalty of Rs 100," they said.

The Supreme Court judgment was correct on legal grounds, even though it does increase the scope for traffic problems in New Delhi. The High Court does not have the power to increase fines, this is a pure policy issue that needs to be handled by the Government, and in my opinion, this is a correct judgment. Of course, the Government does not seem to have this problem of changing the fine structure to be a good deterrence. One wonders what would could move the Government to take steps in this direction.

Labels: Court, Policy, Punishment, Reform, Road, Traffic