That a multi-religious Bench could deliver a unanimous verdict is a tribute to our judicial system and political sagacity
Revered variously as Maryada Purushottam Sri Ramchandra Raja of Ayodhya, the Imam-e-Hind as Allama Iqbal designated him, and a founding pillar of the Oriental civilisation, the status of Sri Ram as the central deity of the Hindu pantheon has always been beyond question. Regardless of whether a temple built at the place of his birth was demolished and a mosque built in its place, it was almost universally believed that this was indeed the place of the God-King’s birth. In fact, till recently Thailand’s Capital was called Ajutthia, referring to Ayodhya — such was the Indic influence of the epic Ramayana. To that extent it would have been a travesty of the faith of generations had the Supreme Court permitted any structure other than a shrine to Sri Ram to be built on that site. Collective historical memory being an integral part of any civilisational ethic, it is not surprising that the local populace around the town of Ayodhya has fought for over 400 years to regain the spot where Ram lalla or the infant Ram was born. Apart from physical clashes between Hindu and Muslim armies, the advent of the British colonialists dragged the matter to the courts where the issue hibernated for more than a century. A closure proved elusive and the case got further complicated by the mysterious appearance of idols of the infant God in 1949, shortly after Independence. So powerful was the collective historical memory that a mass movement to reclaim the site, launched by the BJP in 1989, gained massive traction once the then party supremo LK Advani initiated a Rathyatra from Somnath in Gujarat to liberate the Babri Masjid. Although the yatra could not complete its proposed journey, it aroused passions across the country, reinstating Lord Ram’s place as the most venerated member of the Hindu pantheon. It also gave India an alternative political narrative and birthed a national consciousness.
Given the convoluted history and labyrinthine logic of the arguments tabled by both sides, only a well-considered and voluminous verdict could have pacified the claimants. Even though Saturday’s judgment has been widely welcomed, there are indications that not everyone is satisfied. Some are reiterating that nothing short of restoration of the mosque will be acceptable, knowing well that such talk will only stir a massive communal bloodbath. Fortunately, most responsible organisations on both sides of the religious divide have been more restrained and their followers have not bitten the bait of provocations. The Government’s tough measures in anticipation of the negative role of agents provocateurs have so far kept a tight lid on people wanting to engineer riots and destroy India’s unity and integrity. Even residents of Ayodhya are tired of being circumscribed by a political context that doesn’t help their aspirations and have been seeking closure. With jobs and education on their mind, an entire generation, be it Hindu or Muslim, born under the shadow of the dispute is ready to cast away what has become a beast of burden. The Ayodhya verdict is truly a paean to India’s legendary spirit of tolerance and socio-religious diversity. That a multi-religious Bench could deliver a unanimous verdict in 40 days is a tribute to the strength of our judicial system as well as our political sagacity, too. The Supreme Court must be appreciated for stripping down the complexity of religiosity to the titular nature of the suit and creating a multi-representative trust to decide on the roadmap ahead. Not only that, it has said categorically that the allotment of land, all of five acres, for the construction of the mosque should happen simultaneously and within the perimeter of Ayodhya. Even the Sunni Waqf Board’s counsel Zafaryab Jilani highlighted that the operable parts of the verdict had upheld the secular nature of our polity, such as that classifying the act of demolition itself as illegal. Nothing and nobody must be allowed to damage this legendary resilience and democratic foundations. Finally, let us hope that with the restoration of our civilisational core, it isn’t used as a justification for historical corrections that are guided by narrow political considerations. Lord Rama wouldn’t like that maryada to be tampered with.
Courtesy: The Pioneer
The mistrust of some Hindus towards Bangladesh is disturbing. If the migration issue festers, business communities on both sides will go into hibernation
For more than 100 years, the ratio of Hindu population in the Indian subcontinent has been declining. The dip, from 75.1 per cent in 1881 to 72.9 per cent in 1901, in British India created a paranoid reaction that Muslims would outnumber Hindus. This myth has been repeated after every census ever since. The share of Hindus in free India continued to drop, from 84.1 per cent in 1951 to 79.80 per cent in 2011, and the paranoia is now being used by Islamophobes to rile up Hindus for political reasons.
Of India’s 1.3 billion people, Muslims constitute only 15 per cent. Because of the staggering gap in these numbers, it is absurd to think that Indian Muslims would ever exceed Hindus. It is, however, true that India’s 200 million Muslims possess pendulum-swinging voting firepower, especially in minority-dominated areas.
Across India’s eastern borders, the Hindu growth rate paints a surprisingly different picture. Bangladesh is facing a reverse migration. Hindus have been moving back to Bangladesh from India since Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina recaptured power in 2009. Confirmation of this trend came from no less a person than Shahriar Kabir, a journalist and pro-India man who is widely known as an anti-Islamist activist in Bangladesh. “Over the past 10 years, 250,000 Hindus have returned to Bangladesh. There has been no new migration to India. As a result, the Hindu population has risen by 2.5 per cent.” India’s previous External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj also acknowledged the trend. “About the demographic changes in Bangladesh, as per statistics of the Bangladesh Bureau [of Statistics, which compiles demographic data] in 2011, there were 8.4 per cent Hindus in the country, which has risen to 10.7 per cent in 2017,” she told India’s Parliament.
Influx raises questions: This sudden surge in the Bangladeshi Hindu population, which had been on a free fall since British India’s Partition in 1947, has fuelled wild speculation in Bangladesh: Pro-India Hasina has imported Bengali-speaking Hindus from India to fill key administrative positions in an attempt to tighten her grip on the nation. Hindus had been historically denied top government jobs since the Pakistan days because they were suspected to be sympathetic to India. But now they seem to be ubiquitous. They all too often appear on television and in newspapers as government spokesmen. This phenomenon has caught public attention.
“The calculation of the percentage here is not clear to me. How did the Hindu population growth surpass that of the Muslims in the last few years? Can we assume that a great number of Hindus migrated to Bangladesh from India over the last few years?”asked Masud Kamal, senior news editor, Banglavision, a satellite TV channel in Dhaka. The questions have merits. Research shows the trend defies logic. A study, Hindu Population Growth in Bangladesh: A Demographic Puzzle, concluded that “Hindus have lower fertility, higher mortality and higher international out-migration rates than Muslims.” Given the demographic characteristics, the natural Hindu growth rate trails that of the Muslim. Because of this anomaly, the rumour mill is in overdrive as to why the Hindu population suddenly soared in Bangladesh and how Hindus so quickly captured so many top jobs. Sceptics dismiss the influx as a hoax, arguing the Government fabricated the numbers to appease India. But they fail to explain the surge in Hindu high officials, giving credence to the Hindu import theory.
No official explanation has been offered. This silence may be too costly. In the event the hereditary frictions between the two communities again flare up, genuine Bangladeshi Hindus could be targetted by Muslim mobs on suspicion that they are “imported Hindus.” The speculation surrounding the Hindu influx reflects a deep-rooted suspicion that marks Hindu-Muslim relations, a legacy of India’s age-old caste system. Most of the Bengali Muslims descended from oppressed-and-resentful-lower-caste Hindus who converted to Islam, rebelling against their higher-caste Hindu oppressors. There is still bad blood between the upper and lower castes, or Hindus and Muslims.
India’s paranoia: The paranoia towards Bangladesh and its majority Muslim population runs high among some of the elite in India. Some Hindus, especially those in West Bengal, who share a common language and a rich culture with Bangladeshis, accuse their neighbour of tacitly harboring anti-India terrorism. They also sound a false alarm, saying illegal migration into India is changing its religious demographics.
This rant reflects the century-old fear that Muslims would somehow outnumber Hindus and re-establish the Muslim empire in India. It is this fear that drove Hindutva guru VD Savarkar to oppose a Muslim country next to Hindustan. The nationalist BJP is using this anxiety against neighbouring Bangladesh to galvanise public support.
Bangladesh, the land of 163 million Bengalis, including 12 per cent Hindus, is India’s most friendly neighbour. Still, it has concerns about several bilateral matters, including a fiercely contentious assertion by Delhi that there are 40 million Bangladeshis illegally living in India and that they must be pushed back. This issue spoiled the talks in Delhi in August between Bangladesh’s Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan and his Indian counterpart Amit Shah. The matter became so acrimonious that the two sides failed to issue a customary joint communique after the talks.
Delhi is going through a citizenship verification process to detect non-citizens and has already classified nearly two million of its long-term residents as stateless. India’s Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar has assured that the citizenship verification drill is India’s internal matter; it will not affect Bangladesh. Modi has reassured his Bangladeshi counterpart Hasina twice, first at the United Nations in September and then in Delhi in October.
What’s behind migration politics? Why did Shah push Khan for a treaty to deport illegal migrants? Why did not the Hasina-Modi joint statement include the assurance? There was no mention of the migration issue at all, a lapse that raises suspicions about India’s real intentions. One possible reason could be that the BJP now understands the folly of “Operation Pushback” but still must appease its militant saffron warriors, who want a Muslim-free India. During his election campaign, Narendra Modi told the migrants in States bordering Bangladesh to keep their “bags packed,” ready to be sent home. But his administration waited until his re-election in 2019 to bring up the deportation issue with Bangladesh, the most densely populated nation on earth and less than five per cent the size of of its neighbour.
India’s anti-Bangladesh paranoia appeared so incendiary that it once caught the attention of an American diplomat. During a discussion in Kolkata with visiting US Embassy Dhaka’s political officer Denise Rollins, Dilip Mitra, additional director-general of the state police for railways, listed a lengthy litany of complaints. He was convinced India’s arch rival Pakistan had taken over Bangladesh; that Pakistan’s military intelligence agency, backed by Islamic zealots, controlled Bangladesh’s army and its spy agency, all of which were working to make India “bleed from 1,000 cuts.” On top of all this, he believed, illegal immigration from Bangladesh across a porous border was sharply increasing the Muslim proportion of West Bengal’s population. He vowed to flee the State before the demographic change occurred.
Despite all the railing against Bangladesh, its people still keep close ties with West Bengal. Nahida Rahman Shumona, counsellor at the Deputy High Commission for Bangladesh in Kolkata, estimated roughly 30 per cent of Bengalis have roots in Bangladesh and wish to see their neighbour prosper. Many Bangladeshis come to Kolkata for medical care and go shopping in the city’s vibrant markets and name-brand stores.
The mistrust of some Hindus towards Bangladesh is disturbing. It can only harm the often-testy relations between the two countries. If the migration issue festers, business communities on both sides will go into hibernation. An economic nosedive will destabilise Bangladesh and India will face an influx of refugees. Keeping lines of communication open is essential to successfully managing the bilateral relationship.
Writer: BZ KHASRU
Courtesy: The Pioneer
The roots of R&D have to be Indian assumptions, environment-friendly methodologies and techniques which can work in the infrastructure available here
The quality of research by Indians is well recognised. It is equally true that path-breaking research in Indian institutions, in practically most domains of study, is few and far between. This includes science, technology, medicine, maritime studies and more. This poverty of range and depth is not always a factor of resources or autonomy. There are many factors which have contributed to it, not the least being the intellectual conditioning and orientation of an overwhelmingly large number of so-called ‘intellectual’ leaders. Oriented and bred in Anglo-Saxon scholastic traditions or traditions of US/Canadian Universities, these front line leaders have inherited a world view and academic orientation which they perpetuate through their choice of research themes and methodologies.
Most of the Central Government institutions with specific specialisation, such as science, technology, medicine and management are not short of money or talent. Yet somehow, the chemistry between the objectives of the institutions and the efforts of the personnel have not resulted in the alchemy, which makes for referable fundamental contribution to the chosen domain of knowledge. Nor does it, often enough, significantly, contribute to the Indian domain of application. Very often, an aspiring Indian academic, in an immigration mode, goes abroad and does significant work. But he chooses a field which is usually a subset of his supervisor’s domain of interest or a theme which puts the spotlight on the reprehensible conditions in post-colonial territories. In the academic and media network, rooted in the traditions of the English-speaking world, this is then universally disseminated and quoted. The issue is not simply of scholastic communication but it has serious ramification on the nature and terrain of research. Consider the canvas of recognition in Indian academic institutions. Almost universally a publication in a foreign journal is more appreciated and better rated than a publication in any Indian journal, even if it be refereed. The preposition is simple, in our dominant value, things foreign are by and large more desirable than anything Indian. The careers of significant quotable personalities in knowledge domain, or for that matter in any domain, are a testimony to the fact that, very often, recognition in India followed recognition abroad. Be it cinema (Satyajit Ray) literature and poetry (Rabindranath Tagore) or even renowned economists, they all made their careers through foreign recognition and reaped the harvest in India. This is even more common in the science and technology domain. Operationally the lateral entrants in these fields, like anywhere else, stand testimony to how careers shape up.
This is also true of several other Asian and African countries in areas of fundamental or applied research. The problem is, as noted above, linked with the methods used in research and sources selected for information. Obviously if research is to be carried out on Sal seeds and leaves or Neem seeds or Google or Nux Vomica or for that matter any other such produce, it cannot be on western assumption or western methodologies. The roots of research have to be Indian assumptions, environment-friendly methodologies and techniques which can work in the infrastructure available. The plain truth is, there is hardly any research on research methods. Further, it does not adequately establish a co-relation with the infrastructure available or the delivery mechanisms which enable laboratory results to be transferred to field conditions.
These are important concerns which cannot be overlooked while working on the theme of pushing the boundaries of knowledge and their application in India. The labour conditions which produce goods and services in various parts of the country are significantly different from what works elsewhere. Even on populist issues like gender equity, sloganeering is one thing, the reality can be different.
Women are very much apart of the productive process in Indian ethos. It is not only the woman who steps out of the house to earn, who can be termed productive. Even the person who runs the household is extremely productive because, irrespective of everything, somebody has to run the household. If the family person doesn’t run it, somebody has to be hired for it. That becomes a routine outgo. Hence, the assumption of some economists that only when one goes out of the household and earns is one productively employed, is an erroneous one. A person can be in the household and yet be of economic support to the family. Attributing value to certain modes of production, selectively, is not the scientific way forward. One has merely to look at the assumptions to check whether what is painted as “outcomes” are worthwhile or not. Reflecting on the assumptions is an essential pre-requisite for authenticating the veracity of the findings. Unfortunately for everyone concerned, social science research also has its moorings in Western ethos. Thus it is that the entire scientific method becomes topsy-turvy. Often convoluted conclusions are pandered generously in the name of research. This situation requires a priori examination.
Writer: Vinayshil Gautam
Courtesy: The Pioneer
If public figures do not indulge in misdeeds, they will hardly face any danger from anyone and will not need any security cover, be it SPG or Z+
A big hue and cry has been raised by Congressmen over the withdrawal of SPG (Special Protection Group) security cover for Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, alleging that it is an act of political vendetta. One wonders what the brouhaha is all about, because they will still get Z plus security, which means that they will have commandos from the CRPF in close proximity, besides guards at their homes and where ever they travel in the country. Officials of the Union Home Ministry say the decision to downgrade their security was taken only after getting reports from multiple Intelligence agencies that there was no security threat to the family.
And even if it is “political vendetta” as is being claimed by the red-faced Congressmen, the question which needs to be considered is whether public figures really need such high security at all?
It is my belief, that if public figures do not indulge in misdeeds, they will hardly face any danger from anyone and will not need security. That is my personal experience. When I was a Judge of the Allahabad High Court (1991-2004) I would almost daily go for morning walks for several miles on public roads without any security guard (I only carried a cane to ward off stray dogs). I never received any threat from anyone, though I sometimes even confirmed death sentences. I would go daily from my residence to the High Court and back in a car without any security. When I was appointed Acting Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court in August 2004, on leaving my residence in my car, I saw a policeman on a motorcycle in front and a Gypsy vehicle with half-a-dozen policemen with automatic rifles behind my car. I asked my secretary, who was travelling with me, who these people were. He said they were there to provide me security cover. I said I didn’t need any security and asked them to leave. My secretary replied that under the police regulations a Chief Justice or Acting Chief Justice must have security. So I had no choice in the matter, as the police, and I too, were bound by the rules.
Shortly after I became Chief Justice of Madras High Court in November 2004, I went by train from Chennai (the principal seat of the High Court) to Madurai, where a new Bench of the High Court had been set up. A huge contingent of policemen was at the Madurai railway station to receive me. From the station, I travelled to the Madurai High Court Bench premises by car. I saw policemen posted every 100 or 200 yards throughout this 10 mile route, saluting me. In the evening I called the Inspector-General of Police (Southern Range) and told him that he should not have posted these policemen at the railway station and en route to the High Court premises. I told him that the police force was for the protection of the citizens of the country. Making half the police force of Madurai stand throughout the 10 mile route, saluting me, meant that it had given thieves, cut-throats and other anti-social elements a field day as the common man was left unprotected. I said I had no ego problems with not being accorded that kind of importance and security and requested the officer not to do this again.
The first Prime Minister of India, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, used to jump into the jostling crowd without security and yet there was never any threat to him. The famous Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, K Kamaraj, always refused any security cover and so did Bidhan Chandra Roy, the famous physician-Chief Minister of West Bengal. This was because at that time most politicians were upright. The need for security arose only thereafter when politicians started indulging in misdeeds like corruption. Allegedly, it is widely perceived that the Congress party is totally corrupt and looted hundreds, if not thousands, of crores of rupees and took them to foreign banks or other secret havens abroad. Though technically Manmohan Singh, as the Prime Minister, was the head of the UPA Government, it is well known that he was only a figurehead and the real ruler was Sonia Gandhi.
In fact, Manmohan admitted this himself, first when I attended a reception given to him by the then Cabinet Secretary BK Chaturvedi, and second when I went to him to seek pardon for Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar, a chemical engineering professor who was a convict in the 1993 Delhi bomb blast case, who I thought had been wrongly convicted (the exact words used by Manmohan were, “Justice Katju, I am not a free man”).
Scam followed scam during the UPA rule, not of just crores but of lakhs of crores of rupees. Though there may not be direct evidence, there is overwhelming circumstantial evidence that Sonia was the main beneficiary of this loot. She and Rahul were the be-all and end-all in the Congress Party and all other Congressmen were non-entities. Sonia had evidently been taught by her mother-in-law Indira Gandhi that the Nehru-Gandhi family were the royals who had the divine right to rule India.
Everyone in the Congress party had to blindly accept their leadership and they treated other Congressmen with disdain. One proof of this contempt for other Congressmen was when the Assamese Congress leader Himanta Biswa Sarma (who later joined the BJP in view of his ill-treatment by the top leadership of the grand old party) went to meet Rahul. He could get an audience only after a long wait, and then, too, only for a few minutes, during which the Gandhi scion was feeding his dog.
Indira Gandhi, and thereafter her descendants, treated Indians as gullible fools, who would accept the rule of the “royal” family, no matter what misdeed they committed. Why should the Gandhi family then get any security, far less SPG security? What is so great about Sonia, Rahul and Priyanka that their lives must be protected even at a huge cost to the exchequer? Except for the arrogance that they belong to a royal family, what do they contribute to the country?
They have no ideas about solving the problems of massive poverty, unemployment, farmers distress, child malnourishment, lack of healthcare and so on which India faces. And is India a feudal despotism in which only one family must rule, like the Stuarts, Bourbons and the Romanovs ?
Congressmen say that the Nehru-Gandhi family is indispensable because it is the only glue which can keep the party together. This itself indicates the ideological bankruptcy of the party. Apart from its oft-touted profession of secularism, which really means its desire to get the vote bank it cultivates consciously, what does the Congress stand for? Nothing. And its deeds show that its rule was tainted by corruption.
And if they have done no misdeed, they should openly say so. They should refuse heavy security, like upright Congress leaders in the early years after Independence such as Pandit Nehru, Kamaraj and BC Roy did.
Writer: Markandey Katju
Courtesy: The Pioneer
I fled the East for West Berlin and found out that my ‘friends’ had been informing on me to the Stasi, recalls Fanny Melle
I’ve lived in Berlin for 30 years — but have never gone near the Wall or what’s left of it. I spent so long trying to escape over it that I can’t bear to be near it. Like most West Berliners on that night in November 1989, I sat at home alone watching East Germans flood through the gates at Bornholmer Straße on TV.
I found that moment bittersweet: Having finally managed to escape the East in 1985, abandoning my family and friends, it fell just four years later, producing revelations about my life as an East Berliner just four years earlier along with the rubble.
I had grown up in East Germany near Karl-Marx-Stadt (now Chemnitz), but at the age of 28 I was granted permission to leave; East Germany had signed up to the Helsinki Accords, which made it theoretically possible for citizens to apply to emigrate to the West. In reality, though, the process was tortuous and opaque: You had to apply in person every year and usually your application would be declined without explanation.
The first time you applied, you were immediately blacklisted by the SED (the East German Communist Party), making it difficult to get things like jobs and flats. If, years later, your permission did finally come it came without warning and you were given just four weeks to settle your affairs and go.
So on December 6, 1985 my parents drove me and my then-husband to Friedrichstraße Station, which straddled the Berlin Wall, with platforms in both the East and the West. My parents were very political, both members of the SED. My father was a head teacher and my mother worked as a typist for the party’s Agricultural Department. They were dedicated to East Germany and couldn’t comprehend why I was leaving. It really broke their hearts. They left us at the cavernous glass departures hall at Friedrichstraße station, which we called the “Tränenpalast” (the Palace of Tears). In a very narrow corridor, the GDR authorities stripped me of all my papers, making me officially stateless, and I was free to go.
As artists in the East, my ex-husband and I couldn’t exhibit or publish our work, we weren’t allowed to study and we were under constant surveillance. We knew nothing about West Berlin. All information about the western half of the city was suppressed: on our maps, West Berlin was just a blank white space in the middle of East Germany. When we arrived we drove through the city — it was Christmas and the bright lights made me so dizzy that, on my first night, I didn’t sleep a wink. For months afterwards I had a recurring nightmare that I was visiting my parents in Karl-Marx-Stadt, and when I went to get the train back to the West the door of the station was locked. There was, of course, joy at having left, particularly having the freedom to paint and draw and the fact I had access to proper artists’ materials for the first time, rather than having to paint on old sheets stretched over a bed frame. But there were things I struggled with in the West.
People seemed so uptight to me. Because almost no one in the East had their own phone, if you wanted to talk to someone you just turned up at their flat. Sometimes friends would knock on the door at three in the morning and you would pull on your clothes and head out with them for a drink. I had also never experienced sexism before I left East Germany. When I had my first job interview in West Berlin as a window dresser, they said they liked me but I was 28 so would probably get pregnant soon, and gave the job to a man. It took me months to find work. Although we were free, the Stasi continued to watch us. I later discovered that they had tapped my phone calls back home to my family; one time an old friend from Karl-Marx-Stadt turned up at my door saying that he had been given permission to visit the State Library in West Berlin and could he borrow 10 marks. It turned out he was also working for the Stasi and wanted to check on me and my husband’s whereabouts. Not that we had done anything particularly seditious — we just wanted the freedom to do our work. But in East Germany you didn’t need to do much wrong to attract the attention of the secret police.
The biggest change for me when the Wall fell was that I could see my family again. My sister-in-law came over and visited me in West Berlin and was disappointed by how modestly I lived — I was a window dresser and an artist and earned very little. Where was my video recorder, she wanted to know. Where were my fitted wardrobes?
I went straight over to our town near Chemnitz to visit my mother and father, although my mother was very sick by then. They were still sad that I’d left, but we talked everything through and the best point we could reach was to begrudgingly agree that neither the East nor the West were perfect.
The fall of the Wall meant that the Stasi files were opened up and I was able to apply to the new Stasi Records Agency to view all of the files that had been kept on me.
I’d been part of a large artists’ circle in the East and my first solo show at a local youth club was a sell out. My files, though, revealed that the Stasi had paid the director of the club to buy the drawings to keep my artists’ circle together so they could keep spying on us all, hoping, I suppose, that our subversive meetings and publications would lead to one of us doing something really treasonous. I was devastated. But what really broke my heart was the amount of fellow artists and friends who had informed on me. I cut out anyone that had betrayed us.
Thirty years on, Berlin is still changing so fast that I sometimes wonder how long I’ll have a place here. But I’ve been in the West longer than I ever lived in the East and I don’t see myself as East German anymore. I suppose, finally, I feel like a West Berliner.
Writer: Fanny Melle
Courtesy: The Pioneer
Provocative gestures and doublespeak on the pilgrim corridor show the Pakistani Army’s new designs
Guru Nanak is not just a Sikh guru in the sub-continent but embodies a consciousness. As scholars have chronicled his travels across Saudi Arabia, Tibet, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, India and Pakistan, he spread what is called a “Nanakpanthi culture.” Its practitioners were syncretic groups of people in the Indus plains who followed Guru Nanak’s teachings, irrespective of them being Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims. A community of believers, they broke down barriers of faith and cultures and were undiluted even by the Partition in 1947. So the Kartarpur corridor, connecting Gurdwara Darbar Sahib in Pakistan, where Guru Nanak spent his last days, and Dera Baba Nanak Sahib in India, in that sense, is a symbolic leap of faith in humanity. And probably the antidote that could have helped reconcile the wounds of Partition and set up a communication channel in the Indo-Pakistan dynamic, given the current stress it is under. But Pakistan has been using Kartarpur’s iconic value to further its separatist agenda of indoctrinating and radicalising Sikhs in India and reviving the Khalistani movement all over again. And for all the sweet talk by its Prime Minister Imran Khan, it is just an elaborate trap by the Pakistan Army and Inter-Service Intelligence to refuel militancy in Punjab and give us another security bother. There’s a deliberateness of mixed signals, be it in wooing the Sikh community worldwide through its grandstanding of allowing pilgrim access and provoking us at the same time. Hence the use of pictures of Khalistani separatist leaders Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, Maj Gen Shabeg Singh and Amrik Singh Khalsa in its promotional videos on Kartarpur. The video, which prominently conveys the harmony between Sikhs and Muslims, also features former Punjab Minister Navjot Singh Sidhu and Union Minister Harsimrat Kaur Badal, in a crude attempt to project Khan as welcoming of religious minorities in the sub-continent. Pakistan is hell-bent on denying a sense of comfort to the Indian side, forcing last minute changes that are intended to portray us as the spoiler of expectations. Despite having assured visa-free passage, Pakistan now wants pilgrims to carry passports and permits which defeats the purpose of a dedicated corridor. No Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI)-card holder can make it through Kartarpur, the implication being that Pakistan wants to address only a section of Sikhs in India. While India sought 5,000 pilgrims daily, Pakistan has limited that number to 500 per day. Pilgrims cannot travel on foot, as is ritual, and instead of an annual flow, our neighbour intends to restrict seekers to just “visiting and special occasion” days.
Clearly, now that its level-playing field has been upturned in Jammu and Kashmir, and with both the West and the Islamic world supporting India’s position on its changed status, Pakistan doesn’t want to isolate the Sikhs or lose the trumpcard of Khalistan. Particularly, after its Prime Minister Imran Khan’s “cry wolf” threats of a nuclear war have dented the nation’s credibility at international fora. So the Pakistan Army, without whom Khan would not have been in the chair, has decided to up the pro-Khalistan extremist agenda and foment trouble in Punjab. In fact, this divisive agenda has been in the works over the last 15 years or so. And though the Pakistani leadership has been cool to the Manmohan Singh government’s overtures on Kartarpur, fact is it had been using it as a neo-axis of Sikh separatism since 2003. The gurdwara had been abandoned till then and served as a cattle shed. Pakistan even allowed rampant encroachment but now the land owned by the gurdwara has also been quietly acquired by its government. While announcing the Kartarpur project, Pakistan appointed several Khalistani separatists on the committee, much to India’s discomfort. Its former Army chief Gen Mirza Aslam Beg openly advised the military and the government to use the Kartarpur corridor for Khalistan terror and “create trouble for India.” Recently, the Pakistan Army even got pro-Khalistani supporters to challenge the reorganisation of Kashmir. No matter how hard India may try to make Kartarpur a matter of people-to-people concern, it will never be free of our neighbour’s insidiousness. India has to be alert that the base camp on the Pakistan side doesn’t become a hotbed for Khalistani propaganda in the name of allowing faith congregations. When Pakistan Army chief General Qamar Bajwa stood in Kartarpur, shaking hands with known Khalistani face Gopal Singh Chawla, it was clear he was starting a new front in the proxy war.
Courtesy: The Pioneer
Sweeping changes in the judiciary are must in order to modernise it so that it can provide timely and affordable justice
When it comes to assessing governance, it is usually the performance of the Executive and the bureaucracy that is scrutinised by the media and experts. But a sound, effective and independent judiciary is equally important in a country to protect the constitutional rights of the people. The hallmark of an efficient judicial system is how fast it delivers justice. Today more than 3.5 crore cases are pending in Indian courts and the number is increasing every year almost at the rate of 9.7 per cent. In the Supreme Court (SC) alone the number of pending cases as on July 2019 was 58,669. The Chief Justice of India (CJI) took up the matter with the Prime Minister for increasing the retirement age of judges to deal with this backlog. Though this idea might have some merit, the real issue, however, is the absence of quick, affordable and accessible justice for a vast majority of our people. The causes of pendency are also the way our judicial system functions. The Government must seize this opportunity to discuss with an open mind the restructuring of our faltering judicial mechanism so that a futuristic, natural justice regime is created which is quick, fair and affordable not only at the district level but right up to the apex court.
On many national issues of public interest, the judiciary has come to the rescue of citizens, right from enforcing fundamental rights to ensuring conservation of the environment, protecting the basic features of the Constitution, independence of institutions and also firmly correcting aberrations in discharging duties as per the law by the executives and primarily the bureaucracy. However, the moot question is why the judiciary is perceived to have failed on the issue of providing quick access to justice to commoners. The cost of getting justice is very high, cumbersome and time consuming and powerful people get away with their misdeeds in many cases. Therefore, there is a need for sweeping changes in the judiciary in order to modernise it so that it can provide timely and affordable justice by mirroring the needs of present day society.
On visiting a court, the first impression is that getting justice is a tedious process, especially in civil suits, due to constant delays in court proceedings. The law and its interpretation is so cumbersome that in frustration many people leave their fight midway and the rich and powerful who can afford costly advocates get their way. This is particularly true in case of property disputes among close family members. Here the law, instead of finding contours of natural justice, gets trapped in the nitty-gritty of interpretations.
During the early eighties, judicial reforms brought many tribunals into existence so that domain expertise is used in handling cases on specific subjects along with judicial scrutiny and in order to give quick delivery of justice and to reduce the work of High Courts. Many tribunals however, have become the biggest impediments for justice in many cases. Take for instance the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum (NCDRF) and the Central Administrative Tribunal (CATs). These bodies constituted under two different Acts of Parliament, have become another sinecure for retired judges and a few bureaucrats. They are the antithesis of the purpose they were set up for, holding up cases for many years. There is a case being heard in the Bench of a retired bureaucrat in the NCDRF for the last four years against the Amrapali Group in Noida. The member is extening dates after dates with a gap of 10-12 months and it seems like he is helping the builder more than the litigants. Interestingly, the same issue is being heard by the SC and the consumer forum should have closed the case as its decision had been overridden by the apex court in any case. The situation is no different in CATs. In the Guwahati CAT, the simple case of one officer has not been decided for the last seven years as the members are either on leave or keep postponing the matter on flimsy grounds. Needless to say, the officer is suffering. The Law Ministry should appoint a committee to examine if the purpose of creating these bodies is achieved. There may be umpteen cases which can be cited to invoke the conscience of our SC and the Government to see if the country can review its legal framework and at least simplify it in many cases. The judiciary must evolve a protocol so that judges decide the cases within a time limit and develop a mechanism to quickly deal with intricacies of cases. Another issue is of providing judicial assistance and the exorbitant fee charged by lawyers. It should also be examined if the profession of judges could be separated from lawyers. It will bring more professionalism and effectiveness into the system. For tribunals and other such bodies, only serving judges should be appointed so that they are accountable for what they do. However, the SC should constitute a panel of experts of domain knowledge to assist the judges on subject matters if the need arises. Hope this piece can attract the attention of the CJI, the Prime Minister and the Law Minister and spur some thinking on the issues raised here.
Writer: VK Bahuguna
Courtesy: The Pioneer
If Government and State funding went into the production of texts of important and popular Urdu authors in the Devanagari script,the reading of literature in this beautiful language would grow tremendously in the country
Until the Partition of India, Urdu enjoyed tremendous cultural prestige among educated north Indian Muslims and Hindus, as well as among the more conscientious British administrators.
Urdu was also the first literary language for many of those who also wrote in Hindi. For instance, Upendranath Ashk and Munshi Premchand were famous Urdu authors before they even began to write in Hindi.
In order to fully grasp the state of Urdu in the post-Independence period, an examination of the roots of the language is required. Urdu within India has faced many turbulent times, pressure brought upon by the Government, Hindi chauvinists and sometimes the ineffectiveness of Urdu literary education.
In 1947, when the country gained its independence from British rule and Pakistan was formed, a great shift was made in the maintenance of Urdu in India. Many Urdu experts may argue that within India during the period immediately following Independence, keeping the language alive was a difficult task in many respects.
Many organisations and individuals, with and without the support of the Government, worked hard over the decades to preserve the language and educate the younger generations.
However, there were and still remain, many roadblocks to progress in preserving and spreading the language in modern India.
Among the Urdu writers of the 19th century, the most renowned was Asadullah Khan Ghalib (1797-1869) who was described by Muhammad Sadiq in his book A History of Urdu Literature as a visionary who “broke away from the past both in thought and style. He stands at the threshold of the modern world.” Other famous literary figures were poet Muhammad Iqbal (1878-1938) and short story writer SH Manto (1912-55).
Although, since the Partition, the use of Urdu has become more and more restricted to Pakistan and among Indian Muslims, it is still the primary literary language of many Hindus and Sikhs in India.
In the early years of Independence, in the area which one might call the heartland of Urdu, Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Bihar, the Governments of these States were working to discontinue its use. The somewhat twisted interpretation of the three-language formula devised by the Government was the device by which the State Governments attacked it.
The Centre recommended that three tongues be taught in all schools, the language of the State, a modern Indian language and one other tongue. In UP, Urdu should have been chosen as one of the three languages as it was the most widely used means of communication there after Hindi. However, the Government of UP and some other Hindi-Urdu speaking States chose Sanskrit as the modern language, and so Urdu, which was taught in schools before Independence, was discontinued.
However, from Indira Gandhi’s time onwards, the Government had its own political reasons for supporting Urdu literature. During Indira’s time, a committee was set up in 1972 headed by IK Gujral to consider how the cause of the language could be advanced. Due to vigorous opposition the report was put on the back burner. Later, in 1990 when Ali Sardar Jafri investigated the committee report, he found that 95 per cent of the recommendations made by the Gujral committee had not been adopted.
However, in 1989, the State Governments of Bihar and UP recognised Urdu as an official language. Warsi, in his paper titled, History and Prospects of Urdu Print Media, made an observation that, “in the early stages of the post-Independence period the Urdu print media was mainly being affected by the tragedy of Partition. Consequently, the Urdu Press suffered the most. However, the Urdu media is still struggling for its survival in different Indian cities.”
Many of the Urdu speakers in India, who are not limited to the Muslim community, do not know the its written script, thus giving them access to literary works in Roman Urdu and in the Devanagari script would further the cause of the language.
Tariq Mansoor, Vice-Chancellor of Aligarh Muslim University once very rightly said that “knowledge of many languages is the doorway to success.”
One of the great Urdu scholars Gopi Chand Narang, was quoted as saying that “Urdu is not the language of Muslims. If at all there is any language of Muslims, it should be Arabic. Urdu belongs to the composite culture of India. Hindi and Urdu are supplementary and complementary. They are like sisters strengthening each other.” This viewpoint must also be adopted by the organisations created to preserve it. They should focus their resources and attention to the accurate writing of Urdu classics and translation into Devanagari script. Narang feels that the politicisation of the cause has harmed the language, which should function as a bridge between the Hindu and Muslim subcultures within India.
If Government and State funding went into the production of texts of important and popular Urdu authors in Devanagari script, the reading of Urdu literature would grow tremendously.
Although many works have been reproduced in the Devanagari script, major organisations have not yet made it their duty to help publish such works. The translation of classical Urdu texts into English is another venture, which has been undertaken, but still needs to be done on a larger scale.
The language has seen many shifts in support throughout its long history, as the times change the people, led by their Government, fall in and out of favour of certain languages.
The National Council for Promotion of Urdu has taken the initiative and is bringing out publications in and about Urdu language and literature.
Within India the use of the language is a cause which many people and organisations have been working to uphold. However, these efforts are not without their flaws. It is the mix of these efforts along with popular interest developed by films and ongoing research, which will ensure that classical Urdu texts will be preserved and promoted in the country so that the language does not die and future generations are not the poorer because of this laxity on our part.
Writer: MJ Warsi
Courtesy: The Pioneer
Provocative gestures and doublespeak on the pilgrim corridor show the Pakistani Army’s new designs
Guru Nanak is not just a Sikh guru in the sub-continent but embodies a consciousness. As scholars have chronicled his travels across Saudi Arabia, Tibet, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, India and Pakistan, he spread what is called a “Nanakpanthi culture.” Its practitioners were syncretic groups of people in the Indus plains who followed Guru Nanak’s teachings, irrespective of them being Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims. A community of believers, they broke down barriers of faith and cultures and were undiluted even by the Partition in 1947. So the Kartarpur corridor, connecting Gurdwara Darbar Sahib in Pakistan, where Guru Nanak spent his last days, and Dera Baba Nanak Sahib in India, in that sense, is a symbolic leap of faith in humanity. And probably the antidote that could have helped reconcile the wounds of Partition and set up a communication channel in the Indo-Pakistan dynamic, given the current stress it is under. But Pakistan has been using Kartarpur’s iconic value to further its separatist agenda of indoctrinating and radicalising Sikhs in India and reviving the Khalistani movement all over again. And for all the sweet talk by its Prime Minister Imran Khan, it is just an elaborate trap by the Pakistan Army and Inter-Service Intelligence to refuel militancy in Punjab and give us another security bother. There’s a deliberateness of mixed signals, be it in wooing the Sikh community worldwide through its grandstanding of allowing pilgrim access and provoking us at the same time. Hence the use of pictures of Khalistani separatist leaders Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, Maj Gen Shabeg Singh and Amrik Singh Khalsa in its promotional videos on Kartarpur. The video, which prominently conveys the harmony between Sikhs and Muslims, also features former Punjab Minister Navjot Singh Sidhu and Union Minister Harsimrat Kaur Badal, in a crude attempt to project Khan as welcoming of religious minorities in the sub-continent. Pakistan is hell-bent on denying a sense of comfort to the Indian side, forcing last minute changes that are intended to portray us as the spoiler of expectations. Despite having assured visa-free passage, Pakistan now wants pilgrims to carry passports and permits which defeats the purpose of a dedicated corridor. No Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI)-card holder can make it through Kartarpur, the implication being that Pakistan wants to address only a section of Sikhs in India. While India sought 5,000 pilgrims daily, Pakistan has limited that number to 500 per day. Pilgrims cannot travel on foot, as is ritual, and instead of an annual flow, our neighbour intends to restrict seekers to just “visiting and special occasion” days.
Clearly, now that its level-playing field has been upturned in Jammu and Kashmir, and with both the West and the Islamic world supporting India’s position on its changed status, Pakistan doesn’t want to isolate the Sikhs or lose the trumpcard of Khalistan. Particularly, after its Prime Minister Imran Khan’s “cry wolf” threats of a nuclear war have dented the nation’s credibility at international fora. So the Pakistan Army, without whom Khan would not have been in the chair, has decided to up the pro-Khalistan extremist agenda and foment trouble in Punjab. In fact, this divisive agenda has been in the works over the last 15 years or so. And though the Pakistani leadership has been cool to the Manmohan Singh government’s overtures on Kartarpur, fact is it had been using it as a neo-axis of Sikh separatism since 2003. The gurdwara had been abandoned till then and served as a cattle shed. Pakistan even allowed rampant encroachment but now the land owned by the gurdwara has also been quietly acquired by its government. While announcing the Kartarpur project, Pakistan appointed several Khalistani separatists on the committee, much to India’s discomfort. Its former Army chief Gen Mirza Aslam Beg openly advised the military and the government to use the Kartarpur corridor for Khalistan terror and “create trouble for India.” Recently, the Pakistan Army even got pro-Khalistani supporters to challenge the reorganisation of Kashmir. No matter how hard India may try to make Kartarpur a matter of people-to-people concern, it will never be free of our neighbour’s insidiousness. India has to be alert that the base camp on the Pakistan side doesn’t become a hotbed for Khalistani propaganda in the name of allowing faith congregations. When Pakistan Army chief General Qamar Bajwa stood in Kartarpur, shaking hands with known Khalistani face Gopal Singh Chawla, it was clear he was starting a new front in the proxy war.
Courtesy: The Pioneer
It is perhaps not too late to put the history of India in its proper perspective and undo the blunders committed in the 1950s and 1960s
As an aftermath of the abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, the former State of Jammu & Kashmir has been reorganised into the new Union Territories (UT) of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. The latter consists of two districts: Kargil and Leh. Subsequently, new maps have been prepared by the Surveyor-General of India showing the geographical outline of the new UTs; it is a welcome move by the Government to educate the people of India and the media (and hopefully, the biased foreign Press).
Interestingly, the Leh district of Ladakh includes the districts of Gilgit, Gilgit Wazarat, Chilhas and Tribal Territory of 1947, in addition to the known areas of Leh and, of course, the Aksai Chin, illegally occupied by China since the mid-1950s.
For several reasons, it is important that these maps have been updated. First there was often a discrepancy in the length of the Indo-China border on some Indian websites. Was the length 4,056 or 3,488 km? The first figure is the only valid one as Gilgit-Baltistan (formerly the Gilgit agency) is legally a part of India. The Indo-China boundary starts at the trijunction of Afghanistan, Gilgit-Baltistan and Xinjiang to reach the Karakoram Pass and further runs through the Karakoram and Karatagh passes and along the Kunlun in the north, and through Lanak La and across the western part of the Pangong Lake and then along the ridge parallel to the Indus, before crossing the Indus south-east of Demchok. Hopefully the wrong figures will now be rectified.
The fact that large parts of Ladakh are today occupied by China explain Beijing’s aggressive stance. Speaking of the creation of the two UTs, Geng Shuang, a spokesman of China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs told the media: “China deplores and firmly opposes this. This is unlawful and void and this is not effective in any way and will not change the fact that the area is under Chinese actual control.” He urged India to “earnestly respect Chinese territorial sovereignty and uphold peace and tranquility in the border areas.”
The Indian Ministry of External Affairs did not leave the unwarranted attack unanswered: “We do not expect other countries, including China, to comment on matters that are internal to India, just as India refrains from commenting on the internal issues of other countries,” declared India’s Ministry for External Affairs spokesman. Referring to the Shaksgam Valley, he pointed out that China “illegally” acquired Indian territories from Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir through the 1963 China-Pakistan Boundary Agreement. That infamous pact was signed by Pakistan’s Minister of External Affairs and his Chinese counterpart. The new maps will irritate China no end, as it virtually opens another sector along the Indo-Chinese disputed boundary.
A secret note prepared by the historical division of the Ministry of External Affairs mentioned that “any such agreement will be ab initio illegal and invalid and will not bind India in any respect.” The note observed that the preamble states that the parties have agreed to formally delimit and demarcate the boundary between Xinjiang and the contiguous areas of Pakistan, the defence of which was under the actual control of Karachi; Pakistan based its right on the fact that these areas were under her “actual control.” However, the Indian note explained: “Under international law, the right of entering into treaties and agreements is an attribute of sovereignty. Furthermore, a sovereign cannot presume to exercise sovereign functions in respect of territory other than its own. Having regard to the UN resolutions of January 17, 1948, August 13, 1948 and January 5, 1949 (UNCIP Resolutions) it is clear that Pakistan cannot (and does not) claim to exercise sovereignty in respect of Jammu and Kashmir.”
Very few, even in India, realise the importance of this point. On March 5, 1963, speaking about China during a Calling Attention Motion in the Lok Sabha, the Prime Minister said: “In spite of its professions that it has never involved itself in the dispute over Kashmir or its absurd claim that the boundary negotiations have promoted friendship between the Chinese and Pakistani people and are in the interests of Asia and world peace, it is directly interfering in Indo-Pakistan relations. By doing this, China is seeking to exploit differences between India and Pakistan on the Kashmir question to further its own expansionist policy.”
Of course, since then, China has become Pakistan’s Iron brother, but the motivations have remained the same. Today’s publication of proper maps should only be a first step.
The logical follow-up should be to repatriate all the archives pertaining to Ladakh and the Gilgit Wazarat, to Leh, where a place should be dedicated to their preservation; it is crucial as the history of large chunks of the border with China lies in these records.
During the negotiations of “the Officials of India and China” in 1960, the Indian side noted: “A systematic settlement of revenue for the whole of Ladakh up to the traditional alignment was made during the time of Mehta Mangal who was Wazir or Governor between 1860 and 1865; and this settlement was revised during the period of his successor Johnson (1870-1881) and Radha Kishen Kaul (1882). The lists of villages in both the Revenue Assessment Report of 1902 and the Settlement Report of 1908 mentioned 108 villages, including Tanktse, Demchok, Chushul and Minsar… The Preliminary Report of Ladakh Settlement of 1908 made clear that these areas were part of Ladakh.”
The Indian side submitted a large quantity of such documents. These records will show that India exercised control over the various frontier areas and collected revenues from the border villages till Independence.
These records should be kept in Leh; it should also include the history of the Gilgit Wazarat and other territories now shown under the Ladakh district and how Shaksgam Valley was illegally offered to Communist China.
This would greatly help the project of the Ministry of Defence to write the history of India’s borders, the project for which was recently announced: “The work will cover various aspects of borders, including tracing its making; making and unmaking and shifting of borders; role of security forces; role of borderland people encompassing their ethnicity, culture and socio-economic aspects of their lives.”
It is perhaps not too late to put the history of India in its proper perspective and undo the blunders committed in the 1950s and 1960s.
Writer: Claude Arpi
Courtesy: The Pioneer
Even after demonetisation and digitisation, Indians stash more notes than ever before
Why do Indians love cash so much? That is a question that needs answering after a report emerged in the media that despite demonetisation, the proportion of cash as a share of total savings kept by Indians increased to a quarter of their overall reserve. In fact, a quarter of the currency notes in circulation are actually unproductive and stay at home. These figures were released by National Account Statistics and paint a worrying picture. This is because the cash that is saved up, rather hoarded for a rainy day, is an extremely inefficient way to use any asset because sitting inside a locker, under a bed or even stuffed inside a mattress, it is losing value every passing day. However, with the real estate market bubble bursting, the equity markets tepid and a loss of confidence in the banks have meant that many of India’s non-professional and non-salaried middle and upper income classes have few investment options to grow money. And even though the markets have been climbing of late, there has been a lack of investor confidence as negative economic news percolates through to even lower-run small investors, thus creating a vicious cycle. The bursting of the real-estate bubble in particular has had a vicious effect, as property was for years the best way to deploy cash for many Indians.
To encourage Indians to circulate their hoarded cash and at least return to the previous 10-12 per cent levels of cash holdings as a proportion of their overall savings, the Government should encourage easy investment options in start-ups and also instill a renewed sense of optimism in banks. For one, the amount insured in every account of a scheduled bank, which currently stands at one lakh rupees, should at least be doubled or tripled. The collapse of the PMC bank, even though it was a loosely regulated cooperative bank, has further shaken the confidence of depositors. The gap between the actual and potential output of the economy, that has been referred to by several economists as a direct consequence of this, is not something that can be closed soon. Any action, such as further rate reductions by the Reserve Bank of India, because the money is there, is not being deployed. There is clearly a crisis of confidence, which is causing the problem, and may be the Finance Ministry could simply increase the limit for cash spending without the requirement for a PAN card from Rs 2 lakh to Rs 5 lakh. That will jumpstart the consumer economy once again.
Courtesy: The Pioneer
FREE Download
OPINION EXPRESS MAGAZINE
Offer of the Month