Koshyari’s letter war with Uddhav Thackeray turns ugly as he goes against the mandate of his post to follow a party line
Gubernatorial assignments have always been politicised regardless of regimes. No matter what the party at the Centre, each has used its chosen Governor to keep a watch on Opposition State Governments and undercut federal powers in the event of a crisis, especially when the Central party, as the main challenger, has been within smelling distance of power. But just because a violation has become a political convention, can one justify its continuity? And by extension does it have to be more flagrant than earlier occasions? It is on this count that Maharashtra Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari’s letter war with Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray over the re-opening of religious places in the State is not only indecorous but challenges the limits of a constitutionally-appointed post. Worse, what could have been a mature confabulation was converted to a media circus as the Governor’s letter was circulated widely. Making a case for re-opening places of worship, Koshyari asked Thackeray if he had “turned secular” by keeping them shut. The latter shot back a letter, asking if Hindutva meant simply opening religious places and as a Governor who had sworn on the Constitution, was he denying the secularism enshrined in it? Clearly, Koshyari, who has been used time and again to embarrass the Shiv Sena-led alliance Government, should have clearly kept the arrow in his quiver. For he unwittingly gave the political advantage to Thackeray by trying to expose the latter’s commitment to Hindutva. Thackeray may have been vociferous about Ayodhya but in COVID-stressed times and as Chief Minister of the worst-affected State, he has managed the festival season with reason. By confining the Ganesh Mahotsav to a largely indoor celebration, he avoided a super spreader event. And although the Governor has questioned the rationale of opening bars and restaurants and not shrines, Thackeray knows that faith is a heave of emotion that defies protocols and he would much rather go in for a graded opening of these places after assessing the risk of spread. Besides, the Governor, given the gravitas associated with his chair, should not have run down the weight of the word “secular” in his official capacity, no matter what his personal belief systems might be. Also using the religion card is unbecoming of a post that demands reason, neutrality, dignity and integrity. But then Koshyari has been too pliant to walk the thin line between propriety and impropriety, nicety and brashness. Let us not forget that he is the same man who had revoked President’s rule in the State in the wee hours and hurriedly sworn in BJP leader Devendra Fadnavis with then rebel Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Ajit Pawar, ignoring the split mandate in the State. He did not give adequate time to the Opposition parties and even an adrift Sena for crystallising their adjustments before committing to furnishing letters of support. By that yardstick, the Governor seems immune to the adverse criticism that his overstepping of constitutional limits entails. So long as his political purpose is served, in this case going after the Shiv Sena. This explains why NCP supremo Sharad Pawar wrote to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, expressing shock at the tone and tenor of the Governor’s letter. He even clarified that while he was not against the Governor’s prerogative to discuss matters with the CM, he was against a squabble deliberately played out in the public domain for political gains.
Shaming the regional party, wherever the BJP is the main Opposition, is now more the rule than the exception. In Bengal, Governor Jagdeep Dhankar has been blowing hot on the Mamata Banerjee-led Trinamool Congress Government at the slightest pretext or the other. The latest spat is over the unnatural death of a BJP MLA and the Governor’s letter to vice-chancellors (VCs) asking them to attend a video-conference with him. The VCs refused to attend unless the invitation was routed through the State higher education department. After this Dhankar took to Twitter to defend his partisan action, saying he could not allow students’ issues to be “politically caged.” His lie was exposed when Banerjee herself revealed all of her Government’s communication with the Raj Bhavan before the media. But at least he had done his bit for the BJP’s “Didi hatao” campaign. All these examples prove there is an internecine plot to erode the spirit of alliance politics in general and the regional ones in particular, making them look like puppets in a shadow play, so powerful that the voter changes his pattern in the next round of elections. The problem with the BJP is that it just can’t get out of the whataboutery trap, countering every criticism by citing Congress precedents and repeating every mistake of its rival party that ultimately cost the latter dear. Then how is BJP the “party with a difference?” If Governors are abdicating their role responsibilities and preferring to be agents of the ruling party, then their use is not even ceremonial. For even that demands a degree of integrity and respect for the norms of parliamentary democracy. They are toothless when they recommend President’s rule as it is the Central Government which runs the State affairs by proxy with its own team of bureaucrats. Isn’t it time then to look at the selection process of the post of Governor itself, provided each party agrees to neutralising it in the first place? The procedure for appointment of the Lokpal could easily be followed to secure the position in a manner that the Governor cannot be recalled or moved at the Centre’s whim. But will all parties agree to amend a convention that suits each one of them when each gets the hot seat?
If Chirag and Tejashwi are not able to benefit from the legacy of their fathers in the forthcoming Assembly elections, then who will?
Will the two young leaders of Bihar, Tejashwi Yadav of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and Chirag Paswan of the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) be able to fill the big shoes of their fathers? Lalu Prasad and Ram Vilas Paswan had been players in Bihar politics for decades and held their own despite various ups and downs in their lives. They sensed a political opening in the late eighties to challenge the dominant Congress and succeeded to a certain extent. Now, years down the line, an ailing Lalu is in a jail in Ranchi, serving his sentence in the fodder scam while Paswan passed away recently.
Now, the two young leaders will be playing a much more pronounced role in Bihar politics. They are leading two important caste groups, the Yadavs and the Dalits in Bihar, estimated to be about 24-30 per cent of the electorate. To their advantage, their fathers declared both the young leaders as their political heirs long ago.
The 39-year-old Tejashwi Yadav is the leader of the Opposition alliance called the Mahagathbandhan (Grand Alliance). The Congress Party, the CPI, CPI–M and some smaller parties are part of the coalition. This Mahagathbandhan will be facing the ruling JD(U)–BJP alliance in the Assembly elections in the State.
Tejashwi is young, ambitious, articulate and has learnt some tricks of politics from his father. Once Lalu went to jail, he grabbed the opportunity and quickly moved to neutralise his opponents. However, Tejashwi has many challenges ahead. The first is to keep the flock together. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, a close confidant of Lalu, resigned as the party’s vice-president and left the RJD just before his death last month. Senior leaders like Shivanand Tiwari and some MLAs are leaving the RJD and joining Nitish Kumar’s camp. Though Tejashwi has inherited Lalu’s name, his identity and political legacy, we have to see whether he inherits his father’s vote bank, too. Lalu had carefully built up the Yadav–Muslim (MY) electorate. With his one action of halting BJP leader LK Advani’s famous Rath Yatra in 1990, he has claimed secular credentials for all time to come. In all probability this vote bank will remain with Tejashwi.
Then there is the youth vote. There are four crore young voters who should be targetted by the two young leaders. Tejashwi has built up his social media platforms, posters, slogans and election jingles. Though he has studied only up to Class IX, he is also proficient in English. However, Tejashwi has a long way to go as he lacks the political shrewdness of Lalu.
Second, he has nothing much to show for his achievements as he was the Deputy Chief Minister only for 20 months. Third, Lalu overlooked the claims of his elder son Tej Prasad Yadav and daughter Misa Bharti and declared Tejashwi as his political heir, which has created jealousy and trouble in the family. Tejashwi has to sort this out and ensure his family’s support. Fourth, Tejashwi got his position on a silver platter. He became the Deputy Chief Minister at the young age of 26 and is now waiting to become the Chief Minister. When the Mahagathbandhan ended in 2017, he became the Leader of the Opposition and now the leader of the Grand Alliance. Now is the time for him to show his leadership skills.
Chirag’s story is different. He wanted to become a film actor but after failing to make an impact in Bollywood, joined his father in politics and soon rose to become the party chief. He has been involved in many crucial decisions of the party, including the recent decision to go solo in Bihar Assembly polls, leaving the Nitish-led NDA in Bihar.
Ram Vilas Paswan was known as a weathercock and he had worked with eight Prime Ministers, serving in their Cabinets for decades. His recent death would help Chirag in boosting the party but we will have to see how he translates the sympathy factor into votes. Chirag is yet to emerge as a new Dalit icon like his father. He will also face the challenge of galvanising the party workers and consolidate his position. He should be able to make his voters believe that he is the right person to fill the space left by his father.
In Bihar, Dalits comprise over 17 per cent of the population and they are one of the game-changers. While Paswan could keep his Dalit constituency intact by going “solo”, Chirag will be allowing the LJP’s rank and file to contest the election on a much bigger scale and expand its organisational footprint. Rumours say that he has also sealed a deal with the BJP for the post-election scenario. The two leaders will be facing a formidable combination of the JD(U) and the BJP, who have established leadership, experience, money power, muscle power and the electoral machinery at their beck and call. However, if Chirag and Tejashwi are not able to benefit from the legacy of their fathers, then who will? Could it be the JD(U) or the BJP or the Congress? Probably both might succeed in keeping their flock together if they play their cards well. Or else their voters might move away and then the playing field will be open to all.
(The writer is a senior journalist)
Jewellery brand caves in to vicious trolls, takes down ad celebrating inter-faith marriage. Why let bigotry win the day?
When a corporate giant with an indisputable standing takes down an ad of its jewellery company that celebrates inter-faith marriage and the birth of a baby resulting from that union — simply bowing to the majoritarian sentiment of the day — then we should worry about the India of tomorrow. For it means that the politics of polarisation has completely taken over the cultural domain and the nation’s collective mindspace. The ad had a beautiful story of a Hindu-Muslim marriage, where the Muslim mother-in-law is seen to have arranged a godh bharai or baby shower ritual for her Hindu daughter-in-law, an example of the inclusivity and love that the brand wanted to communicate. But Right-wing trolls ripped it to shreds, saying it promoted love jihad. This after our literature and films have forever celebrated the plurality of Indian life and the countless inter-faith marriages in reality. Besides, the ad showed that the woman was free to pursue her own religion and rituals in her marital home and was not co-opted. The love jihad messages flooded social media to such an extent that the company removed the video campaign rather than risk negative publicity. In other words, the boycott calls and the cancel culture are assuming such hydra-headed dimensions that they are potent enough to determine market economics now. The sad part is if bona fide corporations take a step back and let the dominant sentiment take over, it only lionises bigotry. The sadder part is that the same jewellery brand has used its festival campaigns to convey beautiful social messages before. The saddest part is that many controversial ads have been pulled out after a public outcry, mostly because they were of a sexual nature and not for conveying the story of a confluence of religion and culture in family life.
Many proponents of Hindutva claimed victory after the ad was withdrawn but can they ever stop the harmony and plurality embedded in our civilisational DNA? A similar reaction was seen when a detergent brand tried something similar with its Holi campaign last year. The one-minute long video featured a young Hindu girl, who chose to be drenched in colours to protect her young Muslim friend, who wanted to visit a nearby mosque. Some felt that Holi wasn’t given due importance and others shuddered at the thought of a Muslim man needing protection from a woman, that too, a Hindu. Advertisers force disruptions in the clutter and make us sit up and think, setting up an alternative or reasoned conversation. Today even that space has shrunk. It isn’t news that most Indian families still prefer weddings being arranged within their religion and caste. Those who break the rules and are not privileged with power or education have often witnessed violent consequences, including “honour killings.” According to the India Human Development Survey, only about five per cent of all marriages are inter-caste and inter-faith relations are even fewer. A 2016 survey by Social Attitudes Research for India (SARI) found that the majority of respondents opposed inter-caste and inter-religious marriages. In Delhi, about 60 per cent of Hindus said they would oppose a child or relative marrying a Muslim and a similar fraction of Muslims opposed a child or relative marrying a Hindu. In Uttar Pradesh, the prejudice was even deeper — about 75 per cent of Hindus opposed marriages with Muslims, and only a slightly lower fraction of Muslims, about 70 per cent, opposed marriages with Hindus. Not to forget that in 2018, the Facebook page that called for violence against 102 Muslim men, who were allegedly in relationships with Hindu women, had to be taken down. Then there are legal challenges for couples trying to get a marriage registered under the Special Marriage Act, where courts insist on all sorts of conditions like ensuring the marriage notice is publicised in local media. And in all this, love is never under discussion. And after yesterday, it doesn’t even make for a story.
The methodology adopted in the next 18 months will be crucial for Rahul Gandhi and the Congress. It will determine their success in the 2024 general elections
Congress MP Rahul Gandhi understood to be the de facto president of his party, made a hectic rendezvous in the heat and dust with the farmers of Punjab and to some extent with those in Haryana on the farm Acts. Some observers once again termed his latest avatar as “version 2.0 or 3.0”, depending on how they saw the political graph and career of the Gandhi scion.
The visits got good traction in both the States, particularly in Punjab, as the Congress is not only the ruling party there, it is in a position to organise the machinery for protest marches and public meetings. Plus there is resentment against the laws across the State and among all parties, except for the BJP, which initiated the Acts.
The two political protests in a row — first in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh, in support of the Dalit woman who was gang-raped by upper caste men, followed by the one in the food bowl of the country, Punjab and Haryana — catapulted him into the public eye. And he did seize the first mover advantage on both these issues. At least now he is being viewed as some sort of a “fighter” rather than a “shirker.” Also, since these visits are not related to elections but concern specific issues, the images and footprints of both Hathras and Punjab would remain imprinted on the public consciousness for a while. The image of Rahul being roughed up by cops, consoling the victim’s father in Hathras and riding a tractor in Punjab would help his cause immensely in the medium to long run.
But there is a rider. Rahul has shown consistently that he adopts a strategy and abandons it completely and goes for a long political vacation. Hathras and Punjab —the cause of a Dalit girl and farmers, besides other issues of the subaltern — need to be sustained and adopted in the long term political strategy of the Congress and should not remain a photo opportunity alone. Adopted for a while and then abandoned, something which had become Rahul’s signature for long, the news-grabbing moments gave his opposition repeated opportunity to project him as a politician aloof from the grind, not suited for the heat and dust or the combative brand of grassroots politics. This image can be altered only when there is consistency in his political approach followed by an action plan for each and every issue which concerns the people at large. You cannot be a part-time agitationist and also a part-time tourist vacationing in a foreign country when face to face with an extremely combative adversary who is better planned and always a step ahead.
Remember the temple-hopping spree of Rahul and his attempt to sport a Janeu by proclaiming himself as a Dattatreya Brahmin in the run-up to the last Lok Sabha polls? No one, not even Rahul himself, knows what happened to those half-hearted attempts to play the majority religion card and the efficacy of the strategy itself. No one has even asked him if he had gone to a temple after those photo ops and does he wear a Janeu now. Perhaps after getting a thorough drubbing in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, the Congress strategists who advised him and he himself realised that this was not going to cut any ice with the voters and abandoned the discourse.
Long ago, when the UPA was in power and Rahul was calling the shots, he used to occasionally visit Dalit hamlets in parts of UP and used to spend the evenings and nights there, trying to understand what the downtrodden faced. Once, in 2009, he even took the visiting British Foreign Secretary David Miliband along with him to spend a night in such a household, which became a media sensation worldwide. But this practice, too, was abandoned summarily, suggesting a lack of consistency and strategy in the political methodology adopted. No one has heard if he ever spent a night in a rural household after the Congress-led UPA was ousted from power in the 2014 general elections.
Remember, the Hathras visit came nine years after his much publicised visit to Bhatta Parsaul village in Greater Noida area during a farmers’ agitation, when they were protesting against alleged forcible land acquisition. He was pillion riding a motorcycle then and had entered the village in solidarity with the agitating farmers and sat on a dharna with them. The Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) was ruling the State then with Mayawati as Chief Minister and Rahul was detained for a few hours. Of course, the Congress-led Government at the Centre subsequently passed the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, which raised the compensation given to farmers manifold.
Bhatta-Parsaul was a success story of sorts, which led to the passage of a Bill, considered extremely friendly to farmers if any Government/private agency wanted to acquire the land. But Rahul failed to publicise this success story. Perhaps not realising its significance, he and his party let go of an opportunity which could have helped both politically. On the contrary, the Congress became defensive when its political opponents targeted it over the Bill, saying it hampered easy land acquisition and prevented industrialists from setting up new units and giving employment.
Rahul has been put through tough scrutiny all these years, more so in the post-2014 era when the Congress lost to the BJP lock, stock and barrel and the decline continued like a free fall. In 2017, as Congress president, Rahul did a magnificent job for his party by trying to halt the BJP juggernaut in its strongest base for decades — Gujarat. The party lost but did put up a spirited fight against the political giants — Prime Minister Narendra Modi and then BJP president Amit Shah — both from the same State. The performance of the underdog (Congress) was hailed and it was billed as a new beginning, a new dawn for Congress. This performance was followed by Karnataka where the incumbent Congress government did reasonably well and prevented the BJP from claiming power. Victories in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan added to Rahul’s stature and the possibilities of a Congress revival became real. But come May 2019 and all advantage was lost. The party simply could not build the momentum or keep the pressure and lost out on issues to tackle its opponent, driven as it was by aggressive nationalism and Hindutva. It simply had no answer to the blitzkrieg launched by the BJP in 2019 and surrendered meekly without even putting up a semblance of a fight.
The question now is when the momentum seems to have slightly become favourable with Hathras and the farmers’ issues, will the party, particularly Rahul, be able to sustain it in the medium to long term? That will be a challenge and also provide answers to the political discourse in the run-up to a series of Assembly elections in the next one-and-a-half years.
Many Congress leaders privately say that the practice of starting a campaign or a narrative and then abandoning it midway has to come to an end. A narrative, once adopted and made a part of political strategy, has to continue and given an incubation time. Only then can one build momentum and swing tides of opinion. Partymen need to be consistent and have to hit the streets every two to three weeks to get traction and occupy the opposition space, not wake up every three years.
The Uttar Pradesh Assembly polls, scheduled for February and March 2022, are less than one-and-a-half years away. A State where BJP is firmly entrenched under Yogi Adityanath as Chief Minister, the Congress is still considered to be a rank outsider at this juncture despite Hathras and despite the absence of Samajwadi Party (SP) and the BSP from the politics of agitation. Can Congress fill the vacuum here? Can it spring a surprise? Will the Rahul-Priyanka duo be able to project themselves as some sort of an alternative and replace the caste narrative of SP and BSP? Will they come out with a game-changer? Do they have it in them? This is what Congress leaders and workers alike are asking. For many within the party and outside, the revival of the organisation in UP is the key for success in the 2024 general elections. The road to Delhi goes through UP was an old saying but this holds true even at this juncture where a great churning of the political process is taking place.
(The writer is Senior Resident Editor, The Pioneer, Chandigarh)
NEST Result Update: Candidates will be able to check their NEST 2020 result 2020, as per the information on the official website. The NEST result 2020 has been delayed due to technical difficulties and will be released today evening after 7 PM. Candidates who have appeared for the NEST 2020 examination can visit the official website of NEST 2020 to check the examination results. To download the NEST Result Scorecard students are required to login to the NEST Exam portal - nestexam.in. Candidates will also be able to check the NEST 2020 Results through the direct link which will be provided below.
Students can check the result on: https://nestexam.in
Article 338 and 338A of the Constitution have to be amended, conferring powers upon the commission to take action against State offenders
The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was enacted with the objective of protecting marginalised communities against discrimination and atrocities by the upper castes and the rich and privileged. Section three of the Act enunciates the nature of various actions against a SC/ST person to constitute an offence punishable under it.
The provision stipulates that any act, which is derogatory to human dignity, constitutes an offence under the Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989. The Supreme Court, too, in the Nandini Sundar case, observed that the Constitution itself, in no uncertain terms, demands that the State shall strive incessantly and consistently to promote fraternity among all citizens such that the dignity of every person is protected, nourished and promoted. The conduct of the police in cremating the Dalit gang-rape victim from Hathras, allegedly without the consent of the family members, constitutes an offence under the Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989.
The Hathras gang-rape and the subsequent events leading to the cremation of the victim by the police in the dead of night raises the question whether the State had responded to the incident as required?
The incident shows that the atrocities committed against the Dalit girl were two-fold. First, the gang-rape of the victim by the accused, who allegedly belong to the upper caste and second, the conduct of the police in cremating the body after sunset, allegedly without the consent of family members.
The conduct of the police raises a suspicion that officials were trying to protect the accused. She was allegedly attacked on September 14 and succumbed to her injuries on September 29. A statement has been made by the police that the post-mortem report does not disclose any evidence of rape. Obviously since the post-mortem was conducted after a lapse of more than eight days of the alleged incident, there is a big possibility of the evidence of rape getting erased. However, there is a dying declaration made by the victim that she was subjected to gang-rape, which is admissible in evidence.
Now the issue is whether the State can remain a silent spectator without responding against the alleged conduct of the police in cremating her body without the consent of the family members, which also constitutes an atrocity under the Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989.
The response of the State in the present scenario is only at the mercy of the politicians who are running the Government. There is no “body” constituted under the Constitution, which in such circumstances can take cognisance of the conduct of the erring officials involved in the alleged crime and take necessary action against them without the interference of the Government.
Though Article 338 of the Constitution contemplates the setting up of the National Commission for SCs and Article 338A of the Constitution constitutes a commission for STs, they are only recommendatory bodies. The Constitution only confers power upon them to prepare reports and the President shall cause all such reports to be laid before each House of Parliament, along with a memorandum, explaining the action taken or proposed to be taken on the recommendations relating to the Union and the reasons for the non-acceptance, if any, of such suggestions.
Obviously the President will be acting on the aid and advice of the Ministers. Therefore, the commission cannot take action against the people, who are involved directly or indirectly in the entire episode. The implementation of the recommendations of the commission is within the domain of the political system. Therefore, there is no other Constitutional provision or a created body, which comes to the rescue of the victim when the Government does not respond in a proper manner.
There has to be a mechanism provided by the Constitution to respond to such a situation. The apex court, while deciding the review petition of Dr Subhash Kashinath, observed that the prevailing conditions in various areas of the country show that the SCs/ STs are still struggling for equality and for exercising civil rights. They have been suffering ignominy and abuse and they have been outcast socially for centuries. It was also observed that every person has the right to live with dignity and the right to die with dignity, too.
In fact, the Supreme Court, while upholding the constitutional validity of the Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989, observed that all the three ideas, liberty, equality and fraternity, are intimately linked. The right to equality sans liberty or fraternity would be chimerical, as the concept known at present would be reduced to equality among equals, in every manner a mere husk of the grand vision of the Constitution.
Likewise, liberty without equality or fraternity can well result in the perpetuation of existing inequalities and worse, result in licence to indulge in society’s basest practices. It is fraternity, poignantly embedded through the provisions of Part III, which assures true equality, where the State treats all alike, promises the benefits of growth and prosperity to all, with equal liberties to all, and what is more, guarantees that every person treats every other citizen of the country in a like manner.
Obviously, the State actors at the higher level due to political interference would not respond as the situation mandates. There has to be an independent body which can spring into operation to take necessary action against erring State officials. Therefore, Article 338 and 338A of the Constitution have to be amended, conferring powers upon the commission to take necessary action directly against the State or non-State actors who indulge in illegal acts. Unless such a suitable amendment is made incorporating such powers, justice cannot be done to victims and there cannot be any effective implementation of the Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989.
(The writer is Advocate, at the Andhra Pradesh and Telangana High Courts)
In these difficult days, there is reason to believe that the tribe of progressive social critiques is still heard
The Covid experience has been unique in more ways than what most of the webinars are talking about. For example, social media is not exactly known to elaborate concepts. However, the online versions of printed news media platforms appear to have widened and deepened their reach and impact as compared to the pre-Coronavirus era. The galloping use of smartphones in the country has enabled the reach and availability of news through a large part of the day, beyond the morning. At times, the impact is even clearer. Thankfully, the print media has not fallen prey to that claim that resonates through the electronic channel news daily: The phenomena called “breaking news.”
The concept of “breaking news” has undergone a sea change over the years and it doesn’t even titillate like before. “Breaking news” in years past used to be the equivalent of “Stop Press”, in the print media, when they used to stop the printing presses because something of phenomenal importance just had to be reported in the next day’s newspaper. For instance a war, or the declaration of Emergency, or demonetisation or the assassination of an important leader. Now, like many advertisements, “breaking news” seems more like an attempt to grab attention rather than share any meaningful news story that is unfolding at that time.
Then there is the claim of “impact-making” news. For instance, the gate of a VIP’s residence was plastered with a quarantine notice, which was found to be very embarrassing by the bureaucrat who lived there. Reportedly, the notice was torn away. One of the news channels picked this story up and ran a campaign on “differential treatment.” Soon after, the notice was restored by the authorities that be. Subsequently the news channel claimed to have run an “impact-making” story. Maybe, it was because of the news coverage of the channel that the notice was restored. Maybe it was not. Maybe colleagues persuaded the bureaucrat to tone down the reaction to the quarantine notice. Or maybe the bureaucrat’s good sense prevailed in the end. However that may be, not long thereafter, the practice of pasting quarantine notices on the entrance of households with Coronavirus patients was reportedly discontinued by the Haryana Government.
The impact may not be monocausal. There may be many claimants to the impact and many perspectives. Be that as it may, one thing is obvious that the media does carry a clout, though one-to-one impact-change correlation is difficult to establish. However, when one notices a change after reading something in news columns, it does raise the possibility that the writing made an impact and caused the change.
In these columns on September 28, para three of the text said “…even today in a city that is the proverbial centre of power, pick up a phone and call a landline of the metropolitan telephone service, the ring is preceded by a recorded voice message which, when translated into English, goes something like this: ‘In the entire country the process of un-lockdown has begun. In such circumstances, move out of the house only when it is totally necessary.’” What followed was a light-hearted banter on the intended impact of the message. Several days later that message was replaced by one from a well-known voice from Bollywood. Significantly, the text of the new message on the telephone service resonates far better than the preceding one. Now the person holding the telephone is reminded that not only India but the whole world is grappling with the impact of the Coronavirus.
The purpose of the above narrative is not to claim that the September 28 write-up in this column triggered this modification. Far from it! However, it pleases one to note that somewhere, someone has contributed towards a change for the better. In the past, too, I have flagged such correlations. It is possible that others have written on similar things, too. Others may have talked or others may have noticed what I noticed too. The important thing is we should be proud of having a responsive governance system at least in some kind of experiences and cases. Once should notice the brighter aspects of public life in an otherwise grim scenario. It keeps hope alive. Hope need not come in large parcels or in areas where someone feels fatigued. It is just the indicator of life. In these difficult times, there is reason to believe that the tribe of progressive social critiques is still heard. Whether it is heard often or not often enough is a matter of perception and appetite for favourable response. For some it is still a matter of joy that sometimes those who matter do hear and do respond. We are blessed!
(The writer is an internationally-acclaimed management consultant)
People vote for a party depending on various factors but little or no importance is given to the quality of the person chosen to lead it
Politics is the engine of society. The best of carriages, bogeys and saloons would come to naught if the engine was not maintained well. India has had satisfactory governments and poor ministries but still little thought has been given to the quality of men and women who should govern the country. Neither voters nor parties and their leaders or even our political scientists have given much thought to this subject. If the latter have thought about it, they do not seem to have written or propagated any ideas about it.
Indian elections have experienced positive polling, negative voting, voters choosing with their feet and polarised mandates, caste, class or community-wise. People have been heard saying that they voted to feel safe as a country after Indira Gandhi’s assassination in 1984. Never have I heard anyone saying that he/she voted to try and ensure good governance. Although after the 2019 polling, I did hear some Kolkata voters say that they voted for Narendra Modi for he was the fittest ruler among the choice before us at the Centre, although they did not agree with his party’s ideology.
That a successful democracy needs an effective Opposition is universally agreed. To add, a credible Opposition should also have an inner-party democracy. Out of the 68 years of India’s democratic functioning, most of the time we have either not had an adequate Opposition or the main Opposition party lacking internal democracy that would have injected fresh energy and perspectives. Lately, we have the doubtful benefit of hereditary parties or family-led organisations. The flip side to this problem is that most politicians in recent decades belong to mainly three categories — a family tradition, the unemployables and the freaks. Most others and their parents prefer secure careers or pursuits. Even well-to-do, financially secure families do not encourage their offspring to risk years in politics. Yet it is the same India which sent out their best youth, grown-ups and old, women and men to agitate for freedom. Was this patriotism spontaneous to the people or was it inspired by the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi? Before 1920, there was no tradition of such mass participation in the country’s political destiny, although India, certainly large swathes of it, was under the heels of invaders since the 12th century. And soon after 1947, the patriotic enthusiasm began to dry up.
Independence from the British did not mean that freedom was guaranteed or even secured forever. We experienced a shock in 1962 in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh (then North-East Frontier Agency, NEFA) at the hands of China to the extent that the Prime Minister appeared to weep on All India Radio when he said, “my heart goes out to the people of Assam”. Radio China was broadcasting in November 1962 that the brave soldiers of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) were looking forward to spending Christmas at Calcutta. And the State Bank had unlocked its treasury at its branch in Tezpur and currency notes were being blown by the breeze on the streets.
Retaining freedom is more important than winning it. Therefore, the best talent in the country should try going into politics. Everyone would not succeed. As planned, I rounded up my commercial career and came to Delhi nearly 40 years ago en route Gujarat. In those years caste mattered so much that even the most generous political party could not allot any seat (Lok Sabha). I, therefore, held back in Delhi and worked here quietly for 16 years and then got to the Rajya Sabha for a part term as a result of a byelection. I did my best and that was my satisfaction out of the service I performed. For example, I was able to build 49 Sulabh shauchalayas in Baroda city and in all 88 bus stops in the district with the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) funds I was allotted.
In India, members of the elite and intelligentsia often console themselves that politics is a dirty game and good people should avoid it. This is not true. In my years, I found politics was cleaner than my earlier 25 years in business. Let me quote one example, most of the non-performing assets (NPAs) with the banks are purely business failures. There are much fewer scams in politics.
If I did not go farther in politics, it was because of my peculiarities. I was an ethnic Gujarati, brought up in Bengal and had spent 25 years in business with no experience in politics. We must remember that while business management is a game of selection, politics is one of elimination and in business one generally succeeds without grabbing anyone else’s money. In politics, one wins by dispossessing someone else of his seat. Nevertheless, one’s attitude should be similar to the military national service. Whether one likes soldiering or not, two years are to be devoted to training as a matter of duty. In Britain, many Oxbridge graduates join politics as do a significant number of public school boys and girls. True, in the US it has not been quite the same. When my father was at the University of Boston, between 1929 and 32, he often said he would return to India and join the Congress party. Gandhi was already an acclaimed leader and yet the reaction was often, “After such expensive studies, why go to politics?” Yet the American standards are reasonably good.
Our voters should be more demanding and not so tolerant of standards as they often can be. Take the issue of dynasty. In May 1981, when Rajiv Gandhi was contesting his first byelections from Amethi, I spent a few days motoring through the constituency accompanied by a colleague. One afternoon we stopped at a dhaba where an enthusiastic discussion was going on. The general tenor was how well Rajiv spoke. What chaste Hindi he used and so on. After 15 minutes or so I intervened to ask, “What service has he done for the country except for flying aeroplanes for Indian Airlines?” One sleepy person present suddenly woke up to assert, “He is learning his mother’s vocation. Don’t doctors bequeath their dispensaries to their children? Don’t lawyers train their children how to be advocates? At least Rajivji had to come and get elected again and again to get the people’s approval.”
Coming to corruption, we came across a lucid explanation on the outskirts of Malihabad in the 1984 General Election. Again a dhaba discussion, Anwar Ahmed, a Minister in the State Cabinet, was being praised for being such a good and honest man. One of the participants lost his patience and intervened to ask, “Yes, Anwar Saheb is very upright and honest, he has been a Minister for 10 years but has not been able to build a house for his family. If a person cannot do this least bit for his wife and children, what can he do to help common people like you and me?”
What management is to a company and its success, the Government is to a country. Yet most of our people do not connect the country’s stake when they go to the ballot box. The debacle of 1962 caused by unpreparedness needs recollection. The Indian Army did not have mountain guns or howitzers to fire in mountainous NEFA. The second batch of troops that was sent up to 16,000 feet had canvas shoes, no gloves and ordinary woollen pullovers. General Rob Lockhart, the interim Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Army after Independence, said that we are a peace-loving nation. We do not really need an Army. And that the police is sufficient for our purpose. After all this, the same political party was re-elected in the following election. And in the 1990s, our Prime Minister told in a reply to a journalist that India is too large a country to worry about terrorism.
(The writer is a well-known columnist and an author. Views expressed are personal)
The post of CAG is not a cadre post for IA&AS. Second issue is IAS versus IA&AS. No doubt IA&AS as a service is an excellent service, but its aspiring members cannot claim a comparison with IAS officers when it comes to appointment of CAG. IAS officers have wide range of experiences from the lowest ebb in a district to the top posts of Secretary to Government of India.
Former top CAG official KK Srivastava the internationally acclaimed poet and author’s recent book “Esthetic Blend of Flames of the Minds” on “Mann Ki Baat” programme of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been well appreciated as it brings out the best features of 60 long episodes of “Mann Ki Baat” in just 4,000 words. Srivastava, before retiring as Additional Deputy CAG last month, had a long career, spanning over 36 years, believes an auditor should not venture into the domain of policy auditing as that means an attempt to usurp the role of a public representative. In a freewheeling conversation with The Pioneer’s Swarn Kumar Anand, KK Srivastava talks about his experiences and more…
The Pioneer: On Google, I read articles; your conversations with poets/writers about your fourth book Soliloquy of a Small-Town Uncivil Servant, and articles you wrote. I want to engage you with some articles and your service experiences. Leading a retired life, is spending time an issue?
KKS: No. I spend much time in thinking; I take out books I have not read for decades. Before Covid-19 pandemic, I occasionally used to meet friends from your fraternity over lunch or dinner in Press Club of India. The milieu and discourses with journalists and writers are soothing. I often write articles/reviews. Now retired, I try to spend some time in company of my wife which, for reasons best known to her, she does not seem to relish much.
The Pioneer: I understand you wrote your first review in 2011. You analysed a single, short poem, ‘I’ by a Romanian poetess. It is a long psycho-analysis of a small poem. Please give some background.
KKS: I don’t remember if it was the first review but certainly it was one of the earliest ones. I knew Veronica’s works earlier. She is sober, quiet and perceptive with limited literary output. This poem ran on her imagination of an arriving train at a platform. I analysed it which became longish. In Soliloquy of a Small-Town Uncivil Servant, she went through two sample chapters and made suggestions. In 2013, I introduced her to World Poetry, Canada International. They published her. I don’t know if she still writes or not.
The Pioneer: What prompted you to write ‘Esthetic Blend of Flames of the Minds’ on “Mann Ki Baat” programme of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. It is a mammoth piece which brings out the best features of sixty long episodes of “Mann Ki Baat” in just four thousand words.
KKS: Because it is apolitical and creative. “Mann Ki Baat” is about creativity of not only one mind i.e of that of the Prime Minister but of minds of millions of Indians. It connects Indians to India and India to Indians. Being collective thoughts of millions of Indians, “Mann Ki Baat” represents an unprecedented oneness between the Prime Minister and the people of the country and vice versa. Listening to “Mann Ki Baat” is a must for all public, including civil servants. They ought to know India, its past glory and emerging NEW INDIA through the minds of millions of Indians. It gives physical, mental and spiritual solace.
The Pioneer: You reviewed Vinod Rai’s book, Not Just an Accountant: The Diary of the Nation’s Conscience Keeper in Kitaab Singapore. How did you view the book as a reviewer?
KKS: I read a much lesser publicised book by another CAG, late CG Somiah: The Honest Always Stand Alone. Somiah’s was a complete book: a book of ease, Rai’s was a hurried attempt. As a critic, I have to do justice with a book being critiqued. For me the book: its content, threads, influences and temperament matter. The writer stays invisible. I liked Somiah’s book. It offered his holistic life story. You digest complete, not partially covered periods unless you have the second volume. If you read my review in Kitaab Singapore, you will find in second but concluding paragraph my expectations of the same from Vinod Rai. Six years past, I am not sure if second volume came about his whole life experiences.
The Pioneer: Who are the writers in India you interact with or living Indian writers whose works you read?
KKS: Jayanta Mahapatra, the renowned poet from Cuttack, Odisha. He is above ninety and we have been exchanging hand-written letters for last fifteen years. His mental and intellectual alertness is amazing. Sometimes, I phone him. When he returned Padma Shri in November 2015, I wrote to him why I expected him not to do so. Columnist and writer A Surya Prakash’s books and articles interest me. I critiqued Chief Editor of Indian Express Raj Kamal Jha’s book SHE WILL BUILD HIM A CITY in my fourth book and currently reading his latest book The CITY AND THE SEA. I cherish eccentricity of his hallucinating themes in stylish prose. I planned to call on him after retirement but Covid has vitiated everything. I am also reading Vinod Kumar Shukla’s Hindi poems.
The Pioneer: You had a long career, spanning over thirty-six and half years. You went in capacities from Deputy/Senior Deputy Accountant General, Accountant General, Principal Accountant General, to Pondicherry, Allahabad, Bombay, Ranchi, Jaipur, Rajkot, Delhi as Chief Auditor, New Delhi Municipal Corporation, Gwalior, Thiruvananthapuram and at the end CAG office Delhi and superannuated as Additional Deputy CAG. Your vast experience across the country and varied literary background gives you an enviable position to share your experiences with readers and civil service aspirants.
KKS: I feel amused you took the trouble of seeing my profile. If I saw India, its people, its cultural and intellectual strength, its different shades, it is through the organisation of CAG of India. Mine being a Central service with all India transfer liability, my postings to so many different places taught me uniqueness of Indian people: the oneness within different shades. I could know life people live. I could handle tough associations in places like Allahabad, Ranchi, Rajkot, Gwalior and Thiruvananthapuram. With my growing experience, I could easily relate to staff, their anxieties and strength. When I got posted as Principal Accountant General, Kerala at Thiruvananthapuram, the very next day of my assuming charge, I visited each section, met and shook hands with each and every member of staff. Towards the end, I visited Association room and met members of the association present there. The depressing atmosphere started becoming diminutive immediately. I did this every station I was posted to. It gave me confidence; it gave the staff confidence; it gave a relationship of ease vitally needed to run a big office. Similarly, I had interaction with Principal Secretaries in various States. In retrospect I feel happy to have an augmented life, courtesy learning from experiences of life of thousands of wonderful people.
The Pioneer: Did these transfers never affect your family?
KKS: The family stayed with me throughout.
The Pioneer: We hear various State Governments don’t respond to audit. Which State was most responsive to audit? Please share a few experiences?
KKS: I had cordial relationship particularly with Principal Secretaries (Finance) in every State. It facilitated response from the Government. But Gujarat, where I was stationed at Rajkot, was where officers showed inherent keenness to discuss particularly draft Performance Reviews and that too at very high level. There was an issue. Immediately, after taking over in 2008, I called on the then Chief Secretary who understood issues from me and within a month or so, remedial measures were taken by State Government with detailed work plan for a year in place. Similarly, in 2009, Performance Review on Modernisation of Police Scheme was to be discussed and the then ACS (Home), chaired the meeting spending full half-day in Gandhi Nagar conference room where many senior officers were present. He read each and every line of the draft report himself and requested authorities to respond and give comments/constraints, if any. He wanted me to appreciate and reflect these in the review. I learnt a lot from him during discussion. At the end, both audit and administration were satisfied. I moved from Gujarat but think the review featured in the Audit Report.
Kerala was equally responsive at very high level, though I was heading Accounts Office. Early 2016, perhaps January or February, one evening, ACS (Finance) telephoned me regarding a portion of work of our office and told me to meet Chief Minister without any delay. I sought appointment from him. Next day, it was a State holiday but he called me at his residence. I briefed two other PAsG located at the station and urged them to accompany me. They promptly agreed. Next day, we met the Chief Minister and I explained to him how functioning of that work had improved very significantly in our office and showed him data. My two colleagues supported my contention wholeheartedly. Then he came up to the door where I, folding my hands, said, “Namaste, Sir. Kindly keep our request in view. Our office is performing well.” He looked at me; it was reassuring. That important portion of work stayed with us. On taking over as DG in CAG office, I called on my earlier boss and told her about that episode saying “Ma’am, I did not bother you. I solved it locally.” Appreciating it, she told, “That’s why we call you, KK.” Unfortunately, we lost her sometime back. Normally, I tried to solve issues without flagging these as big issues.
The Pioneer: Recently, when GC Murmu, an IAS officer of 1985 batch, was appointed as CAG, there were talks about his superseding six IA&AS officers (three from 1983 and three from 1984 batch). Is it IAS versus IA&AS issue? Is it discouraging for the officers and organisation?
KKS: When I joined the service at the then Staff College, Shimla, a faculty member explained to us the meaning of the word, “cadre” in the context of IA&AS as a cadre. He clarified that the post of CAG is an ex-cadre post. The post of CAG is not a cadre post for IA&AS. Second issue is IAS versus IA&AS. No doubt IA&AS as a service is an excellent service, but its aspiring members cannot claim a comparison with IAS officers when it comes to appointment of CAG. IAS officers have wide range of experiences from the lowest ebb in a district to the top posts of Secretary to Government of India. They work with different regimes of political leadership which is a big learning opportunity for them. They have public dealings, they meet public, come to grips with people’s grievances on day-to-day basis; they are a part of micro and macro socio-economic problem solving process. They prepare groundwork for political leadership in deciding policies and understand the essentials of policy making. They are certainly better placed as compared to any other service including IA&AS, to occupy the chair of CAG of India. I agree that knowledge of audit and accounts may be beneficial for an outsider CAG, but that knowledge alone is not the sole criterion. Wise people accept immutably universal facts and don’t lament over spilt milk at the last moment.
The Pioneer: What about the supersession of six IA&AS officers?
KKS: My answer is embedded above. I will clarify my understanding once more. Supersession is within a particular service. Supersession is never with reference to other services. It is unbelievable that an IA&AS officer of 1983 batch has been superseded by an IAS officer of 1985 batch, though it is quite possible and a fact an I A&AS officer of 1983 batch being successfully superseded by IA&AS officers of 1985 batch and who knows it better than me. Hence, GC Murmu has superseded no IA&AS officer. The post of CAG is a constitutional post and the Prime Minister has the final word on his selection. I visited GC Murmu’s Wikipedia page. Though it might seem preposterous on my part to say so, in my view, he is a very suitable selection for the post of present CAG and seems to be a down to earth man. Organisation needs such a CAG.
The Pioneer: It is alleged that there is lack of transparency in selection of CAG. How would you react?
KKS: First, I have no means to ascertain whether the process is transparent or not. Second, as I understand this issue has also seen judicial scrutiny in the past. Third, if certain individuals and groups think process is non-transparent, they should take timely and appropriate steps to elevate discussion, debates to higher plateau.
The Pioneer: Why only IAS officers? Why not other professionals like economists, chartered accountants, academics, scientists or even journalists?
KKS: I tend to agree. This should be debated in various forums.
The Pioneer: As a writer, your perception of issues will have a more matured interpretative value. A person can draw meaningful conclusions from your views. What are your suggestions to new CAG?
KKS: I am not sanguine if others will be so sure of what you say but still I will share my honest views. My point of view is CAG of India means he is CAG for 138 crore Indians. Audit Reports get processed and discussed through Public Accounts Committees and COPU. That is a fine arrangement constitutionally mandated. We chalk out audit plans for both Centre and States. I don’t find any say by even a segment of Indian population on their suggestions. There is Audit Advisory Committee where experts are invited but these experts are not substitutes for 138 crore people. Therefore, my first suggestion to new CAG will be to open its website for one month in advance before the process of preparation of Audit Plans begins. During that month, public should be free to offer suggestions for topics to be covered in audit in next audit cycle. It will have two advantages. First, when nation is aiming to become an inclusive society, audit should open its gate to inclusion of nation’s population. Let people express themselves. CAG’s decision on audit plans will be final. Second, it will increase awareness in public about this august institution which is not there at present as it should be. When Sustainable Development Goals were being finalised, views were called from across countries through its website.
Second, last month, I wrote an article Kiran raises hopes for a robust New India. Late evening of the day article appeared, I got a call from a Professor of Psychiatry, AIIMS who had read the article. He invited me to join as a panelist for a webinar on “India’s first Mental Health Access Summit”, organised by AIIMS in collaboration with Mental Health Foundation, India. I participated in it on 4th of this month. I shared my little bit with mental health professionals. The picture of mental health issues that came during panel discussion was alarming.
An All India Performance Review on Assessment of extent of mental disorders, population affected, availability of infrastructure and preparedness to handle this invading behemoth is the need of the hour. This report will be very handy to Government, Medical Institutes, and NGOs generating keenness in Public Accounts Committee and public. I am not sure if this exercise was done in recent past. CAG may like to consider it.
The Pioneer: I came across an interesting set of statistics. I saw profile of some officers in different batches from 1981 to 1990. There were/are some officers who stayed/are staying in Delhi and adjacent States like Jaipur, Chandigarh, Faridabad or even Noida for 20/25 years, including deputation period in different spells. They had/have repeated postings in Delhi/CAG office. A few of them from this group went abroad for posting. This trend is seen even in case of currently serving officers. There are clusters of some officers having these three commonalities in selected batches spending almost 60 to 70 per cent of their service in Delhi and around places alone? It seems there is an elite group. Does it not affect efficiency?
KKS: You remind me of a Hindi proverb, “Haath Kangan ko Arsi Kaya.” The same thing has been felt by a majority of IA&AS officers over last so many years, even decades. Statistics is cited and statistics does not tell lie. Your observation is correct. It might affect efficiency at various levels.
The Pioneer: What are the expectations from new CAG in this respect?
KKS: New CAG may like to look into trends flagged. He may like to consider institutionalising steps as he deems necessary so that these end and corrective measures are taken. The new CAG seems to be a down to earth man.
The Pioneer: There have been media reports about delay in finalisation of audit reports in recent past. Any comments?
KKS: During last about three years before retirement, I had nothing to do with processing of audit reports. Therefore, I cannot answer your question.
The Pioneer: Any comments on delay in placing the reports in Parliament/ Assemblies.
KKS: The decision to place the reports has to be taken by the Government. The CAG has no role in it. His role ends with sending the reports to the President and Governors with the request to cause these to be laid in Parliament/State Assembly.
The Pioneer: Some audit reports become controversial. Why?
KKS: Late ST Kenghe was Director of IA&AS Staff College, Shimla when I was a probationer. He was a scholar. He quoted in Sanskrit from Vedas and Upanishads while talking to probationers. He was fond of saying, “Act as an auditor but don’t adopt holier than thou attitude”. He wrote the same thing in an article published in a book during late TN Chaturvedi’s period.
Two lessons emerge from above. An auditor should never think he is a paragon of virtue. Second his reports should speak, if at all necessary. Controversies arise if an auditor talks about his “achievements”. An audit report is a consequence of incessant hard work of more than hundred staff/officers. It should be kept in view. If these two criteria are respected, Reports will be respected.
The Pioneer: There were issues in the past weather an auditor can audit policies. What are your views and what role do you envisage for audit in current times?
KKS: I think an auditor should not venture into domain of policy auditing, Let me explain how I look at it. Political parties when they go to elections, go with their manifesto: a set of promises made to people. When a party comes to power, in order to convert the manifesto into action, they decide policies. Thus, a policy links public representatives and people through manifesto. Once an auditor tries to audit policies, he starts meddling with this link and thereby tries to usurp the role of a public representative which is barred in constitution. But he can always audit the outcome of policy which is normally done. Coming to the role of audit in current times, late CG Somiah, the then CAG’s advocacy “Audit as an aid to administration” should be respected and followed. Audit should facilitate reforms undertaken by Government and help in formation of a NEW INDIA.
The Pioneer: Any advice to young IA&AS officers?
KKS: It is said of the community of auditors they never welcome advice to them but are first to offer unsolicited advice to others. It’s in lighter vein. Audit organisation has intelligent and hardworking young officers. They should work for the organisation which has a long, glorious history. They should not suffer from ‘fixity and rigidity’ and should contribute to ‘collective personality’ of IA&AS and thereby strengthen the hands of CAG of India. Therefore, they should ponder over and learn from these lines of Salman Rushdie’s THE GOLDEN HOUSE, “In these our degenerate times, men bent on nothing but vainglory and personal gain-hollow, bombastic men for whom nothing is off-limits if it advances their pretty cause… and calling all who oppose them liars, envious, little people, stupid people, stiffs, and in a precise reversal of the truth, dishonest and corrupt.” My best wishes to them.
The Pioneer: Do you have any plans to write your autobiography?
KKS: The bridge is not visible to me. We will cross it if it ever comes.
As one of the tallest Dalit leaders of a post-Mandal India, Ram Vilas Paswan may not have been able to build a national party like the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) or have the mobilising force of its leader Mayawati, but he had Bihar. And the unflagging loyalty of his voters, who never deserted him and returned him as their representative with record-breaking margins, trusting he would deliver. It was this solidity of command and his unchanging vote pie that helped him become the kingmaker of heartland politics, one that no party could ignore and one that he was acutely aware of to become India’s most successful bellwether politician and influencer of coalition politics. In return, he got key ministries in successive Governments of VP Singh, HD Deve Gowda, IK Gujral, AB Vajpayee, Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi. Portfolios that he used to ensure the development of his constituents and pilot their rights. Let us not forget that as Minister he brought in a strict law to penalise atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Tribes. He realised that national politics would keep him relevant even if his voteshare was no more than seven per cent of the Bihar electorate but enough to be a swing factor for any party needing it. Not that he wasn’t aware of the limitations of being a Dalit-only leader and, therefore, included Muslims to strengthen the electoral worth of his Lok Janshakti Party (LJP). The remaining deficit was made up by his national presence that helped him make or break governments in Bihar. He was responsible for dismantling Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) chieftain Lalu Prasad Yadav’s hold on the State in 2005 and laid the ground for Nitish Kumar to become the Chief Minister. Committed to BR Ambedkar’s philosophy and the Lohia brand of socialism, he didn’t hesitate to stand up for what’s right and was instrumental in bringing down the Vajpayee Government over the Gujarat riots and attacks on Muslims. And at one time, he even insisted on a Muslim Chief Minister for Bihar. Yet such was his winsome personality and convincing ability that the cross-jumps he made, disregarding ideology to stay on the right side of power, seemed effortless than contrived, expedient rather than convenient. That explains why everybody may have ridiculed Nitish Kumar for jumping ship but spared Paswan. And using that advantage, he sided with the Modi regime to launch his son Chirag as a bigger player in Bihar politics. Knowing that all senior leaders were in their sunset years and grooming their younger lot, he wanted him to be chief ministerial candidate some day, something that eluded him. So he intended to chaperone him through the forthcoming Assembly elections.
Chirag has, of course, played into the BJP’s ambition of getting Bihar on its terms and, as its proxy, made no bones of his intention to undercut the prospects of Nitish Kumar’s Janata Dal (United) by fielding LJP candidates against it and playing friendly matches with the BJP while supporting the saffron party at the Centre. In fact, he has been aggressive about becoming the BJP’s B-team all too early, ceaselessly attacking Nitish, without testing strengths on the ground. One that forced the BJP to publicly restrain him by reasserting faith in Nitish as CM face, lest it be seen as a usurper of the federal space. Dalits account for 16 per cent of Bihar’s population and half of these are Paswans, a chunk that has been loyal to the LJP over the years. But Nitish, by introducing sub-quotas for Mahadalits, has chipped away at some of that base. Besides, he has roped in another Dalit leader Jiten Manjhi into his fold. But the ambitious Chirag feels that with the CM’s political stock at an all-time low, this is the best time for the LJP to shore up its base and anoint himself as a key power player. Besides, he wants to emerge as an alternative to Lalu’s son Tejashwi Yadav, who is also looking at the Assembly elections for legitimacy. Many believe that Chirag has a better appeal and acceptability among the youth in general than the arrogant Tejashwi but the latter is a bigger crowd puller. Both still rely on the aura and political legacy of their fathers to convince the voters and wouldn’t want to miss an opportunity to prove as much. Chirag, who has a largely urban persona, is handicapped by the lack of his father’s ability to feel the pulse of the underprivileged, speak their tongue and settle into their ways while campaigning. Paswan Junior, who once chased Bollywood dreams, seems that much more distant. Besides, unlike Tejashwi, who has his brothers and sisters propping up the RJD, Chirag has no family support to fall back on. And the LJP, with its heavy-duty reliance on its founding family, has hardly groomed outsiders who could emerge as his advisors. Uncle Pashupati Paras, who is the sitting Hajipur MP, is not interested in working with Chirag. And nobody knows how much he can depend on his cousins to do his bidding. So the young leader has not only lost his father’s counsel, he has lost the family mantle too. So far he has been able to fire up the LJP enough to risk it alone in the Bihar Assembly, naming candidates for 42 seats and netting in five BJP rebels too. But with Paswan passing away at a crucial transitional juncture, Chirag could plateau out and would be wise to not spread himself out too thin. Alternatively, Paswan’s death may translate into a sympathy wave among all Dalit voters, who may vote for legacy than its bearer. Either way, his political survival is at stake. The BJP will be watching him too.
(Courtesy: The Pioneer)
Populist legislation based on subjective concepts of virtue often does little or nothing to address the crimes it pretends to combat
The 16th century King of England, Henry VIII, usurped the power of the Catholic Church when it refused to approve his desire to annul his marriage, so he could wed another woman “more worthy of the throne.” According to the American professor of law, G Marcus Cole, this is when the State took over the roles that were once the exclusive domains of the Church, i.e. defining morality. Cole says that since the king’s authority did not extend to marital issues, Henry simply assumed by force the Church’s duties and powers.
Despite the fact that in Europe, politically, the Church and the State began to be separated from the 18th century, there was always a distance between the two, regarding social and religious matters. For example, issues such as homosexuality, divorce, adultery and so on were hardly ever put before a monarch because these were matters of morality and thus the domain of the Church. But when the political divorce of the Church and the State was complete, citizens expected the State to define morality and legislate laws to punish immorality.
This was easier said than done, because this meant assuming a role that was once the domain of the Church, which had been sidelined because it was thought to be against the principles of enlightenment, such as reason, science and modernity. Nevertheless, according to Cole, ever since Henry’s move, the State has increasingly occupied and further assumed the traditional functions of the Church.
The same was the case in Muslim empires, where the monarchs initially let Islamic scholars and judges define, resolve and judge matters of morality and piety. But increasingly, because of issues of morality overlapping political matters, Muslim monarchs began to trespass the domains of the Ulema (a body of Muslim scholars) often leaving them fuming. The Ulema believed that the monarchs were interpreting and defining religious laws because of pragmatic reasons, more than their desire to create a morally correct society. It is this approach that still drives the dynamics of the modern State and its legislative relationship with morality. Whereas legislating or enacting laws against crimes such as theft, murder or rape have a tangible necessity to maintain a moral order in society, the problem arises when a State tries to formulate laws against what it believe causes such crimes.
In Pakistan, for example, over the years, governments have often enacted legislation and issued ordinances to deal with what they assume causes crimes such as rape and child abuse. During the Zia-ul-Haq dictatorship in the 1980s, decrees and “advisories” were issued about how men and women (especially the latter) should dress on TV and in public. Zia’s “chaadar aur chaardewari” (veil and four walls) motto encouraged women to stay indoors and only venture out in a veil, to avoid sexual harassment or rape. This line of thinking was vehemently opposed by various women’s organisations. They saw it as an idea emitting from the psyche of a male dictator who was putting the blame on women for being abused by men.
No serious discussion was ever attempted by the Government to understand the causes behind rape and harassment, beyond that unidimensional rhetorical solution to keep women inside the four walls of the house and in a veil. Of course, the issue of young boys being raped, many of them in madrasas, was conveniently ignored, and so were incidents in which women, who regularly covered themselves in the veil, could not escape harassment.
Second, on September 20, this year, the Pakistani lawmaker Shandana Gulzar Khan quoted figures by the rights group War on Rape in which it was disclosed that, on many occasions, rapists are known to the victims and include family members. So this means a large number of rapes are taking place inside the chaardewari.
Recently, the Imran Khan Government, echoing the famous Islamic evangelist, Tariq Jameel, has come up with a similar rationale behind the frightening increase in rape cases of women and of children, both male and female. According to Jameel, co-education is one reason, whereas to Khan, the reasons range from Hollywood and Bollywood films and the Chinese mobile phone app Tik-Tok! In Europe and the US, psychologists and psychiatrists have, for decades, been conducting studies whether “obscenity” in cultural products generates actual deviant behaviour. The results have been entirely inconclusive. This is what courts in Europe and the US have been struggling with. Professor of law Daniel Piar says that, from the mid-20th century, courts in the US began to discourage legislation on the basis of morality. Those who support this position give the example of the 1920 prohibition imposed on alcoholic beverages in the US.
It was a decision by the Government based on decades of lobbying by puritanical Christian groups, who often provided “proof” of how alcohol was ravaging the moral fabric of American society. Yet, 13 years later, in 1933, the Government had to repeal the law. In a January 2020 article for The Atlantic, Annika Neklason writes that prohibition caused twice the amount of corruption and violence than the prohibitionists claimed consuming liquor did. Enacting laws to curb an activity, because that activity is defined as being immoral, and the cause behind tangible disruption in society make for a complicated exercise. For example, rape or child abuse are clearly tangible misdeeds. The procedure to determine their cause, however, is the domain of psychologists and sociologists, who must weigh in before the Government can legislate laws to address the causes. But this hardly ever happens in Pakistan, where successive governments and the State often take unilateral action to determine and then define causes in this context and impose curbs against them. The most they do is confer with Ulema. Therefore, the determined causes of rape and child abuse draw some entirely knee-jerk rationale that does not go beyond pleas to put women behind walls, wrap them in a veil or ban “obscene” cultural products.
There’s another reason why this happens. According to the American scholar of law, Louis Henkin, since it is problematic to substantiate that an activity defined as being “obscene” causes certain criminal offences, courts and governments forbid them, not because there is proof that they lead to crimes, but because they are deemed offensive to large sections of society. This is common in polities that define themselves as being morally correct.
When recently, PTV aired a segment in which a woman was shown exercising with a male fitness coach, a conservative journalist tweeted, “Is this (the) Islamic Republic of Pakistan?” Of course, he couldn’t claim that the segment would lead to any heinous crime, it was just him being offended by it because, in his mind, an Islamic Republic should behave in a particular manner. Anything contradicting this manner needs to be banned because it is offensive.
The American legal philosopher, Lon Fuller, describes this as “morality of aspiration” or a conception of moral principles to which humans ought to aspire. He discouraged legislation based on morality of aspiration because it often ends up enshrining flawed and populist concepts of virtue that do nothing to address the larger crimes that these ideas of virtue are pretending to combat.
(Courtesy: Dawn)
FREE Download
OPINION EXPRESS MAGAZINE
Offer of the Month