india legal 31 july 2016

NDIA EGAL L July 31, 2016 `100

www.indialegalonline.com

I STORIES THAT COUNT

48 56Will Supreme Court save a marine graveyard?

Culling: What the law ignores

By Ramesh Menon By Amita Singh

R Ramasubramanian When judges joined the Telangana issue 26

Nayantara Roy The gowns are lovely, dark and deep 64

Usha Rani Das Surrogacy: A law is born 60

Kalyani Shankar How Narasimha Rao tweaked laws to usher in a new dawn 32

KASHMIR EXPLODES - AGAIN! Inderjit Badhwar leans on history, legal tangles and personal experience to pierce the veil of the valley 6

JULY 31, 2016

MHA’s Tibet TangleChildren born between 1950 and 1987 to Tibetan refugees are Indian citizens but the MHA refuses to recognize this while issuing passports.NAYANTARA ROY

New Chapter in Kashmir’s HistoryIts latest uprising was sparked by the killing of Burhan Wani, the face of new militancyin the Valley. It’s similar to the rebellions that occurred there, post the hanging ofMaqbool Butt in 1984 and the murder of Mirwaiz Farooq in 1990. Has PM Modi learnthis lessons from the gory past? INDERJIT BADHWAR

6LEAD

16

State vs StateJudges and lawyers in Telangana protesting the appointment of theirbrethren from Andhra Pradesh in their state returned to work only afterappeals from the CJI and others. R RAMASUBRAMANIAN

26

20

VOLUME. IX ISSUE. 22

OWNED BY E. N. COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD.A -9, Sector-68, Gautam Buddh Nagar, NOIDA (U.P.) - 201309

Phone: +9 1-0120-2471400- 6127900 ; Fax: + 91- 0120-2471411e-mail: [email protected]: www.indialegalonline.com

MUMBAI: Arshie Complex, B-3 & B4, Yari Road, Versova, Andheri,Mumbai- 400058

RANCHI: House No. 130/C, Vidyalaya Marg, Ashoknagar, Ranchi-834002.

LUCKNOW: First floor, 21/32, A, West View, Tilak Marg, Hazratganj,Lucknow-226001.

PATNA: Sukh Vihar Apartment, West Boring Canal Road, NewPunaichak, Opposite Lalita Hotel, Patna-800023.ALLAHABAD: Leader Press, 9-A, Edmonston Road,

Civil Lines, Allahabad-211 001.

For advertising & subscription [email protected]

CFOAnand Raj Singh

VP (HR & General Administration)Lokesh C Sharma

Circulation ManagerRS Tiwari

Published by Prof Baldev Raj Gupta on behalf of E N Communications Pvt Ltd and printed at Amar Ujala Publications Ltd., C-21&22, Sector-59, Noida. All rights

reserved. Reproduction or translation in any language in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. Requests for permission should be directed to E N Communications Pvt Ltd . Opinions of

writers in the magazine are not necessarily endorsed by E N Communications Pvt Ltd . The Publisher assumes no responsibility for the

return of unsolicited material or for material lost or damaged in transit. All correspondence should be addressed to E N Communications Pvt Ltd .

Editor Inderjit Badhwar

Managing EditorRamesh Menon

Deputy Managing EditorShobha John

Executive EditorAjith Pillai

Bureau ChiefsNeeta Kolhatkar, Mumbai

Vipin Kumar Chaubey, LucknowBN Tamta, Dehradun

Principal CorrespondentHarendra Chowdhary, Mathura

ReportersAlok Singh, Allahabad

Gaurav Sharma, VaranasiAssociate Editors

Meha Mathur, Sucheta DasguptaDeputy EditorPrabir BiswasStaff Writer

Usha Rani DasSenior Sub-Editor

Shailaja ParamathmaArt Director

Anthony LawrenceDeputy Art Editor

Amitava SenSr Visualizer

Rajender KumarGraphic Designer

Ram LaganPhotographer

Anil ShakyaPhoto Researcher/News Coordinator

Kh Manglembi DeviProduction

Pawan KumarHead Convergence Initiatives

Prasoon Parijat Convergence Manager

Mohul Ghosh Technical Executive (Social Media)

Sonu Kumar SharmaTechnical Executive

Anubhav Tyagi

The Rotavac SecretsWhy keep the trials for this anti-diarrhea vaccine under wraps even afterit has been launched in four states? A petition in the apex court seeks tomake amends. MEENA MENON

SUPREME COURT

COURTS

4 July 31, 2016

REGU

LARS

Quote-Unquote ......................................................... 14Ringside/Essay...........................................................15Supreme Court.......................................................... 24Courts.........................................................................30National Briefs ........................................................... 37International Briefs .................................................... 75Worldly Wise.............................................................. 81People ....................................................................... 82

The homegrown nature of terror strikes in Paris, Brussels, Orlando andDhaka has unsettled sleuths and security experts who doubt if ourinvestigating agencies will prove a match. SUJIT BHAR

India’s Big Challenge 76

Follow us on Facebook.com/indialegalmediaand Twitter.com/indialegalmedia

Way back in 1991, liberalization was initiated by the Narasimha Raogovernment. Twenty-five years have passed but its benefits have notreached the ordinary citizen. KALYANI SHANKAR

32India’s Reform Story

48

ECONOMY

Faced with the EU Commission’snew rules mandating green safe-guards and modern recyclingfacilities, India’s biggest grave-yard of ships is dying and mustupgrade to survive. RAMESH MENON

Alang: Troubled Graveyard

Their black robes signify mourning upon King Charles II’s passing andare a nod to history as well as the curious evolution of the advocate’sdress code. NAYANTARA ROY

Gowns and Lawyers 64

79

SPOTLIGHT

That is the message behind China’s belligerent reaction to an adverseruling by an international arbitration court over the South China Sea.MEHA MATHUR

World Is my Backyard

Cover Design: ANTHONY LAWRENCECover Picture: GETTY IMAGES

5INDIA LEGAL July 31, 2016

ENVIRONMENT

70Direct democracy has historically been inimical to Project Europe.Brexit is only the tip of that proverbial iceberg. A report by Stratfor

EU’s Referendum CrisisGLOBAL TRENDS

In Half Lion, Vinay Sitapati recounts the events leading up toDecember 6, 1992, what transpired on that fateful day and the trustreposed by then PM Narasimha Rao in the BJP and the Sangh Parivar

38The FaultlineBOOKS

A proposed bill aims to regulate clinics conducting this highly exploita-tive business while protecting the rights of the surrogate mother andthe commissioning parents. USHA RANI DAS

60Surrogacy and the LawACTS & BILLS

Orthodoxy is progress’ enemy. And, though a common civil code willmitigate it, there’s no reason why it should infringe on one’s freedomof religion. JUSTICE NARENDRA CHAPALGAONKAR (RETD)

46Code for Social ReformFOCUS

56The center’s move to allow culling of certain species is a flawedone. These animals have coexisted with us for centuries. PROF AMITA SINGH

They Aren’t Vermin

Another Gory

Chapter onKashmir

As Kashmir explodes following the killing ofBurhan Wani, it’s time welook back at its history.Each Indian PM has writtenhis own chapter of theKashmir narrative. One canonly hope Narendra Modi’schapter will be fresh andavoids the pitfalls of hispredecessors By Inderjit Badhwar

LEAD/Kashmir/ Past and Present

6 July 31, 2016

UNI

ALL of us who love Indiaand harbor strong nation-alist views that this landof our ancestors shouldremain strong, united,viable, and committed tothe majesty of our Consti-

tution and the Rule of Law, believe equallythat Kashmir should never be allowed tobreak away from the Indian union and trig-ger off a process of Balkanization. As a seniorgovernment official asked me recently: “Arewe willing to allow a Brexit situation to takeroot here? It would play right into Pakis-tan’s hands.”

That, of course, is a frightening prospect.It would be politically suicidal for any Indiangovernment to give Kashmir away on a silverplatter. There is too much at stake—political-ly, militarily, the blood Indian soldiers haveshed, the billions and billions of rupees NewDelhi has pumped in, the changing of geo-graphical boundaries, ethnic warfare, the

provisions of the Constitution.... It would besuicidal for Pakistan to try and grab it byforce. It would be hara-kiri for Kashmiris tostage an armed insurrection.

So where does that leave us? One answeris not to kick history in the face for politicalconvenience but rather to face up to its rec-orded realities in search of a solution to aproblem that is bleeding not only Kashmirbut also India. The Modi government hasbeen wise to reach out to opposition parties.Implicit in this gesture is the admission thatKashmir, as admitted by all parties, is a dis-puted issue without any real parallel to otherIndian states and that it needs a solution.

But in my view it is not so much a law-and-order issue as much as it is a problemmired in national and international legal tan-gles, constitutional commitments, treaties,covenants, promises, and broken promises. I also believe that Pakistan has become astakeholder not by right but by force andsome of India’s own foolish moves starting

A TERRORIST OR MARTYR?(L-R) The funeral processionof Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani at Tral area in Pulwama district on July 9;while separatist organizations gave a bandh call, authoritiesclamped curfew to controlthe situation

INDIA LEGAL July 31, 2016 7

UNI

with supporting a UN brokered ceasefire in1948. The problem was between India andKashmir which was virtually a free countrythen, and not between India and Pakistanwhich was an armed interloper trying to grabthe territory of Kashmir by force.

The latest uprising in Kashmir, sparkedby the killing of militant Burhan Wani (simi-lar rebellions occurred after the hanging ofMaqbool Butt in 1984, the arrest of SheikhAbdullah—the Lion of Kashmir—in 1953,the murder of Mirwaiz Farooq in 1990) accu-rately sums up the roots of the Kashmir dis-pute, says India’s top historian and lawyer,AG Noorani who has probably done moreresearch on Kashmir than any other livinghuman being.

Historically, he says in a recent essay, italso provides a clue to the ever deterioratingsituation there: “Sheikh Muhammad Abdu-llah’s Kashmiri nationalism clashed withPandit Jawaharlal Nehru’s Indian national-ism. The clash was inherent in their relation-ship even at the best of times. Nehru arro-gantly spurned conciliation and resorted to

brute force, with the aid of the army, by oust-ing Abdullah from the office of Prime Minis-ter of Jammu & Kashmir on 9 August 1953and imprisoning him for eleven years. Whatis little known is that he submitted his pris-oner and erstwhile friend to hardships; deny-ing visitors access to him and foisting a con-spiracy case which he knew to be false—plot-ting for accession to Pakistan.”

Misunderstanding of the sentiment ofKashmiryat—which to the Kashmiri is ofdeeper emotional relevance than his ownreligious faith—is a trap most of our leadershave fallen into. They have taken the easyway out of making Kashmir a continuouswarlike Indo-Pakistan concern rather thanan India-Kashmir politico-legal concern.

Whether we agree or not with theviews of Noorani, we cannotignore his scholarship and conve-

niently sweep him under the carpet as some-one whose analysis would give comfort toPakistan. He says, for example, that India hasriveted its control over the State after theSheikh’s ouster. “But today, more than evenbefore, grim realities have surfaced to theshock of many to demonstrate that Kashmirinationalism is very much alive and kickingdespite New Delhi’s repressive policies…India—its government, most in its mediaespecially TV, and academia, who have feast-ed themselves on the crumbs New Delhithrows at them from the high table, prefer toenvelop themselves cozily in a state of denial.The reality is unbearable to witness—Indiagoverns Kashmir against the wishes of itspeople. They reject the very legitimacy of itsrule. As Mir Qasim, installed as ChiefMinister by elections which he admitted wererigged and who had supported Abdullah’souster in 1953 wrote: ‘They clearly say thatthey would not like to remain in India. Theywould like to go out of India. They ask for aplebiscite so that they will be allowed toanswer whether they want to remain in Indiaor go out of India. (Mir Qasim, My Life andTimes, 298).’”

Reaching out to the people of Kashmirthrough the slogan of “Kashmiriyat and Insa-niyat” was a bold step by BJP’s Atal BihariVajpayee. It was a much needed political

Sheikh Abdullah wanted a solution that wouldbe fair to all three parties—Pakistan, India, and

the people of Kashmir. He was against a communal solution to Kashmir.

8 July 31, 2016

DIVERGENT NOTIONSOF STATEHOOD

(Above, R-L) Pt Nehru,Sheikh Abdullah, SardarPatel and Baldev Singh

during the proceedings ofthe Kashmir National

Conference in Srinagar inSeptember 1949


salve. And I applaud Modi, that despiteopposition from hardliners within the Sanghhe made the gutsy and sagacious move inreaching out to the PDP in the same spirit.This, and the soft-lining of the Sangh’s viewon Article 370, was the kind of statesman-ship that negates widely-held view in the val-ley that the bridges between India andKashmir “have been burnt forever”. For, thebottomline is “India does not trust Kashmirisand Kashmiris don’t trust India”. The situa-tion deteriorated steeply since the outbreakof militancy in 1989. But its roots lay in theclash of Kashmir and Indian nationalism in1947, Noorani says.

“In a real sense,” he continues, “ there is noalienation of people from the Union; alien-ation implies previous affection that the peo-ple of Kashmir never had for India not evenat the time of the accession as both Abdullahand Nehru knew very well. Reflecting popu-lar opinion, the Sheikh was against Kash-mir’s accession to India, though he preferredits ideology of secularism to Pakistan’s two-nation theory. Reflecting Indian opinion andhis own strong preferences, Nehru wouldhave nothing but its accession to India. Bothknew what the Kashmiris thought and felt,hence India’s initial hesitation in forging

the accession. The record on views of allthree Abdullah, Kashmiris and Nehru speaksfor itself.”

Noorani has dug out an interview ofAbdullah with Michael Davidson of TheScotsman published on 14 April 1949. Hesaid: “Accession to either side cannot bringpeace…. We want to live in friendship withboth Dominions. Perhaps a middle path between them, with economic co-operationwith each, will be the only way of doing it.

Reaching out tothe people ofKashmir throughthe slogan of“Kashmiriyat andInsaniyat” was abold step byBJP’s Atal BihariVajpayee.


NEEDED, A HEALING TOUCH(Below) The valley has eruptedeach time a separatist leader oryouth has been killed;(bottom) Atal Bihari Vajpayeewas deft at negotiating withKashmiri leaders, following theprinciple of Insaniyat

UNI

But an independent Kashmir must be guar-anteed not only by India and Pakistan butalso by Britain, the United States and othermembers of the United Nations.”

Would an independent Kashmir, David-son asked him, a kind of Himalayan Switzer-land, be feasible and constructive? Thoseareas of the present State which borderedIndia and Pakistan and which had no affinitywith the people of the Vale could fall natural-ly to the Dominion with which they wererelated by race or religion—the Poonchis,who are Muslim Punjabis, belong obviouslyto Pakistan, and the Hindus of Jammu,Rajput-Dogras are surely Indians, Davidsonsuggested.

Abdullah replied: “Yes, independence—guaranteed by the United Nations—may be

the only solution. But why do you talk of par-tition? Now you are introducing communal-ism and applying the two-nation theory toKashmir—that communalism which we arefighting here. I believe the Poonchis wouldwelcome inclusion in an independent Kash-mir; if, however, after its establishment, theychose to secede and join Pakistan. I wouldraise no objection.

“I want a solution that is fair to all threeparties—Pakistan, India, and the people ofKashmir. But we won’t submit to a commu-nal solution. There has never been a religiousproblem in the Vale of Kashmir. Hindus andMuslems, we are of the same racial origin, wehave the same customs, wear the same clo-thes, speak the same language. In the street,you cannot distinguish between Moslemsand Brahman Pandits. Why, we even have aMosque in the wall of which a Hindu templehas been built. In Kashmir we have Hinduand Sikh refugees from West Punjab andMoslem refugees from East Punjab.…

“When the Kashmir Moslem Conferencealso turned communally-minded, most of usKashmiris left to form a National Confe-rence, a non-sectarian movement conform-ing with the secular principles of the IndianCongress. Naturally we sympathise ratherwith India than with Pakistan.…

“Religions have never been a cementingforce,” the Sheikh declared. “Christians fightChristians in Europe; Japanese fight Chi-nese; Turkey wants to be Europeanised;Moslems have warred against Moslems. Soc-ially and nationally there are more com-pelling interests, economic and ideological.The first task for the Kashmiris, Hindus, andMoslems is to win internal liberation fromexploitation.”

On Nehru’s position, Noorani writes:It is important to note that Nehrutried to secure Kashmir’s accession

to India while Sheikh Abdullah was still inprison, regardless of his wishes or those ofthe people of the State. His stand was reveal-ingly summed up in the blunt pithy assertionto Liaquat Ali Khan “I want Kashmir”(Lionel Carter (Ed.), Weakened StatesSeeking Renewal: British Official Reportsfrom South Asia, 1 January–30 April 1948,

I applaud Modi, that despite opposition from hardliners within the Sangh he made thegutsy and sagacious move in reaching out to

the PDP in the right spirit.

10 July 31, 2016

DEPARTING FROM THEOLD TEMPLATE

Jammu and Kashmir ChiefMinister Mehbooba Mufticalling on Prime Minister

Narendra Modi in New Delhiin April


UNI

Manohar, part I, pp. 176 and 416. An invalu-able collection of two volumes). Even beforethe Partition Plan was announced on June 3,1947, he began his campaign with a mentionof Kashmir as “a difficult problem” at a for-mal meeting with Mountbatten and adviserson April 22, 1947.

He followed it by a long note to Mount-batten on Kashmir dated June 17, 1947 inwhich he concluded: “If any attempt is madeto push Kashmir into the Pakistan Consti-tuent Assembly, there is likely to be muchtrouble because the National Conference isnot in favour of it and the Maharaja’s posi-tion would also become very difficult. Thenormal and obvious course appears to be forKashmir to join the constituent Assembly ofIndia. This will satisfy both the populardemand and the Maharaja’s wishes. It isabsurd to think that Pakistan would createtrouble if this happens.” (Selected Works ofJawaharlal Nehru, vol. 3, p. 229). Pakistandid not count. He lavishly praised the Sheikh.On July 4 he wrote to the Maharaja, whomhe detested, requesting a meeting and sug-gesting accession “I appreciate your difficul-ties” (ibid., p.253). No talk here of releasingAbdullah.

There is so much déjà vu in all this thatI am compelled to revisit an article Iwrote for India Legal in

connection with our coverstory based on former intelli-gence chief AS Dulat’s explo-sive book Kashmir: The Vaj-payee Years. He was India’s topoperative in Kashmir in the1990’s and gently reminds us—as reviewer Ajith Pillai hadwritten, and Ramesh Menonbrought out in his interviewwith Dulat—that the Kashmirproblem, India’s number onenational security headache,still festers because of bunglingand sins of commissions andomission that play lollypop-like into the ever-ready-to-stump-you Pakistan wicketkeeper’s hands.

I was happy Dulat had writ-

ten this book because Kashmir was verymuch a part of my life in the late eightiesuntil the mid-nineties, after which, for a peri-od, I had to avoid going to the valley becauseI was on a militant hit list for taking a strongposition against terrorist violence in my arti-cles for India Today. I write this only to rem-ind readers in the present context that Dulatwas correct in gauging the volatility of theKashmiri issue—prone to sudden, mercurialshifts—and the changeability of the mindsetof ordinary Kashmiris and their leaders.

Let me recap from my earlier essay, myown take on this issue. I covered GroundZero Kashmir from 1986 to 1991, and thenreturned to cover the 1996 election which hasbeen described by Dulat as a political “mas-ter-stroke.” I saw the Congress-NC alliancebetween Rajiv Gandhi and Farooq Abdullahemerge in 1986 and then the fatally flawedand rigged February 1987 election in whichthe wildly popular, youth-oriented MUFparty was trounced and moderates like AbdulGhani Lone of the Peoples Conference werehounded out of Handwara by NC goons. I wrote about that election: “Congress mayhave won an election but India has lostKashmir.”

The consequent backlash within the nextcouple of years was the emergence of the gun,street battles, political assassinations,

One answer isnot to kick history in theface for politicalconvenience butrather to face upto its recordedrealities insearch of a solution to aproblem that isbleeding notonly Kashmir but also India.


THE PROMISE OF DEMOCRACYVoters at a polling station inUdhampur, during the J&KAssembly election in December 2014

UNI

repression, mass marches, bombings and dis-appearances. India had played into Pakistan’shands. Since the late 1940s, after Indiantroops helped Kashmir trounce and repel thePakistani invaders who had tried to takeKashmir by force, Pakistan had not succeed-ed in training and sending armed militantsto try and destabilize Kashmir on the ideo-logical premise of the two-nation theory. It isremarkable that while Pakistan had beenable to arm Khalistani militants in Punjab itfailed to achieve the same result in Muslim-majority Kashmir.

This is largely because the Kashmiris arefiercely independent. After all, in 1948, mostof the innocents butchered and raped inAnantnag and Baramulla by the Pakistaniinvaders were themselves Muslims. Histori-cally, Kashmiris had fought the Afghans,Mugals, Dogra rulers and Maharaja RanjitSingh. Their concept of Kashmiriyat was—and is—based on their historical fightagainst, and then submission to, outsiderulers who treated them with disdain. That iswhy the concept of azaadi is so deeplyingrained in the Kashmiri psyche.

The various legal resolutions on the Line

of Control, the Ceasefire, UN observers,plebiscite, passed in the United Nations aswell as Article 370, while kept alive as debat-ing points in Kashmir, do not really impactthe internal reality of the Kashmiri psyche.The Kashmiri is taught as a child that he isthe subject of the “Dilli Durbar” and anybodywho makes a pact with “Dilli” is betrayingKashmir to “India.” He feels the same aboutPakistan.

But he knows the real world. India, for thesake of its own ideological secular identityand unity will never cede Kashmir. TheKashmiri knows this. He may wave the Ind-ian flag at times but, always, with two fingerscrossed behind his back. India has learned tocontrol Kashmir through a combination ofpolitics, democracy whenever possible, forcewhen necessary, undercover operations, mo-ney, bribes, sting operations and puppetleaders. The Kashmiris have been smartenough not to escalate violence to such anextent that it would become a full-fledgedarmed rebellion with frightful retribution.Both know where to draw the line. Both sidesplay the game. Kashmiris are rewardedhandsomely from India as well as from acr-oss the border. All Kashmiri parties partici-pate in the politics of blackmail. They useeither the Pakistani or the Indian flag, which-ever comes handy. Indian politicians keepKashmir alive because it is a handy tool towhip up nationalist fervor. Pakistan does thesame because without claiming Kashmir onthe grounds of its Muslim majority, theunderpinning of their ideological identity asan Islamic state would collapse.

And so, the game goes on. This is thegame that Dulat writes about soengagingly and, in the process, fills a

yawning gap about what transpired in the1990s in the spy-versus-spy humint game—far more effective than warfare or “encounterbattles” in creating and weaning leaders tothe Indian side. His account of the ShabirShah game of nerves is brilliantly recon-structed, though I wish he would talk a littlemore about what we journalists called“Dullat’s Boys” or the “friendly militants” likeKuka Parrey who gave Pakistani operativesthe fright of their lives.

Jagmohan

His book is ascathing indictment of

Delhi’s abysmal misunderstanding of

the Kashmir issueand of the Kashmiri

psyche.

MJ Akbar

To him, Kashmir liesat the heart of India’sconsciousness. It’s

not geography that isthe issue; Kashmir

also guards the frontiers of ideology.

12 July 31, 2016


The Kashmir Dilemma is beautifullysummed up by MJ Akbar in Kashmir:Behind the Vale: “Kashmir lies at the edge ofIndia’s borders and at the heart of India’sconsciousness. It is not geography that is theissue; Kashmir also guards the frontiers ofideology. If there was a glow of hope in thedeepening shadows of a bitter partition, thenit was Kashmir, whose people consciouslyrejected the false patriotism of fundamental-ism and made common cause with secularIndia instead of theocratic Pakistan. Kashmirwas, as Sheikh Abdullah said and JawaharlalNehru believed, a stabilizing force for India.”

Akbar records Kashmir’s struggle in thecentury to first free itself from feudal oppres-sion and then enter the world of modernIndia in 1947. Placing the mistakes and tri-umphs of those early, formative years in theperspective of history, the author goes on toexplain how the 1980s have opened the wayfor Kashmir’s hitherto marginalised seces-sionists. Both victory and defeat have theirlessons; to forget either is to destabilize thefuture. Kashmir and the mother country areinextricably linked. India cannot afford to bedefeated in her Kashmir.

Where Akbar left off, Dulat pitched in totake the narrative farther. But there are otherimportant books that fit beautifully into thepuzzle. Governor Jagmohan’s book My Fro-zen Turbulence is a scathing indictment ofDelhi’s abysmal misunderstanding of theKashmir issue and of the Kashmiri psycheand the policy of benign neglect alternatingwith gratuitous political gamesmanship andinterference that further fueled militancyand violence in Kashmir just when successfuldoses of good governance under Governor’srule had helped to pacify much of the valley.

Brigadier Amar Cheema’s The CrimsonChinar is a brilliant perspective on how Indiakeeps blundering in its approach to Kashmir.He relies heavily on the venerable BK Nehru,former governor of Kashmir and IndiraGandhi’s cousin, in pinpointing the roots ofdiscontent starting with the arrest of SheikhAbdullah, the “Lion of Kashmir” in 1953which virtually rendered the state’s Cons-tituent Assembly leaderless, followed by aseries of rigged or uncontested elections until1976 which rendered Indian claims of

democracy in Kashmir a farce.But Cheema is correct in pointing out that

the Sheikh had himself become a corrupt andauthoritarian leader and had completelyrigged the election to the constituent assem-bly itself. History repeated itself in the 1987election which was largely fought on the cor-ruption issue. The Farooq Abdullah govern-ment was widely perceived as venal and rot-ten to the core and the Sheikh Abdullahdynasty was as unpopular as the Shah of Iranbefore his downfall.

For Rajiv Gandhi to have allied with thiscorrupt party and then look away as the elec-tion was openly rigged and brutally manipu-lated, was the last straw. And both Kashmirand Indian are still paying the price.

Prime Minister Modi learns quickly fromhistory and tends to avoid the pitfalls of hispredecessors. So far his Kashmir initiativeshave been sensible. Each Indian PM writeshis own chapter to the Kashmir story. Onecan only hope that Modi’s chapter will befresh and that someone in his administrationwill have learned the lessons spelt out in thebooks written by AS Dulat, MJ Akbar, BKNehru, Jagmohan, and Brigadier Cheema.

AS Dulat

In his book, the former RAW chief

correctly gauged thevolatility of the

Kashmiri issue, proneto sudden and mercurial shifts.

Brigadier Amar Cheema

He believes that theSheikh had himself

become corrupt andauthoritarian leaderand had rigged the

Constituent Assemblyelections.

IL


I know I’m not a showy politician. I don’t tour the television studios. Idon’t gossip about people overlunch. I don’t go drinking in parliament's bars. I don’t oftenwear my heart on my sleeve. I justget on with the job in front of me.

—Theresa May, announcing her bid for Britain’s prime ministership, as quoted

on NDTV.com

The treatmentmeted out toAMU reflects thetreatment metedout to theMuslims of India.

—Lt GeneralZameeruddin Shah,

Vice Chancellor ofAligarh Muslim

University, in Mail Today

Kuchh toh log kahenge logon kakaam hai kehna. (people are boundto say things because it is their jobto say something).

—Smriti Irani, on being asked why she wasmoved out of the high-profile HRD ministry

Jokers, cowards from your organization beat them and fed them gobar. Haryana has your government.... Why won’t you speakagainst this? Will the home ministerspeak against this? Will the CM condemn this? Will they get arrested?

—Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM)chief Asaduddin Owaisi, asking PM

Narendra Modi to condemn peoplewho force-fed cow dung and urine to

Muslim men in Haryana, in The Times of India

14 July 31, 2016

Burhan wasn’t scared ofdeath, he was scared of a lifelived in subjugation. Hedetested it. He lived a freeman, died a free man.Doomed is the occupation!Indian state, how will youdefeat a people who havedefeated their own fears?

—Umar Khalid, JNU student, on Hizbul Mujahideen’s youth icon

Burhan Wani being killed in Kashmir,in a Facebook post which he

removed later

I led a very envied bachelor’s life. Every youngPakistani wanted to be me.And yet, given the choicebetween someone to livehappily with and the bachelor life, I wouldalways choose married life.Because bachelor life is: allthat glitters is not gold. It isvery shallow and empty.

—Imran khan, cricketer-turnedpolitician, in Hindustan Times

QUOTE-UNQUOTE

What we did in 20 yearswe should have done in10 years…. We havebeen too slow.

—Montek Singh Ahluwalia, former Deputy Chairman,Planning Commission, on

the economic reforms initiated in 1991, in The Indian Express

IT was vindication for the Congressand embarrassment for the BJP onIndia’s easternmost frontier. On July13, the Supreme Court chose to turnback the clock and reinstate the

embattled Nabam Tuki-led dispensation inArunachal Pradesh. The court dismissed theBJP-backed Kalikho Pul government eventhough it had passed the floor test fourmonths ago. This is a historic decision; it isthe first time that the SC has restored a dis-solved state government.

In three separate judgments—one by Jus-tices JS Khehar, PC Ghose and NV Ramana,the second by Justice Dipak Misra and thethird by Justice Madan B Lokur—the topcourt’s five-judge constitution bench unani-mously set aside governor JP Rajkhowa’sdecision to advance the Arunachal assemblysession from January 14 to December 16 thatsaw the removal of speaker Nabam Rebia.The governor had no suo motu power tosummon or advance the assembly session,the bench held. Rebia himself stands rein-stated. “The status quo ante as it prevailed onDecember 15, 2015 is ordered to be restored,”the ruling of the bench stated. Analysts feelthe verdict puts paid to the elaborate schemeby the center to usher in a “Congress-muktBharat” through the backdoor.

The July 13 verdict is, indeed, the thirdlegal setback received from the apex court bythe Narendra Modi-led NDA government. Itwas preceded by the Supreme Court revokingPresident’s rule in Uttarakhand in May afterthe Congress’s Harish Rawat won the floortest there and the National JudicialAppointments Commission Act being struckdown in October. The Act sought to give thegovernment of the day a say in judicialappointments.

RINGSIDE/Essay

In a setback to the center, the top courthas reinstated his governmentBy Sucheta Dasgupta

Tuki Returns in Arunachal

“The decision [in the Arunachal Pradeshcase] is a pronouncement on the constitu-tionality of president’s rule. The court hasupheld the democratic process in line withthe judgment in the 1994 SR Bommai case,”additional secretary in the Lok SabhaDevender Singh Aswal told India Legal.

However, it may be too early to exult forthe Congress. CM Tuki cannot afford to reston his laurels. He will now have to undergo afloor test to prove his majority. Thoughspeaker Rebia has been reinstated and hisdecision to disqualify 14 MLAs on the basisof the anti-defection law was made onDecember 15, it took place at a time when aresolution regarding his own removal waspending. The SC order has brought back 58MLAs to the 60-member House. Theremaining two MLAs had been disqualifiedearlier and are not among these 14.

The fact that the 14 defectors have joineda new party—the People’s Party of Arunachal,floated by Congress rebel Pul in March andbacked by the BJP—complicates matters.Tuki has been left with only 15 MLAs andmust quickly muster the support of at least 15more legislators.

The CM has appealed to the rebels toreturn to the fold and backchannels are openfor negotiations. The Congress is now facedwith the challenging job of ensuring that itsvictory in court is not just a symbolic one.


IL

The fact that the14 defectorshave joined anew party—thePeople’s Party ofArunachal—complicatesmatters. Tuki hasbeen left withonly 15 MLAsand must musterthe support of atleast 15 others.

Even though the law and courts say that all persons, including children bornbetween 1950 and 1987 to Tibetan refugees, are citizens of India by birth, theMHA refuses to recognize them as such By Nayantara Roy

THE law may identify themas Indians but theMinistry of Home Affairssees them as foreigners. InJuly and August the DelhiHigh Court will be hear-ing several petitions filed

by persons of Tibetan origin, who claim thatthey are citizens of India by birth in accor-dance with the law. The Ministry of HomeAffairs (MHA) however, feels that it is abovethe law, and the decisions of the Delhi HighCourt as also decisions of the High Courts ofKarnataka, Sikkim and Uttarakhand do notapply to it.

The ministry has clearly said it in writingthat even though the law may recognize suchpersons as citizens of India by birth, they will

Birthright Denied

not be issued a passport until they haveproven that they are citizens of India.

CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTHBetween 1950 and 1987 it was sufficient to beborn within the territory of India, to be a citi-zen of India. Of course, this right of being acitizen of India did not extend to children ofenemy aliens, or accredited diplomatic envoys.

With citizenship come a whole host ofrights, the most important of which are thefundamental rights, guaranteed to all citi-zens. Other rights, included the right to ownproperty, vote in elections etc. One such rightis also the right to be issued a passport, toenable a citizen to travel abroad as a citizenof India.

On July 1 1987, the law relating to citizen-

SUPREME COURT/ Citizenship Rights

16 July 31, 2016

LEGAL ALIENSThe Buddha at the main

monastery of Dharamshala;an elderly Tibetan refugee

lights candles for prayer

Kh. Manglembi

ship by birth was changed. A person, born inIndia would be considered as a citizen bybirth if at least one parent was a citizen ofIndia. Another amendment in 2003,required that in order to be a citizen of Indiaby birth, a person born in India had to haveeither both parents who were citizens ofIndia, or, if only one parent was a citizen of India, then the other should not be an ille-gal migrant.

The amendments of 1987 and 2003,being applicable only prospectively, did notaffect the citizenship rights of all personsborn within the territory of India betweenJanuary 26, 1950 and June 30, 1987.

THE TIBETAN INFLUXIn 1959 the Dalai Lama fled Tibet and tookrefuge in India. A large number of Tibetansfollowed their leader into India, and settledhere. These Tibetan refugees were required toregister as foreigners in India, and wereissued registration certificates. Using a provi-sion in the Passports Act, they were alsoissued Identity Certificates, which also servedas travel documents in lieu of a passport.

Over time, these Tibetan refugees hadchildren in India.

The problem arose when these refugeeshad children, especially in the period 1959 to1987. According to the law, the children ofthese Tibetan refugees were, by law, automat-ically citizens of India by birth. However,without any application of mind, or heed tothe law, these children were also issued regis-tration certificates and identity cards whichrecorded their nationality as Tibetan. Thesecitizens of India were treated as foreigners intheir own country, and the laws applicable toforeigners and refugees were applied to them!

Tenzin Tselha, was born on May 17, 1987in Dharamshala. Her birth was recorded inthe municipality records and she studied tillher graduation in India. Yet when sheapplied for a passport, she was told that shewas not an Indian citizen. Undeterred, sheapplied for grant of Indian citizenship underthe law, only to be told two years later thatshe cannot be granted Indian citizenship, asshe is already an India citizen by birth. Sheonce again applied for a passport, and wastold that she is not a citizen of India.

Caught in this Kafkaesque nightmare,she filed a petition in the Delhi High Court.Jayant Tripathi, who is Tselha’s lawyer, saysthat this is a classic case of the left hand notknowing what the right is doing. He elabo-rates, “The law is clear. Tselha is a citizen ofIndia by birth, just like you and me. That cit-izenship cannot be taken away by the govern-ment. She and Tibetans like her are beingdiscriminated against solely because of theirethnicity and race, which is a clear violationof Article 14 of the Constitution.”

The government on the other hand hastaken a stand that children of Tibetanrefugees, upon reaching the age of majority,had to apply for their separate registrationand identity certificates. According to thegovernment, they filled the forms statingtheir nationality to be Tibetan. Hence theycannot be treated as Indian citizens.

Tselha’s lawyer rubbishes this argumentby pointing out that “there is a specific proce-dure that is laid out for a person to renouncetheir Indian citizenship. No one bothered tothink about the fact that Indian citizens


The EC issued a letter on Feb 7, 2014, toall states and union territories. As a result,Indian citizens of Tibetan origin voted, forthe first time, in the 2014 general elections.

EQUAL CITIZENSA Tibetan woman at aMcLeodganj monastery;those born in India beforeJuly 1, 1987, are entitledto citizenship rights

Kh. Manglembi

do not need to register as foreigners andobtain registration certificates or obtainidentity certificates, which are issued only toTibetan refugees and stateless persons.These people should not have been asked tofill out these forms in the first place.”

The central question to the conundrumis what is the stand of the Government ofIndia on the issue of Tibet as an independ-ent nation?

TIBET AS A NATIONThe Dalai Lama’s website clearly states thatindependence for Tibet is not the goal, theaim being to secure genuine autonomy forTibet within the framework of the People’sRepublic of China. This is also stated to bethe official policy of the Tibetan Governmentin Exile.

The Government of India also recognizesTibet as an integral part of the People’sRepublic of China. In fact, the 1954Agreement between India and the People’sRepublic of China on “Trade and Intercourse

between the Tibet Region of China andIndia” clearly shows that India recognizedthe territorial claim of China over Tibet.

Therefore, as far as India is concerned,Tibet does not exist as a sovereign nation inthe comity of nations. Tselha’s lawyer, whohas raised these points in the petition saysthat a claim by a person that he or she is a cit-izen of Tibet would be at par with a personclaiming citizenship of Khalistan—ie, a claimnot recognized by the Government of India.

NO AMBIGUITY IN LAWThe law is very clear. If a person was born inIndia between 26 January 1950 and 01 July1986, then that person is a citizen of India bybirth. If this person wishes to renounceIndian citizenship, then specified proceduresset out in the Citizenship Act are required tobe followed. A mere declaration of renuncia-tion is not sufficient.

The Delhi High Court, in a judgmentdelivered as far back as 2010 in the case ofNamgya Dolkar had said that “The Petitionerwas born in India on 13th April 1986, i.e.after 26th January 1950 and before 1st July1987, and is an Indian citizen by birth interms of Section 3(1)(a) CA. She cannottherefore be denied a passport.” This judg-ment has been followed subsequently by theKarnataka High Court, and also by theSikkim and Uttarakhand High Courts.

The MHA, aware of the judgment of theDelhi High Court, does not agree with thejudgment. Neither does it feel that it needsto follow the law. On 30th March, 2010 theMinistry of Home Affairs issued a circularstating that, “the children born to a Tibetanrefugee in India will not be treated as Indiancitizen automatically based on their birth in

18 July 31, 2016

THE EXODUSThe Dalai Lama flees

Tibet with his disciples; (far right) his supporters follow him

FAMILY VALUES(L-R) Mother Diki Tsering, eldest

sister Tsering Dolma, eldestbrother Thupten Jigmey Norbu,

brothers Gyalo Thondup andLobsang Sampten, the Dalai

Lama, sister Jetsun Pema andyoungest sibling Ngari Rin

SUPREME COURT/ Citizenship Rights

after 26th January, 1950, but before 1st July,1987, and (3) he/she is ordinarily resident inthe constituency where the application forenrolment has been made”. As a result, theseIndian citizens of Tibetan origin voted, for thefirst time, in the 2014 general elections.

However, the issuance of passports is stillcontrolled by the Ministry of Home Affairs,and this section of the citizenry is stilldeprived of one of their fundamental rights—the right to be issued a passport and beacknowledged as a citizen of India.Hopefully, the Delhi High Court will come tothe rescue of these citizens, who are beingtreated as second class citizens by a depart-ment of their own government.

India before 01.07.1987 under section 3(1)(a)of the Citizenship Act, 1955.”

CHINA CONUNDRUMOne issue of concern, which the governmentdoes not appear to have given any thought tois that if it insists that the children born toTibetan refugees are to be recognized as citi-zens/nationals of Tibet, how will China react?

While on the one hand, the Governmentof India recognizes Tibet as an integral partof China, on the other hand, the Ministry ofHome Affairs wants to declare the childrenborn to Tibetan refugee parents as Tibetannationals. If India does not recognize theexistence of Tibet as a nation, it cannot givecredence to a person who claims his nation-ality to be Tibetan. Tselha’s lawyer points outthat these persons who, according to theMHA, are Tibetan nationals should actuallythen be registered as Chinese nationals!

A decision of the Karnataka High Court inthe case of Tenzin Ling Rimpoche, which fol-lowed the judgment of the Delhi High Court,was accepted by the Election Commission ofIndia. The Commission issued a letter onFebruary 7, 2014, to all Chief ElectoralOfficers of states and union territories that“the ERO’s concerned should not deny enrol-ment to the children of Tibetan refugeeswhere they are satisfied that (1) the applicantwas born in India, (2) he/she was born on or IL


AN ORDINARY DAY(Left) Lamas in aMcLeodganj monastery; (below) The scene atTibetan Children’s Villagenear Dal Lake inDharamshala

Kh. Manglembi

Shrouded in Secrecy A

new petition in theSupreme Court hasdemanded that theentire segregated dataon the Rotavac vaccinetrials held between2011 and 2013 be made

public. The government maintains secrecyregarding the data even as the vaccine isbeing administered in Haryana, HimachalPradesh, Orissa and Andhra Pradesh since

Even before the full data onthese trials has been made

public, the anti-diarrhea vaccineis out in four states. A petition in

the apex court hopes to piercethe silence over the trial results

By Meena Menon in Mumbai

FIRST RECIPIENTHealth minister JP Naddaadministers the first doseof the Rotavirus vaccineto a baby girl inBhubaneswar during thelaunch of the immunization program

20 July 31, 2016

SUPREME COURT/ Rotavac Vaccine Trial

UNI

March this year, with plans to add it to theUniversal Immun ization Programme.

The apex court on July 5, 2016, issued anotice to the center, Department ofBiotechnology (DBT) and Christian MedicalCollege (CMC), Vellore, on a writ petitionfiled by S Srinivasan seeking complete cen-ter-wise results of the clinical trial of theanti-diarrhea vaccine, Rotavac.

Srinivasan, a healthcare activist and man-aging trustee of Locost StandardTherapeutics, demanded that the SupremeCourt set aside the Delhi High Court orderdismissing an earlier petition by Dr JacobPuliyel, head of pediatrics, St Stephen’sHospital, Delhi, on October 14, 2015.

DISCLOSE ALLSrinivasan also demanded disclosure of thesegregated results of the clinical trial of thevaccine conducted on 6,799 infants in Delhi,Pune and Vellore, and sought these results beplaced before the National TechnicalAdvisory Group of Immunization (NTAGI),the expert body on immunization policy, forexamination and scrutiny. DBT had failed tomake available the complete de-aggregateddata (center-wise data) before launching thevaccine. The very raison d’etre of such multi-center trials is to compare results amongthem and without data the vaccine should

TRANSPARENCY IS KEYOn July 5, the Supreme Courtasked the Government of Indiato make public data about thetrials of Rotavac (left)

The Department of Biotechnology failed tomake available the complete de-aggregateddata before launching the vaccine. The datashould have been examined before that.

not have been launched. This data shouldhave been examined by NTAGI in the publicinterest but such is the secrecy surrounding itthat it has not been provided even to thisapex advisory body, his petition contended.

While dismissing Puliyel’s petitiondemanding full data on the trials, DelhiHigh Court ignored the fact that NTAGI alsodidn’t get to see the data and instead, accept-ed the center’s contention that the petitionwas motivated by private interest.

The clinical trials of Rotavac were con-ducted to ensure its safety in terms of thenumber of intussusceptions (intestinalobstruction which could need surgery to pre-vent death) in the two-year trial period. Thevaccine has been permitted for public usedespite questions on its efficacy being raisedin an article in the UK journal, Vaccine. Theresults which were reported in this journal inAugust 2014 by Jacob John (a top virologistfor CMC) and other investigators indicated ahigher rate of intussusceptions among thechildren who were vaccinated. Based on thisdata, Puliyel said this was five to 10 timeshigher than the risks of intussusceptionswith the Rotashield vaccine which was with-drawn from the market in the US and 70times higher than Rotateq which is currentlyused. The incidence of intussusceptions washigher in Vellore (581/100,000 child years)than in Delhi (27.7/100,000 child years) andthe regional differences could mean that itmay be more risky to use the vaccine in someareas. The article did not provide the segre-gated data on the number of ultrasound-diagnosed intussusceptions among the vacci-nated and control groups in Vellore.

The segregated data was not made publicdespite applications under the Right toInformation (RTI) Act by an NGO andonline petitions, apart from emails and let-ters by Puliyel. The DBT and the Ministry ofScience and Technology conducted Phase


3 clinical trials and of the 6,799 infants,4,532 received the vaccine while the restwere in a control group. After the Delhi HighCourt dismissed Puliyel’s petition, a SpecialLeave Petition filed by him was also with-drawn since he was a member of NTAGI.

VELLORE CASESPuliyel made several attempts to get the dataafter the Vaccine article and sent repeatedemails demanding it from Sunil Chandy,director of CMC, Vellore, which was part ofthe trial. He also wrote to all NTAGI mem-bers and its head asking for complete databut to no avail. He then wrote a letter onJune 16, 2015, to the Principal Secretary,Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), saying that

the number of potentially fatal side-effectswas so high in Vellore that the data was notbeing released but the vaccine had beenlicensed for general use. He said in the letter“that phase 3 clinical trials began in 2011.However, 12 years before the trial was evenstarted (in 1998), Bill and Melinda GatesFoundation’s PATH had already selected themanufacturer for the vaccine”.

The trial, incidentally, is funded by a grantfrom the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundationto PATH, USA, and others including BharatBiotech, the company making Rotavac. ThePMO asked the Subject Expert Committee(SEC) of the government to examine the issue.

On June 30, 2015, according to the min-utes of the meeting, the committee reviewedthe submission of the vaccine-related SeriousAdverse Event (SAE) during the Phase 3 clin-ical trial and “did not find the concerns ofnon-disclosure of SAE of intussusceptionand safety from Vellore site well authenticat-ed”. The SEC was asked to examine the mat-ter again and it referred to the Vaccine arti-cle (and not original data). It said that overallthe percentage of intussusception in the vac-cine group was 0.28% (13/4532) and theplacebo group 0.26% (6/2267) and the dif-ference is not statistically significant. None ofthe events of intussusception required surgi-cal interventions and none were fatal. It sug-gested that further review of data at Vellorewith regard to intussusceptions could beundertaken if required, based on the obser-vations of the Delhi High Court.

Dr Jacob Puliyel,a pediatrician at

St Stephen’sHospital, Delhi,was the first to

demand full disclosure of the

data on theRotavac trials.

His petition wasdismissed by the

high court.

Jacob John, atop virologist for

CMC, reportedthe results of theRotavac trials ina UK journal in

2014. Theseshowed a higherrate of intussus-ceptions among

children whowere vaccinated.

CORPORATE BACKINGThe Bill and Melinda Gates

Foundation has funded the Rotavac trials

SUPREME COURT/ Rotavac Vaccine Trial

22 July 31, 2016

UNI

IL

HC’S OBSERVATIONHowever, in an order on October 14, 2015, theDelhi High Court noted that the petitionerwas a member of NTAGI and it is not disput-ed that NTAGI, on being satisfied about theefficacy and safety of the vaccine, had recom-mended including it for the NationalImmunization Programme. “The learnedcounsel appearing for the petitioner could notdispute the fact that the entire segregateddata on the trial conducted in all these centreswas available with NTAGI before making itsrecommendation,” the Court said, ignoringthe fact that no data was shown to NTAGI.

The Court held that no case was made outto show that public disclosure of segregateddata is mandatory before allowing a Phase 4trial. The clinical trial report had beencleared by NTAGI and the vaccine wasapproved by the Drugs Controller General ofIndia. The Court said that no case of viola-tion of any statutory provision was made outin the petition and no case was also made outto show that disclosure of the segregated datais essential in the public interest.

Non-disclosure of data in such a case isunethical, to say the least. The revisedDeclaration of Helsinki in 2013 stated thatresearchers have a duty to make publicly avail-able the results of their research. “Negativeand inconclusive as well as positive resultsmust be published or otherwise made publiclyavailable,” it said. WHO too has strongly advo-cated public disclosure of clinical trial results.

It is a mystery why NTAGI was not given

the complete data and, as Srinivasan contendsin his petition, the full data is crucial to explainthe risks that have already been seen in thePhase 3 trial before consent is taken for usingthe vaccine. It is important to inform the pub-lic about the adverse effects of the vaccine asthe signs and symptoms of intussusception arethe same as that of dysentery (passage of bloodand mucus in the stool). Unless the public iswarned beforehand, it would only suspect dysentery. And that can have disas-trous consequences.

HASTY LAUNCH(Left) Prime MinisterNarendra Modi launchesRotavac; (below) Naddareleases a publication onRotavirus vaccine withministers DharmendraPradhan and AtanuSabyasachi Nayak

The revised Declaration of Helsinki in 2013stated that researchers have a duty to makepublicly available the results of their research.WHO too strongly advocates the same.

IL


UNI

SUPREME COURT

In a significant verdict, the SupremeCourt questioned the government’s

decision to deploy armed forces andgive them absolute powers under AFSPAin Manipur for an indefinite period on theplea of restoring normalcy. It observedthat the situation is a slap on the demo-cratic process of India.

AFSPA is in force in the state eversince it was declared a “disturbed area”in 1958.

The Court also questioned theimmunity granted to the armed forcesunder AFSPA and noted that if foundguilty of “extra-judicial” or “fake-encounter” killings they must beprosecuted in a criminal court.

The Court’s stern reaction camewhile it was hearing a group of peti-tioners from Manipur who had plead-ed for an SIT probe into more than1,500 cases of alleged "fake encoun-ters” carried out by the Army and thepolice in the last 20 years. The apexcourt ordered a thorough probe intoall these “killings”.

The court asked amicus curiaeMenaka Guruswamy and the petitio-ner group to present the facts withinfour weeks.

The center tried to put up a stoutdefense by arguing that the “war-like”situation in Manipur warranted deployment of security forces underAFSPA and that lifting immunity grantedunder the Act would not only dampentheir spirits but also render them ineffec-tual. But this argument did not earn anyfavor from the court.

Rethink needed on AFSPA

The Supreme Court did not enter-tain the AAP government, which

sought a restraint order against anyDelhi High Court verdict over bifur-cation of powers between the centerand the Delhi government. Dismiss-ing the plea, the court ruled that itwill have to wait for the High Court’s ruling.

The state government hadapproached the apex court arguingthat the Delhi High Court had nopower to adjudicate on the issue asit was a constitutional dispute of fed-eral nature and only the SupremeCourt could deal with such matters.

The High Court has reserved itsverdict on a clutch of petitions,including one from the Delhi govern-ment. The Court is likely to give itsruling at the end of this month.

The apex court questioned AAP’sdecision to move the High Court andlater approach the Supreme Courtafter the High Court had reserved itsverdict. It ruled that the High Courtwas best equipped to decide whe-ther the matter was within its juris-diction or not. The apex court clari-fied that the Delhi government couldalways approach it in case the HighCourt’s verdict was unacceptable.

Wait for High Court’s verdict, says apex court

The Supreme Court turned down ajoint appeal from six people who

were acquitted by the court in the2002 Akshardham attack case. Theyhad pleaded for directions to theGujarat government to grant themcompensation for illegally prosecut-ing them, arresting them and keepingthem in jail for almost 10 years.

The Court ruled that acquittal didnot consequently entitle them tocompensation and awarding it wouldset a wrong and even dangerousprecedent.

The petitioners tried hard to makethe court accept their point of viewthat the wrongful sentence was aresult of manufactured evidence andthey had lost many precious years of their lives and alleged that theGujarat government had violated theirright to life.

No case forrelief

24 July 31, 2016

The Supreme Court agreed to hearthe 2002 hit-and-run case

involving Bollywood star SalmanKhan but made it clear that an earlyhearing was not possible asrequested by the Maharashtra government. The state governmenthad appealed to the apex court chal-lenging the verdict of the BombayHigh Court, which had acquittedKhan in the case.

The state government wantedthe hearing to take place, say, withinsix months on the ground that thecase was around 15 years old. But

the bench, while admitting the plea,countered that there were otherimportant cases awaiting the court’sattention and this case could not begiven priority just because a starwas involved.

The counsel for Salman Khansubmitted in the court that the actorhad no objection to the apex courthearing the case, provided it wasdone on merit.

The bench admitting the appeal,clarified the state government couldseek directions from the ChiefJustice of India for an early hearing.

Church courts haveno locus standi

Appeal against Salman verdict

The apex court held that divorce granted by “churchcourts” for Catholic Christians had no legal sanction

and it would be an offense if any of those divorced mar-ried again after such a decree. However, it agreed toexamine the issue in an early hearing.

The Court was hearing a petition from Clarence Pais,ex-president of a Catholic association in Karnataka, whocontended that if “triple talaq” (for divorce) under theMuslim Personal law was not considered illegal, thesame should apply for the annulment of marriage underthe Canon Law. The provisions of the Canon Law gov-ern marriages among Catholics in India, except in Goa.

Pais was at pains to point out that as a result of thisanomaly, many Catholic Christians who entered intowedlock again after getting a divorce from the “churchcourt” were facing bigamy charges in civil and criminalcourts. He pleaded that the problem was serious andthe Canon Law needs to be enforced legally.

The center did not agree with Pais’ argument andheld that the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, andDivorce Act, 1869, were applicable for marriage anddivorce for all Christians. It also informed the Court thatthe issue had been decided by the apex court in its1996 verdict.

The Supreme Court asked theLaw Commission to look into

Section 24A of the AdvocatesAct, 1961, observing that therewas a need to introduce stringentprovisions for lawyers held guiltyof heinous offenses. It also askedthe Commission to evaluate theregulation of the legal professionas soon as possible in consulta-tion with all stakeholders.

According to Section 24A ofThe Advocates Act, 1961, “no

person shall be admitted as anadvocate on a State roll if he isconvicted of an offence involvingmoral turpitude”. However, if heis convicted after empanelment,the disqualification for enrolmentshall cease to have effect aftertwo years of his sentence.

The Court expressed its reser-vations on this part of theSection and compared it to otherpublic servants who were thrownout of service once they wereconvicted.

The Court lamented that thelaw ministry, Bar Council of Indiaas well as the state bar councilshad shown scant regard for mak-ing changes in the Sectiondespite a suggestion from theGujarat High Court three decadesago. It was a must for upholdingthe image of the profession, thecourt noted.

Section 24A needsreassessment

—Compiled by Prabir Biswas, Illustrations: UdayShankar


Judges and lawyers in Telangana wereup in arms over the appointment of

Andhra Pradesh judges in their state.However, the judges returned to work following appeals by the Chief Justice

of India and othersBy R Ramasubramanian

Tale of TwoStates

WE feel we are work-ing under the HighCourt of AndhraPradesh and notunder the High Co-urt of both states.We are afraid of the-

ir future intervention in political and execu-tive administration of Telangana. We cannotwork under Andhra Judicial rulers.” This waspart of a memorandum submitted by theTelangana Judges Association to the gover-nor of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.

AP’S ADVANTAGE Since June 28, some 200 judges frommunisiff-level to district-level in 10 districtsof Telangana have been on a 15-day masscasual leave, joining a strike originally laun-ched by the Telangana Advocates Associationon June 6. Both were protesting the appoint-ment of Andhra Pradesh judges in the Telan-gana region.

COURTS/ AP and Telangana

26 July 31, 2016

JUSTICE DENIED?Telangana High Court’s

advocates protest againstthe suspension of judges

on disciplinary grounds

“

JUSTICE DENIED?Telangana High Court’s

advocates protest againstthe suspension of judges

on disciplinary grounds

UNI

“How can anystate acceptjudgments onits laws, actionsand welfare ofits people byjudicial officersfrom anotherstate? Thisundermines notonly the self-respect ofeveryone inTelangana butchallenges itsvery authority.”

—P MadhusudanaReddy, a lawyer from

Hyderabad

The immediate provocation for the pres-ent crisis was the selection list for the posts ofsubordinate judges released by the HighCourt on May 5. The list comprised 335 subordinate judges for Telangana and 495for Andhra Pradesh. But out of the 335 allot-ted for Telangana, 130 were of AndhraPradesh nativity.

“Younger judges of Andhra Pradesh areposted in Telangana and older judges areposted in Andhra Pradesh. This means theseyounger judges will have bright chances ofgetting elevated to the High Court when theolder ones retire. It would also allow AndhraPradesh to have a numerical grip in the HighCourt at the cost of Telangana’s representa-tion,” one of the striking subordinate judgestold India Legal on condition of anonymity.

The situation reached a flashpoint onJune 26 when hundreds of judges belongingto 10 districts of Telangana took out a rally inHyderabad and marched towards the RajBhawan. They submitted a memorandum tothe governor. They carried placards con-demning what they called as a “step-mother-ly treatment” of the High Court and threat-ened to resign en masse if their demandswere not met.

The High Court of Judicature of Hyde-rabad hit back the next day by suspendingtwo district judges—K Ravinder Reddy, pres-ident of the Telangana Judges Association,and V Varaprasad, its secretary. Nine morejudges were suspended along with eightadministrative staff. In a retaliatory move,over 200 judges went on mass leave.

The High Court’s move further deepenedthe parochialism in the Telangana region.“The total strength of Hyderabad High Courtjudges is 25 and out of this, 18 are fromAndhra Pradesh, three from Telangana andthe other four are from outside these twostates. So you can gauge the actual reasonsfor these suspensions,” said K Srikkanth, aTelangana lawyer.

FOUR DEMANDS The agitating judges and lawyers are nowputting forth four demands to withdraw theirstir. �Cancel the appointment of judges to Telan-gana with Andhra Pradesh origin�Revoke the suspension of 11 judges andeight court staff�Have a time-bound action plan to constructa new High Court for Telangana


SEAT OF DISPUTEThe High Court inHyderabad is beingshared by AndhraPradesh and Telangana

�Explain the mode of appointment forselecting 200 judges for both states on thebasis of an examination conducted in 2015.

Observers feel that one of the major rea-sons for the present crisis was the decision ofthe Hyderabad High Court to ask for serviceoptions from judicial officers from bothstates. “The reason behind this was thatthough Andhra Pradesh was bifurcated in2014, the High Court was not,” explained aretired IAS officer from Andhra Pradesh.

“This means that the judicial officers canbe posted anywhere. But Telangana ChiefMinister K Chandrashekhar Rao in a letter tothen Union law minister DV SadanandaGowda insisted that domicile should be thebasic criteria for the appointments. As bothHyderabad and Secunderabad were allottedto Telangana during the bifurcation, one canunderstand the clamor of those with AndhraPradesh nativity for these postings.”

Meanwhile, rumors and conspiracy theo-ries are floating in Hyderabad with regard tothis crisis. One of them is that pressure isbeing exerted by a Supreme Court judge inthe selection of subordinate judicial officers.“There are four judges in the Supreme Court

who are from Andhra Pradesh. One of themis showing undue interest in posting AndhraPradesh judges in Telangana. This is a largerconspiracy. Politicians who were driven outof Telangana are now trying to controlTelangana through the top judiciary of thecountry,” claimed MP Bargav, a Telanganaadvocate from Ranga Reddy district.

He said that when Telangana was carvedout of Andhra Pradesh in 2014, the arrange-ment was that Andhra Pradesh would haveits own High Court. “As per the AndhraPradesh Reorganization Act 2014—which isthe blueprint for the bifurcation—the twostates are to share a common High Court—the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad—till Andhra Pradesh constructs one of itsown. But Andhra Pradesh chief ministerChandrababu Naidu is showing little interestin constructing a new High Court for hisstate,” said Bargav.

SEPARATE COURTSThe original Andhra Pradesh High Courtwas rechristened as Hyderabad High Courtand is situated in Hyderabad in Telangana.“Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao inFebruary called on Chief Justice of IndiaJustice TS Thakur and pleaded with him fora separate High Court for Telangana andoffered to allot land for that purpose. Hislogic was that since it would take a long timefor Andhra Pradesh to construct a new HighCourt at its proposed new capital inAmaravathi, it could use the present AndhraPradesh High Court (Hyderabad HighCourt) and Telangana would construct itsown High Court in Hyderabad itself. Butunfortunately, no headway was made afterthat proposal,” said Bargav.

He said the Supreme Court seemed hesi-tant to entertain this demand because it didnot want two high courts in one city as thiswould be an awkward proposition. Rao hasnow threatened to stage a protest at JantarMantar in Delhi to demand the setting up ofa separate High Court for his state.

One of the main fears of Telangana politi-cians and their CM is that Andhra Pradesh’sjudicial officers could pass orders againstTelangana in important matters such as irri-gation-related disputes between Telangana

28 July 31, 2016

Telangana Chief MinisterK Chandrashekhar Rao,in a letter to the Unionlaw minister, insisted thatdomicile should be thebasic criterion for appointment of lawyers.

Andhra Pradesh ChiefMinister ChandrababuNaidu is not showinginterest in constructing a new High Court, claim striking Telangana lawyers.

COURTS/ AP and Telangana

“By using the CJI’s appeal as a face-saver andwithout getting any concrete assurancesabout the revocation of the suspensions of 11judges and eight employees, the judges arerejoining. Even if their suspensions are revo-ked, they will not get their original postingsand places,” said Bargav.

He also made it clear that the advocates’struggle will continue. “It is to protect notonly the dignity of lawyers but also of judgesthat we lawyers have launched our protest.Till all our demands are met, we will conti-nue our court boycott.”

There are reports that a section of law-yers may convene an extraordinary generalbody meeting soon to take stock of the situa-tion. This section too wants to withdraw theirstrike and rejoin work. But unlike the JudgesAssociation, opinion is deeply divided amonglawyers, as some want to continue the striketill all their demands are met.

With the protesting Telangana judges re-treating, the higher judiciary has won thefirst round in this judicial crisis.

and Andhra Pradesh. P MadhusudanaReddy, a lawyer in Hyderabad, justified thefear of Telangana. “How can any state and itscitizens accept judgments on its laws, actionsand welfare of its people by judicial officersfrom another state? This undermines notonly the self-respect of everyone in Telan-gana but challenges its very authority.”

JUDGES’ DECISIONHowever, at an extraordinary general bodymeeting of Telangana Judges Association onJuly 6, the protesting judges decided to calloff their mass leave protest and rejoin workimmediately.

“The extraordinary general body meetingof Telangana Judges Association here decid-ed to call of the mass leave protest in view ofthe appeals made by the CJI, the governor ofAndhra Pradesh and Telangana and the act-ing CJ of Hyderabad High Court,” a judicialofficer later told media.

When asked about their main demand—revocation of the suspension of 11 judges—hesaid: “The acting CJ of Hyderabad HighCourt will take care of it. It takes its own timeand there is a process for that. The CJI, gov-ernor and the acting CJI advised us not tocontinue with the protest and we decided tocall it off.”

However, the lawyers have vowed to con-tinue their stir till all their demands are met.

Of the 335 subordinate judges allottedfor Telangana, 130 were of AndhraPradesh nativity, which could influencetheir decisions in inter-state cases.

IL


TUMULTUOUS STARTTelangana CM K Chandrashekhar Raohoisting the largest andtallest flag on its secondanniversary celebrationsin Hyderabad in earlyJune

UNI

COURTS

Nothing wrong with CETThe controversial Common

Entrance Test (CET), introducedby the Maharashtra government inJune this year for admission tolaw colleges in the state, washeld “legal” by the Bombay HighCourt recently. A petition ques-tioning the state’s authority toimpose the test was struckdown by the Court.

The Court ruled that the stategovernment was well within itsright to conduct the screening testfor government and private collegesalthough the way it was done wasquestionable. The petitioner, Shalini

Kotian, who wants to study law,pleaded that the time allowed by thegovernment for preparation was notenough. She also alleged that themanner in which the syllabus wasset up, as well as the list of examin-ers drawn up, was shady.

The Court noted that the stategovernment should have intimatedthe students in time about the exampattern, syllabus, etc.

The state government clarifiedthat CET was brought in under theMaharashtra Universities Act andwas introduced through an execu-tive order.

Allahabad High Courtremoves Rama RamanRama Raman’s reign as chairman and CEO of the

Noida Authority as well as the chairman of theGreater Noida and Yamuna Expressway IndustrialDevelopment Authorities came to an end after theAllahabad High Court asked the UP government totransfer him within two weeks. The Court ordered that all his powers as head of the three Authorities will“remain in abeyance” from July 1. The next hearing is on July 20. Raman was posted in Gautam BudhNagar district since 2010.

The Court was hearing PILs filed by Noida-basedactivist JK Goyal and an NGO which wanted Raman to leave the district. The Court was aghast that an offi-cer could continue for so long and sought an explana-

tion from the UP government. It lambasted the gov-ernment for allowing Raman to stay on for so longwhen there were other officers in the state andobserved that the UP government did not follow itsown rule in this regard.

Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has got relief from aDelhi court in a criminal defamation case.

Kejriwal had to appear in the court and was there-after asked to furnish a personal bond of `10,000

before availing bail.The defamation suit was filed by BJP MP

Ramesh Bidhuri, who had taken objection to certaincomments made by the Delhi CM in an interview toa news channel. The hearing has been postponed to August 6.

Kejriwal gets bail

30 July 31, 2016

Responding to a petition claiming thatthere were not enough public prosecu-

tors available at designated POCSO (pro-tection of children from sexual offenses)

courts in Delhi to handle cases which werepiling up, the Delhi High Court asked theAAP government to furnish data on the situation in other states.

All POCSO courts in Delhi were alsoasked to provide information on cases yet to be disposed off since 2012 andwhether public prosecutors attending thesecourts were comfortable with the numberof cases.

The petitioner Gaurav K Bansal hadclaimed that more than 2,000 cases relatedto sexual offences against children wereyet to be resolved at POCSO courts in thecapital and the AAP government was notserious about appointing more prosecutors.

The Delhi government, however, did notagree and said there were enough prosecu-tors to deal with POCSO cases.

The Allahabad High Court adjourned thehearing on a PIL seeking a CBI probe

into the reasons behind the Mathura vio-lence last month. But not before muchwrangling between the petitioner AshwiniUpadhyay and the counsel for the UP government.

Upadhyay alleged that the sect occupy-ing the Jawahar Bagh was enjoying thepatronage of the state government andtherefore a CBI probe was a must to instillcredibility into the probe.

But his argument was countered by thestate government which claimed that thePIL was baseless as a judicial enquiry wasalready on into the incident and another PILon the same lines was dismissed by theLucknow bench of the court.

Upadhyay retorted that the PIL being

mentioned was “frivolous” while hisdemand was supported by sound reasons.He also rubbished allegations of the government counsel that his PIL was politically motivated just because he was a BJP functionary.

The government counsel wanted time togather more facts in support of his argu-ments and the hearing was deferred.

— Compiled by Prabir Biswas;Illustrations: UdayShankar

PIL for a CBIprobe into Mathuraviolence

Haryana govtslammed overMurthal rapes

Need info on POCSO courts

The Haryana government got apiece of mind from the Punjab and

Haryana High Court over the allegedrapes in Murthal during the Jat agita-tion in February.

Stating that rapes did take placeand the state government had notrefuted this, the court ticked it off forits flip-flop on the issue. “Earlier therewas reluctance on your part to evenregister an FIR. But now you haveaccepted that rape had taken place,”the bench retorted.

The state government pleaded formore time to gather concrete facts onthe incident. The amicus curiae in thecase did not oppose the government’splea either.

While granting the request, thecourt adjourned the next hearing forJuly 23 but noted that nothing hadmoved as far as identifying the vic-tims and ensuring justice was con-cerned. It wanted a fresh status reportfrom the SIT on the hearing date.


TWENTY-FIVE years ago,Dr Manmohan Singh asthe then finance ministerclosed his first budgetspeech with a fightingspirit. “I do not minimisethe difficulties that lie

ahead on the long and arduous journey onwhich we have embarked. But as VictorHugo once said, ‘no power on earth can stopan idea whose time has come.’ I suggest tothis august house that the emergence ofIndia as a major economic power in theworld happens to be one such idea. Let thewhole world hear it loud and clear. India isnow wide awake. We shall prevail. We shallovercome.”

The world heard it and India is on its wayto becoming a global power today. After aquarter of a century, it is time for the countryto toast Prime Minister PV Narasimha Raoand his able deputy, Dr Manmohan Singh,besides the successive governments whichkept the reform process going.

Have the reforms been on the right path?

It was way back in 1991 that reforms wereinitiated by the Narasimha Rao government.

Their benefits are still to accrue to the common man. Does the Modi governmenthave the political will to take them forward?

By Kalyani Shankar

ECONOMY/Reforms

Speed upthe Pace

32 July 31, 2016

FROM THE EDGEOF BANKRUPTCY

The Rao-Singh duosteered the

liberalization process

PIB

Has the country benefitted by the measures?Was the pace satisfactory? What will be itsfuture? The short answer is that whilereforms were timely, there could have beenbetter consensus and less politics and thefruits of it are yet to reach the common man.

DIRE SITUATIONUnfortunately, there is more politics thaneconomics in the reform story. It was out ofcompulsion that the Rao government tookthis historic decision. When Rao took over onJune 21, 1991, India’s economy had alreadybeen downgraded twice within six months byglobal rating agencies. Foreign exchangereserves were enough to cover just seven daysof imports ($1.12 billion). Inflation was risingand the government was on the edge of bank-ruptcy. “There was nothing more to do. Youhad no money, you were going to become adefaulter within two weeks…Once youbecome a defaulter your entire economy,your honour, your place in the community ofnations, everything goes haywire. And youhave really no face to show,” Rao admitted ina TV interview to NDTV in 2004. Added tothat was the burden of retrieving 20 tons ofgold pledged to Union Bank of Switzerlandand 47 tons to the Bank of England as part ofa bailout deal with the InternationalMonetary Fund (IMF).

What struck Dr Singh the most was that

INDIA TURNEDGLOBAL(Below) Economicreforms ensuredthat the quality ofconsumer goodswas enhanced

Rao made reforms possible at a time whenhis own party was out to scuttle it. Seniorcabinet ministers attacked them for theirdeparture from the Nehruvian model.

“many governments have come and gonesince then but the process has not beenstopped. There has been a kind of consensuswhich keeps the reform process going”.

Yashwant Sinha, who later on becameVajpayee’s finance minister, said: “It hadbeen one of ‘stop and go’ as the pace has beenfrequently interrupted.” But it was anotherformer finance minister, P Chidambaram,who succinctly put it: “I was lucky to havehad a part in the various acts of the dramathat continues to play even today. The scriptwas more or less the same only the key actorschanged from time to time.”

TOTAL TEAMWORKThe reform story began with Rajiv Gandhibut it was Yashwant Sinha who realized thatwhoever became his successor, the factremained that India would have to go to theIMF and World Bank for help. He recalls thatthe stage had been set and the 1991 budgethad already been prepared. Even Singhadmits: “What we did was not original.


There were ideas which were in the air.Several discussions had taken place but thepolitical system was not responsive to imple-menting the reforms.”

Rao’s first task as prime minister was tofind a credible international face to head thefinance ministry. His first choice was thethen director of the London School ofEconomics, IG Patel, and when he refused,the choice fell on Manmohan Singh. It wasthis Rao-Singh duo, which steered the liber-alization process for the next five years.Patting Singh, Rao told NDTV: “Behind him

I stood like a rock. It was teamwork. Therewere occasions when I encouraged him. The-re were many occasions I pulled him back. Itwas a question of managing people.”

The reform team consisted of Singh andChidambaram. At the official level, RBI gov-ernor S Venkitaramanan, C Rangarajan(deputy governor of RBI), AN Verma (princi-pal secretary), Montek Singh Ahluwalia(commerce secretary), Rakesh Mohan (for-mer deputy governor of RBI) and AshokDesai (chief consultant to the ministry offinance) helped.

Economic diplomacy also began in Indianembassies. As Ahluwalia notes, reforms inindustrial and trade policy were a centralfocus in the early stages. The major thrustwas to address the macro-economic and bal-ance of payments crisis. With the new indus-trial policy, the biggest hurdles to industrialexpansion disappeared. Within a month,came a two-step devaluation of the rupee.The Indian economy was finally unshackled.

Leading a minority government with noroom for manoeuvrability, Rao made reformspolitically tenable at a time when his ownparty was out to scuttle it. It was not an easyexercise. There had been many stormyCongress parliamentary party meetings in

A TEAM TO RECKON WITH

Dr Manmohan Singh withsuccessive RBI governors

S Venkitaramanan, Dr C Rangarajan,

M Narasimham, Dr BimalJalan and Dr YV Reddy

(Below) Montek SinghAhluwalia, a key member

of team Rao

ECONOMY/Reforms

34 July 31, 2016

RBI

Photodivision

which senior cabinet ministers like ArjunSingh attacked Rao and Singh for theirdeparture from the Nehruvian model. Raocountered this by paying obeisance to theNehru-Gandhi family in the new industrialpolicy and in the budget.

The right-wing BJP, the main oppositionparty, opposed reforms for the sake of oppo-sing them. The Communists passionatelyopposed the liberalization policies, termingthem as “abject surrender to the IMF”.

Facing flak from all around, Rao had toapply a mild break, which was evident fromhis famous “Middle Path” speech at theWorld Economic Forum in Davos in 1994.The next two years saw a slower pace afterthe Congress lost in some states, includinghis home state, Andhra Pradesh, in 1994. Hepresented Singh as the spearhead of reforms,while he himself advocated a middle path.But it was his vision that Singh executed. Raolost the 1996 election amidst charges of cor-ruption and “reforms without a human face”.

CONTINUAL REFORMSThe successive governments since 1991(mostly coalition ones) have continued andadvocated the free market ideology withoutany hesitation. When the Congress support-ed the United Front governments led by HDDeve Gowda first and then by IK Gujral(1996-1998), the left-wing parties supportedtheir policies regarding financial sector liber-alization, disinvestment and foreign invest-ment, albeit reluctantly.

During the Vajpayee era (1998-2004), hepromoted external liberalization and ann-ounced measures to attract private foreigninvestment on a large scale. Ironically, a com-parison of the 2004 election manifestoes ofthe BJP and the Congress shows that theyessentially guaranteed the same things, butcouched them in different words. Vajpayeewould have gone far ahead had not theCongress put the brakes on reform measures.

Ironically, when Singh became the primeminister, he could not push through thereform process. Unlike Rao, Congress presi-dent Sonia Gandhi did not back him fully.Vested interests, trade unions and Left par-ties which supported UPA-I from outside,combined with vote-bank politics and pop-

ulism worked to block reforms. At the state level, regional partners like

the DMK delayed reforms. Above all, Singhwas not able to market the reforms to themasses, as they had failed to generateemployment corresponding to the highgrowth. The “human face” concept did notwork. The opposition parties dubbed the ref-orms as pro-rich and anti-poor. During UPA-II, the government was crippled by hugescams. This resulted in halting the process.

While reforms have a broad consensus,the speed is often held hostage by coalitionpolitics and vested interests. Modi believes inreforms and coming from a business-friendlystate, wants to speed up the pace but politicsis blocking reforms again. The GST and LandAcquisition Bills are examples of politicsovertaking economics.

ATTRACTIVE MARKETThe reforms story is only half-done. India istoday a $2 trillion-plus (6.3 times more than1991) economy. It is less agrarian, more glob-al and more connected and integrated withthe global economy. The middle class hasgrown to about 300 million and is likely todouble by 2025. In the 2000s, the cumula-tive effect of gradual reform finally madeIndia an 8.5 percent miracle growth econo-my. The inflow of better quality consumergoods satisfied the middle class and high

RUNNING INTO AROUGH PATCH(L-R) Sonia Gandhi didn’tsupport ManmohanSingh on reforms whenhe became prime minis-ter, as they were seen as anti-poor; The UnitedFront government led byHD Deve Gowda contin-ued the reforms initiatedby the Congress


foreign exchange stocks were beneficial toinvestors. Foreign investors see India as anattractive market.

However, while support for economicreforms mostly comes from the middle andupper classes, there is a perception that liber-alization, privatization and globalization,while making available foreign exchange andhigh quality consumer goods, has nottouched the common man. Such a state ofaffairs is sure to have a backlash, particularlyfor the government in terms of votes secured.

WAY AHEADBut there still is a long way to go. Second andthird generation reforms need to belaunched. Public sector and labor marketreforms, reduction of subsidies in food,power and fertilizers, defense, foreign directinvestment, banking and legislative reformsare other areas of concern. Irrigation is neg-lected; setting up an irrigation bank wouldhelp in this regard. Areas beneficial to thecommon man like power, transport, roads,

water, sanitation and education need morefocus. Crony socialism should not give way tocrony capitalism.

Another lacuna is that economic reformshave not been accompanied by administra-tive, judicial and legislative reforms. Theprocess has been more difficult particularlyon the legislative side because of politicalinstability during the coalition era in the pasttwo decades or so. Only in 2014 was there theushering in of a single-party governmentheaded by Modi. It has been difficult to buildconsensus for legislation in the insurance,financial sector and labour reforms.

There is also room to reduce central gov-ernment subsidies which are highly distortedand poorly targeted (e.g. subsidies on foodand fertilizers). A rational user charge forservices such as passenger traffic on the rail-ways, postal system and university educationneeds attention. Overstaffing was recentlyestimated at 30 percent and downsizingwould help reduce expenditure.

Simultaneously, state governments alsoneed to take corrective steps. Liberalizationshould be accompanied by supporting actionby state governments. Sales tax systems needto be modernized in most states. Agriculturalincome tax is constitutionally assigned to thestates, but no state has attempted to tax agri-cultural income.

Land revenue is a traditional tax based onlandholding, but it has been generally neg-lected and abolished in many states. Urbanproperty taxation could yield much largerresources if suitably modernized. State gov-ernments suffer from very large losses instate electricity boards (about 1 percent ofGDP) and in urban water supply. Oversta-ffing is greater in states than in the center.

While overall there has been a reductionin inflation, steady fiscal consolidation, acomfortable balance of payments positionand build-up of foreign exchange reserves,the biggest challenge is to sustain the mom-entum and make a success of the reformstory. What is needed is not less but more ref-orms with a quicker pace. For this, politicalwill is required but populism and vote-bankpolitics come in the way. The center and sta-tes will have to work out an answer for thesuccess of economic reforms.

Former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayeepromoted external liberalization and

announced measures to attract private foreign investment on a large scale.

IL

CONTINUING WITHMANMOHAN’S

BLUEPRINTPrime Minister Atal Bihari

Vajpayee and ExternalAffairs Minister YashwantSinha in Copenhagen in

2002. The Vajpayee government continued thereform process started by

the Congress in 1991

ECONOMY/Reforms

36 July 31, 2016

PIB


NATIONAL BRIEFS

— Compiled by Shailaja Paramathma and Usha Rani Das

Author Perumal Murugan“resurrected” Over a year ago a controversy sur-

rounding Perumal Murugan’s bookMadhorubagan had led to the authorannouncing through social media: “Theauthor Perumal Murugan is dead.” A‘Peace committee meeting’ organized byNamakkal district officials in Tamil Naduthen had seen the author giving variousundertakings including deletion of por-tions from his book and withdrawal of

unsold copies from the market. The Madras High Court has now

ruled in favor of the author. The firstbench of Chief Justice SK Kaul andJustice Puspha Sathyanarayana said inthe verdict: “Let the author be resurrect-ed to what he is best at. Write.” The judgment has also relieved the author ofthe various undertakings he had given toNamakkal district authorities.

The Sabarimala Temple case came to thespotlight again, with the re-elected LDF

government supporting the ban on entry ofwomen aged between 10 and 50. The LDFgovernment had filed an affidavit in 2008asking a discontinuation of the discrimina-tory practice. But it was withdrawn by theUDF government, stating right of religiouspractice of a devotee to be a constitutional

right. The state government’s counsel V Giri has now said the apex court’s deci-sion should follow constitutional principles.

The issue of Reliance Power mortgagingits coal blocks as collateral for a

`14,500 crore loan has led to a rift betweenthe coal ministry and the power ministry,both under Piyush Goyal.

The confusion came after the coal min-istry observed in Sasan Power’s case thatmortgage/assignment of mining lease

would vitiate the bid process even after thepower ministry held that mining lease/coalblock is an asset as per Article 16 of thePower Purchase Agreement.

The power ministry contested the deci-sion to turn down the Reliance subsidiary’srequest, prompting the coal ministry toapproach Goyal. Goyal’s office now says theissue has been referred to an inter-ministe-rial committee which will also examine ifall captive projects can do the same.

Goyal vs Goyal overReliance Power

Gujarat High Court has grantedbail to Patidar agitation

leader Hardik Patel in the Visnagarrioting case. A case of sedition hadbeen filed against him after theprotests which had begun last yearturned violent.

The Patidars, who were demand-ing reservation under the OtherBackward Class quota, had set fire

to state transport buses and blockedroads in several cities. The bailorders come on the condition thatPatel will not enter Mehsana,Gujarat, for nine months. He is freeto appeal against this decision onlyafter the completion of an earliersix-month ban order. Patel has notyet been released from jail as anoth-er case is pending against him.

Conditional bail granted to Hardik Patel

The government has formed a com-mittee under chief economic advisor

Arvind Subramanian to look into thesteep price rise and hoarding of pulses .The decision was taken at a ministerialmeeting chaired by finance ministerArun Jaitley.

One of the main agendas of thecommittee is to create a huge bufferstock of 20 lakh tonnes of pulses, fromthe present 8 lakh tonnes. It would alsolook into the possibility of increasingthe minimum support price for pulsesto bridge the demand-supply gap.

Temple entry issue Steps to controlprices of pulses

The Fall of Babri Masjid

6 December 1992. Narasimha Rao woke upat 7 a.m., later than usual since it was aSunday. He read the day’s newspapers. TheTimes of India reported that more than ‘2.25lakh VHP [Vishwa Hindu Parishad] volun-teers are poised to’ perform prayers rightnext to the Babri Masjid. The article quotedthe VHP spokesman promise that ‘volunteerswould not violate the court orders’.

The prime minister then spent thirty min-utes walking on a specially installed tread-mill. His personal physician, K. SrinathReddy, arrived soon after. They chatted inTelugu and English, while Reddy took sam-ples of Rao’s blood and urine.

Since it was a Sunday, Reddy, a cardiolo-gist at AIIMS hospital, spent the rest of theday at home with his family. At around noon,he switched on the television. Channels sho-wed calm in Ayodhya—the three domes ofBabri Masjid visible. At 12.20 p.m., Reddysaw live on television, the assault on the firstdome by thousands of Hindu activists. By1.55 p.m., the first dome had collapsed.

VINAY SITAPATI recountsthe events leading upDecember 6, 1992, andtries to absolve PrimeMinister Narasimha Raoof complicity with right-wing parties in itsdemolition.Excerpts:

BOOKS/ Half Lion

38 July 31, 2016

Nitin Rai

Reddy watched, numb. His father, K.V.Raghunatha Reddy, was an inveterate social-ist, and this had rubbed off on the son. Reddyremembers, ‘It was the worst day for Indiansecularism.’

Almost immediately after, Reddy thoughtto himself, ‘The prime minister is a heartpatient. How will he be feeling?’ A bypasssurgery in 1990 had nearly caused Rao toretire from politics.

Reddy rushed to the prime minister’soffice. Rao was standing when he entered, agaggle of officials and politicians aroundhim. They were all staring at the television.The third dome of the mosque had just fall-en. ‘Why have you come now?’ Rao angrilyasked Reddy. But the doctor insisted that hispatient be examined. Rao moved to a smallanteroom. ‘His mind was elsewhere,’ Reddyremembers, ‘but he was an obedient patient.’

Srinath Reddy checked the prime minis-ter’s pulse and blood pressure. ‘As I expected,his heart was racing away . . . pulse was veryfast . . . BP had risen. His face was gloweringred, he was agitated.’ Dr Reddy gave Rao anextra dose of beta blocker, and left only whenthe PM had visibly calmed.

Twenty-three years later, Reddy recallsRao’s physical state: ‘I am fairly convinced as

a doctor that his personal reaction to thedemolition was one of honest agitation. It isnot that of a person who would have plannedit or been complicit in it.’

‘The body does not lie.’ ....

Narasimha Rao was born into anobservant Brahmin family. He cameof political age fighting against the

Muslim ruler of Hyderabad state, where heworked alongside the Hindu Mahasabha,Arya Samaj and the communists. His guru,Ramananda Tirtha, exemplified these con-tradictions: he was a Hindu swami, commu-nist and Congressman—all rolled into one.Rao’s entire life had been wrapped aroundmorning pujas and yearly pilgrimages. InApril 1991, two months before becoming pri-me minister, he had accepted the post of thereligious head of a Hindu order in Courta-llam. For some, this religious past opens Raoup to charges of being anti-Muslim.

There is no evidence for this accusation. Itwasn’t just Rao who worked with Hindugroups during the liberation of Hyderabad in1948; so had the entire state Congress. Morethan any Indian prime minister, Rao hadgrown up around Islam and Muslims. Hewas well read in Koranic text, and could

That Rao wassleeping onDecember 6when the demolition tookplace is verifiably false.From 12.15p.m., when thefirst dome wasunder attack,Rao was on thephone with several of hisofficials.

MANAGING PERCEPTIONS?Modi addressing the nation on

August 15, 2015

TRUST DEFICIT?Prime MinisterNarasimha Rao withCongress leaderPranab Mukherjee.His own partymenblamed him for thetragedy


WARNINGS IGNORED(L-R) Arjun Singh was

disturbed by theAyodhya movement that

was gaining momentum, but Rao did

not pay heed;the one leader Rao did

not care for was LKAdvani, BJP’s most

prominent voice then

istry. He was close to several BJP leaders,from Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Murli Mano-har Joshi, to Bhairon Singh Shekhawat. Theone leader Rao did not care for was L.K.Advani, at the time the BJP’s most promi-nent voice. Advani had fled Sindh in Pakistanduring the partition of India. Unlike Rao,Advani was not a practising Hindu. Ashumourless as Vajpayee was jovial, he wasalso more disciplined. Advani’s organization-al skills were almost solely responsible for therapid rise of the BJP.

For Narasimha Rao, this rise representedless a visceral threat to secularism than athreat to the Hindu vote bank that had his-torically voted for the Congress. While hewas worried that Muslims were leaving theCongress, he was equally concerned that themajority—upper- and backward-caste Hin-dus—were moving towards the BJP. ‘If onlyminorities vote for the Congress, how can wewin?’ Rao said to a friend. In his book onAyodhya, Rao blames Congressmen for a‘subconscious inhibition that any expressionof [Hindu] religious sentiment on our part,even if we felt it strongly, would be seen as“non-secular”. As a result, the BJP becamethe sole repository and protector of the Hin-du religion in the public mind.’

‘You have to understand,’ he once told anunconvinced Mani Shankar Aiyar, ‘this is aHindu country.’

speak Urdu and Persian better than he couldSanskrit. ‘There was no communalism in theman,’ his Muslim foreign secretary SalmanHaidar says. ‘He was clean in heart.’

The difference lay in his idea of secular-ism. As Haidar puts it, ‘He was well aware ofIndia’s communality.’ Unlike the westernizedJawaharlal Nehru, Rao did not see India as anation of individuals but as a federation ofcaste and religious groups.

Rao’s Hindu self-identity also led him to anaïve portrait of the BJP. Rao had to fend offcommunists through his electoral career,never Hindu nationalists. On the other hand,Rao’s rival within the Congress, Arjun Singh,had battled with (and lost to) the BJP in hishome state of Madhya Pradesh. In his mem-oirs, Arjun Singh recalls lying in a hospitalbed in Bhopal when he heard Advani’s rathyatra pass by, its menacing slogans adding tohis sense of siege. Rao had never had this ex-perience; he thought of the BJP as misguidedHindus rather than dangerous adversaries.

Rao was also blinded by personal chem-

BOOKS/ Half Lion

As Indira and Rajiv’s chief negotiator withvarious dissident groups, Rao specialized in

backchannel talks, where pragmatic dealscould be made away from the public glare.

40 July 31, 2016

UNIPIB

This belief in India’s Hindu-ness as wellas his own led Rao to his master stroke (or so,he thought) in protecting the mosque with-out imposing Central rule.

As Indira and Rajiv’s chief negotiatorwith various dissident... groups inthe 1980s, Rao had specialized in

backchannel talks, where pragmatic dealscould be made away from the public glare.Starting in the middle of November 1992,prime minister Rao began similar backchan-nel talks with various Hindu groups, con-vincing them to protect the Babri mosque.

While these groups had a somewhat com-mon agenda, they were distinct organiza-tions with their own leaders. The BJP wasthe political face, while the RSS was a nomi-nally apolitical organization, as were theVishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal.The Shiv Sena was an entirely separate polit-ical party.... Narasimha Rao—scholar ofHinduism—was confident he could convincethem all.

Rao had personal relations with a numberof swamis, from the Sringeri Shankaracharyato the Pejawar Swami. In addition, hedeployed the Tamil Nadu Congressman R.Kumaramangalam to reach out to gurusfrom south India, while his astrologers N.K.Sharma and Chandraswami dealt with northIndian godmen.... Chandraswami remem-bers meeting Rao many times that Nov-ember. ‘I took the Shankaracharya to meetthe PM... also Acharya Ram Vilas Vedanti.’

In each of these meetings, Rao wouldpress for an assurance that the Babri mosquewould be unharmed. He would even breakinto Sanskrit and quote Hindu scriptures tomake his point. A senior intelligence bureauofficial assisting Rao remembers being pres-ent. ‘They were frauds, some of them,’ hesays. ‘I told the PM that these are men of straw.’

‘I am a Brahmin,’ Rao replied to this offi-cial. ‘I know how to deal with these people.’

Since Rao had studied in Nagpur, knewMarathi, and had represented nearby Ram-tek in Parliament, he knew many RSS lead-ers.... Rao’s old friend Madhukar Dattatraya‘Balasaheb’ Deoras, was the head of the RSS.Rao spoke to him on the phone many timesthat November. He also met with the RSSleader (and Deoras’s eventual successor) Raj-endra Singh. Singh, known as ‘Rajju bhaiya’,was less in the thrall of the prime minister.N.K. Sharma says, ‘Rajju bhaiya was aThakur, so he was against Narasimha Rao.’

Rao also negotiated in secret with theVHP, whose messianic leader Ashok Singhalwas an architect of the Ayodhya movement.Singhal came from a wealthy family of Alla-habad, and lived close to Jawaharlal Nehru’sancestral home. Their ideas of India, howev-er, could not have been more different.Naresh Chandra recalls a meeting in 7 RaceCourse Road where Rao pressed AshokSinghal to have more patience and not insistupon a showdown on 6 December. WhenRao asked the BJP leader Bhairon Singh

Rao sought reassurance

from RajasthanChief Minister

Bhairon SinghShekhawat who

had been representing

the BJP duringthe negotiations

with Muslimgroups.

Rao also negotiated in

secret with theVHP, whose

messianic leaderAshok Singhal

was an architectof the Ayodhya

movement. Raopressed Singhal

to have morepatience.


Shekhawat to speak to the VHP, Shekhawatconfessed to Naresh Chandra that his effortswere not having much effect.

Finally, Rao spent much of November1992 in secret meetings with the leadershipof the BJP. Since Rao’s friend Vajpayee wasless involved in the Ayodhya movement, Raofocused his attention on L.K. Advani—theparty’s organisation man. If anyone in theBJP could protect the mosque, Rao felt, itwas Advani. He asked B. Raman, from thespy agency RAW, for a ‘safe house’ where hecould meet Advani in secret. Raman locateda guest house that had been used by Rajiv

Gandhi to meet the leadership of the AkaliDal right before Operation Blue Star in 1984.

On 18 November 1992, Rao met Advanifor a secret conversation. In preparation forthe meeting, the home ministry sent him amemo, asking Rao to clarify with Advani the‘plans for the resumption of Kar Seva atAyodhya from 6.12.1992’. The memo askedthat the BJP postpone either the kar sevauntil the Supreme Court resolved the feud, orissue a public statement saying that the pro-posed temple would not be built on the dis-puted land. Rao also met with Kalyan Singhthat day, and once again the day after, on 19November.... P.V.R.K. Prasad remembers,‘Around November 25th, Advani, Vajpayeeand Kalyan Singh visited house number fiveon Race Course Road. The meeting was topsecret. I was in the room then. They assuredhim the mosque would be intact.’

In parallel, the prime minister soughtreassurance from Bhairon Singh Shekhawat,the chief minister of Rajasthan who had beenrepresenting the BJP during the negotiationswith Muslim groups. A courtly and courteousRajput, Shekhawat prided himself as a manof his word. Rao and Shekhawat shared amedical doctor. On 2 December, this doctorwalked into Rao’s home and—within earshotof several others—said, ‘Shekhawat sahib sebaat ho gayi hai. All is good.’ Chandraswamitoo spoke with Shekhawat. ‘He said nothingwill happen to the mosque. Narasimha Raobelieved him. Even I believed that the mos-que will not be broken.’

The contents of Rao’s meetings—with aconstellation of religious and political Hinduleaders—have remained undisclosed untilnow.... He did not even mention them in hisbook on Ayodhya, published after his death.However, the fact that at least some meetingsbetween the prime minister and Hindugroups occurred in November 1992 has madeit to the press. They have been interpreted asproof that Rao had, what the legal scholarA.G. Noorani calls, a tacit ‘understanding’with the BJP. The truth, unearthed here,reveals the opposite. Far from secretly con-niving to demolish the mosque, Rao was, infact, secretly conniving to protect it.

They also demonstrate his miscalculation.‘All these people who were consulted had a

UNFORTUNATELEGACY

Commandoes guardSri Krishna

Janmasthan inMathura on December6. 2014. The events of

1992 left a ghastlyimprint on India’s

social fabric

Contrary to the perception thatNarasimha Rao

slept through thecrisis, he calledHome Minister

SB Chavan (right)within minutes of

learning about the destruction.

BOOKS/ Half Lion

42 July 31, 2016

UNI

heightened sense of their importance. Raomisjudged that,’ Naresh Chandra says. ‘Thepeople who were really creating the problemwere the Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena,’ a homeministry official adds. But these were the twogroups that Rao did not reach out to, in thebelief that they could be controlled by hisfriends in the BJP, RSS and to a lesser extent,the VHP. As Jairam Ramesh puts it, ‘My ownreading is that he overestimated his ability indealing with these Hindu groups.’….

On the morning of 6 December 1992,Rao met Dr Srinath Reddy. He alsomet with his astrologer. ‘I cannot

share what I said there,’ N.K. Sharma says.... Meanwhile, at 9.30 a.m., Madhav

Godbole spoke to the head of the Centralparamilitary forces in Ayodhya, telling himthat if the state government required his helphe did not have to wait for formal ordersfrom the Central government. This sequenceof events is chronicled in a clandestine notethat Godbole sent Rao after 6 December. By11.30 a.m., a large but peaceful crowd wasbeing addressed by leaders of the BJP andVHP. Between 11.45 a.m. and 12 noon, thechief of police and administration for Ayo-dhya walked around the perimeter of theBabri Masjid. Everything was in order.

At about noon, a teenaged kar sevakjumped across the boundary and vaulted ontop of the mosque dome. He was not stoppedby any one of the policemen present. Thatfirst kar sevak was joined by thousands of

others, who began chipping away at the do-mes. There was a galaxy of BJP leaders pres-ent who had spent the past year whipping uppassion on the issue. L.K. Advani maderequests on the public address system for thekar sevaks to come down. He was ignored.

Rao’s home telephone began to ring. ‘Icalled up Kumaramangalam immediately,’Jairam Ramesh remembers. ‘Kumaraman-galam said that Rao was not to be reached.’Another Congressman called up the PM’shouse. ‘Khandekar picked up. He told methat the prime minister was in his room. Hedid not want to be disturbed.’ Arjun Singhlater claimed that he had tried to reach Raoat his house, but was told ‘. . . he has lockedhimself in his room and our directions arenot to disturb him under any circumstances.’Many other politicians called, none of whomcould get through. This inability to reach Raoled to the rumour that the prime ministerwas sleeping while Babri was under attack. Asenior journalist even claimed—on the basisof a conversation he claimed he had with asocialist politician who, in turn, claimed hehad heard it from someone else, who, in turn,claimed he was witness to the fact—that Raowas doing puja when the mosque fell. Isthere truth to these allegations?

That Rao was sleeping is verifiably false.From 12.15 p.m., when the first dome wasunder attack, Rao was on the phone with sev-eral of his officials. Naresh Chandra andMadhav Godbole were both in the home sec-retary’s office, monitoring developments.

Analyzing Rao’sapproach in the

wake of theAyodhya

movement,Congress leaderSalman Khurshid

believes that itwas his attempt

to do consensusbuilding that

destroyed him.

Congress leaderJairam Ramesh

says Rao overestimated

his ability in dealing with theBajrang Dal and

the Shiv Sena. Infact, he did noteven reach out

to them.


‘The prime minister was being informed on aregular basis,’ Chandra says. The Cabinet sec-retary S. Rajgopal was also present....

Around 2 p.m., Rao was joined by a hostof officials. Two of them, P.V.R.K. Prasad andthe law secretary, P.C. Rao, later gave a pressconference confirming this. P.C. Rao evenlisted other officials who could vouch for thefact that Rao was awake and monitoring thesituation.

One might still wonder why NarasimhaRao refused to take calls from some politi-cians between 12 and 2 p.m.. Even though hewas awake and on the phone with officials,why did he remain within his locked room?

A friend provides the answer. ‘I was withhim in the room throughout,’ this personsays. He was ‘normal until 12 [noon]. As hesaw [what was happening] on TV... for a fewminutes he couldn’t talk. He was not speak-ing. He trusted all those people very much.’

‘After a few minutes,’ this person says, ‘he

began calling. He called the DIB (director ofthe intelligence bureau, Vaidya), then (homeminister) S.B. Chavan.’ ....

This testimony—along with the evi-dence of those whom Rao spoke to inthose critical hours—is critical to dis-

proving the myth of Nero playing the fiddlewhile Rome burnt. Why then has this friendof Rao not spoken in his defence?

‘He promised me to keep it a secret. Hemade me swear.’

As if to make up for lost time, Rao swunginto action on 7 December. He met a series ofMuslims leaders—who were all furious at hisinability to protect the mosque. On 8 Dec-ember, his appointment diary shows, he metthe Naib Imam, Jamma Masjid + 8’. Two daysafter, the Rao government banned the RSS,VHP and Bajrang Dal, declaring them as‘unlawful’ organizations.

There was pressure on Rao to rebuild themosque on the same spot. In another error ofjudgement, he decided not to. But he was notthe only one who thought so. The minister ofdefence, Sharad Pawar, sent Rao a privatememo on 12 December, cautioning againstbuilding the mosque on the same place. ‘Ifthe masjid is rebuilt at the same site . . . [the]issue is likely to be exploited again and againfor spearheading mass movements. In such asituation the minority community will have

There is no question that Rao made thewrong decision on Babri Masjid. He should

have imposed President’s rule betweenNovember 1 and November 24,1992.

BOOKS/ Half Lion

DEFINING DATE(Right) Muslim

organizations observeDecember 6, 2014 as aBlack Day to mark the

22nd anniversary of the fallof the Babri Masjid;

(below) Rashtrawadi ShivSena members

celebrate Vijay Diwas inDecember 2013 to mark

the 21st anniversary of thesame event

44 July 31, 2016

to continuously face insecurity and tension.’There is no question that Rao made the

wrong decision on Babri Masjid. He shouldhave imposed President’s rule between 1November and 24 November 1992. Thisdecision would have been constitutionallysuspect and politically fraught. The SupremeCourt might have held the move illegal; theBJP would surely have brought a no-confi-dence motion in Parliament, Rao’s rivals inthe Congress would have blamed him, andthe prime minister might have lost his job.But it was a risk that should have been taken.The fall of Babri Masjid was an event thatshook the foundations of independent Indialike few others. Many Indians woke up to adifferent country on 7 December, and stillblame the prime minister of the day. Historyhas judged Narasimha Rao harshly.

But this is a judgement made with thebenefit of hindsight, after knowing how eve-nts unfolded on 6 December. Knowing onlywhat Rao did before 6 December, what canwe fairly accuse him of?

To accuse him of plotting the demolitionis a lie, and will remain one until contraryevidence emerges—which it has not in thetwenty-four years since. Not only is there nohard proof that Rao aided the conspiracy,there is plenty to indicate that he tried to pro-tect the mosque through secret talks withHindu leaders....

What then can Rao be legitimately criti-cized for?

His error was that, against the judgementof his officials (and, it must be admitted,Arjun Singh), Rao reposed his faith in mem-bers of the VHP, BJP, RSS and sundry Hindugurus. To be fair to Rao, he began these infor-mal talks only when he realized he had fewformal options. But he should have knownthat people like L.K. Advani were either in onthe conspiracy (as the Liberhan Commissionsays they were) or were riding a tiger theycould not control. For a statesman with apreternatural instinct for his own weakness-es, Rao’s overconfidence in his ability to con-vince Hindu groups must go down as a seri-ous failure of judgement.

Rao’s desperation to protect his ownminority government also clouded his ins-tincts. Salman Khurshid says, ‘The tragedyabout Rao sahib is that his attempt to do con-sensus building is what destroyed him.’ This‘consensus building’ was driven by Nara-simha Rao’s interest in appeasing both theHindu as well as Muslim vote bank, insteadof a single-minded focus on protecting themosque. Rao wanted to protect the mosqueand protect Hindu sentiments and protecthimself. He ended up with the mosque des-troyed, Hindus unattracted to the Congress,and his own reputation in tatters....

It led to the killing of many innocents,mainly Muslims, in the riots that followed. Italso symbolized for many the passing ofNehruvian secularism.

But that demise was not caused by thedestruction of a disused mosque.... It ste-mmed from the rise of the BJP. As long as themosque stood, the BJP could play on theHindu humiliation they claimed it symbol-ized, and rise from a party with two seats in1984 to 120 seats in 1991.

In the final analysis, therefore, the endur-ing political victim of the Babri demolitionwas Narasimha Rao himself. Some of thiswas his doing, much of it deliberate defama-tion by his own party. As Narasimha Rao putit... in his book on the events of 6 December,‘...those responsible for the vandalism hadgot not only the Babri Masjid demolished,but along with the Babri Masjid it was mewhom they were trying to demolish.’

Half Lion: HowP.V. NarasimhaRao TransformedIndia

By Vinay Sitapati

Published by Penguin

Pages: 391; price: `699

IL


UNI

An Attempt atSocial Reform?

RECENTLY, the Uniongovernment requestedthe Law Commission toexamine the enforce-ability of a commoncivil code. At least, prima facie, it appears

to be only a tracer shot and not a firm pro-posal. This move from the central govern-ment is a sort of declaration that it is alive tothe reminders from the Supreme Courtabout Article 44 of the constitution of India.It is also an assurance to the voters that theruling party is still wedded to some of its oldpromises.

Whatever may be the reason behind thisstep, it is bound to trigger fresh debate,where old arguments will be repeated. Themain objection of those who oppose the ideaof a common civil code is that in a multi-reli-gious and multi-cultural society like India, itwould infringe on freedom of religion guar-anteed by the constitution.

FOCUS/ Common Civil Code

Will such a code in a multi-religious, multi-cultural society like

India infringe on freedom of religion? No, it will not interfere inthe way of worship of any religion

By Justice NarendraChapalgaonker

46 July 31, 2016

UNI

IL

Misconceptions about the scope of reli-gious freedom give rise to most of such objec-tions. A common civil code, in whatever formit is enacted, will not interfere in the way ofworship and ethical values cherished by anyparticular religion. If, in the absence of amodern state, religion has started governingsome of the secular aspects of family andsocial life of an individual, some day jurisdic-tion will have to be transferred to a secularstate when it has come into existence. Oldrules governing these secular aspects of lifewill have to be replaced by rules which wouldrespect human rights and a modern conceptof individual liberty.

CHURCH VS STATETo what extent should a secular state inter-fere in the personal law of a citizen withintent to reform? The demarcating linebetween the jurisdiction of church and statehas been a contentious issue for centuries. Acommon civil code, to some extent, would bean attempt at social reform, using the law asan instrument. All social reforms are alwaysopposed by religious orthodoxy. The framersof the constitution considered a proposal tomake a common civil code compulsorilyapplicable for all citizens. Unfortunately, asub-committee considering the question of acommon civil code rejected it by a majorityand voted in favor of putting it in the direc-tive principles. We presumed that the spreadof education would make people aware ofhuman rights and make them more liberal.The experience is otherwise.

In the 1950s, an attempt to bring certainreforms in Hindu law by enacting a HinduCode Bill was frustrated, not by any politicalparty in opposition but by a strong groupwithin the Congress which had accepted sec-ularism and equality as its creed. The conflictresulted in the resignation of Dr BR Ambed-kar and the provisions were enacted in frag-ments after the atmosphere had cooleddown. If the government is serious aboutchanges in the civil law governing families, itshould resort to the same method by whichHindu Law was amended in 1955-56. Whynot think about bringing in a comprehensivebill on maintenance applicable to all citizenswhich would undo the mischief which was

MULTI-RELIGIOUS INDIAA common civil code will notinterfere in the way of worshipand ethical values of a religion

lawfully done by Muslim Women [Protectionof Rights after Divorce] Act? It is not neces-sary that all the provisions common to allshould be contained in a single statute.

Another option can also be considered.An act protecting rights like maintenance,property and adoption should be enacted butmade optional. Whosoever opts for that atthe time of marriage should be protected byit irrespective of any religious mandate to thecontrary. All disabilities opposed to the pro-visions of this act should be declared inappli-cable to that couple.

Therefore, a debate is welcome. The onlyrider is that it should not go round and roundthe same arguments which are hardly relevant and are likely to be political innature.


UNI

Salvaging Alang,

48 July 31, 2016

ENVIRONMENT/ Ship-breaking Rules

IT is almost ironical that the thro-bbing Alang beach on the Bhav-nagar coast in Gujarat, one of thebiggest graveyards for decommis-sioned and aging ships, is seem-ingly on its deathbed. Toughinternational regulations that fo-

cus on clean methods to break up shipsthreaten the industry that is seen to be a seri-ous polluter.

A couple of years ago, over 350 vesselsused to be broken at the ship-breaking yardevery year. It had a 10-kilometer coastlinewith ships in various stages—some almostbroken and others in the process. It was abooming industry with a potential of nearly `6,000 crore.

FAVORITE DESTINATIONThousands of laborers worked throughsmoke and dust with gas-powered blowtorches and huge hammers, stripping everyship of its steel for months. Once the giantvessels were broken into bits and carriedaway for recycling to steel melting units,preparations were made for another ship tobe beached for breaking. Over 7,000 shipshave been broken down in the last 33 years.With lax environmental laws, India was afavorite destination to send ships from all

A move by the EU Commission and theSupreme Court to get ship-breaking yards to create environment-friendly facilities may save Alang as it gasps for lifeBy Ramesh Menon

Graveyard of Ships

DARK GRAVEYARD(Left) Ships being dismantled on the Alangbeach in Bhavnagar


Youtube

over the world with decontaminated materialfor recycling. But, that may not be the caseanymore.

For more than a year now, there has been alull on the otherwise busy coastline that creat-ed a money-spinning industry. Today, thereare hardly 80 ships for breaking and ship-breakers are no more laughing all the way tothe bank. Many ship-breaking yards havebeen shut. The workforce has come downfrom 30,000 to 18,000. Those who remainwonder how long they will be there as uncer-tainty hangs in the air.

They are not the only ones grappling withquestions about their future. It also includesscores of people who run ancillary industriesthat melt the scrapped steel. There are shopsfor over seven kilometers on both sides of theroad in Alang that sell goods that have beensalvaged from ships, like furniture, kitchen-ware, washing machines, fridges, mattresses,curtains and machinery parts like pumps that

can be re-used. They too face a bleak future.Many of the 165 or so yards where ships arebroken down are empty and many are on theverge of becoming so.

EU RULESHow is India going to lose out on its ship-breaking business? The European UnionCommission is now looking at ways to getship owners to send their vessels only to tho-se ship-breaking yards that have modernrecycling facilities, strict environment safe-guards and which take good care of theirworkers. At the moment, Alang can’t stakeclaim to any of these.

Four years ago, the Supreme Court pro-hibited ships coming for ship-breaking fromnumerous well-off OECD countries fromentering India’s territorial waters if they hadnot removed hazardous waste that the BaselConvention had specified. It wanted haz-ardous material within the ship to be first

THIRD WORLD’SBURDEN?

Developed countriesdo not want to dismantle the

hazardous wastes intheir discarded shipsbefore sending them

to ship-breaking yardsin South Asia

50 July 31, 2016


Pierre Torset

removed and destroyed before it was sent forship-breaking to India. But ships with poi-sonous material continue to beach at Alangfor breaking.

For many years now, the ship-breakingyard at Alang has been tangled in numerousallegations about how it does not follow envi-ronmental norms and has done a lot of eco-logical damage. Greenpeace has been in theforefront of this campaign and has even prevented toxic ships like French aircraft carrier Le Clemenceau from being brokendown in Alang as it had a huge amount ofasbestos. Human right activists have oftenhighlighted the high number of deaths atAlang due to accidents and scores of othercases of serious injuries. The workers aremainly from helpless impoverished familiesfrom Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal, UttarPradesh and Odisha.

The worrisome thing is that foreign shipowners, in collusion with Indian ship-break-ers, are trying to outwit the Basel Conven-tion. There is a legal obligation for countriesnot to send contaminated ships for ship-breaking, but they are doing just that. This isbecause developed countries do not want topollute and endanger the lives of their citi-zens with poisonous carcinogenic materialthat is often found in ships, like asbestos, amaterial that is banned in 50 countries. Afew weeks ago, a Danish ship was in the newsfor beaching at Alang for ship-breaking.Activists say that it violated internationallaws by doing so and took advantage of thelax regulations in India.

POOR ENFORCEMENTWhat is disheartening is that India’s Ship-Breaking Code that was formulated afterSupreme Court directives has not achievedthe desired results. A study by the NationalHuman Rights Commission on Alang saidthat conditions have not improved. There hasbeen poor enforcement of safety regulations.As there have been over 470 confirmeddeaths in the ship-breaking yards from 1983to 2013, emergency facilities to treat the inju-red should have been established. Workershave to be taken 50 km to Bhavnagar fortreatment because there are grossly inade-quate health facilities to treat the injured.

Since 1983, over 400 fires have broken out atAlang. It is crying out for emergency facili-ties. But the focus has been on business andnot on worker welfare and rights. Housingand sanitation have been ignored and so haveeducation facilities for the workers’ children.

The incentive for ship owners to sell theirdecommissioned vessels to South Asian ship-breakers is huge as their lenient rules for dis-posing of asbestos and other forms of wastemake profits higher. That was one of the reasons for Alang’s booming business.

The European Commission now wants toneutralize the advantage which countries likeBangladesh, Pakistan and India have hadand are pushing for ship owners to recycleonly at clean, approved facilities that havemodern methods. These new EU rules require EU-registered ships to be recycledonly at sustainable facilities. Ship-breakers inIndia say that they will have to invest heavilyin creating dry docks for ship-breaking, withhuge cranes and lifting devices.

The new international strictures willensure that the erstwhile lucrative businesswill move to countries like China and Turkeywhich are ready to invest in building modernship-breaking facilities that cater to the newnorms. While environmental activists and

“We have nochoice but toclean up.... If wehave managedto ensure environmentallycleaner cars,why can’t we have ship-breakingyards that are environment-friendly?”

—Chintan Kalthia,owner of RL Kalthia

Ship Breaking Private Limited


laws have come as the industry wants to nowbe seen as a clean one and not as one of themost polluting ones which rapidly destroysmarine ecology.

EXPENSIVE PROPOSITIONInternationally, the pressure on dirty recy-cling of aging ships has increased with envi-ronmentalists demanding that only the onesthat have clean methods that pollute mini-mally should be allowed. Ship-breakers saythat if they bring in facilities that are beingdemanded by the EU Commission, profitswill collapse as it will be very expensive toclean up the industry and production capac-ity would fall by around 30 percent.

In 1983, then Gujarat finance ministerSanat Mehta had taken this writer to Alang

NGOs would want Alang shut down, theGujarat government and the center wouldrather not do it as it is a money-spinner. Butwith tough international regulations and con-cerns of environmental damage, ship-breakersin Alang will have to invest in creating mod-ern, clean facilities and also look after theirworkers. This will cut into their profits but ifthe ship-breaking yard is to survive, this is theonly way out.

Karmenu Vella, European Commissionerfor Environment and Maritime Affairs, saidthat the shameful practice of European shipsbeing dismantled on beaches will end with theintroduction of the new law that will ensurethat EU-registered ships are scrapped only atsustainable facilities with proven safeguardsfor the environment and workers. These tough

As numerous hazardous wastetrafficking scandals hit the

headlines in the late Eighties, theUnited Nations EnvironmentalProgramme in 1992 adopted the Basel Convention on the control of trans-boundary move-ment of hazardous wastes andtheir disposal.

The Basel Convention controlsthe international trade of haz-ardous wastes. However, it is cru-cial for the ship-breaking industryas ships have numerous haz-ardous materials within theirstructure like asbestos, oilresidues and other toxic materiallike PCBs. These are organicchlorine compounds used incoolants, electrical apparatus andother heat transference fluids.

The Basel Convention, ratifiedby 181 countries, is the only inter-national regulation which aims atprotecting developing countriesfrom the dumping of toxic waste.In 1995, there was an amendmentin the Convention called the BanAmendment which bannedexports of wastes intended for

recovery and recycling to devel-oping countries. It was ratified by81 countries. This amendmentwas also incorporated in theEuropean Waste ShipmentRegulation which said that EUmember states are not allowed toexport hazardous wastes todeveloping countries. However,many ships from the EU end upon the beaches of South Asia.

In 2002, the Basel Conventionalso adopted a document called:“Technical guidelines for the envi-ronmentally sound managementof the full and partial dismantlingof ships”. These guidelines provide recommendations on procedures to ensure safe dis-mantling of ships.

The Hong Kong Conventionof 2009 which allowed ship-break-ing on tidy beaches in developingcountries was ratified by justNorway, France and Congo. It hasstill not come into force and thereis no date specified. NumerousNGOs worldwide condemned itfor legalizing scrapping of toxicships on these beaches.

Cleaning up

52 July 31, 2016


to watch the first ship that had come to bebroken on a pristine beach. “Give me 10years,” he had said, “I will turn this into oneof the largest ship-breaking yards of theworld.” He did make good on his promise.But Mehta, who passed away over a year ago,would have been disappointed to see theenvironmental damage that Alang caused.

Alang has a lot of promise but both thecenter and the state will have to step in torescue it by respecting both Indian and inter-national law and making it a destination forout-of-date ships.

JAPANESE HELPChintan Kalthia, owner of RL Kalthia ShipBreaking Private Limited, which is one of theyards that has modernized, told India Legal:

“There is hope as the Japanese government isnow planning to start investing heavily inimproving facilities at Alang. Japan sees it asworthwhile to invest in an industry like this.It is a fact that we have to make this a cleanindustry and ensure that our workers havesafe conditions to live and work in. We haveno choice but to clean up if we have to survivein the international market. If we have man-aged to ensure environmentally cleaner cars,why can’t we have ship-breaking yards thatare environment-friendly?”

Japan has pledged to give a loan of `18crore ($180 million) to the ship-breakingindustry in Alang to upgrade 70 yards. Thefunds would be provided by the JapanInternational Cooperation Agency and theloan has to be paid back over 40 years.

LIVING ON THE EDGEWorkers toil in hazardous conditions at ship-breaking yardsin Third World countries. Unlessthe yards clean up,they will not be ableto survive


Naquib Hossain/Wikimedia

a pre-treatment facility for the removal andtreatment of hazardous materials from ves-sels and the expansion of the facility’s currenttreatment storage disposal facility to enable25 tons of waste to be incinerated daily.

In early July, a Japanese team was inAlang for one of its numerous inspections. Adraft project plan of the Japan government tobring about a turnaround in Alang is expect-ed to be ready by September this year.

Japan offered its expertise in upgradingthe ship recycling industry in India after avisit by Prime Minister Narendra Modi toJapan when this was discussed. India acc-ounts for nearly 30 percent of the global shiprecycling industry.

There is a new flicker of hope now in Ala-ng with this development as Japan’s techno-logical help can aid in the decontaminationof ships after they are beached and also cre-ate procedures and conditions for workersafety and environment protection.

—With inputs from Mishika Chowdhary

The money will be used to create a pre-treat-ment facility for the removal and treatmentof hazardous materials from ships beforebreaking and expanding the current disposalfacilities. Japan is also trying to get India toratify the Hong Kong Convention so that for-eign ships can be allowed to come to India tobe broken down.

The upgrades that will be undertakenthrough the loan include the construction of

IL

� Fire-fighting equipment � Appointing qualified safety officers for supervision� Maintaining distance during cutting of steel � Providing personal protection equipment� Inspection by government officials� Training of workers according to the Ship Recycling Code

Basics ignoredIndia’s ship-breaking code was created in 2013 after specific directionsfrom the Supreme Court, but it has not achieved the desired results. Someof the guidelines made elaborate provisions for safety compliance:

STRUGGLE TOEXIST

(Above) Half-dismantled ships at

the Alang beach withworkers living in

pathetic shantiesacross the road

54 July 31, 2016


Ramesh Menon

IL

In response to an articlepublished in the India Legalissue of April 30, 2016, Bid

& Hammer, a prominentauction house, has the following to say about

counterfeits in Indian artand the recourse it has

taken to curb the menace

IF the world of Indian art is booming,so is the infiltration of unscrupulousdealers and gallery owners who arepassing off fakes as originals andoriginals as fakes in an attempt to

rake in millions. In such a scenario, it is in-deed very difficult to ascertain which art-works are actually genuine or which source isto be trusted especially when it comes toworks by senior artists like MF Husain, SH Raza, Manjit Bawa, KH Ara, FN Souzaand Ravi Varma.

However, it wouldn’t be all gloomy if theconcerned individuals and experts walk thetalk and establish the authenticity or other-wise of their claims and this is precisely whatwe at Bid & Hammer, as a responsible auc-tion house, have been espousing and stand-ing by our expertise on artworks to the extentthat we successfully took legal action againsta known collector to prove the validity of ourauthentication process.

A victim of media concocted speculation acouple of years ago, we unflinchingly stoodour ground amidst all the noise by our com-petitors who avariciously called for a“Regulatory Body to curb Fakes”. Under-standably, it was in an attempt to deflect theirown shortcomings that Bid & Hammer wastargeted in spite of our catalogue havingworks with impeccable provenance from thedescendants of the Maharaja of Burdwan,

Artist Foundations Sued for Fake Claims

ART SCENE

TIMELESSARTAn originalBindu seriespainting by SH Raza


freedom fighter Radha Devi Goenka, actressNamrata Shirodkar and other notable artistestates. Expectedly, the campaign was full ofrhetoric and eventually withered away.Subsequently, to expose the real cartels thatmanipulated the market in collusion withsections of the mainstream media, we havecoherently taken legal recourse against thoseindividuals, galleries and artist foundationswho orchestrated the smear campaign.

Bid & Hammer's counter campaign isbacked not only by Prof Ratan Parimoo butalso KS Radhakrishnan (an authority onRamkinkar Baij) and Prof Rajeev Lochanwho have denied making observations aswas published in the media. Even artist KKHebbar’s daughters, Rekha Rao and RajaniPrasanna, are wholeheartedly supportingthe crusade of the auction house againstfakes. The onus has now been passed on tothose who make such allegations to sub-stantiate them with concrete evidence. Ifnot, they should refrain from airing such ill-informed views in the greater interest ofIndian art.

The government’s move to allow“vermin” to be killed is a flawed decision when these animals have co-existed with

local people for decades By Prof Amita Singh

A MyopicMove

RECENT notificationsof the Ministry ofEnvironment, Forestsand Climate Change(MoEFCC) to declaresome wildlife animalsvermin and allow their

hunting are an example of inexperienceddamage management. The government def-ends itself by citing distress calls from thefields as a cue to these notifications. In one ofthe most overpopulated countries, which ishigh on both corruption and institutionaldefiance, one should be relatively more cau-tious in differentiating between the price andthe value of any object or living thing beforetaking the extreme step of eliminating anddeclaring a species of nature as vermin.

It was expected that the present govern-ment which claims to have given a voice tothe believers of Hinduism within whichShiva (Pashupatinath or the god of animals)occupies a larger space, would give more fil-

ENVIRONMENT/ Culling Animals

56 July 31, 2016

COMING TO THE RESCUEA man carries a dog ashe wades through aflooded street in Chennai

UNI

It is difficult tobelieve how afew of thesebenign animals, whocome insearch of foodbecause theirfood habitatshave beencompletelyannihilated,cannot coexistor be treatedwith softeroptions.

lip to environmental and animal conserva-tion policies beyond the well intentioned butunenforced initiatives taken by the previousincumbents, Jairam Ramesh and JayanthiNatarajan. Sadly, “Pashupatinath” is confinedto cosmetics of civility which concealed whatBertrand Russell mentioned as those layersof violence and killing which man carriedsince the prehistoric times.

ON THE HIT LISTThrough four recent notifications startingDecember 24, 2014, the central governmenthas declared macaques (Macaca mulatta),nilgai (Boslaphus tragocandus) and wild pigs(Sus scrofa) listed at serial number 17-A ofPart 1 of Schedule II to the WildlifeProtection Act, vermin for inclusion inSchedule V of the said Act and so liable to behunted. The government draws this powerfrom Section 62 of the Wildlife (Protection)Act, 1972 (WLPA), which empowers it todeclare by notification wild animals otherthan under Schedule 1 and Part II ofSchedule II to be vermin for a specified areaand period. The office memorandum of theMoEFCC in Section 4(3) of its advisory in thecontext of human wildlife conflict (HWLC)proclaims that “no such proposal is seenreceived in the ministry” till 2014.

Interestingly, immediately after this advi-sory, one sees a barrage of notifications com-ing out of the MoEFCC between December 1,2014, and May 24, 2016. For some 70 yearsafter independence, these animals have co-existed with local people. Has their psychechanged suddenly or, like everywhere else,has the arrogance and intolerance of men gotan upper hand? But institutions of gover-nance are not expected to tame this erro-neous human behavior, especially in India,though co-existence is the key to existence.

The decision is also flawed on anotherground. It is not based on its own internalfindings. A 2014 MoEFCC advisory in thecontext of HWLC had suggested the follow-ing key government initiatives to precede anyrecourse to Section 62 of the WLPA: � Treatment of forests outside the protected areas � Regulating human habitations along theforest fringes facing HWLC

� States to institute HWLC ManagementStrategies (HWLCMS) on priority, formulateHWLC Management Plans (HWLCMP) foridentified conflict zones for primarily initialmitigation and quick response action. (Thiswas suggested to inculcate confidence inlocal communities in the forest administra-tion staff )� Enhancement and enforcement of infor-mation and knowledge on wildlife throughresearch and at times, by population man-agement strategies (this cannot be necessari-ly understood only as “killing” or that thespecies be declared “vermin”) � Section 6 of the advisory envisages that anysuch proposal must be based on ground-levelassessment of the gravity of the situation andmust be supported by “any study, consulta-tive expert opinion, survey etc”.

SOFTER OPTIONSJoint director Shiv Pal Singh led this team ofexperts but this crucial document was notlooked at before the drastic step of advocat-ing killing. There is also a very stringentwarning which comes through Section 11(1)of the WLPA 1972 which authorizes the chiefwildlife warden to “permit hunting of anywild animal specified in Schedule 1 if itbecomes dangerous to human life… only (as alast resort) when it cannot be captured, tran-quillized or translocated”. It is difficult tobelieve how a few of these benign animalswho come in search of food because theirfood habitats have been completely annihi-lated by some kind of lobbies could not

WHOSE LAW ISIT, ANYWAY?A nilgai beingcaught in Delhi


Youtube

coexist or be treated withsofter options suggestedabove in the WLPA.

When the Indira GandhiInternational Airport wasbeing constructed in 2005-6, Wildlife SOS, an NGO,relocated more than 30-40nilgai to other habitats infull consideration of theirfamily bonds and habitatrequirements. But the ques-tion is not that. The govern-ment would probably noteven need to relocate them as the same argu-ment has repeatedly failed in case of dogswhen expanding cities shoved bulldozersover their habitats. The WLPA has adequateprovisions to take corrective measures asSection 4(3) of the advisory suggests.

The real story behind this decision is this:Within this period when these co-existinganimals were being eliminated, the MoEFCCwas clogged with proposals from mining lob-bies, change of land use commercial estab-lishments, stone crushers, hydro-electricprojects, sand-bajri and boulder projects.Many proposals for boundary alterationswere cleared around Wildlife Sanctuaries(WLS), such as Kolleru and Coringa WLS(AP), Kaimur WLS (Bihar), Buxa TigerReserve (West Bengal), Mulund WLS(Maharashtra), Mukundra Hills (Durrah) in

Rajasthan, Hastinapur WLS (UP), MajathalWLS (Mandi, HP), Jakhol Sankri WLS(Thane, Maharashtra), Panna Tiger Reserve(MP), Baisipalli WLS (Odisha), MussoorieWLS and Muskdeer WLS in Kedarnath,Uttarakhand.

Many rivers too are being affected, inclu-ding the Noon, Gulati and Ramgarh rivers.This is likely to affect the Kedarnath WLSand the Nanda Devi National Park. Theactivities on land are also affecting marinesanctuaries. The Narayan Sarovar and Puli-cat Bird Sanctuary in Ponneri taluk ofThiruvallur in Tamil Nadu, Son GharialSanctuary (MP) and even the BhitarkanikaSanctuary of the rare Olive Ridley turtles aregoing to witness more village settlementsthrough government pattas (documents). Itis a well-established argument that an “ani-mal protects the forest from human greed”.Greedy humans first try to eliminate the ani-mals in their rush to grab cash.

FOLLOW ONTARIOMany untrained youngsters in the mediaflow with the popularity of a theme. Events atJNU in recent times have visibly exposed thethirst of the media to sensationalize and cre-ate leaders out of demons. I always had theopportunity to work at the ground level withsome of the most sensitive and consistentyoung journalists with vision, but that is notthe general situation. Newspapers havechurned out news to support culling withouteven sparing time to read the wisdom of pastexperience in sustainable damage control.They have even quoted policy decisions fromthe US on killing without reference and con-

Expandingcities haverepeatedly

shoved bulldozers

over the habitats of dogs.

A GRIM REALITYA stray dog being sterilized

as part of the Animal BirthControl program in

Kozhikode

58 July 31, 2016

ENVIRONMENT/ Culling Animals

UNI

population growth rather than curtailing it � Provide scientific data documenting theclaim that “abundant” species can have a pro-found and negative impact on the environ-ment and on the biodiversity of sensitive andunique areas.

Most American documents have treatedsweeping arguments such as “abundant pop-ulations harming agriculture and posingthreat to people’s lives and livelihood” asflawed, unreasonable and unsubstantiated.

The last but also the most importantissue is that there is a suspicion that the list-ing of some animals for killing will lead tothe rise of subsidiary meat alternativesespecially as beef availability drops. The meatindustry will introduce culinary innovationsto the voracious human food industry.Australia’s culling of kangaroos, startedto control population, is now almost anindustrial scale slaughter for the mass mar-ket, plus the ever-expanding export trade.The emu, which we admired as a flightlessbird, already feeds a mass consumptionindustry to compensate for chicken.

Thus, culling is giving away from the backend what is refused in public by the govern-ment, ie, “beef ”. I can only suggest the minis-ter in charge of this most precious ministryread Oscar Wilde’s short story, The SelfishGiant, which teaches us the indispensabilityof co-existence for our own existence.

(The writer is from the Center for theStudy of Law and Governance and head of

Disaster Research Centre, MemberSecretary of Institutional Ethics

Review Board, JNU, Delhi)

text. Of the many states which have theirplan in place for managing HWLC, I quote afew relevant sections from Ontario’s Plan: � Amend the strategy to include a recogni-tion of the intrinsic value of wildlife in asocial, cultural and spiritual context asopposed to the current approach which iden-tifies only the problems with wildlife thatresult in direct impact on humans (Ontario’sDraft Human Wildlife Conflict Strategy,September 29, 2006) � Remove value-laden statements that aremade in the absence of scientific evidence oron biased information such as the claim that“overabundant species” reduce biodiversity � Increase the availability of compensation toagricultural communities impacted bywildlife to reflect the $33 million costs incrop damage and wildlife predation andassist in the development of an agriculturalwildlife impact prevention program � Conduct a realistic economic analysis ofdeer (animal) impacts on agriculture;acknowledge that $7.5 million spent by farm-ers to prevent wildlife conflicts is a positivestart but hardly a significant investment,averaging at $125.56 per farm in Ontario � Provide definitions for such terminology as“abundant populations”� Provide statistical information for theclaim that increased hunting opportunitiesfor abundant wildlife populations, such asdeer, have resolved human-wildlife conflicts,not just provided temporary relief � Address the concern that the increases infertility and reproductive rate observed inhunted versus non-hunted deer populationsmay mean that hunting actually stimulates

IN DISTRESS(From L to R) A group ofemus, deer and a kangaroowith its joey

IL


Wikipedia

ACTS AND BILLS/ Health

Birth of a VitalRegulation

Surrogacy is a highly exploitativebusiness in India.

A proposed lawseeks to regulate

hospitals and clinicsinvolved in it while

protecting the rights of surrogate

mothers and commissioning

parents By Usha Rani Das

WHEN Surabhi, 34, adomestic help in Delhi,learnt from her friend howshe had earned `1.5 lakhby becoming a surrogate

mother, she was also inspired to makemoney. She needed it to provide a decenteducation for her son and daughter. Surabhiapproached the International FertilityCentre (IFC) in the national capital and vol-unteered to be a surrogate mother.

She was soon approached by a young manregistered with the clinic. He offered her `3.5lakh (less her hospital expenses) to be a sur-rogate mother and she accepted.Hospitalization could mean between`50,000 and `2 lakh. But that did not dis-suade Surabhi. She is nearly four monthspregnant and hopes to make a sizeableamount post delivery.

60 July 31, 2016

BREAKING STEREOTYPEPanchi (28) is one of the

many faceless women who have defied socialconventions to become

surrogate mothers albeitfor monetary recompense

Anil Shakya

Surrogacy is a highly commercializedindustry in the absence of any laws to regu-late it. The government has been under pres-sure to have a legal framework that governsthe business. The draft Surrogacy(Regulations) Bill 2016 is meant to fulfill thatneed. It got the green signal from the lawministry on May 6, 2016 and is before aGroup of Ministers (GoM) for consideration.

Though the issue has been debated forquite a while, Bollywood actor TussharKapoor brought it to the forefront by becom-ing the single parent of a surrogate boy inJune 2016. Earlier, Bollywood icons AamirKhan and Shah Rukh Khan had also opted for surrogate parenthood. Ironically,one of the main agendas of the Bill is whethersingle parents should be given the rights of surrogacy.

UNREGULATED MARKETIndia is one of the few countries that allowcommercial surrogacy. The cheap and unreg-ulated market has made it a major hub andAnand in Gujarat is termed the “surrogacycapital” of the country. Indian Council ofMedical Research (ICMR) data notes thatapproximately 2,000 babies are born everyyear through commercial surrogacy. It is esti-mated to be a $2.3 billion industry andGujarat reportedly contributes 40 percent toIndia’s surrogacy industry.

Those who encourage women to rent out

their wombs would like to see it as a noble act.“Usually society blames the woman when shecannot bear a child. They don’t see that thefault can be with the man too. So I did a goodjob helping women in distress,” says Sumathi,who became a surrogate mother in 2008.Indian society is slowly understanding thenobility of the cause and breaking stereotypes.“What if you are unable to bear a child afterthis? But it’s okay for me. I have a daughterand a son. I don’t want more children,” says28-year-old Panchi. Panchi is three monthspregnant and is happy with the care given toher at the surrogate home of Baby Joy IVF andSurrogacy Centre in Janakpuri, Delhi. She isgiven proper counselling to make her under-stand the generosity of her bequest.Counselling is also done so that a surrogatemother does not have any kind of emotionalattachment to the baby she has to forego.

“Surrogacy should not be banned in India.Even foreign couples should not be bannedfrom coming to India for a surrogate child,”Inderpreet Kaur, head of Baby Joy IVF andSurrogacy Centre, told India Legal. But thereis a darker side to the business and there areseveral stories of surrogate mothers beingexploited and middlemen taking away themoney due to them. When corrupt practicescome into the picture, then it can be a cut-throat business.

It was in October 2015 that the govern-ment submitted an affidavit in the


According to the IndianCouncil ofMedicalResearch,approximately2,000 babiesare born everyyear throughcommercial surrogacy. It is estimated to be a $2.3 billion industry.

DADS WITH A DIFFERENCEBollywood actors AamirKhan, Shah Rukh Khanand, most recently,Tusshar Kapoor have allopted for surrogacy tobecome parents

Supreme Court to allow only “altruistic sur-rogacy” for needy infertile married Indiancouples after their cases are examined by acompetent authority. The affidavit had beenfiled in response to 14 specific issues thatwere framed by a bench of Justices RanjanGogoi and NV Ramana while hearing a PILon the issue.

“The government does not support com-mercial surrogacy and also the scope of sur-rogacy is limited to Indian married infertilecouples only and not to foreigners…adequateprovisions will be made in the enactment toprohibit and penalise commercial surrogacyservices,” stated the affidavit. The govern-ment also pointed out that the proposed newlaw—Assisted Reproductive Techniques(Regulations) Bill 2014—would protect therights of surrogate mothers and ban foreign-ers. The Bill is yet to be passed.

It is not clear if the Surrogacy(Regulation) Bill 2016 will replace theAssisted Reproductive Techniques(Regulation) Bill or supplement it. The latterhas been pending for over five years and hadundergone several revisions at the hands ofthe ICMR and the Ministry of Health andFamily welfare.

Many hope that the issue of legality of the

parentage of children born of surrogacy willbe settled once the Surrogacy Regulation Billis passed. Whether the biological parent/s willbe considered the legal parent/s of the surro-gate child is an issue that will be resolved.“Children should get the status in a legal legit-imate manner without any exploitation,” saysDr Ranjana Kumari, director of Centre ofSocial Research India. She adds that thiswould decrease the cases of pedophiles, traf-fickers and other abusers who have black-marked the industry over the years.

The new law will also resolve several otherissues related to surrogacy. “It will eliminatecases where the commissioning party refusesto accept twins or a girl child,” says Dr RitaBakshi, in-vitro fertilization (IVF) specialistat IFC. She adds that her clinic checks policerecords of both the surrogate mother and thecommissioning parents before signing thecontract to eliminate any anomalies before,during or after birth.

VULNERABLE AND EXPLOITEDBeyond the generosity of the cause is hiddenthe dark truth that lures marginalized andvulnerable women to rent out their wombs.Vijaylakshmi from Vyasarpadi in northChennai, who became a surrogate mother

62 July 31, 2016

� The contract signedbetween the parents andthe surrogate mother andher husband should bemade in the native language of the surrogate mother.� Any married woman, whointends to act as a surrogate mother for a couple, shall be eligible toenter into an agreement forsurrogacy, if she hasattained the age of 21 yearsbut is not above the age of35 years; procreated notless than two children fromher marriage; obtained con-sent of her spouse for act-ing as a surrogate mother.� A woman can become asurrogate only once.� Any couple who intendsto seek surrogacy throughthe use of assisted repro-ductive technology shallinform the office of theNational Board in the dis-trict about the assistedreproductive technologyclinic where he intends toseek surrogacy; declare thewoman who has agreed toact as a surrogate motheror potential surrogate moth-er; bear all expenditureincurred on medical testsand treatment, food, healthinsurance, compensationand other requirements ofthe surrogate mother fromthe date of agreement, dur-ing the period of pregnancyand after delivery as permedical advice and till thechild is ready to be handedover as per medical adviceto the biological parents.� There is a need to estab-lish a National Board forRegulation of Surrogacy.

Proposed lawKey points in the DraftSurrogacy (Regulations)Bill 2016

“Children should get the status in a legal legitimatemanner without any exploitation.” Dr Ranjana Kumari, director ofCentre For Social Research

“Surrogacy shouldn’t be bannedin India. Even foreign couplesshouldn’t be banned from com-ing to India for a surrogate child.”Inderpreet Kaur, Baby Joy IVF andSurrogacy Centre, Delhi

ACTS AND BILLS/ Health

when she was 32 years old, speaks about theexploitation. “A woman broker from my vil-lage told me about surrogacy and how it couldsolve my financial burden. I was promised `2lakh, but was given only `1 lakh,” she recalls.

In the absence of any concrete laws, sur-rogate mothers are often promised money interms of a package, which includes medicalexpenses, food and accommodation providedby surrogate homes and post-partum care.These terms are not defined in the contractsigned between them and the commissioningparents. Some surrogate mothers are unedu-cated and hence, they cannot verify on theirown what is written in the agreement theyare signing.

Another area of lack of awareness is themedical problems related to C-Section deliv-eries—infection and depression. Also thecommissioning parents and doctors may goin for unwarranted Caesarean deliveriesbecause it is more remunerative for the hos-pital and the date and timing of the birth canbe fixed for the convenience of the commis-sioning parents.

Vijaylakshmi gave birth to a surrogatebaby by a Caesarean section, as did the otherthree women from her community who werelured into renting out their wombs. She

stayed in the surrogacy hostel for five monthsduring her pregnancy. “During this period, Iwas taken proper care of, but after givingbirth, I was not given any post-partum treat-ment for my operational wounds,” she said,which again is a mandatory part of the pro-posed Bill. But doctors at some centers saythey allow the surrogate mother to stay onafter delivery for about 20-25 days.

According to Hari G Subramaniyam,chief consultant of Indian Surrogacy LawCentre, a Delhi-based specialist legal firm,the Bill can help acknowledge the rights ofthe surrogate mother and the intended par-ents in a surrogacy arrangement. Most rightsof the parties involved in a surrogacyarrangement are governed by the agreementwhich is entered between the surrogatemother, her husband and the intended par-ents. However, recognizing the agreementcan help avoid confusions and complications.

In 2012, the home ministry banned gaycouples from accessing surrogacy. Whilesome officials welcomed this move, IVF spe-cialists and activists have questioned it. “Ifeel that new age families such as single par-ents and gay parents must certainly beacknowledged by the upcoming Bill. Theright to parenting and to have a family is abasic right. There have been arguments thata child may be neglected in new age families.It is an argument that makes no sense ordoes not have any scientific study to supportit. However, we must also be able to weigh inon the rights of the child to have a stablefamilial environment for nurture. We mustbring in checks and balances to ensure that the single parent can actually handle the parental responsibility in its fullness,”says Subramaniyam.

He also favored transparency of theparentage of a child born of surrogacy. But hesaid it can be exploited if definite checks andmeasures are not put into place now.“Disclosing information outside the surroga-cy arrangement would hamper the right toprivacy of the parties involved. Intended par-ents go through so much mental trauma dueto infertility. Making it public would onlycause further mental agony. They have aright to family like anyone else and must notbe targeted,” says Subramaniyam.


“The new law will eliminatecases where the commission-ing party refuses to accepttwins or a girl child.”Dr Rita Bakshi, in-vitro fertilization specialist at IFC

In the absence ofany concretelaws, surrogatemothers are oftenpromised moneyin terms of apackage whichincludes medicalexpenses, food,accommodationand post-partumcare. Theseterms are notdefined in thecontract signed.

IL

EVERY so often, the debatein bar rooms turns to whyIndian lawyers should stillbe in mourning for KingCharles II. The anachro-nistic, but admittedlyimpressive, black gowns

that lawyers wear lend solidarity and order toa profession that is held together chiefly bythe observation of quaint traditions.

Amidst the talk surrounding the attire of

SPOTLIGHT/ Lawyers’ Attire

Of Gowns, Chapkans, Ever wondered why lawyers in India wear the clothes they do? The origins

judges and lawyers around the world whoselegal system is derived from the British com-mon law system is that of black gowns wornin India and other Commonwealth countriesas well as Great Britain. The reason why theyare black is because the bar went into mourn-ing after the death of English King CharlesII. And, as law professor Charles M Yablon inhis article “Wigs, Coifs and otherIdiosyncrasies of English Judicial Attire”,comments: “They have apparently never got-

64 July 31, 2016

BLACK ISBEAUTIFUL

(From left) SupremeCourt advocates

Gautam Singh, MaryMitzy, Harsimrat

Randhawa and SurbhiMaheshwari

Anil Shakya

ten over it.” During the time of King EdwardIII, fur and silk-lined robes had become thenorm for judicial officers.

BAR IN MOURNINGJudges generally wore green in summer, vio-let in winter and red on formal occasions.According to an article in the June 2005issue of the Western Australian BarAssociation Review called “Why DoBarristers Wear Robes?”, barristers in the

Tudor period wore brightly colored robesclosed at the front. It gradually evolved to “along open gown of somber color, typicallymulberry”. Black slowly became a preferredcolor for barristers and eventually, upon thedeath of King Charles II, they went intomourning, hence the mourning gown, thepredecessor of lawyers’ gowns.

In India, depending on the weather andthe relevant High Court, rules regardinggowns vary. In many lower courts, gowns aredispensed with. In the Supreme Court, theyare worn the whole year round.

NEED FOR UNIFORMITYKC Mittal, former chairman of the BarCouncil of Delhi and former president of theDelhi High Court Bar Association, said thatthe idea of a uniform is to project a certainuniformity of purpose. It symbolizes that thewearer is involved in advancing justice andstands for honesty, decency, dignity anddecorum. At the same time, he said, somefeel the Bar should not give an impressionthat it has adopted this British legacy whole-sale. Some changes in uniform are necessary,taking into consideration Indian traditionsand weather, as has been done in the DelhiHigh Court where gowns are traditionallydispensed with between Holi and Diwali.

The Advocates Act, 1961, empowers theBar Council of India to make rules for “theform of dresses or robes to be worn by advo-cates, having regard to the climatic condi-tions, appearing before any court or tribu-nal”. Accordingly, Chapter IV of the BarCouncil of India Rules permits clothes in var-ious combinations of black and white,including allowing the wearing of achkan,chapkan, dhoti and sherwani for men.

Achkans and Dhotis lie in medieval England, albeit with an Indian twist By Nayantara Roy


IN MEMORY OF...King Charles II, afterwhose death the blackattire of lawyers started

Jeans are expressly not allowed. “Lady advo-cates” may wear sarees, long skirts, churidar-kurta or salwar-kurta with an extra dispensa-tion for color that the men do not have, addi-tionally permitting “any mellow or subduedcolour without any print or design”. Theblack coat is to be worn over these.

In general, black coats are not mandatoryin summer in courts, other than the SupremeCourt or high courts. Of course, the rulesmention that the dress “shall be sober anddignified”. Bands must be worn with theexception that “in courts other than theSupreme Court, High Courts, DistrictCourts, Sessions Courts or City Civil Courts, ablack tie may be worn instead of bands”.

In April 2014, there was a to-do in the

According to ProfCharles Yablon: “Thewig was predated by

the medieval legalheaddress the coif, a

piece of whitelinen...designed tocover the tonsure.”

TOGETHER IN LAW, SPIRIT AND ATTIRE(Clockwise from above) First senators of the federal constitutional court ofGermany in 1989 wearing court dress; Justice Alnashir Visram of Kenya;Canadian Supreme Court lawyers

66 July 31, 2016


Karkardooma courts where a lawyer nunappeared wearing her habit but with the cor-rect black coat and white neck band. Butwhen Sister Jasmine’s attire was objected to,she pointed out that if turbans were allowed,why the discrimination against the habit? Ofcourse, while framing rules, the Bar Councilwould not have considered a nun’s habit, butthere seems sufficient flexibility within therules to include a habit, provided it corre-sponds to the color scheme prescribed.

ADVOCATES AND MONKSFurthermore, if her head covering was anissue, the objecting advocates should haverecalled the connection between an advo-cate’s gown and a monk’s robe. According to

Yablon, the wig (which mercifully is not reg-ularly worn in India) was predated by “thedistinctive medieval legal headdress the coif,a piece of white linen which seems originallyto have been designed to cover the tonsure ofmonks who were acting in a legal capacity”.He goes on to say that “by the late sixteenthcentury, however, all members of the legalprofession wore round black skullcaps tocourt, with the white edges of the coif stick-ing out underneath. When wigs were intro-duced, judicial wigs had a small version ofthe skullcap and coif sewn into them”. Somuch for not being allowed to wear a habit!

Going back to the gown and its connec-tion to monkhood, theories about the littleblack triangular piece of cloth which

DIFFERENT STROKES FOR DIFFERENT FOLKS(Clockwise from left) Scottish judgesmarching out of the court premises; agroup of judges and lawyers wearingtraditional Bahamian court attire; ladyJustice Kalpana Rewal of Kenya


sticks out at the back of the gown vary. The less favored theory is that it is a leftoverfrom the traditional monk’s cowl (hood).Another dull but probable theory from theWestern Australian Bar Association Reviewarticle is that this is just a part of the mourn-ing regalia worn for Charles II, ie, it is thehood that goes with the mourning gown andis shaped thus. “This was cast over the barris-ters’ left shoulder and held in place by a longtassel known as liripipe, originally held in theleft hand. This liripipe has survived on therobe today, and is now represented by thestrip of cloth that hangs down the front of themodern gown.”

However, the theory that has more cachetis that this hood-like piece of cloth was apouch for fees. It has been described as hav-ing two compartments, one for silver coinsand one for gold ones, although today, thereare no such compartments in the Indiangown. Payment was made into this pouchwithout the lawyer seeing the amount. Therationale was that “if barristers could not seehow much they were being paid, the qualityof their advocacy in court could not be com-promised”. And of course, it was to “maintainthe dignity of the barrister”.

LAWYERS’ BANDSThen, there are those two rectangular stripsof white cloth that stick out like a bib insteadof a tie that lawyers wear, the bands. Whatexactly is the origin of these? The WesternAustralian Bar Association Review attempts

THE RIGHT DISPENSATION

(Right) US SupremeCourt justices gatherfor a group portrait in

Washington; (Below) Members of

the Madras HighCourt Advocates'Association and

Women Lawyers'Association at a

protest rally inChennai

KC Mittal (right), former chairman

of the Bar Council of Delhi and former

president of the Delhi High Court Bar

Association, says that the idea of a

uniform is to project a certain uniformity

of purpose.

68 July 31, 2016


ROBES OF HONOR A group of Syrianlawyers await verdict incase of Syrian migrantsin Szeged, Hungary

to trace the origins of the bands or “jabot”.Theories abound from their beginnings as areplacement for the fussy Edwardian ruff totwo pieces of linen cloth tied with lace to hidethe shirt collar. These symbolize learning inthat they were also worn by doctors and cler-gymen and signify the tablets of Moses.

Supreme Court advocate Prateek Jalan,recalling his Calcutta High Court days,describes an episode concerning “mourningbands”. In the Calcutta High Court, lawyersand judges wear special “mourning bands” ata time of national or state mourning, or whenthe Court is in mourning. Additionally,judges wear a white sleeve over their regularsleeve as a sign of mourning. Jalan recalls anargument between a lawyer and a judge onone such occasion. The lawyer was not wear-ing his “mourning bands”. The judge said, (asis the traditional manner in which a judgeindicates to a lawyer that he is improperlydressed): “I cannot hear you.” To which thelawyer, realizing why he had been hauled up,wondered aloud if state mourning shouldonly be applicable to judges as they are partof the “organs of the state”, whereas lawyersbeing private citizens, should not be requiredto wear official signs of mourning!

Something that advocates should keep inmind is that Rule 8 of the Bar Council ofIndia—Rules On An Advocate’s DutyTowards the Court—stipulates that “an advo-cate should not wear bands or gowns in pub-lic places other than in courts, except on suchceremonial occasions and at such places as

the Bar Council of India or as the court may prescribe”.

TOO MANY BARSAnd what exactly is this “bar” that these cos-tumed professionals belong to? As IanPilarczyk regretfully informs us in his article,“The Origins of Passing the Bar”: “A commonassumption is that there is some connectionwith admission to the legal profession andthe ancient relationship between lawyers andtaverns. …. However much the public mayenjoy the putative connection between thelegal profession and alcoholic libations, how-ever, this is not the true origin of the term.”

Pilarczyk claims the word has its origin inthe French barre or the Latin barra. InEngland, the bar was the wooden bar thatstood in front of English and Welsh court-rooms. Originally, at the Inns of Court, thebar separated “benchers” from the main hall.Students who had reached a certain levelwere “called to the bar” to participate in mootcourts. By the 1600s, the bar was the barrierin the courtroom that separated the officersof the law from those not part of the legalprofession, usually a party to the case.

Despite the British/European origins ofthis uniform, there is a certain universalquality in these traditions of respect forlearning and for the gravity of the law. This issomething that advocates would do well toremember before they embark on acts ofhooliganism that have made headlines inIndia in the past few months. IL


According tothe AdvocatesAct, 1961,black coats arenot mandatoryin summer incourts, otherthan theSupreme Courtor high courts.

Brexit has rekindled the demand for referendum in other EU member countries

too. What is the genesis of this demand for breaking away?

A Report By Stratfor

WHILE clearly enor-mously significant,the June 23 deci-sion by British vot-ers to “Brexit” theEuropean Union isonly one of several

referendums throughout Europe impactingthe European project in 2016 alone. Thisembrace of direct democracy by EU memberstates has ominous implications for theunion. Voters’ anger at economic troublesand traditional political parties makes refer-endums a very attractive tool for politiciansto use to woo those disaffected voters. In thecoming years, referendums will be proposedby three main sources—national govern-ments, opposition groups and civil societyorganizations—and they will touch upon abroad range of EU-related questions.

AN INTERESTING PARADOXThe European Union has a tempestuous his-tory with referendums. European govern-ments have made many crucial decisions

Brexit, the First ofMany Referendum

Threats to EU

affecting national sovereignty without con-sulting the populace. The founding membersof the European Economic Community (theEuropean Union’s predecessor) did not holdreferendums when the supranational organi-zation was created in 1957. Four decadeslater, the initial members of the eurozone didnot ask voters their opinion before creatingthe currency union. Only Denmark and Swe-den held referendums on whether to enterthe eurozone, and people voted not to join.The United Kingdom, in turn, negotiated anopt-out to the euro from its EU peers.

70 July 31, 2016

GLOBAL TRENDS/ Europe/ Nationalist Movements

When nations have consulted their citi-zens, the results have many times tendedagainst European integration. The Irish ini-tially voted against the treaties of Nice (2001)and Lisbon (2008), which transferred morepower from the national government to EUinstitutions. In both cases, Dublin negotiatedconcessions from the European Union beforeholding second referendums, which resultedin favorable votes for the treaties. In Den-mark, the treaty of Maastricht, which createdthe European Union, required a second ref-erendum to pass in 1993 after people voted

against it a year earlier. Perhaps the mostnotorious EU referendums were held in Fra-nce and the Netherlands in 2005, when peo-ple voted against a plan to establish an EUconstitution. Such strong popular rejectionin two founding EU members caused thebloc to abort the project.

Whether the European Union is demo-cratically legitimate has been a matter ofdebate for decades. Aware that transferringnational sovereignty to unelected technocratsin Brussels could alienate voters, nationalgovernments decided to enhance the role


DIVIDED VOTEA demonstration againstBritain’s decision to leavethe European Union incentral London on July 2

Photos: UNI

of the EU Parliament, the only internationalEuropean organization whose members areelected by universal suffrage. The idea wasthat by giving the European Parliament grea-ter participation in the Continent’s decision-making process, the European Union wouldbecome more democratic.

But Europe’s economic and political criseshave exacerbated the debate over the bloc’sdemocratic legitimacy, and governments arebecoming increasingly nationalistic in res-ponse. With the “Brexit” referendum, theUnited Kingdom has been the most extremeexample of this trend—and the first torequest a return to an earlier phase in theprocess of EU integration. But other coun-tries are likely to make similar demands inthe future. The referendum issue poses aninteresting paradox: Asking voters to weigh

in on European issues seems to be the mostdemocratic way to reform the EuropeanUnion—an arguably undemocratic institu-tion. But... things are not as simple as theyinitially seem, and the practice could in factweaken the bloc beyond repair.

LAYERS OF COMPLEXITY On the surface, referendums are the mostformidable tool of democracy, giving voters adirect say on political, economic and socialissues. They allow people to re-engage withthe political process and give governments apopular mandate for major decisions thatrequire a broad consensus....

But critics of referendums argue that theyforce voters to make decisions on complexissues about which they may not have com-plete knowledge. Referendums tend to createthe illusion that complex issues can be pre-sented in simple terms; the vote is oftenreduced to a “yes” or “no” answer. Referen-dums are also intimately linked to domesticpolitical situations. Many citizens and politi-cal parties tend to see referendums as a voteon the government at the time rather than onthe issue at stake, so outcomes often aredetermined by the economic situation or thepopularity of the government at the time.(That in itself is a chilling thought for theleaders of the EU’s founding states, Franceand Germany—which face elections in 2017where voters increasingly seem disenchantedwith establishment parties.)

The European supranational governmentcreates an additional layer of complexity. EU-related issues tend to be harder for voters tounderstand than national issues, and voterstend to more closely identify with and careabout national rather than supranationalissues. This means that voters often decideon EU referendums according to domestic ...conditions. Many of the French votes againstthe European constitution, for example, wereactually a vote against former PresidentJacques Chirac. The same happens with elec-tions for the EU parliament; most politicalparties tend to campaign on domestic issuesrather than on European issues. Thus,European Parliament election results arewidely perceived as a barometer of the popu-larity of national governments.

72 July 31, 2016


The EU’s Most Important Referenda1972 Ireland and Denmark vote to join the EEC

Norway votes against joining the EEC

1975 UK votes to remain in the EEC

1986 Denmark ratifies the Single European Act

1987 Ireland ratifies the Single European Act1992 Ireland and France ratify the Maastricht Treaty

Denmark votes against the Maastricht Treaty

1993 Denmark approves the Maastricht Treaty in a second referendum

1994 Austria, Finland, Sweden vote to join the EUNorway votes against joining the EU

1998 Ireland and Denmark ratify the Amsterdam Treaty

2000 Denmark votes against joining the eurozone

2001 Ireland votes against the Nice Treaty

2002 Ireland votes in favour of the Nice Treaty in a second referendum

2003 Countries in Central and Eastern Europe vote in favour of joining

the EUSweden votes in a non-binding referendum against joining theeurozone

2005 France and the Netherlands vote against the EU Constitution

2008 Ireland votes against the Lisbon Treaty

2009 Ireland ratifies the Lisbon Treaty in a second referendum

2012 Ireland ratifies the Fiscal Compact Treaty

Croatia votes in favour of joining the EU

Courtesy Stratfor; Source: European Election Database

helps these parties to soften their image,because a referendum looks less threatening(and more democratic) than the promise ofunilateral action. Finally, interest groups ornongovernmental organizations may try topush their agendas in a similar way. But theiroptions are more limited; only a handful ofEU members have mechanisms that allowfor citizens to organize referendums. In Italy,referendums organized by citizens are bind-ing, but only if voter turnout is above 50 per-cent. Most of the citizen-backed referendumsin the past two decades were declared voidbecause of low voter turnout.

In the Netherlands, the threshold forvoter turnout is much lower (30 percent), butthe referendums organized by the public arenot binding. However, even non-bindingvotes can put governments in awkward situ-ations. The Dutch government is currentlylooking for ways to honor its promise to res-pect the result of an April referendum inwhich people asked The Hague not to sign anassociation agreement between the Euro-pean Union and Ukraine. Countries such asCroatia, Lithuania and Hungary also havemechanisms that enable citizens to propose a referendum.

Some countries have other mechanisms ofdirect democracy. In Austria and Finland, forexample, people can force their parliamentsto discuss a certain topic if they collect

EU-related referendums are also complexbecause of their impact on decision-makingin Europe. Treaties need to be ratified by allmember states before they take effect, whichmeans that in those countries where referen-dums are needed to ratify a treaty (such as inIreland and Denmark) the entire processcould be stalled because of the decision ofvoters in a single country. This creates enor-mous uncertainty about the feasibility ofpassing treaties, but it also gives countriestemporary albeit notable leverage to negoti-ate concessions.... Denmark, for example,received several exemptions from EUrequirements after people initially votedagainst the Maastricht Treaty.

A POWERFUL NEGOTIATING TOOLNot every country is as capable of negotiatingconcessions from the European Union as theUnited Kingdom or Denmark have been. In2015, the Greek government used a referen-dum against austerity to pressure its lendersto soften the terms of its bailout agreementwith little success. In Hungary, the govern-ment will use popular opposition to a Euro-pean Commission plan to relocate asylum-seekers to justify its rejection of the plan inBrussels and to improve its popularity athome. But Hungary’s position will be stron-ger if it coordinates its actions with otherlike-minded countries in the region. LargerEU members may feel more tempted thantheir smaller peers to threaten referendums,since they can inflict more damage on theEuropean Union.

Euroskeptic political parties will also usereferendums as a part of their electoral cam-paigns. The leader of the nationalist FreedomParty of Austria recently said Austria shouldbe “governed via referendums” as Switzer-land is. France’s National Front has promisedto hold a vote on the country’s EU member-ship if it wins the presidential election in2017. Italy’s Five Star Movement has said itwould hold a referendum on the country’smembership in the eurozone if elected.Considering that France and Italy are thesecond- and third-largest economies in theeurozone, respectively, such referendumscould finally doom the European Union.Promising to put EU-related issues to a vote


DEMOCRACY OVERTECHNOCRATS’ RULEItalian Prime MinisterMatteo Renzi casting hisvote during the EuropeanParliament elections inPontassieve, nearFlorence, in May 2014

Critics of referendumsargue thatthey force voters to makedecisions oncomplexissues aboutwhich theymay not havecompleteknowledge.

enough signatures. In lateApril, the Finnish parlia-ment held a debate on thecountry’s membership inthe eurozone after a groupof citizens collected signa-tures to force the topic.While the debate was notbinding, citizens sent theirgovernment a clear signalthat they are worried aboutthe effect of the commoncurrency on the Finnisheconomy. These discussions

can be particularly awkward when, like inFinland, a Euroskeptic party is actually amember of the government and has to find abalance between its political manifesto andits coalition commitments.

THE UPCOMING VOTES There are plenty of issues in Europe thatcould be decided by a referendum in thecoming years. Though a new EU treaty isvery unlikely in the current political environ-ment, any attempts to modify the bloc’s legalframework would trigger an avalanche of ref-erendums across the Continent. Euroskepticpolitical parties and organizations in Sou-thern Europe, as well as more moderate governments, could threaten to put theirmembership in the European Union or the

eurozone to a vote so as todemand concessions fromBrussels on varied topics,including fiscal targets anddebt restructuring. Euro-skeptic forces in NorthernEurope could push for refer-endums to resist measuresthat undermine their nation-al wealth.

Separatist movements inplaces such as Catalonia,Scotland and Flanders will

continue to push for referendums for moreautonomy or for outright independence.Regional or municipal governments canresist EU plans to allocate asylum seekers intheir territories by putting the issue to a vote.Cyprus’ Greek south and its Turkish northare once again negotiating to reunify theisland, but any agreement will have to be rat-ified by both sides in a referendum. (In 2004,Greek Cypriots rejected a U.N.-backed planin a referendum.)

Referendums can also affect internationalaffairs beyond the European Union. Popularpressure could force governments in severalEU nations to hold a referendum on tradeagreements such as the Trans-Atlantic Tradeand Investment Partnership. Countries likeFinland and Sweden are unlikely to joinNATO without a referendum, and Austriaand Ireland are not planning to join the mil-itary alliance any time soon, but if they did, areferendum would be difficult to avoid.

These votes will probably be held againstthe backdrop of growing nationalism andfear of globalization. They will almost cer-tainly be influenced by the political and eco-nomic situation at the time of the vote andwill be subject to populist manipulation fromboth the organizers and their opponents....The alleged attempts to solve the EuropeanUnion’s crisis of representation could there-fore contribute to the bloc’s weakening.

AMONG THE CORE ISSUESMigrants on the Greek-Macedonia border. Refugee influx is a major problem areaamong member states

IL


74 July 31, 2016

JOINING THE CHORUS Tweets like this welcomed

the Brexit referendum

Anew law defining rapepassed by the German par-

liament says that “No MeansNo,” even if the victim did notfight back. The new law alsoclassifies groping as a sexcrime and makes it easier toprosecute assaults committed

by a large group. The attacks in Cologne on

New Year’s Eve prompted acampaign for reform under thehashtag “NeinHeisstNein”.

The new law also makes iteasier to deport migrants whocommit sex offenses.

Germany passes “NoMeans No,” rape law

INTERNATIONAL BRIEFS

Seven-year-old RababAli, daughter of envi-

ronment lawyer Qazi AliAthar, has sued the Pak-istan government for violat-ing her generation’s rightsto a healthy life.

This is the first time thata minor has filed a publicinterest litigation case inPakistan. The apex court

had rejected her appealbut was overruled by thechief justice, who statedthat minors can file a legalpetition in the interest ofthe public at large throughan attorney. It is also thelatest in a global string oflawsuits to force govern-ments to do more on climate change.

— Compiled by Shailaja Paramathma and Punit Mishra

Seven-year-old sues Pak govt

No foreign judges in Sri Lanka

Law againstchild marriage

Virginia state in the UShas brought in a law that

states that a girl can getmarried only after 18 yearsof age. She can also getmarried at the age of 16 if “emancipated” by acourt order.

Marriage laws differ fromstate to state in the US and,according to a report by The Independent, there areas many as six states wheregirls below 16 years canlegally say “I do”, if their parents agree.

In Virginia there are sev-eral instances where girlsaged 12 or 13 years haveentered into wedlock, eitherwith the consent of their par-ents or because they were pregnant or due to humantrafficking and rapes.

Sri Lankan PresidentMaithripala Yapa

Sirisena has stated that hewill not compromise onnational security andintegrity at any cost. Hestated that no foreign court,judge or organization wouldbe allowed to intrude intothe domestic affairs andjudiciary in Sri Lanka todayand in future as well.

Reiterating his stand onthe issue, he said thatthough various views arebeing expressed in thecountry regarding deploy-ing of foreign judges andsetting up of foreign militarycourts to take action agai-nst the so-called humanrights abuse during theperiod of conflicts, this willnot be permitted to happen.

Massachusetts state in theUS has sent a transgender

anti-discrimination bill to beenacted into law. The new billaims to end discriminationagainst transgender people inpublic spaces such as restau-rants and parks.

The bill allows transgenderpeople to use the bathroom or

locker room of the sex with whichthey identify themselves. The leg-islation provides for the Massa-chusetts Commission AgainstDiscrimination and the attorneygeneral’s office to report theirsuggestions, regulations or guid-ance by September 1, with fullimplementation of the law takingeffect from October 1.

Transgender bill to be enacted


Caught in Terror’s Tentacles

THE Dhaka Holey ArtisanBakery hostage crisis thatended with 26 dead, inclu-ding an Indian girl, hasmany lessons for India.This dastardly act was per-petrated by seven youth

from affluent families who suddenly seemedto give up their westernized lifestyles and gotindoctrinated by the ISIS. While the surviv-ing terrorist who has been captured is likelyto throw more light on the issue, the fact isthat this metamorphosis wasn’t as sudden asis made out to be.

Meer Hayet Kabir, father of Meer SaamehMubasher, 18, one of the terrorists, has ad-mitted that from a fun-loving boy who

GLOBAL TRENDS/ Terrorism

Be it Dhaka, Orlando, Paris or Brussels, indoctrinated and misguided Muslim youth have created havoc and destruction. Will ourinvestigating agencies be a match for them? By Sujit Bhar in Kolkata

ALL IS LOSTRelatives of the

Dhaka victimsin a state of

shock

76 July 31, 2016

UNI

indulged in music he became a serious, reli-gious-minded one who put his guitar away,saying music wasn’t good. Considering thechange that has taken place in youth in othercountries under the influence of ISIS, thesechanges could easily have been deciphered byexperts as signs of indoctrination over theinternet. But an inexperienced fat-her failedto read the signs.

SAME METHODOLOGYOne may recall that last February, threeBritish schoolgirls had run away from theirhomes with a plan to join ISIS in the jiha-dists’ stronghold in Raqqa, Syria. The girls—who were later found—were good studentsfrom decent families in Bethnal Green, eastLondon. They were influenced over the inter-net. Their parents had no inkling of the cha-nge. Other acts of terrorism in Orlando, Parisand Brussels clearly fit this methodology.

Three things emerge from these attacks:most of the “converts” were educated andhailed from decent to affluent backgrounds,they had a sudden change of heart, they

YOUTH GONE ASTRAY(Left) Meer Saameh Mubasher, afun-loving boy, was one of theterrorists;(top) the site of attack inOrlando where 50 persons werekilled in June this year; (above) a scene in Paris after anattack in November 2015

leaned towards the extreme Islamic ideals of ISIS and they all had unbridled access tothe internet.

But if such acts of terror are happeningclose to West Bengal, will the state be thenext target? Bengal is a proven, safe and easycorridor for all terror-related activity that hasbeen going on across the border. The October2014 explosion in Khagragarh in Burdwandistrict saw two suspected Indian Mujahi-deen terrorists killed and a third injured.That busted the myth that West Bengal waspeaceful. And on July 4 evening, days afterthe Dhaka blast, a man—Mohammad Masi-ruddin alias Mussa—was held at Burdwanrailway station from a Howrah-Rampurhattrain. Investigators found that he had linkswith the ISIS.

ISIS LINKSA source in the Criminal Investigation De-partment was quoted in the media as saying:“At the preliminary level, we thought theman had links with Bangladeshi terror groupJamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB).But after interrogation, we have found his


UNI

UNI

IL

links with ISIS.... We have found him regu-larly conversing with IS leaders, includingSafi Armar in Syria and Afghanistan thr-ough email and messenger. Several foreigntransactions with his bank account were also found.”

While these operators in India may not fitthe general description of “lone wolves” as inDhaka, they are the principal motivators,acting through the internet and influencinginnocent and immature minds.

Vivek Sahay, IG, Central Reserve PoliceForce (CRPF), Eastern Region, told IndiaLegal: “We have been too complacent. Thetime for such complacency is over. If wethink we in West Bengal are living in an oasisof peace, we are mistaken.”

ROLE OF INTELLIGENCESo how does one stop this “conversion”?“That depends on how good your intelligenceis. It is essential for all security agencies tostrengthen their community outreach pro-grams and install robust anti-radicalizationprograms,” said Sahay.

That is, however, only a part of the entireeffort. It is difficult to pre-empt the action ofa lone wolf. However, if he or they are goingto attack buildings such as Red Fort or Par-liament House, they would require huge log-istics, long planning, backup and trainingwhich organizations such as Pakistan’s ISIcould have provided, said Sahay.

“They would leave enough intelligence

chatter on the net to pick up. But one personor a group of friends deciding to attack a softtarget such as a restaurant would be difficultto pre-empt.”

That is where an agency such as the NIAcould come into play if it had enough powerto monitor noise on the internet, in socialmedia and over phones, quite like how theNational Security Agency has in the US. “It iseasy to put all the responsibility and blameon security agencies,” said Sahay. “I believethere has to be all-round awareness and acti-vity—political, civil, enforcement—all actingtogether,” he added.

PRIVACY INFRINGEMENTWhat was left unsaid was simple. The prom-ulgation and invoking of acts such as theMaintenance of Internal Security Act andthe Prevention of Terrorism Act (2002) mayhave had their effect. But times havechanged, and there should be a modern pre-emptive act that can pick up the bad noisefrom social media, feel experts. However, lawenforcement authorities have to be carefulabout infringement of privacy even as theymake a place safe.

Mohammed Salimuzzaman, director ofan engineering firm in Dhaka, does not buythe ISIS theory though. “Why target Bangla-desh? People here are religious, soft andempathetic. Experts blame intelligence fail-ure as one of the main reasons for the attack.I also think that a non-democratic system ofgovernance and non-accountability by thegovernment are largely responsible for suchan incident,” he told India Legal via e-mailfrom Dhaka.

Salimuzzaman added: “Bangladesh hasbeen experiencing ‘target killings’ for sometime now. Not a single killer has been arrest-ed or tried so far. In the name of catching‘militants’ and ‘killers’, the law enforcementagency has arrested thousands of people.They have repressed political opponents aswell as killed many ‘criminals’ in ‘crossfire’without any trial. All this has paved the wayfor crime on a bigger scale like what hap-pened at the café.”

That is all the more reason for Indianintelligence agencies to keep their eyes andears open.

“We have beentoo complacent.

The time for suchcomplacency isover. If we think

we in WestBengal are living

in an oasis ofpeace, we are

mistaken.” —Vivek Sahay, IG,

CRPF, Eastern Region

78 July 31, 2016

GLOBAL TRENDS/ Terrorism

THE Indian Ocean is not India’sbackyard and upholding thisperception could trigger clash-es, a Chinese military officialhad warned India a year ago, on

July 1, 2015. The counter-question that theworld needs to pose is: is the South ChinaSea China’s backyard, that it ignores theclaims of Philippines, Indonesia, and othernations in the region?

Exactly a year later, as an internationaltribunal based in The Hague rules againstChina’s sole claim to the South China Seaand its aggressive posture, China remainsdefiant in the face of the ruling. It is nowamply clear who treats international watersas its backyard.

The tribunal ruled that China had no his-toric basis for staking claim to the SouthChina Sea, and faulted it for aggravatingtensions in the region. But Beijing’sdefence was: “China’s aim is to turn theSouth China Sea into a sea of peace, friend-ship and cooperation”. However, vice foreignminister Liu Zhenmin, also cautioned thatthe region could be converted into a “cradle

GLOBAL TRENDS/ South China Sea

That is the message behind China’s belligerent reaction to an adverse

ruling by an international court overthe South China Sea. Its sole

agenda is regional dominance. By Meha Mathur

The Worldis my

Backyard

of war” if countries tried to interfere in themaritime dispute.

CONFLICTING CLAIMSA look at the region’s geography makes theclaims of other littoral nations understand-able. The sea is flanked to the east by thePhilippines in the immediate neighborhood,to the west by Vietnam, to the north at a con-siderable distance by China and Taiwan,and to the south by Malaysia and Indonesia.At the centre of the controversy are twogroups of islands—Paracels and Spratlys,the Scarborough shoal and a number of othersmall islands and reefs. There is a possibilityof the Paracel and Spratlys, geographicallyclose to the Philippines, possessing hugereserves of oil and natural gas (for thatmatter the entire region could be possessingbillions of barrels of untapped oil andnatural gas).

The fishing resources are another impor-tant economic asset. But equally important,the sea is a critical trading route, and coun-tries like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan,Vietnam, Brunei, Indonesia and Malaysia


Historically,China regardeditself as theMiddleKingdom. It isclear that theChinese havenot shed thatethno-centricview.

Source: Wikipedia

IL

regional powers into the picture and has ledto escalation of the arms race. The US haslifted its arms embargo against Vietnam toequip it militarily to deal with the Chinesethreat. Japan, which had, in the aftermath ofWorld War II, followed the policy of notengaging in conflicts on foreign soil, changedits security law in September 2015 to enableit to assist other allies in overseas conflicts.And now, India and the US have expandedthe ambit of their annual naval “MalabarExercises” to involve Japan too. This year, theexercise, involving Japan, took place in mid-June.

China’s one-upmanship also runs con-trary to international rules. The UnitedNations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) provides for “Exclusive EconomicZones (EEZ)”, under which coastal countriesenjoy sole exploitation rights over marineresources within a 200 nautical mile area. Itgives the right to both naval and military ves-sels of other countries to cross the area.

Historically, China regarded itself asthe Middle Kingdom. It is clear that theChinese have not shed that ethno-centricview. What matters to China, obviously, isterritorial integrity over anything else,even at the cost of rightful claims of neigh-boring countries.

depend upon it for their supplies andexports. For the superpower to claim hege-mony over the sea route would be detrimen-tal to the burgeoning economies of SouthEast Asia.

China has staked historical claim toParacel and Spratlys, stating that the twoconstituted part of its territory for centuries.It has done so on the strength of a 1947 mapand through a “nine-Dash line” showing theChinese boundary. But other claimants con-test the map.

MAJOR FLASHPOINTSSatellite imagery of China creating newislands and increasing the size of existingislands, and constructing ports, air strips andother military installations in the Spratly andother islands has caused concern among theglobal community. In 2012, it wrested con-trol over the Scarborough Shoal following astand-off with the Philippines. In May 2014,when the state-owned China NationalOffshore Oil Corporation started drillingoperations 120 miles from the Vietnam coast,it upset Vietnam as the location was close tothe disputed Triton Islands. In the ensuingconflict between Chinese and Vietnamesevessels, a Vietnamese fishing boat was sunk.

The conflict has also drawn global and

DISPUTED WATERSA Vietnamese marine

vessel and a ship ofthe Chinese Coast

Guard come dangerously close to

each other in the SouthChina Sea during aperiod of tension in

May 2014

80 July 31, 2016

GLOBAL TRENDS/ South China Sea

UNI

1. White spaceA: No parking zoneB: Free timeC: Reserved tableD: Sky

2. All my eye!A: Never!B: Watch out!C: Come on!D: Humbug!

3. Dirge A: DesireB: Greed C: Funeral songD: Dog food

4. LucubrationA: Study by nightB: Slow vibrationC: Fast vibrationD: Hallucination

5. Dacnomania A: Obsession with moneyB: Obsession with killingC: Obsession with timeD: Obsession with

flowers

6. Find the wrong one:A: A herd of cattle B: A herd of deer C: A herd of swineD: A herd of puppies

7. In a blue funk A: Walks on ropes B: Sings in sleepC: Plays all instruments

D: Shirks work

8. Sphygmomanometer A: Measures altitudesB: Measures blood

pressureC: Measures wind velocityD: Measures gas

pressure

9. USPA: Unique selling pointB: Unique selling

position C: Unique special pointD: Unique selling

proposition

10. Better bow than ….A: bungleB: bemoanC: breakD: resign

11. Clodhopper A: Large, heavy shoeB: TractorC: CookieD: Farmer

12. Cack-handed A: Right-handedB: ClumsyC: GiftedD: Dextrous

13. Ne plus ultraA: The ultimateB: Very stupidC: ExtremistD: Great design

14. Slammer A: PrisonB: StammerC: CriticD: Enemy

15. PugilistA: PoetB: Care-takerC: BoxerD: Gold medalist

16. Glad-hander A: PoliticianB: Swindler C: Homosexual D: Pickpocket

17. Rap sheetA: Divorce noticeB: Credit cardC: Criminal recordD: Failure report

18. EffeteA. UselessB. SickC. EffectiveD. Vulgar

19. To fazeA: To cheatB: To disturbC: To spreadD: To leave

20. Feral A: Worldly B: WorthlessC: WildD: Independent

1. Free time2. Humbug!3. Funeral song4. Study by night5. Obsession with killing6. A herd of puppies7. Walks on ropes8. Measures blood pres-sure9. Unique selling propo-

sition10. break11. Large, heavy shoe12. Clumsy13. The ultimate14. Prison15. Boxer16. Politician 17. Criminal record18. Useless19. To disturb20. Wild

SCORES

0 to 7 correct—Youneed to do this more

often. 8 to 12 correct—Good,

get the scrabble board out.

Above 12—Bravo! Keep it up!

ANSWERS

Have fun with English Get the right answers Play better scrabble

By Mahesh Trivedi

WORDLY

WISE

[email protected]


COPING WITH REALITY: A little one lives with hope at a refugeecamp in Kabul, Afghanistan.

PEOPLE /

VIEWFROM

THE TOP: Sikh

devoteesdress up

and cometo Rajapar

Gurudwarato celebratethe birthday

of GuruNanak Dev

in Jaipur.

WEAVE MYCHILDHOOD:

A mother braidsher daughter's long

locks after taking a dip in theShipra river at the

Simhastha KumbhMela in Ujjain, India.

— Compiled by Kh Manglembi Devi Photos: UNI

WISH COME TRUE:A child drops coinsinto golden Buddha

statues to seekblessings at the ThaiBuddhist Chetawan

Temple in PetalingJaya, near Kuala

Lumpur.

PREPARING FOR WISDOM: 11 year-old Zarnayar isimmersed in Buddhist texts at a monastery outsideMandalay, Myanmar.

Innocence of chilhood

82 July 31, 2016

india legal 31 july 2016

News & Politics