Secular India???

As the V-day approaches, love birds around the world rejoice at the thought of spending an entire day with their loved ones. While in India, the thought of V-day brings up fear among the lovers as they don’t know which religious fanatic organisation will harass them and make them suffer for no fault of theirs. These religious fanatic organisations who remain almost nonexistent the entire year and who are usually never heard of suddenly take the center stage on Valentine’s Day. We see love birds almost every day walking in the nearby parks yet these organisations only target them on V-day. Just because V-day had its origin in Western culture, these fanatics think it should be banned. When we accepted and blended many Western cultures to our needs, why still hate some traditions? After all India is a free country and everyone has right to follow whatever traditions they like. This problem arises because of our understanding of the word “Secularism”.

World understanding of term “Secularism” differs from Indian understanding. The world view of secularism refers to the non interference of the State in any religious matters. State does not identify with any religion; they remain equidistant from every religion. Indian understanding of secularism largely differs from the World’s view. Accordingly State should not identify with any religion but it should at the same time protect the interests of the religious minorities. Whenever the people of religious minorities feel discriminated, State comes to their rescue. Many people do not recognize this difference and tend identify with the World view which in turn is creating tension among various religions and cultures. For the same reason the framers of our Constitution never used the term ‘secular’ in our Constitution. It was later added specifically to the Preamble of our Constitution by the 42^nd amendment. Our fore fathers knew world’s understanding of secularism will be difficult to implement in India as ours is a land of many religions and sometimes the majority may curb the interests of the minorities, so the responsibility of defending and protecting the interests of the minorities falls upon the State.

The government too sometimes fail to understand its duties in protecting the interests of the minorities. Protecting the interests of the minorities is a broad term and can be interpreted in many ways which sometimes leads to tensions. For example the Union government is providing subsidies to the Indian Muslims undertaking Hajj pilgrimage. The government supports this move while the majority religion people oppose it as by doing so it is not protecting interests of the minorities but instead simply appeasing them for their votes which in turn is antagonizing the majority. Bhagvad Gita is holy text of the Hindu religion which is recognized as the official text in Russia which can never happen in India. Instead of looking at Gita in an objective manner, people tend to identify it with a particular religion and the Government too agrees with this view. These instances show that the State too has a narrow understanding of the term ‘secularism’ which in turn by its actions is creating religious tension between the majority religion and the minorities.

As people too fail to understand the term ‘secular’ in Indian context, they define Government’s actions with the world view and criticize it. Let’s consider the recent controversy regarding the film ‘PK’. The film is about an alien who comes from a Utopian world where religion does not exist but the concept of GOD does exist. The entire film depicts his search for GOD and finally learning to believe in one true GOD and not the Gods created by human beings. This film which contains a good message for the entire society was criticized by some because of their narrow understanding capabilities. Their fixation on trivial issues made them fail to understand the inner message due to which they demanded ban on the film. In India all the films are reviewed by Central Board of Film Certification (popularly known as Censor board) which depending on the content certifies whether the film is universally watchable or whether it is an adults only film. So a film once reviewed and cleared by the CBFC should not be interfered with by the State. But the State to appease particular sections of the society time and again is interfering in these issues. For example a Telugu film ‘Denikaina Ready’ which was cleared by the CBFC was again reviewed by a committee appointed by the State and edited it as a particular community expressed that their religious sentiments were hurt by the film. Such incidents completely change the understanding of the term ‘secular’.

It is the duty of the State to make people understand the issues and should not buckle under pressure. They should stand for the values enshrined in the Constitution and uphold them in high esteem. When the State itself fails to understand what 'secularism' means, how can it educate the citizens? Instead of trying to appease some sections of the society, the State should focus on upholding the Constitutional values and educating the people in Indian understanding of 'secularism'. Then only we can call ourselves a 'Secular State'.

Balancing Judicial Independence & Accountability

“With great power comes great responsibility”. Every person who watched Spiderman will never forget the words uttered by Uncle Ben. Power without responsibility or responsibility without power both are harmful for the society, there should always be a balance between them. Doctrine of checks and balances is enshrined in the Constitution of India. Our Constitution contains checks and balances which require all the three wings Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary to work harmoniously. It has created a separation of powers between all the three wings. The legislature and the executive must act within their powers as declared by the Constitution and whenever they exceed their powers or jurisdiction, Judiciary stepped in time and again to maintain balance. But power without responsibility is dangerous in a democratic setup such as ours. Accountability and transparency are the very essence of the democracy. No one single public institution or for that matter even a private institution dealing with the public is exempted from accountability. Hence Judiciary too is accountable. Judges’ accountability is to the Constitution and the laws, to the precedents and to the Code of Ethics that govern all judicial powers and conduct. But allegations of corruption on the Judiciary left a bloat mark on the credibility of the Judiciary. Lack of accountability is bound to shake the confidence of the public in the Judiciary as an institution and that in turn can lead to disastrous consequences to the rule of law and democracy. 

 

Indian Judiciary being the custodian of the Constitution was bestowed with the responsibility to uphold Constitutional values. Judiciary safeguards fundamental rights (Art. 32) and the Constitution and can strike down any law or executive action that is contrary to the fundamental rights or other provisions of the Constitution. In Kesavanand Bharati Case, Doctrine of Basic Principles was formulated to uphold the Constitutional supremacy. The Indian Judiciary’s powers of judicial review to declare Parliamentary and executive actions ultra vires of the Constitution have been recognized ever since 1950, when the Constitution came into force. Art. 50 of the Directive Principles of the Constitution states that the State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services. When the legislature or the executive failed to act on the alleged allegations of corruption in 2G spectrum Judiciary stepped in. But to manage the task of upholding Constitutional supremacy Judicial Independence must be maintained. Judiciary should be free from all sorts of external influences. Judge should decide a case according to law and he cannot be interfered with by anybody without process.  The Constitution has insulated Judiciary from interference both by legislature or executive. There are several provisions in the Constitution which safeguards independence of the Judiciary and the Judges:

i.            Judges of the High Courts and the Supreme Court have their tenure guaranteed by the Constitution till they attain the age of superannuation.

ii.                 Judges salaries and allowances are charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State or Union, as the case may be and are not subject to a vote by the State Legislatures or the Parliament. Their pensions are also charged on the Consolidated Fund.

iii.              Art. 121 and 211 prohibit any discussion in the Parliament or State Legislatures on the conduct of a Judge of Supreme Court or High Court in the discharge of their respective duties.

iv.              The High Courts and Supreme Court are Courts of record and have powers to punish for contempt.

v.                 Judges are immune under various laws like Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 from civil or criminal action for their acts, speech etc., in the course of or while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of their official or judicial duties or function.

Independence of the Judges in their individual capacity or of the Judiciary as an institution is not absolute. Courts are institutions run by human beings and human beings are subject to selfish or venal motives and even moral paragons differ in the quality of their mental faculties and in their capacity for judgement and wisdom. Among the constitutional limitations on the Judges of the High Courts/Supreme Court by the address of the Houses of Parliament to the President on the ground of ‘proved misbehaviour or incapacity’. This is provided in Art. 124(2) and (4) in respect of Judges of the Supreme Court and in view of Art 217, that procedure is attracted to the ‘removal’ of Judges of the High Court also. Judicial accountability is an indispensable counterbalance to the judicial independence. Accountability is fostered through the processes for selection, discipline and removal found in the Constitution and statutes in various judicial systems. As the judicial system involves complete inter-relationships among the three branches of the Government, the demand for openness and the transparency cannot shield the judiciary from the scrutiny.       

    The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 was passed providing for procedure for the investigation and proof of misbehaviour and incapacity of Judges of the Supreme Court (including the Chief Justice of India), the Chief Justices and Judges of the High Courts, where reference is made by the Speaker or the Chairman to a three Member Committee after admitting a Motion initiated by a specified number of Members. But the process for the removal of a judge is too difficult. The motion for the removal of a judge on proved misbehaviour must be passed by at least 2/3^rd majority of the members present and voting and not less than majority of the total membership. This is too difficult to achieve in current scenario. When Justice Ramaswami faced the motion for his removal it failed as required majority was not garnered for the motion. Recently Justice Soumitra Sen too faced removal motion which was passed in Rajya Sabha. But before the motion was passed by Lok Sabha, Justice Soumitra Sen submitted his resignation so Lok Sabha decided to drop the proceedings. Even Justice P.D. Dinakaran too faced the motion and was forced to resign before the motion was passed. So are we well equipped to deal with the corruption allegations on the Judiciary? Recently Lok Sabha passed the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010. Some of the highlights of the bill are:

Ø The bill requires judges to declare their assets, lays down judicial standards and establishes processes for removal of judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.

Ø Judges will be requires to declare their assets and liabilities and also that of their spouse and children.

Ø The Bill establishes the National Judicial Oversight Committee, the Complaints Scrutiny Panel and an investigation committee. Any person can make a complaint against a judge to the Oversights Committee on grounds of ‘misbehaviour’.

Ø A motion for removal of judges on grounds of misbehaviour can also be moved in the Parliament. Such a motion will be referred for further inquiry to the Oversights Committee.

Ø Complaints and inquiries against judges will be confidential and frivolous complaints will be penalised.

Ø The Oversights Committee may issue advisories or warnings to the judges and also recommend their removal to the President.

Ø The Oversights Committee consists of three judicial and two non-judicial members. It will consist of a retired Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as a Chairperson, a judge of the Supreme Court, a Chief Justice of a High Court, the Attorney General of India and an eminent person appointed by the President of India.

Ø Scrutiny Panel will be constituted in the Supreme Court and every High Court. It shall consist of a former Chief Justice and two sitting judges of that court.

Ø Investigation Committee will be setup by the Oversights Committee to enquire into complaints. The Bill does not specify the qualifications of the members of the investigation committee but leaves it to the discretion of the Oversights Committee.

  

The bill included many recommendations of the Law Commission and the Standing Committee to review the bill. The process for removal of a judge is only enshrined in the Judges Inquiry Bill, 1968.With this, the allegations which does not warrant removal go un-punished. So Law Commission in its review of Judges (Inquiry) Bill, 2005 recommended equipping the council with the power to impose minor measures when proved misbehaviour does not warrant removal except when it was referred by the Chairman/Speaker on motion for removal. Another recommendation includes forming the council with only judges. Some criticized that it is unfair to for judges to judge the judges. But peer review is an international norm and is covered by several resolutions of the International bodies. The drafted bill includes non judicial members like Attorney General and any eminent person appointed by the President of India in the Oversights Committee. But the Scrutiny panel include members of judiciary only.

Judiciary is accountable and independent. Judicial Accountability and Independence cannot be viewed as dichotomous but must be viewed as two sides of the same coin. At the same time too much interference by the executive on the judiciary too is not acceptable. Executive try to influence the judiciary by promises of nominated posts after retirement. So transparency should be maintained while appointing persons for these kinds of nominated positions. So Judiciary while being accountable to the Constitution must maintain its independence too. Lee Epstein in the book ‘Judicial Independence’ says that, ‘Too little independence can undermine the separation of powers; too much independence can undermine the democratic basis of a political order’.

Sources:

i.                   Law Commission Report 195

ii.                 PRS India- Final Brief for printing - Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill 2010.

iii.              www.judicialreforms.org

Honesty Vs Diplomacy

During my childhood days one quote attracted me the most and that is 'Honesty is the best policy'. I was attracted to this particular quote as it was the most relevant one during the early days of my life. Whenever I used to lie I used to get my father's special 'ROOM TREATMENT'. My father usually says, "Everyone makes mistakes after all we are humans but you should have the guts to accept and rectify your mistakes instead of searching for methods to cover up the mistakes". I tried my best to follow his advice (most of the times after all I too was a regular normal kid who used to make many mistakes).

Coming to the present situation, I am in a dilemma whether my most prized quote still holds valid or not. The world we live in is full of lies. I started learning that Humans find it difficult to accept reality (truth) in some situations. I started get a feeling that a fabricated false is better than a painful truth. To legitimize this belief people introduced the term 'Diplomacy'. Now a days being diplomatic means covering the burning truth with a fabricated false. People got so used to the presented truth (partial or complete false)  that now no one cares about the actual truth. If you consider the issue of Wiki-leaks, most of the matters leaked by them are know to all or major portion of the society but no one dares accept it. They just try to push off the issue by saying that they are being diplomatic. If for being diplomatic is we all live for then what is the need for teaching kids the values of honesty or truthfulness???? 

Instead of misguiding the present generation kids, change the quote to "Diplomacy is the best policy".  Stop teaching them the need for being honest. Tell them that if you want to survive in this society then you should better be ready to lie to the society if situation asks for and also accept the lies ( or so called truths) of the society. 

Note: These are purely my ideas and I am not trying to force them on any one. Some may agree with me some may disagree. Comments are always welcomed.

Honour Killings- a black mark on Humanity

 

It has been a six-year legal battle for Sushma against the horrific ‘honour killing' by her brother of almost her entire marital family: husband Prabhu Nochil, her father-in-law and two minors in their home near Mumbai, all to avenge her marriage into a family of a ‘lower' caste. Sushma is from a Brahmin family of UP, and Prabhu, an Ezhava from Kerala.

On July 22, 2009, Ved Pal Maun, a 27-year–old medical practitioner of Mataur village in Kaithal district was brutally murdered by armed people in front of a warrant officer who ran away with injuries. Ved Paul loved Sonia who was Banwala gotra and they eloped and married.

These are just a few of the innumerable barbaric acts taking place in the name of ‘honour killing’. Intolerant families and illegal panchayats kill young couples who marry in violation of traditional community norms.

These barbaric acts need to be condemned by the whole nation. These panchayats are not even sorry for their act. They still feel what they are doing is right. We surely need separate laws for ‘honour killings’. Funny thing is our govt. don’t even record these killings separately, so we don’t even have proper statistics about it. Although the issue was raised in the Parliament last year, legislative measures are unlikely in the near future as major political parties are unwilling to antagonise their caste vote banks.

In case of Mrs. Sushma, although the fast track sessions court in Maharashtra, and later the Bombay High Court, awarded the death penalty to Sushma's brother Dilip Tiwari and his accomplices, the Supreme Court in December 2009 reduced the sentence to 25-year imprisonment. Though I am against capital punishment (personal feeling), the reason mentioned to reduce the sentence is at flaw.

The Supreme Court, explaining its decision to revoke the death sentence, said: “It is a common experience that when the younger sister commits something unusual and in this case it was an inter-caste, intercommunity marriage out of a secret love affair, then in society it is the elder brother who justifiably or otherwise is held responsible for not stopping such [an] affair.If he became the victim of his wrong but genuine caste considerations, it would not justify the death sentence... The vicious grip of the caste, community, religion, though totally unjustified, is a stark reality.” 

This is totally illegal. Indirectly the Supreme Court is justifying honour killings. By making such statements the Apex Court is sending wrong message to the nation. No one has any right to stop willing couples from marrying. It is surely against law.

We the people should demand for separate laws regarding honour killings. The major political parties should stop their vote bank politics and implement new laws regarding  this issue.

references: Cover Story in Frontline dated 28th Aug 2009,

Recent article in Hindu Her struggle for justice against honour killing.

Why is the media here so negative?

This is a letter written by Dr.. Abdul Kalam to all Indians

Why are we in India so embarrassed to recognize our own strengths, our achievements?
We are such a great nation. We have so many amazing success stories but we refuse to acknowledge them. Why?
We are the first in milk production.
We are number one in Remote sensing satellites.
We are the second largest producer of wheat.
We are the second largest producer of rice.
Look at Dr. Sudarshan , he has transferred the tribal village into a self-sustaining, self-driving unit. There are millions of such achievements but our media is only obsessed in the bad news and failures and disasters.
I was in Tel Aviv once and I was reading the Israeli newspaper. It was the day after a lot of attacks and bombardments and deaths had taken place. The Hamas had struck. But the front page of the newspaper had the picture of a Jewish gentleman who in five years had transformed his desert into an orchid and a granary. It was this inspiring picture that everyone woke up to. The gory details of killings, bombardments, deaths, were inside in the newspaper, buried among other news.
In India we only read about death, sickness, terrorism, crime.. Why are we so NEGATIVE? Another question: Why are we, as a nation so obsessed with foreign things? We want foreign T.Vs, we want foreign shirts. We want foreign technology.
Why this obsession with everything imported. Do we not realize that self-respect comes with self-reliance? I was in Hyderabad giving this lecture, when a 14 year old girl asked me for my autograph. I asked her what her goal in life is. She replied: I want to live in a developed India . For her, you and I will have to build this developed India . You must proclaim. India is not an under-developed nation; it is a highly developed nation.
Do you have 10 minutes? Allow me to come back with a vengeance.
Got 10 minutes for your country? If yes, then read; otherwise, choice is yours..
YOU say that our government is inefficient.
YOU say that our laws are too old.
YOU say that the municipality does not pick up the garbage.
YOU say that the phones don't work, the railways are a joke. The airline is the worst in the world, mails never reach their destination.
YOU say that our country has been fed to the dogs and is the absolute pits.
YOU say, say and say. What do YOU do about it?
Take a person on his way to Singapore . Give him a name - 'YOURS'. Give him a face - 'YOURS'. YOU walk out of the airport and you are at your International best. In Singapore you don't throw cigarette butts on the roads or eat in the stores. YOU are as proud of their Underground links as they are.. You pay $5 (approx. Rs. 60) to drive through Orchard Road (equivalent of Mahim Causeway or Pedder Road) between 5 PM and 8 PM. YOU come back to the parking lot to punch your parking ticket if you have over stayed in a restaurant or a shopping mall irrespective of your status identity… In Singapore you don't say anything, DO YOU? YOU wouldn't dare to eat in public during Ramadan, in Dubai .. YOU would not dare to go out without your head covered in Jeddah.
YOU would not dare to buy an employee of the telephone exchange in London at 10 pounds (Rs.650) a month to, 'see to it that my STD and ISD calls are billed to someone else.'YOU would not dare to speed beyond 55 mph (88 km/h) in Washington and then tell the traffic cop, 'Jaanta hai main kaun hoon (Do you know who I am?). I am so and so's son. Take your two bucks and get lost.' YOU wouldn't chuck an empty coconut shell anywhere other than the garbage pail on the beaches in Australia and New Zealand ..
Why don't YOU spit Paan on the streets of Tokyo ? Why don't YOU use examination jockeys or buy fake certificates in Boston ??? We are still talking of the same YOU. YOU who can respect and conform to a foreign system in other countries but cannot in your own. You who will throw papers and cigarettes on the road the moment you touch Indian ground. If you can be an involved and appreciative citizen in an alien country, why cannot you be the same here in India ?
In America every dog owner has to clean up after his pet has done the job. Same in Japan ..
Will the Indian citizen do that here?' He's right. We go to the polls to choose a government and after that forfeit all responsibility.
We sit back wanting to be pampered and expect the government to do everything for us whilst our contribution is totally negative. We expect the government to clean up but we are not going to stop chucking garbage all over the place nor are we going to stop to pick a up a stray piece of paper and throw it in the bin. We expect the railways to provide clean bathrooms but we are not going to learn the proper use of bathrooms.
We want Indian Airlines and Air India to provide the best of food and toiletries but we are not going to stop pilfering at the least opportunity.
This applies even to the staff who is known not to pass on the service to the public.When it comes to burning social issues like those related to women, dowry, girl child! and others, we make loud drawing room protestations and continue to do the reverse at home. Our excuse? 'It's the whole system which has to change, how will it matter if I alone forego my sons' rights to a dowry.' So who's going to change the system?
What does a system consist of? Very conveniently for us it consists of our neighbours, other households, other cities, other communities and the government. But definitely not me and YOU. When it comes to us actually making a positive contribution to the system we lock ourselves along with our families into a safe cocoon and look into the distance at countries far away and wait for a Mr.Clean to come along & work miracles for us with a majestic sweep of his hand or we leave the country and run away.
Like lazy cowards hounded by our fears we run to America to bask in their glory and praise their system. When New York becomes insecure we run to England . When England experiences unemployment, we take the next flight out to the Gulf. When the Gulf is war struck, we demand to be rescued and brought home by the Indian government. Everybody is out to abuse and rape the country. Nobody thinks of feeding the system. Our conscience is mortgaged to money.Dear Indians, The article is highly thought inductive, calls for a great deal of introspection and pricks one's conscience too…. I am echoing J. F. Kennedy's words to his fellow Americans to relate to Indians…..
'ASK WHAT WE CAN DO FOR INDIA AND DO WHAT HAS TO BE DONE TO MAKE INDIA WHAT AMERICA AND OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES ARE TODAY'
Lets do what India needs from us.
Dr.. Abdul Kalam

Telangana Issue

Recently I had a discussion with my friend about Telangana issue. He supported the formation of separate state. We both argued for sometime and I want to share with you guys.
First he started with the argument that if a separate state is formed there will be development in Telangana region. Telangana is rich in minerals and if "water" is used properly economy will increase.So coming to water issue, we all know that Andhra Pradesh is fighting legal battle with both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu which are its neighboring states on water issues. And this legal battle is running from many years. So if a separate state is formed a never ending war for water will start between Telangana and Andhra.Also first to build new projects state doesn't have enough money. Central Government should release more funds for this and currently Central Govt. is not is a position to provide extra funds.

Next he talked about employment issue. He says if a separate state is formed there won't be any employment problem for Telangana people as currently many jobs in Telangana are occupied by people of Andhra. All are aware of recent attacks on Indians living in Australia. Some say these are racist attacks but its wrong. Many Australian companies are recruiting Indians as they have better skills. So this created fear among Australians and also recession made them lose their nerve. So they started attacking. Now we all criticized Australians for attacking Indians. So why there are more Andhra people working in Telangana, because they are more skilled. A company always prefers skilled persons as they are very helpful for its growth. Suddenly one day it sacks all its skilled employees and replace them with some novices what will happen to the company. If a small industry takes that much precaution , how much more careful should be a State while choosing people for jobs.

My friend raised a point that Andhra people are ruling Telangana. He says since persons from other region are ruling them, their region remained undeveloped.Now consider about India. Our Prime Minister is Manmohan Singh who is from Punjab. Now should all Telugu people demand for a separate country saying that we are being ruled by a Punjabi. If everyone starts thinking on same grounds what will happen to the country. Just think. The leaders are chosen by you.If your region is not developed demand answer from your leader. You have a right to question him if he doesn't work for you.

So please don't support for formation of separate state. Formation of separate state doesn't result in development of the region. All the political parties are using students for their selfish needs. They will do anything for power. We should not just blindly follow them. Just think before you act.

Is India over reacting on trivial matters?

Recently film star SRK was under detention for 2 hrs at Newyork Airport. SRK started accusing US airport authorities that he was under detention as his name ends with 'KHAN'. Now India started to react on this matter. Our aviation minister Mr. Praful Patel said to the reporters "We will take the issue with the United States government strongly. Such incidents involving Indians due to their religion or nationality should not happen... we will not accept it".But the government is forgetting that VIPs are not above law. The ghost of 9/11 is still haunting U.S. They are very much concerned about the security. Interestingly on the same day that SRK was detained, American singer 'Bob Dylan' was asked for an ID by two young cops to know who he really was. When he couldn’t furnish one, he was taken right back to the resort where he was putting up and staff there vouched for him. America is Dylan's own country. In a country like US celebrities are not treated specially. But coming to India we treat them as 'GODs'. People and the government over-react to the slightest discomfort their GOD faces. This should change. They may be popular but that doesn't give them special status in all aspects. The government shouldn't have reacted in such a way. Till now they were not concerned about all the security checks Asians undergo but once a celebrity faces problem they started to react seriously. The government should learn from US regarding security checks. We should take our security more seriously n treat all persons may be a common man or a celebrity equally.

About one week back a Chinese strategist wrote in one of his article in some Chinese website that China should help divide India.It was an article written by some unknown Beijing strategist on an obscure Chinese website calling for 'splitting India' which may or may not be backed by the Chinese government.But Indian government was quick enough to react on the issue. Is it really necessary for the Indian government to react on what some anonymous blogger wrote. Now-a-days we find many blogs on the internet which are controversial. Some may hurt Indians feelings but should we really need to take them seriously. The answer is no. Those blogs are their thoughts n beliefs and they have right to express their feelings. Individuals may react on it but governments are not supposed to react. Media also plays an important role about which issues should be given more importance. Highlighting trivial issues like this may create tension between nations and may lead to war. So even media should decide before making any issues.

In India we are suffering from many problems. The government should react on those problems and try to solve them. Instead if they start reacting on trivial issues they will loose their dignity. So stop over reacting and work for the development of the nation.