EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

NOIDA/DELHI THE HINDU

FRIDAY, JUNE 16, 20178EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

CMYK

M ND-ND

EDITORIAL

The biggest takeaway from the U.S. Federal Re-

serve’s decision to raise the federal funds rate, for

a third time in six months, is its assertion that

growth in the world’s largest economy has gained trac-

tion and is on course to warrant further “gradual” rate

increases. Fed Chair Janet Yellen emphasised the

factors underpinning this rebound in economic activity

— an “ongoing improvement in the job market and relat-

ively high levels of consumer sentiment and wealth”

that have spurred household spending, an expansion in

business investment, and most signiicantly, a global

pickup in demand. This ofers more reassurance that

the global economy may have inally re-emerged from

the post-inancial crisis doldrums. It is also noteworthy

that the economic revival has been happening amid

heightened policy uncertainty worldwide, especially in

key areas like trade, as political tumult continues to roil

the U.S. under the Donald Trump administration and,

more recently, the U.K. as well. And while Ms. Yellen re-

iterated that the American central bank remained on

alert in monitoring inlation developments, given a re-

cent softening in price gains, the Fed’s decision to an-

nounce the contours of a programme to gradually pare

the size of its $4.5 trillion balance sheet is another sign

that the U.S. economic engine is warming up. India’s ex-

porters can take heart that demand in one of the largest

markets for their goods and services is likely to continue

to strengthen in the coming months. The Fed also

bumped up the median projection for U.S. economic

growth in 2017 to 2.2%, from 2.1% forecast in March.

Ms. Yellen and her colleagues on the Federal Open

Market Committee have also done well to ward of a

2013 ‘taper tantrum’-like scenario by lagging the pro-

jected path of balance sheet normalisation — a deliber-

ate and clearly calibrated set of reductions that increase

over time — without detailing a schedule for the start of

the process. Clearly spelling out that the plan to de-

crease reinvestment of principal payments from asset-

backed and Treasury securities is conditional on the

economy staying its anticipated course, the Fed has ear-

marked this year as the broad time frame for its start. In-

dia’s monetary authorities can derive some reassur-

ance that they are not alone in adopting a policy stance

that seems counter-intuitive to some in the light of slow-

ing inlation in their respective economies. While the

Fed describes its stance as “accommodative” to spur

further strengthening in labour market conditions and

a sustained return to 2% inlation, the Reserve Bank of

India has said that its “neutral” poise is intended to con-

tinue support for economic expansion while ensuring

price stability. The common theme is the welcome em-

phasis on consistency and stability in the messaging.

Shoots take rootThe rate increase by the Fed indicates that the

world’s largest economy has gained traction

In a welcome move this week, India has ratiied two

key global conventions meant to keep children away

from work, decades since they were originally adop-

ted by the International Labour Organisation. Nonethe-

less, the scepticism aroused by the Child Labour (Pro-

hibition and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2016 over

the government’s commitment towards complete abol-

ition of child labour will persist. The ILO treaties are

about the minimum age at which a person may begin

work and the hazardous industries where she may not.

Crucially, conventions 138 and 182 of the United Nations

body leave it to the member-states to determine what

constitutes acceptable or unacceptable work for chil-

dren at diferent ages. Such lexibility has given the In-

dian government wiggle room in adopting the interna-

tional standards in question, even though the 2016

legislation falls several notches below a comprehensive

prohibition of child labour. The Act contains the contro-

versial provision that condones the employment of

children below 14 years under the rubric of family en-

terprises and the declassiication of several industries

as hazardous occupations. The detrimental efects on

the ground from these dilutions of the original 1986 Act

could be widespread. With roughly 90% of the work-

force continuing to remain outside the ambit of the or-

ganised sector, protecting vulnerable children from ex-

ploitation is diicult. The rules notiied by the Ministry

of Labour and Employment for the enforcement of the

2016 amendment include some small concessions. Un-

der these stipulations, children may work in domestic

enterprises only for three hours after school, and not

between 7 p.m. and 8 a.m. These restrictions are inten-

ded to ensure attendance at school. But given the sensit-

ivities involved in monitoring activities within tradi-

tional households, efective enforcement will pose a

challenge, and the rescue of vulnerable children will re-

main an uncertain proposition.

India’s ratiication of the two conventions, after more

than 165 countries have legally bound themselves to

their obligations, is itself a sad commentary on the pri-

orities of successive governments, cutting across party

lines. The ILO’s Minimum Age Convention of 1973

entered into force in 1976 — and the instrument pertain-

ing to the elimination of the worst forms of child labour

in 2000. While policymakers are no doubt alert to the

inequities that perennially plague Indian society, the

practical realities are too painful for the millions who

languish on the margins. Any genuine enforcement of a

minimum age at work will elude governments so long as

a universal minimum wage of subsistence for the adult

workforce is not implemented scrupulously. On this

score, the record of diferent States is at best patchy.

This scenario is unlikely to improve in the absence of a

vibrant mechanism of collective bargaining among

stakeholders. Without this, the total elimination of

child labour will remain a diicult task.

No time to workWith ratiication of conventions on child

labour, we must have assessment of violations

This year, the 70th anniversaryof India’s independence isalso the 70th anniversary of

India’s partitioning. The divisionwas not neat. It was a giant, bloodymess. Uprooted from their homes,some 14.5 million human beings,Hindu, Sikh, Muslim, left the newPakistan for India, or India for thenew Pakistan.

They left in terror, travelledtrembling, and ‘arrived’ traumat-ised to a ramshackle refuge. A newand powerful word moved fromthe small print of the English lex-icon to everyday Indian speech:refugee. The very rich and the ri-diculously poor were refugees to-gether. One had left a manor, an-other a hut. Both begged togetherfor food, shelter, medicines,clothes — and dignity. All thesetook time coming. The only imme-diate relief was that the claws of ab-duction, loot and death were nolonger upon them.

Rejoicing and mourningEstimates vary but some of themtell us that at the lowest about200,000 and the highest about2,000,000 human beings werebutchered in the process. The Gov-ernment of India claimed that33,000 Hindu and Sikh womenhad been abducted. The Govern-ment of Pakistan claimed that50,000 Muslim women had beenabducted.

Life stood divided, death stoodpartitioned.

Refugees seethed in rage.On this anniversary, we should

remember that 1947 was one partindependence, one part dismem-berment, one part triumph, onepart tragedy. Unimaginable, indes-cribable tragedy.

“Tomorrow we will be free frombondage to the British,” said

Gandhi in Calcutta on the eve of thenew dawn. “But from midnight to-night Hindustan will be brokeninto two pieces. So tomorrow willbe both a day of rejoicing and ofmourning.” There was much celeb-ration in the city, great ca-maraderie.

The euphoria was short-lived.Sixteen days into Independence,on August 31, at about 10 at night, afuming mob of Hindu youths cameto where he was staying in theMuslim quarter of Beliaghata, look-ing for his Muslim hosts to attackand perhaps kill them. It wasGandhi’s day of silence.

He was unwell, tired and prepar-ing to leave the next morning forNoakhali, by now in East Pakistan,to assuage Hindu families traumat-ised by the murderous attacks onthem. The youths started breakingthings, hurling stones at lamps andwindow panes.

They ran into the rooms lookingfor their ‘targets’. “What is allthis?” Gandhi asked the rampagingcrowd, breaking his silence andwalking into the mob. “Kill me, killme, I say. Why don’t you kill me?’’A posse of military police arrivedand dispersed the crowd. But riotslared in the city. The next day,Gandhi cancelled his Noakhali visitand went on a fast.

“For how many days?” AbhaGandhi asked. “Until peace is es-tablished I shall take nothing butwater.” By the fourth day of thefast, Calcutta was quiet again.Later that night some of the riot-in-stigators came and surrenderedtheir weapons — riles, cartridges,bombs.

In Delhi shortly thereafter, hesaw the same mayhem again. An-other fast ensued, another calm. Inhis prayer meeting on January 20,1948, as he spoke, a small bomb —they later called it a gun-cotton slab— detonated. There was some com-motion. “Suno, suno (listen,listen),” he said to the congrega-tion, “kuchh nahin hua hai (noth-ing has happened)… agar sachkuchh ho jae to kya karoge (if some-thing were to really happen, whatwill you do)?” And then asking thegathering to stay calm, he got his

associates to begin singing theRamdhun. All India Radio has re-corded the entire sequence, withthe sound of the explosion dis-tinctly audible.

The ‘bomber’ was 25-year-oldMadanlal Pahwa, a refugee fromWest Punjab. He was spotted by awoman, appropriately named Su-lochana (the good-eyed), and a po-lice team soon arrived and took theyoung man into custody. Whenasked later if he thought Pahwa’swas just “the harmless prank of anirresponsible youth”, Gandhi saidit was not.

“Don’t you see there is a terribleand widespread conspiracy be-hind it?” He was right, Pahwa wasintegral to the conspiracy whichwas to hit its target 10 days later.That was the temper of the nation70 years ago. Hate, brutality, viol-ence both sudden and also calcu-lated. It was the season of ven-geance, of retribution. It was theseason of dank suspicion, ofhooded conspiracies.

So, does the 70th anniversary ofthe birth of independent Indiawhich is the 70th anniversary ofthe death of undivided India aswell, admit of any celebration?

Of course it does, for riddingourselves of the yoke of colonial-ism was unquestionably a tri-umph. Seeing the imperial powerout of our lives was a matter of re-joicing. Watching JawaharlalNehru unfurl the Tricolour on the

Red Fort was “very heaven”.We must and will celebrate that

and more — the advance of India onthe path of economic self-relianceand prosperity, electoral demo-cracy and the rule of law. But wecannot aford to forget the price atwhich that independence came.Not just because it was a heavy levybut because we are paying that cesseven today. And it may be calledthe Two Nations Theory Cess.

The Two Nations theory had twocelebrated articulators: VinayakDamodar Savarkar of the HinduMahasabha and Mohammed AliJinnah of the Muslim League. Theirperspectives were diferent, theirpurposes divergent. Savarkar be-lieved Hindus and Muslims weretwo nations living in their distinct-ness within an un-harmonised In-dia but he did not want a division.Jinnah believed Hindus andMuslims were two separate nationsthat needed to be in two separatenation states.

The Muslim League’s advocacyof the Two Nations theory reachedits purpose by the formation ofPakistan 70 years ago. What of thecounter goal of a Hindu Rashtra?

Bedrock positionFor some three generations overthe last 70 years, India has been aplural society with a secular gov-ernment committed to the ideathat religion has no business withgovernment and government has

no interest in religion.

Has that bedrock position beenoicially reversed? No, it has not.But it stands undermined.

Those connected historicallyand culturally to the idea of aHindu Rashtra are, today, promul-gating their passionately-heldphilosophy in diferent ways, dis-persed incidents, apparently un-connected, in ways that make aMuslim feel fearful, a Christian feelas light as a leaf that can be blownof by a single majoritarian breath,a liberal feel vulnerable, a dissid-ent feel targeted. They serve tomake the cattle-trader afraid, thenon-vegetarian at his meal declareit is not, please, Sir, not beef. Theygo to make the journalist feel hesit-ant, the farmer feel betrayed, theDalit and the tribal feel insecure.Above all, anyone hurt by adminis-trative wrongdoing or dismayed bystate policy feel afraid to say so for:if you are against the government,you are against the nation.

Fear is abroad, like an invisiblefume that you do not see but knowthat it surrounds you. And know,too, that it can ignite in your face.

The great American thinkerThomas Jeferson said: “We mayconsider each generation as a dis-tinct nation.” A new generation ofIndians, a new distinct nation, ismarking the 70th anniversary ofour independence in an idiom andwith a vocabulary which has noth-ing to do with the freedomstruggle. It is making ‘the difer-ently disposed’, both outside andwithin the Hindu fold, its target.And its equally active counterpartin Pakistan, going for ‘the other’both within and beyond Islam, isnot its adversary but its twin. Theirreligion is not Hinduism or Islam, itis Separateness.

On the 70th anniversary of inde-pendence and partition we mustresist a second partitioning of In-dia, of its versatile ethos, throughan invisible surgery, performed bythe knife of discord moving underthe numbing anaesthesia of fear.

Gopalkrishna Gandhi is a formeradministrator, diplomat and Governor

The anniversary of a divideFear, like an invisible fume that you do not see, surrounds us. And it can ignite in our face

Gopalkrishna Gandhi

WIK

IME

DIA

CO

MM

ON

S

How soon is too soon to raisediicult, politically chargedquestions about a tragedy

that has cost lives? It’s become anincreasingly pertinent question inBritain, which has witnessed aseries of devastating events — fromthree terrorist attacks within athree-month period to the cata-strophic ire that engulfed a resid-ential tower block in west Londonon Wednesday killing 17 people,with the death toll set to risefurther.

In the past politicians have oftenstayed away from questionsaround whether policy decisionshave contributed to tragedies for acertain amount of time, but in theheated political and highly ideolo-gically charged country that Bri-tain has become over the past year,that’s become less so.

In the days immediately afterthe Manchester attack, JeremyCorbyn, the leader of the Labourparty, spoke out against the gov-ernment’s foreign policy and cutsto police forces, arguing that the

tragedy raised questions aboutboth: whether Britain’s interven-tionist approach in countries suchas Syria, Libya and Iraq contrib-uted to the risk to civilians from ter-ror attacks back home, andwhether cuts to police forces madeit harder for them to gather coun-terterrorism intelligence sui-ciently rigorously. His decision todo so was clearly not of-puttingenough to the public, who handedthe party its biggest increase interms of share of the vote in post-war Britain.

Austerity link to tragedy?The ire was still raging throughGrenfell Tower on Wednesdaymorning when Mr. Corbyn drew apotential link between the govern-ment’s austerity programme andthe tragedy.

“If you deny local authoritiesthe funding they need, then thereis a price paid by a lack of safety fa-cilities across the country. I thinkthere needs to be some verysearching questions as quickly aspossible in the aftermath of theire,” he told LBC Radio, also point-ing to the cuts that had taken placeto ire services across the country,and reiterating his message thatpeople could not be protected onthe cheap.

This time he was not a lone voicein raising questions about whether

policy had played a role: RonnieKing, the honorary administrativesecretary of the House of Com-mons All Party ParliamentaryGroup Fire Safety and RescueGroup, had told the radio stationearlier in the day of how his groupand others had urged the govern-ment to act upon the indings ofpast inquests that had highlightedthe need for reform of the ire regu-lations governing tower blocks, of-ten a crucial part of afordablehousing schemes in city centres.The recommendations were notacted upon.

Others on the scene noted thelack of council staf on hand as thetragedy unfolded, with communityorganisations stepping in toprovide assistance. “There’s beenso many cuts, there aren’t enoughpeople to do with this,” a Kensing-ton and Chelsea councillor told TheGuardian.

At a time when there is a fren-zied national debate over inequal-ity and social justice, the tragedywill inevitably feed into this. Thetower is owned by the local councilin a borough considered the mostunafordable to rent in the entirecity and which, like most of the restof London, has extreme wealth sit-ting side by side with great depriva-tion.

Harrods is as much part of theborough as social housing estatessuch as the Lancaster West Estate,with largely working-class, multi-cultural communities.

The chilling blog of the GrenfellAction Group chronicles the manytimes over the years that residentshad raised questions around neg-lect, often relating to ire safety reg-ulations. “The Grenfell ActionGroup irmly believe that only acatastrophic event will expose theineptitude and incompetence ofour landlord, the Kensington andChelsea Tenant Management Asso-ciation,” it ominously warned lastNovember.

The tragedy has unsurprisinglyled to checks up and down towerblocks across the country, whilePrime Minister Theresa May haspledged a full investigation. Butkeeping up the pressure will be es-sential — tensions around inequal-ity and the ability to have one’svoice heard have long simmered

below the surface in the capitalcity, exploding at points as they didin 2011 when thousands rioted,triggered by the death of Mark Dug-gan, a black man stopped by policein North London. They swiftly be-came about much more: the angryenergy of the urban poor.

Fire safety standardsBut while in the aftermath of suchsituations promises of goodwilland measures to tackle underlyingproblems are aplenty, in realitythey’ve rarely been acted upon in aconcerted way. In the case of Bri-tain’s tower blocks, one architect,Sam Webb, told various media out-lets on Wednesday of a report he’dworked on as early as the 1990swhich warned the governmentthat the majority of tower blockshe surveyed across the countryhad failed to meet basic ire safetystandards.

The precise cause of the ire willonly become known in the daysand weeks to come as ireighterscontend with the grim aftermath,but the anger palpable in the localcommunity and beyond makes theneed to ask diicult questionsmore pressing than ever. Politi-cians and the public must have theguts and persistence to ensurethey’re answered and dealt with.

vidya.ram@thehindu.co.in

Fuelling other ires The Grenfell Tower tragedy will feed into the frenzied debate over inequality and social justice in Britain

Vidya Ram

AF

P

Deadline jittersThe Finance Ministry’sresolve to go ahead withimplementation of theGoods and Services Tax(GST) from July 1, rejectingthe chorus of demands forits postponement, is myopic(“Put of GST rollout toSept.1, Aviation Ministrytells FinMin,” June 15).Experts have justiiablyraised a red lag over thechallenges faced byindustries in the servicesector. Companies withmultiple oices spreadacross the country are nowrequired to obtain separateregistration for each State.With barely 15 daysremaining for the roll-out,the IT system and the GSTNetwork (GSTN) system arenot even accepting newregistrations. The GSTSuvidha Providers (GSP) toohave reportedly expressedtheir inability to perform

their assigned tasks due tovarious technical and otherreasons. Some of the rulestoo have not been inalisedyet. There is nothingsacrosanct about July 1 asthe GST is required to beonly operationalised bySeptember. S.K. Choudhury,

Bengaluru

Anti-democracyThe Election Commission(EC), acclaimed for itsprofessionalism in holdingelections in a transparentand fair manner in a vastcountry like India, appearsto have suddenly lost its wayby seeking power to punishfor contempt (“Unfairproposal,” editorial, June15). There is no yardstick tomeasure what amounts to‘contempt’. Positivecriticism may be lookedupon as contempt by anintolerant institution.

Democracy thrives andevolves through debate anddiscussion, though theprocess of reachingconsensus may facediiculties. The EC has still alot to answer for concerningissues of public interestsuch as missing names onelectoral lists and bribing ofthe target electorate. V. Subramanian,

Chennai

The EC’s seeking of powerto punish for contempt isyet another sad example ofhow intolerant ourinstitutions of democracyhave become to criticism.There is no doubt that theEC still continues to enjoythe conidence of the largemajority of people despitesome embarrassingquestions posed by politicalparties. However, theinstitution can retain publictrust only if it responds to

criticism through a codiiedprocess rather thanattempting to silence thealready fading voices thatraise scepticism. Further,the ‘power to punish’ undercontempt law invites abusein general and has to berevisited.S.A. Thameemul Ansari,

Kayalpatnam, Tuticorin

Next First CitizenWith the ElectionCommission of India issuingthe statutory notiication forthe country’s 15thpresidential elections, itseems just next toimpossible that a broadconsensus would emergebetween the NDAdispensation and theOpposition front. Onewonders why the rulingelite swung into action solate in this regard as June 28is the last date of ilingnominations. As far as the

majority mark in theElectoral College —comprising all elected MPsand MLAs — is concerned,the BJP seems to be wayahead. However, as wecomplete 70 years ofindependence, ourlegislators need to makesure that the winner getselected unanimously. It wasa good four decades ago, in1977, that Neelam SanjeevaReddy got electedunopposed, the only personto have done so thus far. Hemant Kumar,

Ambala City

Paradise getting lostThe little pleasures ofmountaineering — escapinginto the bountiful Natureand discovering yourselfwhile getting lost — havedisappeared due to itsvulgarisation, as hashappened in the case ofMount Everest (“Mission

Everest Inc,” FAQ, June 15). The fragile ecology of thepeak is adversely afecteddue to overcrowding andlittering of the glaciers andcamps. If this so-calledtourism boost continues atthe present pace, the day isnot far away when thispristine peak would becalled the ‘world’s highestgarbage dump’. The recentcrumbling of Hillary Stepshould be a strict warning tostop exploiting ourmountain ecosystem.Eforts must be put in notonly by the government butalso by NGOs and citizensthemselves to prevent soilerosion, trampling ofvegetation and excessivewaste disposal caused byincessant expeditions.Kriti Chachra,

New Delhi

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Letters emailed to letters@thehindu.co.in must carry the full postal address and the full name or the name with initials.

more letters online:

www.hindu.com/opinion/letters/

https://telegram.me/TheHindu_Zone https://telegram.me/PDF4EXAMS

CMYK

M ND-ND

OPEDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

THE HINDU NOIDA/DELHI

FRIDAY, JUNE 16, 2017 9EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC

DATA POINT

Ask any economist, and the stand-ard advice you are likely to hear isthat the government must step into help the economy wheneverthe market fails. Almost no eco-nomist, however, talks about eventhe remote possibility of govern-ment failure — even though thereis ample evidence all around us tosuggest that governments are farfrom perfect. Political corruptionof various kinds often makesnews, and sometimes afects uspersonally, yet economists con-

tinue to believe that the government can play a positive role inthe economy. Just why are economists so blind to reality?

A possible answer lies in the assumption that economistsusually make about the nature of individuals. When econom-ists talk about producers and consumers, they have in mind aneconomic man, or homo economicus, who is purely inter-ested in his own self-interest.

So economic models, for instance, assume that business-men run companies primarily to maximise proits, while con-sumers purchase goods and services from irms primarily tobetter their own personal condition. Yet, when it comes topoliticians and bureaucrats who run governments, econom-ists for some reason naively assume that these are altruistic in-dividuals who care only about the well-being of society, ratherthan their own self-interest.

‘People are People: The Elements of Public Choice’ , an es-say by Gordon Tullock, ofers an alternative — and more real-istic — view of public servants. Tullock, an American econom-ist and a prominent member of the Virginia School of PoliticalEconomy, encourages economists to view politicians and bur-eaucrats as self-interested individuals just like any of us. In Tul-lock’s view, public servants do not participate in public life topromote the interests of the people, but rather just to line theirown pockets.

This crucial insight about human nature leads to many inter-esting conclusions in public policy — mostly to do with the un-intended consequences of government ownership and regula-tion. For instance, private monopolies are usually considereda huge threat to the eicient working of the market economy.Consequently, many economists argue that government regu-lators must be given the powers to prevent the domination ofany single group of companies. Very little thought, however,goes into the likely incentives that face bureaucrats who are incharge of regulation. Not surprisingly, lobby groups — whichare more organised than consumers — end up inluencing bothregulations and regulators. Meanwhile, the social good —which is supposed to be the goal of all regulation — goes for atoss.

So, if people in government are interested only in furtheringtheir own interests, as Tullock argues, what does it mean forpublic policy? Government policy, in that case, will simply bedictated by the personal interests of those in power. If so, it isworth noting that the fate of any reform that can beneit theoverall economy will depend above all on how it might irst af-fect the interests of the powerful.

Since men are not angelsIs the fate of any reform dependent onhow it afects interests of the powerful?

CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC

SINGLE FILE

Prashanth Perumal

GE

TT

Y IM

AG

ES/I

ST

OC

K P

HO

TO

Late last year, an editorwhose employment wasended under the ‘tatkal’quota met a media ownerwhose exit had been sim-

ilarly fast-tracked a few monthsearlier.

“Who was making the [phone]calls?” the latter asked. When heheard the names of a couple ofUnion Ministers, the ‘malik’snarled: “Oh, wasn’t that glib RSSchap in the BJP amongst them?”

The anecdote might well be apo-cryphal. What is not is that main-stream media is in deep coma,gasping under pressure not felteven during Emergency’s darkestnights. That was an advertised, in-

your-face, executive intervention —the censor sat openly amid journal-ists in newspaper offices andblacked out stuff they thought In-dira Gandhi wouldn’t like.

Co-option and coercionWhat is on today is a sly, insidiousoperation without anybody’sAadhaar-linked fingerprints. It isaimed not merely at “managing theheadlines” in the newsroom but atpaving the way for a lethal ideologythat has long craved legitimacy,through the boardroom.

In that sense, it is not just the me-dia that is under siege, but the very“Idea of India”.

Influential owners, anchors, edit-

ors across the nation re-semble the hapless Kash-miri tied to the Army jeep.They are the advanceparty to quell dissent,manufacture consent, setthe agenda, drum up sup-port, and spread fear,venom, hatred andbigotry — sometimes through sheersilence.

The saffronisation of the airwaves is staggering.

It would be useful, therefore, tostop deluding ourselves that thesiege began with the raid onNDTV’s promoters. Far from it, it isthe culmination of a devious, top-down attempt at co-option and co-operation that failed. Hence, the co-ercion.

So, in the “New India”, it is per-

fectly normal to hearthat the government hasa list of journalists whoattended a protest meet-ing in NDTV’s support;perfectly normal for theForeign Correspondents’Club to publicly assert itwas not involved in it;

perfectly normal for a CEO toprivately predict no one in the TVindustry will stand up because“most will be too scared”.

When Big Brother tracks everychannel, watches every tweet, andreads every word, why would any-body want to take a risk when the“caged bird” is a homing pigeon,striking targets with precision?

Putting the same man in chargeof the Finance and I&B Ministries in2014, therefore, was a master-

stroke. After all, the government isthe biggest advertiser.

“The country is going through anexistential crisis. Fear, anger, anxi-ety and paranoia have become nor-mal. Nobody trusts anyone any-more. Nobody feels secure. People,including journalists, try to provetheir loyalty to the government bysnitching on colleagues and neigh-bours.” Turkey’s most famous wo-man novelist Elif Safak could wellbe speaking about India.

Who’s to blame?Much of what is now happeninghere is happening in countrieswhere nativist nationalists are run-ning riot: the United States, Japan,Turkey, even France.

Defamatory name-calling (usingterms such as ‘presstitutes’, ‘journ-

alopes’ and ‘giraegi’); weaponisedtrolling; arrests, killings, raids, lock-downs. Little wonder, India nowstands at 136 on the World PressFreedom index, down from 133.

However, it would be foolish tolay all the blame for Indian media’scurrent plight at the politician’sdoor. The siege began long ago withdodgy ownership; mercenary busi-ness practices; advertising and cir-culation revenue meltdowns; emer-ging technologies. But at least therewas “independent journalism”shining the light, showing the way.

Today, as non-state actorsthrottle India’s foundational valuesin broad daylight, and much of a be-sieged media happily plays cheer-leader, future historians might won-der if it did not suffer from theStockholm syndrome.

Is the media under siege?It is not just the media that is under siege, but the very

idea of the nation that is India

Krishna Prasad

is former Editor-in-

Chief of ‘Outlook’

magazine, and a

member of the Press

Council of India

LEFT, RIGHT, CENTRE

LEFT

It was fashionable, atleast until quite re-cently, for Muslim cler-ics in India to raise thewar cry: Islam in

danger! This was used to feed theparanoia of the unlettered massesamong their followers and galvan-ise them into violent action againstanother community or the statewhenever any threat, real or per-ceived, was felt. Looking at the waysections of the Indian media havebehaved over the last few months,it seems they are replicating thatmodel.

Since the BJP with Narendra

Modi at its helm barged into powerin Delhi, the so-called left-liberalsections of journalists, especially inthe English-language media, havedemonstrated near-hysterical beha-viour, claiming from rooftops thatthe Indian media is under siege.

Anti-Modi biasThis stems basically from theirpathological dislike of Mr. Modi. Un-doubtedly the BJP knocked downthe comfortable bastions of the left-liberal intelligentsia’s privileges. Butto conclude from the discomfitureof the erstwhile elite class of scribesthat the media in India is under

siege is not only fallaciousbut also mischievous andsmacks of an ideologicalbias.

There is not an iota ofevidence to substantiatethe charge of siege. It wastruly gagged hand, mouth and footonly once in independent India,which was during the Emergency.

The vicious anti-Modi campaignthat was unleashed by the left-lib-eral media in 2002 still determinestheir mindset towards the BJP gov-ernment. Be it in print, TV or thesocial media, the present govern-ment, particularly the Prime Minis-ter, is lampooned on a daily basis.Stories that would make the regimeuncomfortable are exaggerated andgrossly highlighted.

Upstarts like a small-time demagogue calledKanhaiya Kumar of JNUare given publicity totallyout of proportion to theirinfluence.

Reports of attacks onMuslims, especially those accusedof eating or selling beef, are playedup in a way that is bound to excitecommunal passions, cause disturb-ances and thus destabilise thegovernment.

No vindictivenessHas the government reacted to thisconcerted attack with an iron fist?During the Uttar Pradesh electioncampaign virtually the entire left-liberal media ran a drive suggestingthe BJP’s vote bank had shrunk

since the 2014 Lok Sabha polls. Despite the party and its allies

romping home with an unpreced-ented 325 seats out of 403, the hec-toring of Chief Minister YogiAdityanath has been relentlessfrom day one. Did the Union orState government react? Did theystop or even cut down advertisingsupport even to the hostile sectionof the media?

Has any journalist been harassedfor propounding an anti-govern-ment view? Has anybody been ar-rested or even questioned by thepolice, something common duringthe Emergency years? If nothing ofthe above has happened, what isthe basis of suggesting the media isunder siege?

Following the recent raid on the

premises of promoters of NDTV, the“media under siege” cry has be-come shriller. Raids on a mediahouse are indeed undesirable, but adistinction has to be made whetherthe reason for the raid was editorialor financial.

No cause for alarmIn the instant case, the CBI claimsthe reasons were purely financial. Itis now for the agency to justify itsaction in a court of law. It is not forus to prejudge the issue. If NDTV isnot being pursued by the investigat-ors for its editorial predilections,there is no cause for alarm.

Given the country’s strong demo-cratic traditions, it is worth remind-ing ourselves that the media in In-dia is as free as it wants to be!

Has the government reacted to the concerted attack on

it by the left-liberal media with an iron ist? No

Chandan Mitra

is Editor of ‘The

Pioneer’ and has been

a two-term Rajya

Sabha MP from the

BJP

RIGHT

Coincidence in thetime of conflict israrely a divine occur-rence or even an at-tribute of moral luck,

and one cannot help but ascribe itwith sinister overtones.

The timing of the CBI raids onthe Roys of NDTV throws up similarquestions. The controversy oversome of the financial and institu-tional transactions of NDTV has res-ulted in a fault line within the me-dia in response to the raids, withcommentators suggesting that thismight be less about freedom of thepress and more about accountabil-

ity. But when democratic institu-tions are under attack and when ithappens selectively against thoseinclined towards questioning thepolicies and politics of the govern-ment, those who profess constitu-tional faith in liberal values cannotbut blame the powers that be.

Cause for concernBut is the NDTV affair conclusiveevidence of the fact that the mediais under siege? There are difficultiesin arriving at such a conclusive pro-gnosis.

For one, is it possible to have asingular idea of the media? NDTV

with its influence has beenable to galvanise supportfrom all quarters, but aswith most wars, the realcasualty is generally borneby the foot soldiers andcritics are right to pointout that myriad attacks(the recent denial of per-mission to screen films on RohithVemula and Kashmir, theKafkaesque use of ISBN to monitorpublishers, etc.) have not receivedthe same kind of attention as the at-tack on NDTV.

This is certainly a valid critiqueand yet at the same time there is adanger of subsuming this into arhetoric of worthy and unworthyvictims, and the assault on NDTVshould be a cause of concern for the

ordinary journalist,writer, filmmaker andblogger precisely be-cause NDTV is such apowerful and influentialplayer.

Defending the elitesWhen asked why he

chose to defend Claus Von Bulow, aknown aristocratic anti-Semite, in amurder trial, lawyer Alan Dershow-itz, who was then a champion ofcivil liberties, replied that it wasprecisely because of Bulow’s elitestatus. He added that if the statecould get away with harassingelites, then one could only imaginewhat they could get away withagainst those much less powerful.

There remain other difficulties,

however, with the use of the militar-istic metaphor of a siege. The wordevokes a sudden forceful takeoverand this is not really a useful ac-count of how conflicts actually un-fold — the moment of the siege isonly the performative culminationof sustained lower-order assaults(by the likes of Censor Board chiefPahlaj Nihalani & Co.).

The presumption of media beinga singular thing under threat fromthe state belies the fact that much ofthe siege is actively orchestrated bythe media as collaborators of thestate.

The trolling of academic ParthaChatterjee for likening the Armychief ’s defence of a Major’s actionsin Kashmir to General Dyer of Jalli-anwala Bagh infamy, the tireless

tirade of Times Now against TheWire all gesture to a deeply dividedmoment for media where onedoesn’t really need the state toquestion the legitimacy of mediasince they are more than willing todo it themselves.

Civil war within?What therefore is at siege to mymind is not the media but a politicaland moral idea of the media aswatchdogs of truth, and until itfrees itself of its lustful desire to beand act like biblical angels — whoseonly job is to sing hymns of praiseto the glory and honour of the di-vine — it would appear that thesiege appears as much as a civil warwithin media as it does a threat bythe state.

What is under siege is not the media, but a political and

moral idea of media as watchdogs

Lawrence Liang

is professor of law at

the School of Law,

Governance and

Citizenship, Ambedkar

University Delhi

CENTRE

The language controversy erupted with full fury in the LokSabha to-day [ June 15, New Delhi], virtually paralysing theproceedings of the House for 15 minutes. The Speaker, Mr. N.Sanjiva Reddi, combined humour with firmness to restore theorder in the House. The controversy started when the S.S.P.member from Mysore, Mr. J.H. Patel, sought to put a questionin Kannada on the utility of the proposed revolving tower res-taurant at the State-owned Ashoka Hotel in the capital. Hewas allowed to put the question in his language, but when theMinister could not reply and the member insisted on an an-swer there was trouble.

FIFTY YEARS AGO JUNE 16, 1967

Language trouble in Lok Sabha

CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC

FROM ARCHIVES

A motor car fatality occurred about the midnight of last nightin which a native policeman lost his life and another wasslightly injured. It appears that two policemen were on theirway home from Napier Cinema where they had been on dutywhen they were run into by a motor car driven by CaptainManson, R.A.M.C., with whom were two other officers. Colli-sion occurred on Wellesley Road near Jewish Synagogue. Cap-tain Manson drove the injured men to the Sassoon Hospitalwhere the one who was more seriously injured succumbed tohis injuries within a couple of hours of admission. The policeon learning the occurrence held an inquiry, SuperintendentYond and Inspector Corby to-day recording statements ofthose concerned in the case.

A HUNDRED YEARS AGO JUNE 16, 1917

Motor accidents at Poona.

When the Supreme Courtobserved recently that theLokpal Act was an “emin-ently workable” piece of le-gislation, and wonderedwhy it was not being opera-tionalised, it was indirectlyadmonishing the govern-ment for delaying the es-tablishment of the Lokpal.It is one of several citizen-friendly laws dating backmany years that have eitherlapsed or are yet to be en-acted or not implementedfor one reason or the other.

A significant Bill thatcould help guarantee deliv-ery of services to citizensand empower them to seekredress of their grievanceshas not seen the light of dayfor years now. The Right ofCitizens for Time-boundDelivery of Goods and Ser-vices and Redressal of theirGrievances Bill, 2011, wasintroduced in the LokSabha in 2011 but it lapsedwith the term of the lastHouse. The essence of theproposed law was thatevery public authority will

be required to publish a cit-izens’ charter that will setout the goods and servicesprovided by it, along withtimelines for their delivery.Some States have such le-gislation to guarantee toright to public services de-livery, but the Central lawsought to provide an over-arching framework.

The Bill required everypublic authority to estab-lish information and facilit-ation centres for an effi-cient and effective deliveryof services and redressal ofgrievances.

The Bill provided for theappointment of grievanceredress officers and Stateand Central Public Griev-ance Redressal Commis-sions. Citizens could filecomplaints before these au-thorities pertaining to anyviolation of the citizens’charter, that is, a failure todeliver goods or services aspromised, or the function-ing of any public official.These grievances wouldhave to be remedied within30 days. Those aggrieved

by the grievance redress of-ficers’ orders could appealbefore a Designated Au-thority. Further appeals tothe State and Central Com-missions were provided for.Orders by these two Com-missions could be appealedagainst before the Lokay-ukta and the Lokpal re-spectively. A ParliamentaryStanding Committee,which went into the provi-sions of the Bill, felt thatthere was one appeal toomany provided in it. It didnot favour the Lokpal andLokayukta, conceived of asanti-corruption agencies,being burdened with griev-ance redressal.

While implementinglaws related to the ombuds-man against corruption,the government would dowell to give statutory guar-antees for the right to deliv-ery of services. As a citizen-strengthening package, itshould also fast-track pro-posals for a whistle-blowerprotection law and elec-tronic delivery of servicesas well.

Guaranteeing time-bound services

CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC

ACT ONE

The ombudsman law needs to include statutoryguarantees for the right to delivery of services

K. Venkataramanan

Thucydides’trap International

relations

The idea that the rise of anew power, as a compet-itor to an existing super-power, likely leads to theescalation of political ten-sions and war. The termwas coined by Graham T.Allison, an American polit-ical scientist and author ofthe 2017 book Destined forWar, and is named afterthe 5th century Athenianhistorian Thucydides. Al-lison based his conclusionon the study of 15 histor-ical cases since 1500 inwhich the dominance ofan established power waschallenged by a rising newpower. War resulted in 11of the 15 cases, as therising power caused fear inthe ranks of the estab-lished power.

CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC

CONCEPTUAL

What is dynamic fuelpricing?http://bit.ly/fuelpricing

CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC

MORE ON

THE WEB 3

https://telegram.me/TheHindu_Zone https://telegram.me/PDF4EXAMS