|
|
|
|
|
|
Economic Highlights
Iran Goes Ahead On N-Energy:WHITHER THE INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL?,by Dr Chintamani Mahapatra,13 Feb 08 |
|
|
Round The World
New Delhi, 13 February 2008
Iran Goes Ahead On N-Energy
WHITHER THE INDO-US
NUCLEAR DEAL?
By Dr. Chintamani
Mahapatra
School of International Studies, JNU
The nuclear deal between India
and the US
appears to have got stuck. Is it because the Opposition has gone relatively
mild against this deal? Is it because the Government has nothing new to say on
this? The CPM's ideological supremo, Prakash Karat, has threatened to restart a
campaign against the nuclear deal and the US Ambassador Mulford has expressed
his willingness to meet him to clarify doubts, if any.
Is it appropriate for an Ambassador to meet the Opposition
leaders to clarify on a deal that has been finalized by his Government with the
Government of the host country? No one has raised the appropriateness of this
issue and it reflects that the Opposition parties have gone soft on this issue.
The CPM has shown its interest in starting a campaign but has not done it yet.
A lot many events are happening outside of India and the US that would affect the fate of
this deal until it truly materializes. Significantly, while Indian Government
appears to be struggling hard to fulfill its side of the commitment to enable
the Indo-US nuclear deal to come to its fruition, the Iranian Government is
showing ever more determination to go ahead with its uranium enrichment
programme.
Due to the political barriers erected by a constituent of
the ruling coalition of the UPA Government, the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
is at pains to complete the process in time for the Indo-US civilian nuclear
cooperation deal to materialize. The seriousness of the domestic hurdles to the
nuclear policy is indicated by the willingness of the American Ambassador to
meet with Prakash Karat, the leading champion of the Left’s opposition to the
nuclear deal to clarify misperceptions.
Unlike India,
the Iranian leadership does not have much domestic opposition to the country's
civilian nuclear programme. On the eve of celebrating more than two decades of
the successful Iranian Islamic Revolution when President Ahmadinejad asked a mammoth
rally of people: ""I ask the people's view. Would you agree if I ...
gave in, surrendered or compromised over the nuclear issue? Would you agree to
give up one iota of your nuclear rights?" the crowd replied in response:
"No!" and "Nuclear energy is our definite right."
Iran's main problem comes from the
external sources, particularly the United States. Significantly, the
Bush Administration is trying to convince the international community the
potential danger of the Iranian civilian nuclear programme. The Americans do
not believe that there is any urgent need for energy resource rich Iran to spend
enormous amount of money in an expensive nuclear programme. Washington
suspects that Tehran's
main ambition is to develop a nuclear weapon capability.
Moreover, Iran
has been at logger heads with the United States since 1979. Washington accuses Tehran
of supporting anti-US terrorist groups, of opposing the Middle Eastern peace
process, of indulging in destabilizing Lebanon
and backing the anti-American insurgents in Iraq. An Iranian regime that has
taken an extreme hard line position on the very existence of Israel and appears determined to go ahead with its
nuclear programme is clearly unacceptable to the US.
Washington sees nothing but an ambition to
acquire nuclear weapon capability in Tehran.
It argues that denying Iran
a full cycle civilian nuclear energy capability is the best for the non-proliferation
goals of the international community.
Simultaneously, the US Administration is seeking
international endorsement for a civilian nuclear cooperation plan with India by
indicating the potential benefits of such a venture. The Indian nuclear energy programme,
unlike the Iranian one, is viewed as a positive step towards nuclear
non-proliferation. To the critics, it is a reflection of double standard of the
Bush Administration, since it is seeking nuclear cooperation with a new nuclear
weapon power outside the NPT regime and denying an NPT member its legitimate
plan to generate nuclear energy.
However, the Bush Administration does not see a
contradiction in its policy. It argues that the nuclear deal with India will
promote environmentally friendly nuclear energy in a country that is
experiencing one of the fastest economic growths in the world; will bring under
safeguards 65 per cent of its nuclear reactors to boost the non-proliferation
goals. However, by keeping its eyes closed to the Iranian nuclear programme it would
certainly lead to emergence of a yet another nuclear weapon power in not so
distant a future.
The Iranian dimension of the problems affecting the Indo-US
nuclear deal is well known. The US
has been urging India to
halt its negotiations with Iran
on the proposed Indian-Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline. New
Delhi took a few steps to satisfy Washington’s demands, but the gas pipeline
proposal reappears once in a while. The Ministers in charge of energy issues of
the three countries are likely to meet in Tehran
to discuss the issue. What does it mean?
India has also finalized negotiations
with Russia
for the construction of four new nuclear power plants. The signature on this
subject will be inked once the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and
the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) give clearances for the civilian nuclear
cooperation with India.
What does this move towards Russia
mean?
Is India
using its proposed hydrocarbon energy cooperation with Iran and nuclear energy cooperation with Russia as
bargaining chips? Certainly the Indian opponents of the Indo-US deal will be
happy to see positive movements on these two issues. But will the United States feel satisfied with Indian moves
towards Iran and Russia?
In fact, the Americans are currently in the midst of crucial
Presidential election campaigns. The domestic opposition to the nuclear deal;
and India's positive
overtures towards Iran and Russia are like to complicate the Indo-US
nuclear deal further, even as the US election campaigns unfold. Both
the Democratic Party Presidential hopefuls are unlikely to back a deal
initialed by the Republican Administration of George Bush. There is no
guarantee that the Republican candidate McCain will replicate Bush's initiative
towards India.
It is to be seen how this issue is played up during the
election campaigns in the US.
The Government of India has to make very careful diplomatic moves and issue
official statements, if it continues to hold high hopes on this deal. ----INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|
|
Karanataka Elections:MAYAWATI & MULAYAM KEY PLAYERS, by M D Nalapat, 4 April 2008 |
|
|
Open Forum
New Delhi, 4 April 2008
Karanataka Elections
MAYAWATI &
MULAYAM KEY PLAYERS
By M D Nalapat
Poor "Humble Farmer" Deve Gowda. After having been
lured into breaking up with the BJP with the promise of a partnership with the
Congress Party, he was left by the roadside. Former Chief Minister S M Krishna,
KPCC chief Mallikarjun Kharge and CM-in-waiting Siddaramaiah prevailed on a
vacillating Congress High Command to push for elections, rather than have another
Congress-Janata Dal (Secular) coalition.
According to those, who till recently were occupying
ministerial chambers in the government in Karnataka, the ornate Vidhana Soudha,
Deve Gowda had been convinced by some of the myriad astrologers around him that
there was no way he would come back as Prime Minister, were younger son
Kumaraswamy to continue as Chief Minister. Whether such talk of an astrological link to
the downfall of Kumaraswamy is accurate or not, the fact remains that Deve
Gowda's switch from saffron to "secular" destroyed the credibility of
his party as a reliable coalition partner, and made a fresh Assembly election
possible.
The Congress leadership saw an opportunity to take away the
vote bank of the JD(S) and come back to power in Karnataka on its own. Deve
Gowda's minority vote bank has been dented by his alliance with the BJP, while
the return of S M Krishna to State politics from the comforts of the Mumbai Raj
Bhavan is expected to win over the Vokkaliga votes that otherwise would have
gone to Gowda. It is a fact that the US-educated Krishna
has been popular, especially among the urban middle class, for his low-key
charm and the reasonably effective government that he led
Should the Congress Party emerge as the single largest party
in the State Assembly, it would be an easy matter to split the JD(S) enough to
form the government. However, in case Deve Gowda wins even 35 seats (or half
his earlier tally) and the BJP emerges as the single largest party in the State
Assembly once again, the only way the Congress Party would be able to form the
government would be through an alliance with him that would be unpopular both
with the voters as well as the Congress cadre.
Even if Deve Gowda does not any more insist on getting the Chief
Minister's portfolio for the JD(S), and agrees to a Congress CM with elder son
Revanna as Deputy Chief Minister, the wily politician from Hassan would
dominate the government, the way he did the earlier Congress-JD(S) coalition
government headed by Congress leader Dharam Singh. An angry BJP would ensure a
constant flow of fireworks gets diverted to the ministry, aided by the known
proclivity of the large Deve Gowda clan to bend the system in ways that suit
the interests of their friends.
Now well into his 70s, can S M Krishna make enough of a
difference to the preferences of the electorate to ensure a humiliating rout
for Gowda? For if the JD(S) wins 35 seats or more, Deve Gowda would see to it
that Krishna gets prevented from coming as the
Chief Minister. He would prefer that a non-Vokkaliga take the job, so as to
avoid competition to his present status as the most powerful Vokkaliga
chieftain. For Krishna, annihilating the JD(S)
is a priority, even more than tackling the BJP
And, Gowda is making things easier for him, by refusing to
work out a seat adjustment - thus far - with Sarekoppa Bangarappa, who leads
the Samajwadi Party in the State. Although Bangarappa has only a 2 per – 4 per
cent vote share across around 40 constituencies in the State, yet in at least
20 of these, the difference made by an alliance with him can enable the SP and
the JD(S) to price those seats from the Congress and the BJP. However, Gowda is
known for his refusal to make concessions to those wishing to be his allies, as
Mulayam Singh is finding out. Were Kumaraswamy to prevail on his father and
force an SP-JD(S) alliance, it would also help Gowda to win back the Muslim
votes that have now gone to the Congress.
Besides Mulayam Singh, the other force that could destroy
the hopes of a return to power by the Congress Party is the Bahujan Samaj Party.
In more than 70 constituencies, Dalit votes are crucial, and should that
community turn away from Congress in protest at the sidelining of KPCC chief
Mallikarjun Kharge by the induction of Krishna,
the BSP may make the difference between failure and success for the Congress
Party in as many as 38 seats.
An abysmal Congress performance would enable the BJP to come
to power on its own in Karnataka. That would be recompense for having been
marginalized in Uttar Pradesh by the BSP and the SP. The future of Karnataka
politics now hinges on whether the BSP and the SP can expand their support in a
State that is tired of the major political parties it has experienced, the
Congress, the BJP and the JD(S).---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|
|
Muslim Community:NEED TO ADRESS BACKWARDNESS, by Dhurjati Mukherjee,March 14, 2008 |
|
|
Open Forum
New Delhi, March 14, 2008
Muslim Community
NEED TO ADRESS BACKWARDNESS
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
Discrimination against the
disadvantaged and weaker sections in society has been a serious problem in our
country. Though the Constitution provides enough space and good reason to
provide social equality, very little has been done. As a result there is
growing disparity in society. Thus, it is imperative to evolve a plan of action
for improving conditions for the poorer sections, specially those belonging to
the minorities.
It is in this context that the
Rajinder Sachar committee report, released last year, has evoked much debate
over the social, economic and educational status of Muslims for sometime now. While
confirming the backwardness of the community, it has clearly pointed out that
Muslims lag behind other religious groups on most development indicators. They
were poorer, illiterate, have access to
fewer educational facilities and relatively under- represented in public and
private sector jobs. Poverty has thus forced them to live in slums and similar
type settlements in urban areas.
With the focus on providing equal
opportunity, the report recommends measures such as the setting up of an Equal
Opportunity Commission, increase of UGC grants to the community-run schools and
colleges, reform of madrasas, their affiliation to higher education boards in States
and enhanced participation in governance. The proposed Commission is to be
patterned on UK’s
Racial Opportunity Commission and is supposed to provide relief to individuals who
suffer discrimination. Interestingly, the panel felt that both the National
Human Rights Commission and the National Commission for Minorities were not
equipped to address the issue.
In effect, the report stressed the
need for formulation of appropriate programmes to address the educational and
economic backwardness of the community, a statement confirmed by the Prime
Minister’s office. It is understood that the Government wanted to have a
discussion on the report to evolve a national consensus to improve the
conditions of the Muslims. This is necessary at this juncture as the problem is
related to backwardness and, as such, incentives need to be given to the
community.
The exclusion and marginalization of
the Muslim community may be attributed to three compelling reasons. First, it is
in the interest of every society to improve economic status of all
disadvantaged groups. Second, it’s well-known that high economic growth and inclusion
must go hand in hand and that the two cannot be sustained without all sections
of society participating. Thirdly, it cannot be denied that this community has
been kept out of the process of economic development.
Given the above scenario, the Union Budget
has provided a whopping allocation of Rs 1,000 crores for a multi-pronged plan
for improving education and entrepreneurship. A development plan for 90
minority concentration districts is in the pipeline worth Rs 3,700 crores of
which Rs 540 crores would be for 2008-09. The Centre is also planning to
introduce a pre-matric scholarship with Rs 80 crores and a scheme for
modernizing madrassa education with Rs 45.45 crores. The corpus for Maulana
Azad Education Foundation has been hiked to Rs 60 crores.
In the sphere of education, it is
seen that even in urban areas the Muslim boys and girls prefer to go to
madrassas, where the quality of education is poor and emphasis is on religious
teaching. In comparison, missionary schools set up by the Christians have
imparted high quality education despite religious teachings. Moreover, social
taboos have prevented Muslim girls from going to schools and colleges,
specially in rural areas. In sum, this has increased the backwardness of the
community as well as halted its inability to keep pace in this competitive
world.
What are the reasons for fewer
Muslims going to school? The reasons
could be: schooling is more difficult for them. Over half of the Muslim
children in Karnataka, Maharashtra and Andhra
Pradesh speak Urdu. While all these States have number of Urdu-medium schools, results
in school leaving examinations are dismal. In U.P. and Bihar,
they do go to non-Urdu schools but here too standards are dismal. Besides, Muslim
families follow occupations that don’t require education and find child labour
valuable to fritter away in schools. And, finally there is a sense of discrimination
in getting attractive jobs and the Sachar committee received much verbal
evidence to this effect.
What is the government’s role to
uplift the conditions of minorities? In the past, the government was firm --- backwardness
has to be tackled in its totality and cannot be community specific. This is correct
and should not be diluted unless really necessary. However, in recent times,
the creation of a Ministry of Minority Affairs, the Prime Minister’s 15-pount
programme for the welfare of the minorities and the reported decision to
allocate 15 per cent in development schemes for minorities as also the present
enhanced allocation in the Budget are important signals by the government of
its concern for the minorities.
The 15-point programme can be the
basis for spreading education among the Muslims. But the involvement of the
community would be vital in upgrading the quality of education in the
madrassas. However, the Government has to provide scholarships, textbooks etc.
to deserving boys and girls and/or those from the poorer sections within the
Muslim community. A Sub-Plan for the socially and educationally backward
minorities, better access to modern education and a drive to encourage
recruitment in public institutions will help improve the conditions of Muslims
in the long run.
Though the Sachar report has stopped
short of recommending quota as the prescription for upgrading the conditions of
the community, the question of reservation for dalit Muslims has been a
long-standing demand that needs to be considered. However, occupation-based
caste groups across religious spectrums presently fall in the OBC category. As
Arif Mohammed Khan observed that since 1991, OBCs covered under the Mandal
Commission “constitutes about 70 per cent of the Muslim population”. The
figures produced by the Sachar committee prove that despite reservation
available in this (OBC) category, things have not improved for the community.
The remedy lies in compulsory universal education for every Indian child,
including Muslims. “Modern education will help in not only correcting the
present imbalances but will liberate Muslims from obscurantist clergy and communal
politics”, Arif has rightly pointed out.
Regarding employment opportunities,
the Sachar report found that Muslims presence in the Government as also the
private sector was found to be dismal. It has suggested the need “to sensitize
the private sector to go ahead with positive discrimination or positive action”
to recruit Muslims more widely and the Finance Minister has assured that “more
candidates from minorities will be recruited in CRPF”.
But apart from all these, there is
need to generate more social awareness among the Muslim community and this can
only become possible through involvement of the educated sections within the
community. There is need to restraint Muslim religious leaders who should instead
concentrate more on spreading education than on inculcating religious ideas,
some of which have lost their significance and value in this age of
globalization.
An important suggestion has been
that the government should put the money it spends on Haj into
modernization and diversification of industries the Muslims are specializing in
i.e. fabric, leather, tobacco, auto repair etc. However, it is also important
that Muslims must not be looked upon with suspicion by certain sections of
society and public institutions but integrated into the mainstream of life and
activity.
In implementing the Sachar
proposals, the ‘Kerala model’, including the community-based quota in state
government jobs is a case worth considering. The progressive political social
role played by some Muslim groups, specially the Indian Muslim League (IUML) in
Kerala, deserves attention. The IUML,
part of most coalition governments in the state till 1980 when Left,
unrealistically branded it a communal party, has shown administrative and
political vision to ensure all-round benefits for the community while ensuring
that the community remained within the moderate democratic mainstream. Perhaps
others could learn from the above--- INFA
(Copyright,
India News & Feature Alliance)
|
|
2009 Election Perspective:WILL CONGRESS, BJP SWAP ROLES?, by T.D. Jagadesan,27 March 2008 |
|
|
OPEN FORUM
New Delhi, 27 March 2008
2009 Election
Perspective
WILL CONGRESS, BJP
SWAP ROLES?
By T.D. Jagadesan
The new constituency boundaries recently fixed by the
Delimitation Commission have without intending to do so liberated the Congress
--- and its rivals --- from the phantom of mid-term polls. The eight or so
months the Election Commission of India (FCI) will need to graft the changes on
to the Lok Sabha map, in effect, means about eight months without the big
election.
How will the political parties use the reprieve? Looking at
the Congress’s current form, it should sink into further inaction. Even without
the mid-term threat, the farthest approximate date of the 15th
General Election is April-May 2009 – just a year away. But so far the Congress
has betrayed none of the get-up-go visibility that is there in its rivals.
Instead, there is about it a sense of resignation of an approaching defeat ---
so much at odds with its status as a ruling party with some achievements to its
credit.
Consider the three existing political formations, the
Congress-led United Progressive Alliance, the Bharatiya Janata Party-led
National Democratic Alliance, and the yet to concretize third alternative. Of
the lot, the first looks a loser already and the second a winner already. The
third alternative appears placed midway.
In truth, all three are shaky, and have much to thank the Election
Commission for. The Congress has a theoretically speaking stable alliance but
is so fuzzy about everything --- its programme, its vision, its leader, its achievements
and the state of its alliance ---- that it will surprise no one should the
winner of 2004 transmogrify into the loser of 2009.
The BJP’s dazzle and show hide the fact that it leads a rump
alliance. The third alternative’s possible partners are all very important and
high-profile but how, when, and with what common programme? Whether the
Samajwadi’s Mulayam Singh-Amar Singh duo, the Telugu Desam’s Chandrababu Naidu,
the Indian National Lok Dal’s Om Prakash Chautala and the Left parties will
unite is hard to tell.
The BJP, always first into action, and constantly first with
propaganda, has leapt ahead of the competition with some deft footwork. The Party
revels in the meet the President, meet the Chief Election Commissioner, issue
statements, announce yatras, unveil
portraits, plan strategy sessions, hold Party meetings, hold NDA meetings et
al. No one knows better than its peripatetic leaders how to cram the day with
activity.
The BJP and the Congress must have opposite DNA codes. The
Congress can barely wake up. The BJP is full of beans. When the latter was just
out of power, it plunged heartily into factional fights. Now it is as heartily
into cozy togetherness. Indeed, through the time the Congress has been in
power, it is the BJP that has hogged the headlines --- first for its many
troubles, and lately, for the resolve with which it has fixed the troubles.
Today the Party that fought endlessly has a Prime
Ministerial candidate behind whom the cadre stands in apparent solidarity, its
leadership is gung ho after winning Gujarat and
has the RSS as its moral guardian. Together the package is of a Party driven,
united and focused on the 2009 big fight. The new zeal had L.K. Advani
asserting recently that his Party would inflict upon the Congress its “worst
defeat in history.”
All very impressive but a lot of the buzz is premature,
self-created and very BJP like. About a month ago, the Saffron Party spearheaded
a meeting of the NDA, which hogged television and print news. And for good
reason: The NDA constituents, overcoming their earlier reservations, had
unanimously backed Advani for Prime Minister.
The problem was with the accompanying visuals. The NDA that
posed with Advani seemed a sadly emaciated version of the NDA that captured
over 300 seats in the 1999 Lok Sabha election. Only three alliance partners
could be spotted in the picture --- the Akali Dal’s Prakash Singh Badal, the
Biju Janata Dal’s Naveen Patnaik and the Janata Dal (United)’s Nitish Kumar.
Some allies like the Shiv Sena, were possibly out of the
frame but still in the alliance. Even so, this was a vastly depleted stock
compared to the NDA’s 1999 magnificent peak. Not that this little matter
stopped the BJP’s beaming spokespersons. They claimed the presence at the meet
of “all our allies except Mamata Banerjee” and got away with it, too, judging
by the gushy media coverage of the event.
Since 2002, it has seen a virtual exodus from the NDA. Among
those that have deserted the BJP are Farooq Abdullah’s National Conference, Chautala’s
Indian National Lok Dal, Ram Vilas Paswan’s Lok Jan Shakti, Karunanidhi’s Dravida
Munnetra Kazhagam and its State-allies, Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok Dal, Sukh
Ram’s Himachal Vikas Congress and the Indian Federal Democratic Party.
The NDA’s outside prop, Chandrababu Naidu’s Telugu Desam has
broken away while the Trinamool Congress seems on the verge of quitting the
alliance. All this not counting the many one-man State parties that habitually
align with the ruling side.
The Congress too has had its share of alliance problems. Chandrasekhar
Rao’s Telangana Rashtra Samiti and Vaiko’s MDMK have exited the UPA. Mulayam's
Samajwadi and Mayawati’s BSP, which at one time lined up behind the Congress,
are as good as not there thanks to the Congress’ constant flip-flop between the
two Parties.
Of the rest, Laloo’s Rashtriya Janata Dal, Paswan’s Lok Jan
Shakti Party and Karunanidhi’s DMK won the maximum seats they could in the 2004
election. The DMK alliance won 25 of the 25 seats it consented, the RJD – LJP
alliance 26 of 34 seats it contested and Sharad Pawar’s NCP is unlikely to be
able to repeat its 22 seat tally. Besides, it can just tolerate its senior
partner (Congress). The People’s Democratic Party and the Congress are in an
equally loveless relationship.
What this adds up to is a delicate coalition held together
more by the glue of power than by chemistry and a sense of common purpose. The
constituents, with their history of broken commitments and relationships, can
head in any direction come 2009.
What should the Congress have done? What can it still do? Many
things. First, ensure that the partners have a stake in staying the course.
Second, dispel the confusion on the Prime Ministerial question. True, the
Opposition needs to declare its Prime Ministerial candidate, not the ruling
party. However, a ruling party that might change its leader without evident
compulsions calls attention to its incapacity.
Specially, when that possible new leader is a young and
untested member of the dynasty, Rahul Gandhi, it also calls attention to the
Party’s bankruptcy. Third, the Grand
Dame of Politics needs to hit the streets, go to town on its achievements,
re-jig the Party apparatus, send the best leaders there are to the States, and
do so unitedly and cohesively.
But look at the Congress record. The UPA has put in place
three legislations acclaimed as historic --- the National Rural Employment
Guarantee Act (NREGA), the Right to information Act and the Schedule Tribes and
Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act. Each is
in force defying internal sabotage. The ownership of the NREGA has moved from
the Congress to the Opposition. On the foreign policy front too, the civil
nuclear deal with the United
States was a coup of sorts that the Congress
disowned before the Left parties.
In 2004, Sonia Gandhi stitched up an alliance that went on
to win. Today, the Congress cannot spring that surprise. As the ruling party,
it must define its record in office. Instead, it is mired in confusion over
whether or not to push Rahul Gandhi. Indira Gandhi earned her spurs; Sonia
Gandhi has proven her worth. Rahul Gandhi cannot talk meritocracy and rely on
aristocracy.
This is where the BJP comes in. The Party suffered a
stunning defeat in May 2004, watched the NDA crumble and today has to virtually
start from scratch. Yet its motivation seems all the greater for the challenge.
Last month, it has re-engaged with the AIADMK leader Jayalalitha. A core team
is also prospecting for other allies.
The road is far from easy. Parties such as the TDP, the LJP
and the Trinamool Congress need the Muslim vote more than they need the
Hindutva party. If the BJP fails, it will not be for want of trying.
The Congress should learn a lesson from the 2004 poll when
the BJP’s shrill propaganda led it to a crushing defeat. The Congress then was
the tortoise to the BJP’s hare. But today, the slow and steady tortoise must
have a strategy to win the race. --- INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|
|
Politicians And Rule of Law:A CONSTITUTIONAL OUTRAGE,Ashok Kapur, IAS (Retd), 17 March 2008 |
|
|
Open Forum
New Delhi, 17 March 2008
Politicians And Rule of Law
A CONSTITUTIONAL OUTRAGE
By Ashok Kapur, IAS (Retd)
The Chief Minister of U.P. has
reportedly issued an order requiring mandatory reservation of jobs in all
private entities if they are to continue doing business with the State
Government.
Even by the declining standards
of Indian politicians and their scant regard for constitutionalism and the rule
of law, this is an unprecedented assault on the Constitution since it was
introduced in 1950. According to
reports, no work or supply order would be issued by the U.P. Government nor any
contract awarded to a private party unless it reserves a certain percentage of jobs
in favour of a particular caste or community. Translated into plain English, it
means the U.P. Government has enforced a quota regime in the private domain.
Needless to mention, persons appointed to reserved jobs shall belong to the
Chief Minister’s own caste.
In the scheme of the Constitution
--- a holy covenant in any civilized society --- there is a provision for a
certain percentage of job reservations. But this is so only in public
employment. The founding fathers made it a time-bound measure at the dawn of
independence. That time is long past but the beneficiaries of the quota regime
have grown into a vested interest, solely to perpetuate themselves and their
progeny in power.
The initial quotas were aimed at
benefiting the marginalized sections of the society, identified as belonging to
certain castes or tribes so as to bring them into the mainstream. These were
duly notified as Scheduled Castes and Tribes. Two generations have passed and
the beneficiaries of the quota regime, by and large, are now an elite in their
respective castes or communities. Instead of gradually doing away with such
artificial props, the politicians have expanded the quotas to include the
so-called OBCs.
The Constitution does not
authorize the executive to enforce reservations in the private domain. It guarantees
equality of opportunity in matters of employment to all citizens. Another
fundamental right prohibits discrimination on grounds of caste or community or
religion. The U.P. Government, by enforcing quotas in private employment has
curtailed the fundamental rights of citizens to equality. In other words, the
State Government has, through an executive order, in effect bypassed the
Constitution and curtailed the citizens’ fundamental right against
discrimination.
Some very serious issues arise in
this context. The Chief Minister has been badly advised as to the ramifications
of her government’s action. When questioned as to the authority for such an
unconstitutional move, she is reported to have stated that it had been
authorized by the State Cabinet! The reply is not even risible. Were it not for
the fact that it is being carried out by a Chief Minister with some
administrative experience, it could have been explained away as plain ignorance
or misplaced sympathy.
In context, such a measure can
only be attributed to a brazen defiance of constitutionalism and the rule of
law. In any other democracy that claims to be civilized, such a move would have
immediately attracted a motion for impeachment. But some Indian politicians
deem that success at the elections confers on them an immunity from law and
Constitutional obligations.
It needs to be recalled that the
same Chief Minister had earlier appointed a Cabinet Secretary, who is a
political appointee and a local recruit.
In the bargain, she had enshrined the principle of ‘spoils system’,
described as an evil ‘system’ in the world’s first constitutional state, the USA. It was
likewise an unconstitutional step. As it was not opposed by the Government of
India, an unhealthy precedent was allowed to be set. Of a piece with the
earlier action, her latest move is tantamount to amending the Constitution by a
State Government.
It is indeed disconcerting that
none of her advisers pointed out that executive instructions, which impinge on
the fundamental rights of citizens, are an initio null & void. Let alone a
State Government, even if these were to be issued by the Union Government.
Apparently, the elected state cabinet is not aware of the basic scheme of the Constitution,
whereby fundamental rights cannot be whittled down or curtailed, being
immutable. This is the position after the landmark judgment of the Supreme
Court in the celebrated case of Keshvananda Bharti in 1973.
The further reported announcement
by the Chief Minister that such reservation was to be limited to 10 per cent of
the private employment, will fool no one. It only reminds one of the proverbial
tale of the camel’s entry into the Arab’s tent. The Constitutional Review
Commission, headed by the respected Justice M.N. Venkatchalliah, former Chief
Justice of India, has cautioned the Union Government against what it termed as
the “law of unintended results in the public domain”.
Once such executive instructions
are accepted unopposed and observed as sovereign fiats, there is absolutely no
guarantee that the initial percentage will be gradually increased to cover a
majority of the Chief Minister’s own caste or community. Increasingly, castes
or classes are becoming conveniently elastic, thanks to the machinations of
wily politicians. It would be a safe wager that eventually the ten per cent
formula may quite literally be turned on its head, and may eventually come to
represent the unreserved percentage. Incidentally, members of the Chief
Minister’s community claim to be a majority of more than 70 per cent.
This is already happening. In a
southern State, such reservations have exceeded 50 per cent thereby openly if
not brazenly flouting the reservation limit laid down by the Supreme Court.
Once again, needless to mention that the reservations are in favour of the
ruling Chief Minister’s own caste. In theory, the orders of the Supreme Court
have the force and effect of the law of the land. Apparently, some ruling
politicians have little or no patience with such technicalities as
constitutionalism or the rule of law.
In sum, the reported move by the U.P. State
Chief Minister needs to be immediately reserved if India is to survive as a democracy
under the rule of law, now a basic feature of the Constitution. --- INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|
|
| | << Start < Previous 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 Next > End >>
| Results 5662 - 5670 of 6004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|