Supreme Court on Requirement of Basic education for Contesting Elections.

Year 2015 is coming to an end, and we have seen many of new trends and developments in political thought. All were threadbare debated; propagated by supporters and opposed by others.

But my article is about some of decisions of Supreme Court, which gave affirmation to these thought and processes. I understand that verdict of SC is law of land and cannot be challenged but can be requested for review only.

One of the decisions that puzzled me is upholding the rule by Haryana Government that, for contesting Panchayat election, candidate must have some education standard. (Similar law has been passed by Rajsthan Govt also). And by coincidence or otherwise both states are ruled by BJP. We are not privy to thinking process or logic that went in to upholding validity of such laws. Probably it is intention of judges that representative should be educated to be effective. (It may that they have differentiated between right to vote and right to contest.)

But does SC should go by intention or by constitution? Is it not onslaught on fundamental principal of constitution- namely universal franchise and equality of all before law? This is so because, while framing the constitution itself, such criteria were discussed and rejected.  While everyone is giving lip service to inclusiveness in society, this measure advances exclusivity. This is against last generation which may not be educated, but may have experience and wisdom to lead society. This is also against SC/ST, OBC and woman whose general education standard is generally low compared to general public. These weaker groups had started participation in democratic process due to affirmative action’s/ protection under available under constitution.

This stand of SC seems at odd with its stand on AADHAR. Apart from issue of privacy, SC is not allowing AADHAR compulsory because it has observed that AADHAR card has not been issued to all, and in absence of card no one should be denied benefits available from government. Same is case with education, whole population is not educated (may not be fault of person), still SC is depriving them of basic/ fundamental right – participation in democratic process.

Above stand is at odd with one of the other ruling by SC. This time it is about law of “Compulsory Voting” in election made by Gujrat state (coincidence –this is also a BJP ruled state), which is struck down by SC on the ground that, such valediction will make voting as “Duty” while as per constitution it is “Right” and has been left for voter’s discretion to use it or not. Such discriminatory ruling is coming from SC now very often. SC has uphold the law of Kerala, where in wine is allowed in 5 star hotels but not otherwise.

One more disturbing thing about SC rulings (not limited to these cases) is -at one point of time it binds itself with existing constitution and says nothing can be done as it is law of land and parliament/ assembly should make appropriate law if things need to be changed ( Latest case- position of SC, not staying release of Juvenile convict, who had completed term as per law). At other point of time it provocatively makes law or struck down law made by parliament (Observe fate of NJAC   law).

How this debate will turn in 2016?. Will it turn debate on wisdom of having educated (having some certificate) representative or experienced representative.Will it turn local level law against rules at National level( Reservation for Woman at local level but not at state/centre level) and so on. But what if this debate comes out of court room and academic arena, to political field.

Will such move by BJP ruled state and /or support by BJP will benefit it or harm it. Will Congress and others will blame it for advocating exclusivity ( and rule by Brahmans) and take advantage being taken by propagating Modi govt as “Suit Boot Ki Sarkar”. We will see only in 2016, but one thing certain BJP needs to move very cautiously.  

Rejection of NJAC by Supreme Court.

It is very difficult and easy to understand reason/s for rejection of NJAC by SC.

Difficult in the sense, that SC has rejected NJAC on ground of encroachment of independence of judiciary and violation of basic structure of constitution and so on. But problem is that concept of basic structure is, itself a creature of court, nowhere mentioned in constitution. Similarly the existing arrangement, that is appointment of “Judges by Judges” themselves under collegium system does not find any mention in the constitution. As per original provision of constitution SC/HC judges is to be appointed by President (in fact by govt.) on the advice of Chief Justice of India. The system existed from 1950 to 1992/93, when SC by its own ruling changed the rule of game.  

Easy in the sense that, the way political class and specially ruling class, not this one but from the time of Indira Gandhi (She had coined the word Committed Judiciary), has developed dislike/ hatred for independent institutions and perceived them stumbling block in implementing their own wishes and policies, it is very important for each institution and more for SC to safe guard its independence.  For example, when Govt. was troubled by Mr. Seshan as EC, it made EC a multi member commission. In the present age, for long FM was voicing concern over RBI governor not reducing interest rate and has come out with idea of Monitory Policy Commission where governor may not have veto. Such examples are available by dozen.

In democracy, nothing wrong if elected leaders have last say /control over all other institutions and many mature democracies do have this arrangement. But tragedy is that Indian polity is not mature enough and is short sighted. No active/popular leader after Nehru took interest in developing institutions Under Manmohan Singh institution became strong or new institution came in to existence because of his a political nature ( not because of interest). Now every citizen have suspicion for Political class, and rightly fear that any institution controlled by govt, will be misused. See fate of CBI, it booked a Secretary, and later court freed him, saying CBI wrongly implicated him.

So under the circumstances as a citizen I am ready to live with extra constitutional arrangement made by SC rather than constitutional arrangement.

What is next ? It is time for BJP (and NDA), to realize that their high handedness and despise   for congress/ opposition is proving counterproductive. After testing dust on “Land Acquisition Bill” (for genuine opposition by congress) and facing problem over GST (for political reason), it will be third occasion when though original NJAC bill  was passed unanimously, revised bill ( on NJAC) will not get support of congress and will not be passed.

Lesson from this episode, if political class wants to be supreme claiming it to be right position under democracy, they themselves has lot to improve and mature and prove themselves worthy of a ruler. 

Achievements of Macro-economics. Sufferings of Micro-Economics.

In economics what is good for micro economics (individual) may and is not good for macro economics. For example it is good that individuals save and postpone consumption but if such habits become addiction of large population, total demand  declines and so macroeconomic growth which, much depends not only on saving –investment but demand consumption( Two side of a coin).

Similarly what is good for macroeconomics may be bad omen for micro economics (individual).  For many years India (Central Government and RBI) was struggling to control inflation ie price riseand now seem to achieve it. But it cannot be said with certainty that success is good for common man. Whole  depends upon how you control it by utilizing  four factors demand, supply (of goods) and government revenue and spending (fiscal deficit) on which inflation depends.

 While inflation can be reduced by reduction in demand (for same good demand is lowered) or increasing the supply of goods (demand remaining same). Other way to reduce inflation is to control fiscal deficit by reducing the spending (which adversely affect future growth, employment and income large population) or increasing the revenue which adversely affects rich tax payers and/or entrepreneurs. RBI has role in it by way controlling money supply (which affects demand).

The problem is present reduction in  inflation  is achieved by control on spending which in turn reduced demand rather than increasing supply and revenue.

The moment new government came in to power much of spending on social sector has been reduced. While it is good that poor is not affected by inflation but if this is to be achieved by reducing the income (of poor) how it can be said good for poor.

It seems, control of inflation has started vicious circle, now RBI has reduced rates. Banks are following suit by reducing lending rates, which in turn is going to reduce interest rates offered on deposit. It will adversely affect the large section of people depending on interest income. In a short time now to have parity government is likely to reduce interest rates on NSC/PPF and so on. Not only it will adversely affect common man but may affect household financial savings.

Thus we see inflation is controlled by reducing wage, welfare and interest income of poor.( Having income to purchase commodities at higher price is always better than having no income to purchase anything.)

Not a good omen for economy which is already adversely affected by low international commodity prices (Do not think it is good for us. Exports are showing negative growth for last 9 months). Low commodity prices are affecting/ will affect large number of nations which depend on income from commodity. (Arab countries, Russia and African countries). Their saving or government surplus is turning negative. They are pulling out saving / investment from international market. So investing surplus is shrinking for us.

 Government needs to be cautious on these developments (including affect of inflation control on poor and savers) and act fast to take remedial/ mitigating action. Already many of schemes /objects announced in last 18 months have shown limited success. Latest being result of disclosure scheme for foreign black money which resulted announcement of less than Rs 4000 cr and now govt. has taken stand that much of black money is in India. New railway time table, which was postponed  for major changes in speed of trains, but did not seem to have achieved desired effect. Credibility is at stake. 

Modi/NDA needs to draw a bigger line.

In our child hood, we used to throw a puzzle at each other- to make a line short without touching or erasing it.  Some related it  to Akabar- Birbal stories of wisdom. It is said, when everyone failed, Birbal just draw a Bigger line( parallel to old one) and showed that earlier line is now shorter one.

I remember this because, now days, there is competition among BJP/RSS/Minister to belittle Nehru legacy.  All this started with, election campaign of ‘Congress Mukt Bharat’, and continuing  with dismantling of ‘Planning Commission’, revamp of ‘Nehru Museum’, discontinuation of stamps of ‘Indira and Rajeev’ and so on.

I agree with BJP/RSS charge that one family got undue importance- and other important leaders of independence struggle and nation building were neglected- in historical narration. But my point is, to prove their point BJP/RSS need not waste time in tempering old things and must concentrate on proving themselves better than congress in governance. This will be better way to achieve ‘congress mukt bharat’. At state level the same has been achieved in certain states. Shivraj Singh Chouhan did better governance than Digvijaysingh and voter of MP forgot Congress.

If this is possible for BJP at state level, why it is difficult at national level?  In my view BJP/NDA has some real problem at national level.

First,  talent crunch. Everybody is ridiculing /questioning Smriti Irani’s qualification for HRD ministry, but a few experts had doubted competence of Jaitely (a lawyer by profession) to head finance ministry and over a period this feeling has percolated among layman. Such examples are more and varied. People give more value to RBI governor’s than FM’s view on economy and finance.

Second- lack of expertise in parliamentary politics and negotiations. Most leaders of BJP are trained as RSS pracharak and does have different value system than that needed for parliamentary politics. At  extreme level  valued key (over rated) person Jaitely have no experience of electoral politics and is hard liner (against V Naidu a soft liner). He is good at twisting the argument or justifying situation (like a lawyer), but for the same reason is antagonising opposition and this is not helping NDA. While in opposition he justified parliamentary disruption but now laments about it. For reforms etc, he (NDA) started with ordinance route, then proposed joint session, now questions wisdom of having Rajya Sabha and again says many bills will be brought as Money Bills (so nod of Rajya Sabha is not required). How many of these have failed and how many will fail only god knows. But all these put BJP/NDA in poor light and expose them to charge of not knowing the constitutional provisions and procedure.  Declaring intention without ability to implement is taking toll on credibility of Govt. They may blame Congress for it, but failure to move forward is going to harm them and benefit Congress.

Third-In fact the way BJP/NDA is prioritising the non core issue, Congress instead of receding in history, has, as opposition back at the centre stage of Indian politics. They may not win elections in next 4-5 years, but already they are able to decide course of debate. Within a year, NDA has to change plank and stop talking big things and concentrate on poor people. Withdrawal of Land Bill is a big boost for congress. Why government is in hurry to concentrate on small things like fighting with AAP in Delhi, appointment row at FTII and so on which gives excuse for opposition unity. Its minister Like Cultural ( Kalam inspite being Muslim was patriotic) and HRD minister are  more busy  in creating controversy than drawing bigger lines. Many a times govt itself promotes this view- for example while releasing religion wiase census data for 2011 it commented Muslim proportion has increased. To be impartial it could also have added comment that highest percentage fall in growth rate (5 %) for decade is from Muslim community. These one sided information is helping Congress and others to prove communal charge against BJP/NDA.

Fourth-In its long term vision, it is forgetting importance of short term achievement. Many of NDA’s initiative like ‘Swacha Bharat’; ‘Namai Gange’ etc are long term and are work in progress. I am happy that Railway Minister did not bow to regional politics and did not announce a single new train. But due to all these, ground level perception of ‘ Acche Din’ is not being felt. It seems Government is behaving like small kinder garden kids who dislike old toys, dismantle it but does not know how to reassemble parts in a new toy. 

In foreign policy many initiative are praise worthy but can Govt hold position of declaring Hurriyat leaders as third party and no talks with Pakistan?

Ultimately govt. must realise limitation of parliamentary democracy (limitation to take nation forward on its own) and try taking opposition along with it to draw a big line for itself. Erasing /tinkering old line is not a proper strategy. Time is running out, its own people like Swamy has started questioning performance of economy ( exports are down for continuous 9 months). Before chorus becomes louder and lay man start doubting competence to deliver government should change course and style of functioning.  

Allahabad HC decision on Education.

Recently Allahabad High Court has given a ruling that  is historic but may not stand scrutiny of legality on many counts. It is likely to be challenged in SC  and struck down there.

Ruling is all wards ( son and daughters ) of Government Servants, Judges and Elected Members must study only in government schools. Those who do not obey this order will have to deposit money with the govt. equivalent to fees paid in private school. Order is to be implemented by next session. 

The ruling came while disposing a petition, which drew attention to poor conditions of govt schools in terms of infrastructure and lack  of teachers in UP  and  asked  courts direction to improve the same.

Court observed that previous directions have  failed to improve the situation  and felt that unless the wards of the authorities who are responsible for improvement  go to these schools, situation will not improve.

I agree with diagnosis but beg to differ with solution provided. Under the present provision of liberty ( fundamental right) available to every citizen under constitution, how, a state can direct a individual to send his wards to send  to a particular school/ institute, just because he is govt servant or elected representative and so on. It is  also discrimination and violates equality  before law. 

Another angel is, if this logic is applied, these people must compulsorily avail medical facility in govt Hospitals ( Govt. Hospitals are  also in poor condition and needs improvement). Same with public transport and many other services provided by state. This way we need to force these people  to use wheat and rice of PDS only. Is it practical ?

Unfortunately, India in terms of services, has virtually divided in 2 -3 parts. Affluent and people with influence have developed all these services ( world class/ affordable) for themselves outside the government network. Slowly-slowly over the years, specially after liberalization of 1991, government services in any area be it in education, health, transport or any other area came to be identified as work and duty of welfare state directed towards poor. They were/ are provided below cost also., and so to reduce burden people who could afford were kept out.

This has generated vicious circle. Govt services for poor and so of poor quality.      

Seed of such problem was sown quite early after independence, when in every sector ( in absence of private sector) and in neglect of need of poor govt. gave priority  to Higher education (IIT etc), Best Health services (AIMS) and so on overlooking primary education, primary health center and so on.

Result is every one to see, we are a nation having succeeded in sending Mangalyan in first attempt, but we are also a nation with highest number of hungry people  in world and there rate of decrease is far less than  in other nation.

Basically, we need to change (feudal)  mind set of division of Ruler and Ruled. And this is not a Problem of UP, nor restricted to primary education only. Once this is changed and only through this situation can improve and not by HC directive.

Capital Punishment: A Discussion.

Capital Punishment: A Discussion.

Yakub Menon's death penalty and its execution has raised more question on our justice system than positive indication of our resolve to fight terrorism.

The different point of heated debate are.

1. Capital punishment is a killing by state and is to be condemned.
2. Capital punishment is no deterrent for criminals.
3. Justice is different -different for different  people based on
i. Political Backing.
ii. Money Power.
iii. Religion of Accused.
iv. Caste of Accused.
4. Decision are affected by constituents of bench of court.

Many more points of debate / discussion are possible but basically they will be offshoot of above points.

Let us take one by one.
1.It is argued that capital punishment should not be given because if you are not able to give life to any one you do not have right to take it. Even state do not have this right. This is barbaric and civil society has no place for such thing.Further,it is irreversible and it is found that if appeal is made, in 95 % of cases High Court/ Supreme have reversed the trial court judgement. Counter is - what should be highest punishment ?. Many countries ( of Europe) who had abolished this are now considering reintroducing it in the wake of rising terrorism. The human right activist who advocate right of accused forget rights of victim. And so on.

2. Second -Capital punishment is no deterrent. Yes I agree, it is specially true when person has been completely brainwashed in the name of religion or patriotism. Perpetrator of such crime know in advance, what are the consequence of their action.
But if this argument is logically extended, no punishment is deterrent for any criminal. Punishment has not stopped any crime. Even pickpocket-er knows in advance what are consequences, but does it. What is more, many are busy in crime (specially white crime) as profession and does not feel any guilt. Under the circumstances should state abandon whole justice/ punishment system ?.

We are confused with the role of punishment. In most cases it is solace to victim of justice than deterrent to criminal. And that is acceptable role of punishment.

So far arguments are academic and do not rouse passion or divide society. But point number 3 & 4 are most divisive and needs serious discussion if we want to survive as united society and wish  to maintain credibility of our justice system including Supreme Court. As per Constitution ruling of SC are law of land and their is no appeal against it. Even criticizing  (any ) court rulings can invite contempt of court proceeding.

But admitting that this is man made arrangement and considering the number of ruling of HC overturned by SC or reprimanded for poor reasoning. Is it not possible to argue that in a hypothetical situation where there is court above SC, many of its ruling will be overturned or criticized by upper court as discriminatory ?.
Take the ruling that " delay in considering mercy petition is ground for cancelling death penalty". Can higher court not question " If normal is not defined how delay is there". Poor reasoning or an intellectual argument to rationalize or justify the decision taken?. Take another example ( out of context), of Sahara Group chairman's detention. In my view had this step been taken by lower court,SC would have over ruled it on the ground of fundamental right of liberty. It seems, it has more to do with SC v/s Sahara than SEBI/ Investor v/s Sahara. In last 70 years we have not been able to to decide when justice process ends ?. With SC ruling or Mercy petition with President? If President has rejected can Governor take up and rule on mercy petition differently ?. Question are many and that led to hearing of  Yakub case  at midnight.

It is being termed as independence of justice system. But look from other perception, it is just abuse of system by wealthy and mighty. Justice is perceived to be purchased than given. That is why 80-90 % of convicts are poor and from weaker section of society.

Agreed all system are operated by human being and subjectivity can not be ruled out. Even contemporary LAW of land is product of balance of power between different stake holders. As balance of power changes LAW changes.Take example of different  law on gay rights and right to death in different countries.Why a person should suffer because he is born  at wrong time and in wrong country?

So it is important that all players of system develop  empathy and do not take advantage of their strong position in terms of Money, Political clout and so on.
Else it is bad sign for peace and unity of society, country and world at large.

Vyapam- The Role of Fourth Estate and other matters.

It is unfortunate that my state is in the news for wrong reason. For long years BJP was  rightly claiming that Shivtraj Chouhan has turned fortune of this state and taken  it out of  BIMARU state list.

But all that is history and people all over the nation and world now will associate MP with VYAPAM scam the way it is/was associated with  Union Carbide gas leak, in which thousands died and population still facing health problem even after 30 years. But that can be termed as industrial accident caused by negligence and their is no conspiracy theory or failure of any pillar of democracy involved.

But in this case, first of its kind which is more than just economic offence like other scams, (a few are - Foddder scam of  Bihar, NHRM scam of UP)  is going to affect moral and confidence of young generation  of MP in years to come.

In the VYAPAM, like Murphy Law, whatever can go wrong has gone wrong.

Let us take Media first- Can media take high moral ground of taking due notice of it, as it was unfolding. Definitely No. As usual it was busy with its TRP game,  time to time taking up different trivial issues of interest to its viewer or  reader. Forgetting next day/ week once new sensation comes to live, behaving like theater owner who screens one by one different movies in order of release, without any attachment and doing so only for commercial interest. There was a time ( on matter of Documentary- Nirbhaya) when channels were actually taking opposite view - NDTV ( who had rights) supporting screening of it, and Times Now supporting ban on it. Their insensitivity to issues involved is also a matter of concern and just a few month back they attracted strong criticism while covering Nepal earth quack.

So  acting like any other trade union, when it took notice of it ?. Only when one of its own scribe Akshya Kumar died while attempting  to do story on it. There after whole media turned tide over Shivraj/ MP govt. and ultimately case handed over to CBI. Was 45-46th  death needed for it ? Earlier 44 deaths were of  no consequence for media or government?.

Now let us take  role of Constitutional Authorities like Governors. I think they have been given protection/ immunity from inquiry/ charges  for the function/ duty they are supposed to do and it intend to enable them to discharge these duties without fear and favor. Does this immunity extends to work they have done beyond call of duty and is in the range of criminal acts ? The High Court erred in this respect while not allowing FIR against governor Yadav. Time has come to make these immunity laws more explicit, what it covers and what not.

There, is political angel to it  also and if it is taken in to account blame of VYAPAM reaches Delhi  and may affect Modi. Why, NDA government who is fond of removing UPA appointed governors or sending them to Mizoram ( Kala Pani for Governors, state  has seen 8-9 governors in last one year) did not took notice of misdeeds of Mr. Yadav and removed him for the sake of justice. Was whole NDA is protecting Yadav knowing well that, if Yadav opens mouth it is trouble for all ? Already there are names of RSS leader associating with scam., live/ dead,  are going around

What about High Court- Judiciary- Why its SIT and STF was ineffective. Why not it took steps ( whatever it could) to remove governor or his immunity to make room for speedy independent probe. Was it because vested interest of some of Judges was also involved. in the scam and they do not want investigation to reach logical conclusion in time. This is worry some, as with passage of time , credibility of different institutions is going down and down.

Technology who is claimed to usher in transparency/ efficiency and so on has in fact is opening new avenues of cheating / fraud and making it more widespread and efficient. It is seen in other exams also, like AIPMT. So in a sense opposition to AADHAR or Digital India is justified.

Other aspect are also there but blog will go lengthy and I stop with reproducing comments in media.
Some one has changed name of SHIVRAJ to SHAV-RAJ and Mama to Kans Mama.

May this scam does not affect moral of YOUTH in my state. They continue to have faith in hard work and system. Scam seems to have shaken this.

Yoga Day.

After a long time or to say first time, India has demonstrated its superiority in the field of Health and

Spirituality. It is India’s coming of age and moment of self-pride. So far so good as long as it is related to India or Bharat.

But danger is its supporters as well as its opponent are likely to link it to Hindu uprising or

dominance and that is worrying factor. It is said that a neutral concept of “RAM RAJYA” of good

governance, used by Mahatma Gandhi had sown the seed of Hindu-Muslim divide long before, issue

was formally taken up by Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League. Supporters of Yoga like activity, do

not see anything good happened in India post 9- 10 th Century AD. For them nothing good happened

since then. They are not able to appreciate Kalidas and Mirza Galib together. Or when Pt. Madan

Mohan Malviya is remembered for BHU nobody wants to remember Khan Brothers for AMU. Such

example are endless and this is worrying.

But who is loser in the process?. Whole India suffered. It is said, we are left behind in manufacturing

due to “labour laws” and progressed in IT (software not Hardware) as there was no government

interference in it. Our much emphasis on Book Knowledge or to put other way advancing the sector

where upper Hindus had advantage and neglecting the area where others including Muslim had

advantage is the main reason for our lagging behind in manufacturing. Our attitude of looking down

manual labour is the culprit. (Even today to make success of Make in India, first we will have to

change this attitude.)

This brings to question for whom India is relevant, for whom policy should be framed. Should we be

proud of Yoga Day and Mangal Yan success or be ashamed of the fact that in many socio economic

criteria we are far behind countries like Ethiopia and Bangla Desh. Presently, everything is by and for

top 20-25 crore, and takes space in tv and policy making.  Even to get attention you need to be

raped in Delhi not remote corner of India. That is worrying.

Leave all this. Does Yoga will change India or it is another Photo opportunity. Yoga done for 30

minutes and business as usual for rest 23 and half hour is no Yoga and will not benefit anybody. Yoga

is for Mind and Body discipline. Yoga will not give promised result unless we practice or adopt rules

of code of conduct (for mind and body) Yam and Niyam -the foundation of Yoga. We cannot

continue with Yoga without adopting truth, non-aggression and so on (All principles of Yam and

Niyam).   

And if India adopts Yoga seriously, what will be effect on economy. Whether it will slow down or

accelerate. That is any bodies guess. Off course all sectors that are promoting Yoga will grow fast.

But what about Allopathy and Surgery? Will youth leave night shift of BPO industry. Social effects? 

A Yogi should be have empathy or be considerate towards fellow citizen. Will it happen?   This way we can go on analysing every aspect of life and activity. Can all important position money has taken in our social life will change?

All these question are there if we accept that Yoga is an attempt to change the society for better and

there is no hidden agenda behind it. But doubts are being raised on it. There is controversy over

absence / no invitation to Vice President. It is also no coincidence that Amit Shah BJP President went

to poll bound Bihar to celebrate Yoga day.

ONLY FUTURE WILL TELL TRUE STORY AND RESULT. TILL THEN BEST WISHES FOR  GROWTH OF YOGA

CULTURE.

Modi's One Year.

You need not analyse performance of Modi Govt. in detail. It is sufficient to know what are the genetic strengths and weaknesses of persons running the government and its policy. Only then you will be sure to come to right conclusion about its performance.

There is no doubt that, persons running the government, including Modi has received parenting from RSS. RSS is known for discipline and efficiency. It has a dream of making India a strong nation and if possible Hindu nation.  To make Hindu philosophy competitive with Christian and Muslim it is all the time emphasising single GOD and single caste Hindu. Corollary of it, its disregard for diversity and dissent in society.

So, whatever work it does as per its core philosophy, it does far better than others.

Take the example of Foreign policy, even if we accept that common citizen do not have access to opinion expressed by counter party and has to rely on what government or Indian media says about it, every one acknowledge that government is taking very good initiative in  foreign policy matter. Core theme is containing/ countering China and projecting India a strong nation. We have succeeded in Shri Lanka and in near future may succeed in Afghanistan (Presently they are close to China and Pakistan).Its emphasis on North East and JK should be seen as part form of foreign policy

Similarly government’s efficiency is praise worthy at the time of Yemen and Nepal crisis. Successful implementation of Jan Dhan Yojana is another example. Its thinking on railway being national assets and treating it like that is unprecedented in free India. It is also good that in national interest many of the UPA schemes are being continued including ADHAR and FDI in retail (though they want to stress BJP oppose it). In fact many of success of NDA are efficient implantation of UPA (where UPA failed).

So far so good, but their basic belief of discipline, efficiency and Rashtra Bhakti, is creating unnecessary flash point by way of Land Bill, Treatment  of foreign funded NGOs, disregard for constitutional watch dogs like CIC CVC  Lokpal etc.

They seem to fail and feel uncomfortable, whenever they have to take a position because of political or democratic compulsion.

Like saying it is government of Poor. If it is so, it should make toll free for public and commercial transport and charge heavy toll on private vehicles (presently opposite is practiced). Presently, govt. is soft on car parking on street/ road but root out vendor on street, such anti poor policy should be reversed.

My only apprehension is if they try to stand on two stools (of thought and policy) they may fail to do what is their core competency. Government should avoid split personality and should show to public that its core policies benefits nation and poor better than mere lip service. For example, If it has courage, to eradicate Black Money it should clean political funding (rest is farce).  

Poor Sunday- Worst Political Economy

Poor Sunday- Worst Political Economy.

It is unfortunate that on this Sunday (19/04/15), India’s economic debate has again centred on Poor. It is the force of democracy that Modi, who came to power on development agenda is forced to repeat word POOR every alternate sentence in a speech given to BJP parliamentarian (in a work shop which itself was titled something like “Schemes for Poor”).

It means all theories about victory of BJP with regard to aspirational poor and a vote against entitlement politics (free- bees) of UPA was wrong. Similarly theory of AAP winning election based on alternative politics was also wrong. The fact is in Lok Sabha election people voted single party against coalition and preferred Modi against none (Now Rahul is trying successfully to make it Modi v/s Rahul). Victory of AAP can also be seen where peoples were attracted by Kejriwal and his promise of free water, subsidised electricity and regularisation of illegal colonies (reaffirmation of entitlement politics).

I am not against poor, I am against policies which makes no economic sense or unviable but are announced and people vote for it. It is also unfortunate that those who is not pro- poor (freebees) is pro crony –capitalism.  The fight is between two vested groups to corner natural resources at the cost of national development.

It is not a political but social problem. A divided society where no group has empathy for other group.   For example, as long as UPA policies were benefitting rich and upper middleclass, everything was good. The moment it became pro poor by way of MNERAGA, RTE (Right to education), Rights of Tribe, Food Security Bill etc. all started crying about policy paralysis and scam etc. The crime was not a policy paralysis, the crime was spending more than the earning.

NDA came to power and everything changed, there was sensible, central and railway budget. There are sever cuts on education, health and welfare schemes due to fund crunch and so on. (But I am not endorsing cuts).Now if it shifts gear to pro poor, label of policy paralyse by rich is not far away, and many of good program like efforts to take railway on track or properly responding to China policy ( encircling India)  will be derailed.

Coming back to problem of policy of entitlement and crony capitalisms- why we cannot have middle path. Presently, when everyone says crops are failed and farmers are committing suicide (must be true), but then why there is no corresponding dip in crop output. Or why we do not admit damage is to the extent of crop damage and say only really affected farmers be supported. Further, no body ask, why farmers are not saving for a bad crop in a cycle of 3-4 years. For industrialist also, financing pattern in India is such that, in case of profit shareholder/owner corner benefit but in case of loss lender (bank) suffers. Owner boast of being entrepreneur but does not take risk of loss.

Reverting to land bill which is in the storm of controversy, every rational parson (not only economist) agrees that there is need for reduction of population dependent on agriculture. (Presently for 13 % of GDP contributed by Agriculture, but almost 67 % population depend on it) and land is urgently required for non-agriculture purposes. Then why schemes are not prepared, where by owner farmer continues to own land and/or enjoy benefit out of it when land is proposed to be utilised for non-agriculture purpose.    

Thus focus of debate on the bill should shift from, consent clause etc. to retaining ownership /perpetual benefit like an owner. Farmer should accept the need of land for non-agriculture purpose and entrepreneur / industrialist should be ready to give proper rate of return on a factor of production –Land.

In general every Debate or Policy should not be pro-poor or pro rich, they should be pro-anti-development. Somewhere, policies advocated by Amirtya Sen and Jagdish Bhagwati/ Panagariya should merge together.   For this to evolve first society should develop empathy.

Else, the way we have lived with Garibi Hatao as slogan and Crony Capitalism as policy for last 45 years, we shall continue to live for another hundred year. The dream of taking over China will be a dream for ever.

We need to change content and discourse of Political Economy.

Making Changes in law. Democracy or Mobocracy.

Making Changes in law. Democracy or Mobocracy.

Parliament's prime duty is to make legislation for the country. For that it needs to debate and see all pros and cons of new proposed law  including problem of implementation.

In this sense/ aspect our legislating capacity seems not up to the mark. It is generally carried away by emotions and sentiments of the day and of public. Our main constitution itself has been amended more than 125 times in short span of 65 years. But we need not go back this much. Illustrating recent examples are sufficient.

Take the example of  clause/ section 66A of IT Act that is  struck down by SC. By this section an anomaly was created where in what was not criminal in print and electronic media was made criminal on social media. Now drafter of the legislation themselves saying section was poorly drafted. Was all this was not obvious while making the law. 

Take example of non legislative decisions also.In this aspect see the fate of  ban on Nirbhya documentary. No sane voice was heard during the debate except that of people like Javed Akhatar etc. Ultimately ban turned out to be non-enforceable.Take another example of hue and cry over release of Masart Alam. We can understand it from ignorant public but same scene in parliament ?. All voices, including PM, without taking in to account legal aspect and what was happening before Mufti became CM ?. Was it not the duty of HM to tell the nation what is correct position.   

Now come to mother of all controversy, Land Bill. ( I think previous to this Hindu Civil Code  Bill must have raised such debate in Nehru's time).

Before we come to merit of 2013 Bill or present ordinance etc. Need to amend a Bill ( which was not opposed by present ruling party) within a year of its passing is itself shocking. Does it mean while passing the bill all aspect were not seen or discussed. We could understand if the present amendments, were same as BJP  had proposed earlier but could not get it passed because of lack of majority or voted against the bill. But the fact BJP had supported the Bill.

Now coming to the merit of amendments. We fully agree that rural people should move away from agriculture. Presently, there is disguised-employment ( work without productivity) in agriculture or rural economy. We also full agree that considering the small land holding and large number of farmers involved consent clause seems to be impracticable. Same can be said about social impact assessment, which is generally done on fictitious/ unreliable project report. It is game to include more and more people as project affected persons.

But the solution is more dangerous than problem. This way farmers are forced to sacrifice whatever little assets they are presently having. Ruling class says  amendments are beneficial  for farmers. Now if some thing is better for farmer why farmer will not give consent for it ?.

Basically, landowner, where land is considered as a factor of production, should be made as shareholder in any project on land. Be it in  road or railway or any manufacturing activity. We can leave purely public goods like science laboratory or defense establishment where no revenue will be generated from such share holding. But wherever revenue is likely to be generated, be  it by govt or private, some way of ownership in project must be insured for farmers. 

Further, even commercial activity can be divided in two parts. One is like dam which has to built on existing river or road/ rail which has to be built between existing cities and can not be located elsewhere. Another is factory etc. which can be located any where ( of course cost and market are consideration but it is not essential, it only  affects profitability). Law for the first type should be different from second one.

Any commercial activity will surely affect one group positively and another group negatively. You can not ask to sacrifice the  loser for  another group which is likely to benefit. It is cross subsidy.Why not encourage experiments like Magarpatta of Pune  where in farmers themselves developed city. 

Intention here is not to discuss pro and cons of a particular bill or clause.  But parliament should pass the law with full discussion. We should give a thought, why a British law  made in 1894 continued for 119 years and our bill needs amendment  in a year. 

We should not turn democracy to mobocracy.

Dehli to Srinagar via Patna.

After winning Loksabha and some assembly elections by BJP, its strategy seems to be failing. The way things have unfolded for BJP in Delhi, Patna and Srinagar give rise to doubt about Modi-Shah duo’s capacity to lead BJP and nation in a Statesman like spirit.

(If it is so, what was reason for its earlier victory – people’s delusion with coalition politics and weak congress leadership, which gave BJP advantage? And it is possible that when they are confronted with other more capable leaders and local / regional parties BJP’s weakness in strategy is exposed.)

Coming straight to Kashmir, now it seems BJP has repeated the mistake of delaying the decision. In Delhi it was delay in calling the election and in Kashmir it was about forming the government. ( so that its effect should not be felt on Delhi election.)

This begs the question – Is the BJP in agreement to what is happening in J&K for last 10 days but does not want to acknowledge it in public (and wanted to happen it after Delhi election). Modi has already said- what is stated in public and what is in the interest of nation or required to run the government is two different aspects. His U turn (for better) on ADHAR project is an example of this sort.

What has been stated by Mufti in his first press conference- giving thanks to separatist and Pakistan for peaceful election-  and then demand for mortal remains of Afzal Guru (by PDP MLAs) and release of Masarat Alam. All seem to be coherent policy of PDP, addressed to constituency of his party that is Kashmir valley (It is as simple and clear as AAP party’s announcement of subsidy on Electricity and Water- fulfilling the election promise). BJP’s strong reaction is addressed to its constituency without any seriousness about it.

And if alliance is to continue- I think it will/ should continue for national integration- we should be prepared for such more action on part of PDP. (Though BJP says it has got assurance from PDP of non-recurrence of such decision)

As the opposition to view of PDP’s action and terming it antinational is well documented and publicised in mainstream media, I do not wish to elaborate it.

What is to be understood/ realised that there can be a different, other than held by us, perception on Kashmir. Every argument has counter argument- argument is that PDP released the Alam, counter argument is, judiciary ordered for release and detention was illegal (Further his and others release has happened earlier also). What is coming out in public domain, leaves only charge on PDP of not re- arresting him.

We say release of Alam is betrayal of public who has participated whole heartily in election. Counter argument is PDP won the election in Kashmir valley and pro nationalist BJP got 2-3 % vote with 0 seats. (More voting was done to ensure BJP does not win elections. Congress has better record who won seats in all three parts of J&K.)

That leads to question who is/are Alam and others, separatist/ terrorist or political prisoners. This is the critical question.

Can it be said that because PDP has different perception it is anti-national. Or state government/ regional parties should not air/ influence foreign policy issues. But then same is being done in Tamil Nadu (Sri Lanka), West Bengal (Bengla Desh) and accepted by Centre.

Further, BJP says action of PDP is outside CMP and asks PDP to concentrate on development (this will solve problem of Kashmir), PDP says it is part of CMP and says there cannot be any development without peace.

Argument/counter argument will go on  and BJP has to decide, whether it wants to seize the historic opportunity to enter Valley and change mind set of Kashmiri people or snap the relationship, that will be advantageous to PDP (in Kashmir) and for BJP ( in rest of India) but valley problem will continue forever.

Even though public posture is giving signal in other direction I think and wish and has feeling Modi/ BJP is taking Vajpayee’s mission a step ahead (But do not have courage to say publicly and it is here Modi is different than Vajpayee and short in stature). Already spokes persons are defending the BJP-PDP alliance on the line of BJP-Akali Dal alliance (earlier many of Akalis were sympathetic to Khalistan movement and so on) and hope to, what has been achieved in Punjab, achieve in Kashmir. They already have converted one separatist- Soz to election fold and they should continue this mission and be courageous enough to say so.

If it is not so, after 1948 (taking it to UN), 1971 (Breaking Pakistan which gave rise to anti India feeling to new generation of Pakistan) it will be third time (not honouring /working with elected government) we will be mistake on Kashmir policy.

For last 68 years we have been saying that since Kashmiri people are participating in election, there is no need of Plebiscite on Kashmir as promised by us. Kashmiri separatist do not buy this argument, saying election and plebiscite are two different issues, and to begin with rest of India should have faith on peoples and peoples elected by them.( Can we dream of a day when we can have Scotland type referendum where in, people rejected call for independence from UK).

Can we accept this challenge.

Nirbhya-India's daughter.

It is once again same self-defending reaction by Government and Society.

“It is conspiracy to defame India”.  

As far as I remember the same arguments was echoed long back against Satyajt Ray’s film “Pather Panchali” who documented India’s poverty.   

I have not seen the documentary nor going into merit in arguments for and against the banning the documentary. But I understand it is one of the 7 or 9 documentary prepared or to be prepared internationally and not unique for India or for defamation of India. We have reacted in the same way when Obama, commented on religious intolerance in India, in a long speech in USA while assessing the world situation and making a remark about India at the end of speech.

Any way we must understand all are commenting /will comment from a point advantageous to them. NDTV who was to broadcast documentary is showing all reactions against ban, while Times Now (for reason unknown) is making all hue and cry why documentary was made at all. Who so ever is taking position for and against it may be taking for its own sake. Which position is correct cannot said.

Why we should feel or conclude, any observation not liked by us is against us.

Further, we should be able to distinguish what is against state (power) and what is against nation. In this respect the case of not allowing Greenpeace activist to go to England for briefing British Parliamentarians about plight of Advasis, due to activities of a British company, is still fresh in our mind and case is sub-judies.

What is more shameful -documentary or justice could not be delivered so far.

In this respect it is also a commentary on parliamentary democracy, who plays to gallery but does not show any intention of basic changes. Remember, Verma Commission after Nirbhay case or Jan Lokapal and so on. Situation is not unique to India Hitler commented in the same way in his autobiography about German Parilaiment.

I won’t comment much but only say it is time to introspect  our  gender biases and social priorities-WHY WE (MAN) ARE ABLE TO PURCHASE A MOBILE OF RS 15000-20000 BUT WHEN IT COMES TO CONSTRUCTION OF TOILET WE ARE SHORT OF MONEY.

J and K Agreement.

It seems agenda for governance between PDP and BJP in J&K has gone beyond the agenda of political parties forming the rules for sharing the power. It has entered in the area of central government (like treatment of refugees, LOC etc) and RBI (all lending to be priority sector for 5 years) and so on.

While reading I felt as though it is international treaty entered between Ruler of independent Kashmir and Indian Government something like agreement of 1948. 

The agreement needs more scrutiny as effects of these will affecting/ binding on future state govt. and central government.

How perception differs, is to be realised while we mainstream citizen feel BJP has compromised its position on Article 370 for power, in an interview NC leader and ex-cm Omar Abdulla says, article 370 is part of basic constitution and India and Kashmir agreement and BJP cannot do anything about it. Reviewing article 370 means revisiting India and J&K agreement of 1948 ( and is BJP ready to do that ?).

Same way he blames PDP (we blame BJP) for diluting position on AFSPA which they had promised to abolish within 1 year of coming to power. He also states that abolishing AFSPA is purely in the hands of state government and PDP has abdicated this power to centre who will never repeal the act.

On other political and social issues also he says nothing is new and they have been part of Governor’s address for last 10 years. In fact he blames PDP to compromise on promise of “Self Rule” in Kashmir for the sake of power.

While rejecting the claim that BJP-PDP alliance is like North and South pole together, he said as far as my understanding goes ( of science) if  two poles come together it is total catastrophe, I hope it is not so.

Black Money

Out of many future tense sentences, lot of them on Black Money. My take is as below.

 Subject of Black Money is once again has come to centre stage with Arun Jaitely promising very stringent law on it in his Budget speech.

Whether law will be realty and whether it will be able to tackle the problem?

Considering the previous experience of behaviour of political parties (irrespective of being in power or in opposition), including the attitude on Lokpal, before and after passing the law, it is certain that this law will face  the same hurdle during  the passage and after the law becomes law ( if at all) as faced by Lokpal.

Whatever posture and action we are seeing presently is due to pressure generated by Anna movement and Supreme Court orders.

My view is first it will face the hurdle in passing, the way woman’s reservation is facing. And even if it is passed it will face the hurdle in the enforcement/ operationalization the way lokpal is facing.

Why it is so?

Basic thing is, those who are showing intention to pass the law (politician) are in fact in greater need of it, to win the elections. Thus electoral reforms are pre-requisite for law on Black Money. Similar is the case with Bureaucracy/ General public who need it for getting admission, appointment, posting and promotions. This is also true of Industry who needs it for getting clearances and promoting crony capitalism.

Ultimately all money reaches Political boss. Thus if electoral reforms are undertaken, administrative reforms and other changes for industry and for general public will not be far off.

This may smoothen the passage on law on Black Money or if need for generating Black Money is gone, who knows we may not require this law at all.

On the other hand, socially we need to discourage and criticise display of money and stop alluding the people who display money but do not have known source of it. In fact we should ask transparency in expenses and source of money. 

  

Rahul Gandhi and Congress Future.

Disclaimer: These views are not aimed to support Rahul Gandhi and Congress, but aim to express views that are not aired so far on public platform in this context.

Rahul Gandhi on leave? Is it really so. Probably no. Reverse of it seems to be true. He has started asserting himself and not ready to take uncalled blame for congress rout/fall in last 4-5 years. Real problem is many of old stalwarts (of Soniya time) are not ready to work under Rahul nor supporting Rahul in any election.

Now Rahul is saying either my way or no way and decide it before AICC session of April 15. Till that time I am going on strike and let the world know about it.

Can Rahul have his way? Yes, and probably on this condition only he will start his second inning. What is rational of this thinking? In spite of apparent failure of Rahul Gandhi, fact is that there is no one else in congress, around which Congress can remain united.

This begs the question of Dynastic politics practiced by Congress. Very first thing we need to understand that this is not the congress that we can call 130 year old grand party. At the most it is 45 year old party launched by Indira Gandhi. Old timers remember that, that time officially, there were 2 congress parties Congress (I) –I for Indira   and Congress (O) – O for organisation led by leaders like Morarji.  Those who had differences with Indira Gandhi and her policies left congress (I) and either vanished from public scene or became regional leaders by launching new parties.

Today’s problem of Congress or Rahul are to be traced back to Indira Gandhi policy, which destroyed party structure, regional leaders and made political party only an election winning machinery. This was in contrast with Nehru policy who not only nurtured his own regional leaders but took care to protect and encourage nano (not even micro) opposition. Just to protect interest of regional leader’s subject of “Land” was not included in central list of constitution and an elaborate chapter is available on land in it. Further, agriculture income was kept out of Income tax and so on.

Any way I expressed this view not in context of analysis of Indira Gandhi but in context of blame of Dynastic Politics on Congress. I only say after 1977 defeat, Indira Gandhi created her own congress in 1980 and there is nothing like Dynastic about it.   

Does Rahul Gandhi is perpetuating dynastic politics at least of Indira Congress? In a sense that congress is also not there now. After congress defeat in the hands of VP Singh, Congress was without Gandhi family and was on the way out of Indian politics. Then congress man prayed to Sonia Gandhi, who rebuilt congress of today and won two elections on her own. (Those who were opposed to Soniya, like Sharad Pawar, has left the congress)

Does Rahul Gandhi want to resurrect Indira Congress or continue Soniya Congress? It is further firm no. At least in theory, he wants to rectify mistake made by Indira Gandhi of destroying party structure and wish to move beyond Sonya Gandhi’s way of functioning. His vision is to create Nehru Congress version 2 on the line of AAP.

Will he succeed? Yes and No. or No and Yes.

Reason for No is basically/ inherently and so on is, after witnessing murder of Grand Mother and Father in quick succession on account of Power politics, I believe he really feels “Power is Poison” and by heart does not wish for it. In this mental state his is continuance in politics is itself an act of courage. How many of us will be able to continue in such situation?

This is big reason for No. But there are sign that out of humiliation or otherwise he is changing. His last public address in Dehli election (at Jhajarpur or something like that) gave glimpse of it.

If this no is gone. Rest of negatives are peripheral. Remember the early days of Soniya when her foreign origin was rallying point for opposition and her Hindi pronunciations were a matter of joke but she moved ahead and critics are left behind.   Rahul does not suffer from such basic negativities is a advantage for him.

Can Rahul coerce or persuade congress leader first and later masses to follow him. Chances are yes. The record of congress is better than BJP. Congress is not an ideological party, it is a public limited company, whosoever seems / is winning election and ready to give chair/profit , congress leader will follow him/her. Obedience is better in congress (there is nothing like RSS) see fate of BJP under Bedi, and compare it with Congress under Manmohan Singh and for that matter of Rahul (under unsupportive leaders).

In loksabha election, it was assumed country has moved beyond “entitlement politics” of Congress and now it is “Aspirational India”. But nine month down, with AAP victory in Dehli, it is again proved that voter still demands “subsidies and rights” and so demand for congress polices is intact. There is strong vote bank of 65 % for grab (outside core 35 % of BJP) any party including BJP.

Age is on his side, and  the blame of not having any experience can turn out to  be advantage of “no baggage”, when fighting against like Lalu, Mulayam etc. Having power in 8 states (though small ones) is advantage over AAP.

Rahul has opportunity, only future will tell us that once determined, whether he was able to replicate   hard work  done by Indira Gandhi between 1977 and 1980 and specially in last 2 months before 1980 election where she took extensive tour of India and addressed  more than 1000 rallies.  

There can not be a vacuum any where , specially in Politics.

With BJP Mast ( Self overjoyed, Ruttiest), Congress Sust (Sluggish, Sickly or Weary) and AAP Yvast ( Busy, active) the result of Dehli Election was a fore gone conclusion.

As I said earlier whatever be the result AAP had scored moral victory which ultimately tuned out to be political victory.

Some where I  have said, with the way BJP is undergoing under Modi, BJP is going the way Congress  had gone under Indira Gandhi and will suffer in long run.

Unfortunately I never imagined downfall will be so swift and so quick.This down fall started the day , overriding the constitution/ precedence, BJP made party President and PM from the same state. Then for a single person  ( first) ordinance was brought in. With this, BJP/Modi's self righteousness started in full speed and last in series was amendment to land acquisition bill.

But what BJP did or did wrong is not the subject matter and reason for AAP's victory. The architect of AAP's victory is Congress or complete collapse of Congress. Where BJP failed and AAP succeeded is occupying  the space vacated by Congress.

AAP's path to victory was ensured the day it forced unwilling BJP to have election by keeping its own MLA united ( BJP wanted to have defection and power without election). Result was further confirmed when   battle was made Kejriwal v/s Bedi. The way comparison was made between Rahul and Modi in parliament election, the same comparison was made between Bedi and Kejriwal and later was preferred. Ultimately there is no substitute for self hard work.

What is  the ripple effect of this development ?. Immediate effect will be on J&K government formation, where  now PDP will hard negotiate with BJP or may go with Congress and NC. Next  effect is on Bihar Politics, in aftermath of Delhi result BJP will rework/ rethink its strategy to support Manjhi. ( What a social development over 20-25 years. Earlier Lalu Nithesh fought battle of Dalit -Sawarn, over a period now it is between Dalit and Maha dalit).

Now, all Modi/ BJP's allies will be more critical/ vocal to speak their mind. Whosoever is hurt by BJP/ Modi attitude over last nine month is showing happiness and first in line is Shiv Sena, next is Akali Dal. Other group is of opponent of Modi/ BJP's, and where elections are due- Bihar, West Bengal and UP.Regional leaders of state  Nitish, Mamata and Akhilesh Yadav are praising AAP and expressing willingness to have alliance etc.

This result will also have adverse effect on  effectiveness of Modi's many initiative -domestic and international including Make in India. Already Pakistan and China media has shown happiness over the results.

And here is litmus test for AAP also. Not to have temptation to spread wing by alliance etc. Its leaders have shown dislike for anti BJP/ Congress front and preferred to have different type of politics. They hope to have organic growth and may next test their strength in Bangalore Municipal Elections. Ultimate test  is to stand by there own ideology/ commitment. Else history has seen many land slide victories like 1977 (Janata), 1984( Rajiv) and 1989 (VP Singh) without leaving lasting effect on political space. Its contribution will not be measured by its victory in elections but its success in reforming electoral politics.

Can AAP take space left by Congress. Not in near future. Whether it will grow nation wide depends on fate of congress. If congress, rejuvenate AAP has no future. AAP leaders are also aware of it and so does not see BJP as opponent. They realize, that  they can not take away BJP's vote bank, there whole energy to occupy rest of space and that is of Congress or Congress ideology.    

Indian politics has entered an interesting phase,on one hand  if BJP outreaches other constituents of society its core supporter are unhappy. But that space/ constituents  is almost 65 % of total population ( That is hope of India and Indian Democracy). Who grabs it- BJP, Congress or new parties like AAP is  real thing to watch.

Delhi Election 2015.

In a technical sense, Delhi's elections are not even state election and does not deserve the attention it is getting. However, being national capital and the fact that it is a litmus test for AAP type politics and BJP's desire to continue its winning streak, it has got an out of proportion  media attention  and political   significance.

(In a sense, it always happens, one rape in Dehli gets more publicity than say in Assam. The same is  also world over, the massacre of 12  people in Paris got world vide attention, so many state head attended rally and so on , while at the same time thousands of people were massacred by Boko Harem in Africa, but did not get any due attention.).

Any way today's topic is not about it.

  

From the beginning BJP is/ was more cautious about Delhi, first it delayed election in spite of Modi wave, then to avoid impact of alliance with PDP ( allegation of compromise over core issues of BJP for forming government would have been an issue in Delhi election and would have adversely affected it) is delaying the pact ( it will be  announced soon after voting in Delhi). There after to match the Kejrival, it brought, Bedi and sensing Bedis ineffectiveness again marshaled whole MPs and CMs   for campaign.

Whatever may be the result (  recent surveys showing AAP ahead in race), when BJP decided to put whole weight and brain behind Dehli's election and sensing the uncertainty of result made it Kejriwal-Bedi fight rather than Kejriwal-Modi fight, morally AAP has already won  the election .  A few people also say that with  both Arvind and Bedi joining politics, Anna or his movement has become irrelevant. But  to me it is success of Anna/ movement that, main stream political party has  either become irrelevant ( Congress), or forced to field one of the leader of movement to check AAP (BJP). It is also change of scene (due to Anna) that middle class/professionals instead of doing drawing room discussion over elections, has decided to participate in it. It is sign of maturing democracy  in India.

Who should win the elections ?.  Should Delhi  be ruled by BJP or AAP (AAP supported by Congress). Both  situations has its own pro and cons. If AAP wins , voice to oppose BJP will get momentum. Presently many of lies or misdeeds  of BJP/Modi goes unexposed or un-protested because of low morale or disarray in opposition camp and it is not good.( Credit to BJP for fall in petroleum product or amendment to land acquisition bill are a few examples.). Electoral reforms also may get momentum. On the flip side  many of the good initiative  like AADHAR, Swach Bharat etc. which  are getting successful just because there is no opposition to Modi/BJP may not be that much successful /possible in future. Locally Delhi may not  much develop under AAP ( Already, in earlier elections and now  also, BJP wants one party govt at Center/State / Local level, to have fast development. Corollary  concept of it that , center will not cooperate with non BJP govt at State or Local  level is also not being opposed on political or theoretical level).

This issue of development has different meaning to different strata of society.In this sense also Delhi elections are unique in the sense that first time in India votes will be given based on class  affiliation rather that caste and religion basis. With the Congress failing to take up issues of weaker sections ( because of communication problem)AAP has taken that space  and  they ( weaker section) are looking forward for free water / electricity and freedom from petty corruption under AAP and upper class is dreaming of world class infrastructure ( irrespective of cost) under BJP.

And under universal  franchise and favorable population ratio of weaker section AAP seems to be winning the election.

And where is  the Congress?. No where. Congress is still struggling to complete  generational change. So far this transition has become difficult due to reluctance and failure of Rahul. Old guard are leaving or becoming inactive.Latest is Jayanti Natarajan. Once this process is over , I hope congress will once again bounce back.

There are sign of it, today's Rahul, in a election rally  ( at Jahangirpur Dehli) was quite different. He was confident, extempore, taking responsibility for what Jayanti alleges about him and using to his own advantage.

For Delhis Election, this is too little and too late.

But, if Rahul can keep such confidence in future, who knows  a  months / year down the line  congress will start upward swing. If old guard continue to oppose Rahul, Congress may see one more split. But I foresee little chance of it as there is no unity  among leaders or leaders  of independent stature (, the way syndicate leaders under Moraarji Deasi opposing Indira) . Chances are old guard will just whither away. 

Let us  see what happens in Delhi in near future and of Congress in long term.

Prakash 

4/02/2015.

Population Growth Rate and Hindu Muslim Divide.

With the statement given by Sakshi Maharaj, that Hindu woman should give birth to four children, a new dimension to, BJP’s development agenda against fringe element’s / parent organisation’s cultural agenda on one end and Hindu Muslim divide on the other end has emerged.

While BJP (officially) says, we do not concur with the view and has given show cause notice to adamant MP. Congress says all are hand in glove and so on.

It is no secret that some element of BJP (including some new entrant in its fold) by emphasizing development agenda, wish to come out of RSS shadow and make BJP a PAN India party, RSS and its parivar, see (BJP rule) an opportunity to spread its /their own ideology and increase influence over society.  Aim of both is same but path is different.

To some extent both group are successful also, that is why, in 102th National Science Congress, many of non –scientific issues (including Make in India) were discussed.

If we do not subscribe to view of congress that all are hand in glove, there seems to be intense internal war going on between Govt. and RSS. And many of Modi’s admirer like economist Bahgawati has cautioned against RSS agenda. (Somewhere I have written and I always maintained whatever be the size of unit/ organisation, it will always will have 2 parts, each opposing other).

Any way my topic of today’s discussion is not about BJP-RSS but about Hindu Muslim.

Even though BJP has given show cause notice to MP, VHP has come out in support of Sakshi Maharaj, citing reason of demographic imbalance caused by one community (Muslim) having higher birth rate (than Hindus). To prove their point (rightfully), they quote Sachhar Committee report.

But unfortunately, while they quote population growth rate of Muslim as against Hindu, from report, they deliberately forget education, economic, job disparity between two communities noted in the report.

That gives rise to a new question, whether disparity between Hindu Muslim birth rate is due to religion factor or education/ economic factor.

To understand this /find answer, we must compare birth rate among similar educational-economic group of Hindu and Muslims (Compare first, birth rate based on education/ economic criterion and then further based on religion), and still we find Muslim birth  rate is higher than Hindu’s birth rate then only we can attribute it to religion factor. 

There is a wide spectrum of opinion with regard to Hindu Muslim relations.

a.       Muslims has got their own nation and they do not have any place in India. v/s

b.      Indian Muslims have shown faith in secular India, and they need all the protection /encouragement.

c.       During the app. 600 years of their rule , Muslims have destroyed Hindu culture and it is time to take revenge v/s

d.      While ruling in India (unlike Britishors ) they have mixed with/ settled in India and has given rise to what we call ganga- jamuna tehjib and that is soul of present day India and needs to be preserved at any cost and so on

On which side of spectrum you stand, one is labelled as secular/ communal-nationalist etc.

Whatever may be one’s view, it must be admitted that in our feudal system (where caste/society is given more importance /prominence) like India, where progress of individual / community depends on right connections with ruling class (not only in politics but, business industry and every walk of life), and in this respect Hindu (secular or otherwise) being ruling class Muslim (and earlier other Dalit Hindus) could not make progress based on Merit (in general Muslim ruling class opted for Pakistan, today if 2 youth both 10^th pass, is interviewed for peon post , chance is Hindu youth will be selected over Muslim youth ).

As implied above, Muslims (who remained in/ opted India), were back ward class on the eve of Independence and benefit of any leadership and thus the gap between Muslim and other community widened over time.

 In this scenario there may be a deliberate thinking (other than economic, educational reasons), but I am not sure, in community to preserve identity by increasing proportionate population (overlooking what a small, but economic strong community can achieve- like Parsi).

But I still believe high birth rate among Muslims have roots in poverty and low education.

Solution to demographic imbalance can be found in decreasing Muslim birth rate by eliminating above causes (of high birth rate) and not increasing Hindus birth rate.

Prakash

16.01.15