India Inc reborn
THERE was another burst of verbal activities on Saturday with the aim of energising the ongoing economic reforms process.

Cold War rhetoric
THE hot words exchanged recently between the United States of America and Russia over the pounding of Chechnya sound disturbingly like the rhetoric used by the two mutually hostile camps during the infamous Cold War era.

PAKISTAN AND THE INDIAN MIND
The disappearing contrast
by Bhupinder Brar
NEVER far from the minds of the thinking and the unthinking Indians, Pakistan loomed large in the collective psyche once again when a military General recently overthrew its civilian government. With several first page stories and editorial comments later, the focused attention is just beginning to subside. This might be the right moment, then, to take stock, not so much of what happened there, but of how we in this country tend to react to developments in Pakistan.

Role of regulatory authorities
by Vinod Mehta
THE country took a step towards the second generation economic reforms when the Lok Sabha passed the IRDA (Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority) and FEMA (Foreign Exchange Management Act) and Money Laundering Bills.

Higher judiciary: curbs from within
by Anupam Gupta
“A FORM of life and conduct far more severe and restricted than that of ordinary people,” Winston Churchill told the House of Commons in 1954, “is required from Judges..... They are at once privileged and restricted.

B.C. Sanyal’s revealing memoirs
by Humra Quraishi
THE highlight of last week was the release of the second volume of the memoirs of the oldest surviving artist in our midst — the 97-year-old BC Sanyal. A neat, well arranged function, presided over by the Vice-President of the country, took place at the National Gallery of Modern Art.

Yesterday and today
by M. K. Agarwal
COMPARISONS are always odious and abominable. It is also monstrous to assess the present with experience and blinkers of the past and condemn all that is new.

75 Years Ago

December 13, 1924
The Unity Committee
THE personnel of the Committee appointed by the All-Party Conference at Bombay for the purpose of considering the best way of re-uniting all political parties in the National Congress and preparing a scheme of Swaraj..

India Inc reborn

THERE was another burst of verbal activities on Saturday with the aim of energising the ongoing economic reforms process. Six more committees were formed and asked to come up with practical ideas within six months, and a very high-powered panel was set up to implement these very proposals. Does it mean that the three-member ministerial body has to sit idle waiting for something to monitor? Not necessarily. The government has before it six earlier reports, most of whose recommendations are gathering dust, almost unread, and they can be selected for preliminary action. All the ideas men are leading industrialists and the inevitable “convergence and consensus” between them and the top echelon of the government has led to the justified perception that the Council of Trade and Industry, which the Prime Minister set up last year, is indeed India Inc. (A similar cosy relationship in Japan provided the spark that started the phenomenal development, with western critics dubbing it Japan Inc.) The government’s enthusiasm is understandable. The successful adoption of the insurance and foreign exchange management Bills has imparted a momentum and it does not want it to dissipate. The industry is happy that the WTO failed to agree on the much-feared linking of labour standards with trade. And this celebratory mood was sustained by last week’s World Economic Forum-CII summit and has culminated in offering tight cooperation with the government. This does not mean that the last obstacle on the road to market-driven economy is about to disappear. In the days to come the inherent divergence of interests between the government and industry will surface. A cursory look at the selection of the six themes underlines this pessimism.

Software star Narayana Murthi and a rising Birla scion will draft new rules for good corporate governance. The very concept is a contradiction in terms. Any framework for transparent working of the private sector should start with strict adherence to all rules, including tax laws and consumer protection measures. The record of Indian companies is not inspiring on these two fronts. They are still clinging to that part of history when non-violent non-cooperation with the government was a patriotic act. One of the Ambanis will draw up the road map to encourage the corporate world to heavily invest in education and health. The health part is redundant since several five-star heath care centres have come up; or, does the government want to withdraw itself from offering medical facilities? As sporadic attempts have revealed, education is a costly business and hence attracts a huge subsidy. Privatisation will take education, particularly technical education, away from the middle class. The same Ambani will also think up of ways to painlessly convert NRI wealth into venture capital. Mr Rahul Bajaj, the brain and muscle behind the mythical Bombay Club which openly seeks protection for local industry, will devote time shaping India’s policy on WTO and globalisation. There is a mismatch here, or is the intention to smoothen whatever opposition the Bombay Club may have? Disinvestment outlines will be spelt out by another businessman and he cannot be very thoughtful of the long-term interests of state-owned units some of which are blue chip companies. The latest exercise does not show any lack of ideas with the government since that road has been heavily traversed. It is safer to speculate that it merely shows the new-found confidence and enthusiasm of the government.

Cold War rhetoric

THE hot words exchanged recently between the United States of America and Russia over the pounding of Chechnya sound disturbingly like the rhetoric used by the two mutually hostile camps during the infamous Cold War era. Other related developments too indicate that the leader of the unipolar world is getting impatient with the audacity of those holding on to the other pole. It may be a bit early to press the panic button, although the exchange of undisguised "unpleasantries" between Russian President Boris Yeltsin and US President Bill Clinton would justify such a reaction — at least among the nations which had genuinely started believing that the new millennium would mark the beginning of the promised era of global peace. The Soviet Union may have become part of history, but the bulk of its massive nuclear stockpile is still intact and is now in the effective control of Russia. And unlike the bear of the stock exchange the one which represents Russian pride and dignity hates being seen going down, specially in the presence of Uncle Sam. Although Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has tried to play down Mr Yeltsin's nuclear sabre-rattling the Russian President evidently meant every word of what he said on the American criticism of the military campaign in Chechnya. As far as Mr Clinton is concerned "save Chechnya" is part of the diabolical song he has been singing since the last UN General Assembly session where Secretary-General Kofi Anan himself first whistled the tune that national boundaries should not come in the way of going after human rights violators. The decision to expel a Russian diplomat by the USA on the charge of being caught eavesdropping too is a straight lift of the policy followed by Washington and Moscow with extraordinary vigour during the Cold War era.

A major reason why Mr Clinton has raised the decibel level of his global "tough talk" can be found in the refusal of the Republican-dominated US Congress to ratify the CTBT. The show of defiance by representatives of lesser nations, both on the streets of Seattle and in the conference room, of the US-led attempt to force the rich world's agenda down the throat of poor nations, has caused him global embarrassment. Besides, there are still some sharp pebbles on the path to a unipolar world which tend to reduce the comfort level of Uncle Sam and his hangers-on. One pebble which hurts most is Cuba. It is actually a tiny icicle from the Cold War period which has refused to melt in spite of the US-generated heat for turning it into political vapour. In what amount to a show of pettiness the State Department made it clear that Cuban President Fidel Castro was unwelcome on American soil for attending the WTO conference. Of course, Mr Castro did not go to Seattle but it was President Clinton who was made to look silly in the controversy over the future of a Cuban boy in US custody. The boy, Elian, was part of the illegal human cargo which turns up periodically on the economically more attractive American shores. The boat in which he was travelling capsized and his mother and most other passengers perished in the tragedy on November 25. Whether the illegal immigrant should be allowed to live in the USA or returned to his father in Cuba became a human rights issues! President Clinton backed the boy's claim to be treated as a political refugee from Communist Cuba. However, when Mr Castro raised his voice the US President was heard expressing "sympathy" for the boy's father while throwing in the usual jargon about the "legal process" for settling the dispute. History is witness to seemingly trivial incidents causing major catastrophes. The stand off between the USA and Cuba over the custody of the castaway, as of today, has caused more amusement than concern. What it conclusively proves is Uncle Sam's inability to get over the hangover of the Cold War.

PAKISTAN AND THE INDIAN MIND
The disappearing contrast
by Bhupinder Brar

NEVER far from the minds of the thinking and the unthinking Indians, Pakistan loomed large in the collective psyche once again when a military General recently overthrew its civilian government. With several first page stories and editorial comments later, the focused attention is just beginning to subside. This might be the right moment, then, to take stock, not so much of what happened there, but of how we in this country tend to react to developments in Pakistan.

It goes without saying that the unthinking mind in India tends to gloat over Pakistan’s miseries. Every crisis that Pakistan runs into proves to such a mind how unnatural and illegitimate the idea of Pakistan itself was, how untenable it continues to remain, and why it should not have been allowed to concretise in the first place. Because Pakistan is seen as the opposite of what India is, crises in Pakistan also seem to prove how tenable, resilient and vibrant India is. Failures of theocratic Pakistan supposedly bring into sharp relief the secularism of India, its composite, democratic and tolerant culture.

But how different is the “thinking” Indian mind in its response? The question is pertinent to ask and crucial to answer, for on it hangs ultimately the future of South Asia. The answer is not far to seek. It is true that academic scholars have been slow, as usual, in coming on record, but then the media coverage has been prompt and extensive. And we can go by their record.

Two kinds of responses have marked the media coverage. One saw the developments in Pakistan as yet another proof of how brittle and fragile the leadership structure in that country was. This response then seemed to suggest that to bank on such leadership for normalisation of relations with India was unrealistic, naive and even dangerous. If Kargil proved that, the military coup proves that even further. India must never lower its military guard against a nuclear Pakistan which is not only aggressive but also so unstable.

The other response was that India could not wish away Pakistan whatever kind of a state it was, and whatever kind of leadership it inflicted on itself at one point of time or another. Therefore, it was suggested that India must follow a policy of enlightened pragmatism and, keeping firmly in mind its “national” interests, “do business” with the new dictator. Democracy in Pakistan might be good for the Pakistanis if they can afford it, but India had no business paying even the slightest cost on their behalf. We have our democracy, and let them have whatever they wish or what they deserve.

On the face of it, the two responses appear very different, but in fact they are not. Both come out of the belief that whatever is precious to India lies within it, whatever happens in Pakistan is external to it, and all is well with India as long as it can safeguard the internal from the external, the vital from the vitiated.

Let me suggest that this condescending way of looking at Pakistan is, to say the least, crude and unhistorical. There is nothing intrinsic to the Pakistanis that should make them embrace authoritarianism time and again, and sometimes also welcome it; and there is nothing intrinsic to us Indians that will, by itself, prop Indian democracy forever. Racially and culturally, the Pakistanis are no different from the Indians, and in any case, democracies function not because people happen to have one kind of blood running in their veins rather than another, they run because they have the requisite socio-economic base to support them. Such a base is certainly very narrow in Pakistan and much wider in India. But let us recognise that the base is not evenly firm everywhere in India, in several domains it is dangerously thin.

So, rather than look superficially at Pakistan and India as the opposites,we could try to take a broader, and less prejudiced view. In that view this part of the South Asian subcontinent will appear not as two discreet, mutually impermeable countries, but as a patchwork of socio-economic regions, some more conducive to democracy, some less so, and others inimical to it altogether. If you looked at it this way, there are pockets of “India” within Pakistan, and large stretches of “Pakistan” in India.

Explaining in adequate detail what I mean by the above statement requires much more space than a newspaper article allows, so let me make do by merely sketching it out. What I need to do for that is summarise first of all the “wisdom” that the Indian specialists on Pakistan have developed over the decades. This wisdom banks heavily on building contrasts between India and Pakistan. Democracy, they say, could have prospered in Pakistan only if it had inherited, or developed, the requisite socio-economic base for it. It did not do that. In contrast, India inherited a rich legacy, and enriched it further.

That claim translates as follows. The political elite that provided leadership to the struggle for Indian independence was secular and nationalist. The political elite which forced the creation of Pakistan was communal and sectarian. Unlike the former, the latter had neither the democratic vision nor indeed the mass base to consider democracy safe for itself. It leaned as a result on a combination of religious obscurantism and authoritarianism to keep itself in power.

Second, India had a sizeable indigenous industrial class which wanted to integrate and consolidate Indian economic market for itself and wanted it protected against foreign encroachment. It, therefore,had a vested interest in backing the policies which promoted “national unity” and “self-reliant economic growth”. That in turn provided the economic underpinnings to Indian democracy.

In contrast, Pakistan remained largely feudal and had no indigenous industrial class worth the name. What Pakistan had were individual industrialist who preferred to play junior partners to foreign capital. This capital came mostly from western industrial countries which were also the dominant military powers. When these powers, led by the USA, sought to induct Pakistan into their military alliances, there was naturally no class within Pakistan to oppose it.

Joining these military alliances led to militarisation of Pakistan and the ascendance of the armed forces within its polity. The feudal elements had nothing to fear from this development because almost all officers of the armed forces came from the feudal background. If any thing, dominance of the armed forces over the polity provided the guarantee that vested feudal interests would never be challenged.

It is not my intention to challenge this wisdom about Pakistan even though it should be easy to see that these generalisations, like all such generalisations, overly simplify a complex situation. My major interest lies in pointing out that the contrast built between the conditions in Pakistan and India might have been truer in the first four decades of Independence than in the more recent past and the present.

In this context, the shifts which have occurred in the recent past in India need to be studied closely. The most important among them is the shift in the behaviour of the Indian industrial class. Barring some exceptions, most members of this class have given up the hope of competing with foreign capital, and many have found it profitable to start playing the junior partner. As their profits become increasingly dependent on the tie-up with foreign capital, both their motivation and capacity to resist the redesigning of the Indian market (and thereby the re-mapping of Indian polity) will come under serious question.

Important to note in this regard are the urgings of this class to all political parties in India to agree on a broad agenda of new economic policies. Apparently, once that happens, it will be of extremely secondary importance to this class as to which party or combination of parties comes to power, centrist or regionalist, secularist or communalist. Add to this the fact that the present ruling coalition is actually a combination of communalist and regionalist persuasions, and there is little sign of protest from the Indian industrial class about the political, social, cultural and educational policies being pursued.

Second, if Pakistan is predominantly feudal, feudalism has not disappeared as a political force in India. The attempts made in earlier decades to fight feudal interests were half-hearted, but the new political combination does not even mention the fight as a priority. It is not a mere accident that none of those who at least profess to fight feudalism are in the coalition that rules India now.

As far as the armed forces are concerned, no one can sanely argue, at least yet, that the Indian armed forces are keen to stake their claims for political power. But two significant developments need to be noted in passing. One, some Generals have shown enough interest in politics to join political parties after their retirement. Two, there is increasing resentment among the armed forces that the political class creates a mess and then calls them in to sort out this mess. Neither of these developments can be seen as strengthening the prospects of Indian democracy in the long run.

The contrast, therefore, is beginning to get diffused, and this should alarm all democratic-minded people in this part of South Asia. We need not see what happens in Pakistan as something that concerns only the Pakistanis. We must see that there are both democratic and anti-democratic forces in Pakistan, just as both exist in India. As South Asian democrats, we must support the democratic forces in both countries and fight the anti-democratic ones.

One way to do that is to put pressure on political classes in the two countries to work for the de-escalation of military build-up and resume confidence building measures. We must always remember that whereas militarist mentality creates wars and border conflicts, wars and border conflicts also create militarist mentality. That is good neither for Pakistan nor, indeed, for India.

Professor Brar teaches political science at Panjab University, Chandigarh.

Role of regulatory authorities
by Vinod Mehta

THE country took a step towards the second generation economic reforms when the Lok Sabha passed the IRDA (Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority) and FEMA (Foreign Exchange Management Act) and Money Laundering Bills. As we move towards implementing the second generation reforms there is bound to be some resistance from vested interests, and there might be many unscrupulous elements entering insurance business or circumventing the provisions of FEMA and Money Laundering Bills when they become Acts.

As for the vested interests opposing these reforms, the government should take a firm stand and do not get unduly perturbed by their strike tactics. The efficient employees among them would have already made up their minds to join the new companies. Inefficient employees already stand alienated from the people.

But as we move towards economic liberalisation and privatisation, the role of regulatory authorities as a public watch-dog becomes more important. In most of the developed countries, the regulatory authorities are statutory bodies with very wide powers to take action against companies and persons who wilfully misuse public funds.

It is not that there will be no frauds or misuse of public money after regulatory mechanism is in place but, as experience of the developed countries shows, the possibility of frauds is minimised and the interests of the consumer protected to a very large extent.

The Foreign Exchange Management and Money Laundering Bills will protect the genuine players in the economy but will be harsh on the unscrupulous people who misuse the provisions of these Bills to cheat the individuals, the companies, and the nation. The need of the hour is to earn substantial foreign exchange and to regulate its outflow as well as check the use of funds for anti-national activities. When both Bills become an Act we shall see that foreign exchange inflow grows while money laundering for anti-national activities is minimised. However, it will be useful if we have some mechanism or some authority to oversee the implementation of these provisions. There might be a special cell in the RBI itself to monitor the foreign exchange situation.

However, the regulatory mechanism for the insurance sector has to be very stringent. The regulatory authority is supposed to see that the funds garnered by the insurance companies are channelled into sectors as indicated in the Bill, and that the people who buy their policies are not cheated. At the same time, the regulatory authority has to ensure that the insurance companies remain financially healthy and don’t enter into any dubious deals.

It is important for the government to study the role of the regulatory authorities in developed countries and the mechanism they use to protect the interests of the customers and the investing public. In this connection it can be mentioned that the Insurance Regulatory Authority in Singapore controls the insurance business there. Similarly, developed countries like France, Japan and the USA have their own regulatory bodies and as a mechanism to control financial institutions, including insurance business.

It may be prudent to study their regulatory mechanisms and adopt them to our own needs. For instance, all these regulatory authorities have a data bank on the fraudulent practices indulged in by insurance companies to dupe consumers and investors. Pre-knowledge of such fraudulent practices will help the regulatory authority in India to be fully equipped to anticipate and deal with such cases before they turn out to be big financial scandals.

The way the regulatory authorities are treated in India as an appendage of the government, they will not be able to serve the purpose for which they have been set up. Take the case of the Telecom Regulatory Authority in India (TRAI). From day one it has been embroiled in some or the other controversy not only with the government but also with private telecom operators, DoT and MTNL. When the telecom authority fixed the upper limit of rates for local, STD and ISD calls, there was a large public outcry.

These rates were worked out on some rational basis and the idea was to discourage cross-subsidies on various types of calls. The TRAI approach on fixing tariff for various kinds of calls made economic sense, but the government intervened in its functioning on public outcry thus caving into populism.

The right approach should have been to allow the providers of basic telephone services to improve their efficiency and bring down the cost of local calls. By intervening in the functioning of the telecom authority the government only weakened its authority. Now TRAI, instead of playing its role for which it was set up, is embroiled in court cases. Now what regulatory role can be expected from such a regulatory authority?

The point is that if we set up a regulatory authority then we must respect its autonomy, the steps it takes to play its role. The government must desist from interfering in its assigned role. Such an interference not only undermines the authority of the regulators but also provides an opportunity to unscrupulous elements to take advantage of the loopholes.

Therefore, the government should not interfere in the functioning of IRDA but give it full powers so that it can play the role it has been assigned. Once the government starts issuing directives to it or starts interfering in its day-to-day functioning, this will amount to only eroding its authority and giving signals to unscrupulous elements to make hay while the sun of confusion shines.

Another element which needs to be introduced in financial organisations, including insurance companies, is to allow full transparency in their functioning. The balance-sheets of financial institutions conceal more than what they reveal. Since these companies invest some of their mobilised funds in government securities and a part in private companies or elsewhere, there must be total transparency in their functioning.

The insurance and other financial companies like banks, etc, apart from coming out with their balance-sheets must be asked to reveal the names of the companies to whom the money has been lent and the names of the companies not repaying back their loans. This is the only way to check the growth of non-performing assets of financial companies.

The term “non-performing assets” is a misnomer. What the term simply means is that the money loaned by a particular financial institution has not been repaid by the borrower. This outright cheating by the borrower is termed as a non-performing asset which, in fact, is not an asset at all but some kind of a liability. In fact, the use of the term “non-performing assets” must be totally banned. Instead, the term “unrecovered loans” may be used to give the true picture of the state of finances of the financial companies, including insurance companies.

With such a measure, the defaulters will not be able to raise any further funds from the financial market and would be forced to set their house in order. It is really surprising that the government does not allow financial institutions to make public the names of defaulters. By not allowing this, the government is actually helping such companies to stay with the public money. If there is any such provision in the rules of the financial companies that bars them from making public the names of defaulters, it must be repealed immediately in the interest of transparency in functioning.

The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority must have the powers to ask the insurance companies to reveal the names of defaulters so that these companies are not put into a precarious situation. Once the IRDA is allowed to play its assigned role fully, we will find fewer number of frauds and more efficient insurance services. — INFA

Yesterday and today
by M. K. Agarwal

COMPARISONS are always odious and abominable. It is also monstrous to assess the present with experience and blinkers of the past and condemn all that is new. Samuel Johnson warns; “Every old man complains of growing depravity of the world, the petulance and insolence of the rising generation.” But, juxtaposition of Yesterday with Today, if done dispassionately, can be quite educative and rewarding. With this caution in mind, let us take a brief look at some of the more visible changes, like norms, tastes, habits, goals, aspirations of people — between Then and Now.

Children of yesterday took to school when about six years old, and they generally went to the one which was the nearest or the most convenient. For today’s children, the nightmare begins at the age of three and a public or English-medium school is invariably the destination.

Not long ago, parents took delight in narrating to their offspring epic tales of the land, to inspire and exhilarate. The exhortation now is to become smart; to cut corners or circumvent procedure, but somehow reach the goalpost; to make the pile while the going is good. “Get on with life and have a good time” is the dictum.

Previously, one bought clothes to cover the body with dignity, acquired a vehicle to reach office in time, and invested in books for pleasure or knowledge. Now, the focus is different — it is to emphasise the figure and flaunt the body; to outsmart a colleague or impress the neighbour; to adorn the bookcase and convey a notion of culture. The compulsion to fulfil a need has been supplanted by the desire to create an image.

Sensible reading habits and staid forms of entertainment of the past have yielded place to glossy, soft-porn magazines, racy literature, soap operas. Some of the shows on the big or small screen are, no doubt, extremely innovative; once in a while, exalted literature also appears. However, the general accent is on morbidity, sex, violence and tangled conjugal relationships. Often, the primary aim is to confer on the viewer or the reader vicarious pleasure and voyeuristic gratification.

Music of yesteryears possessed aesthetics, melody, rhythm, a kind of ever-lasting appeal, and haunting charm. The singer acquired some degree of proficiency after years of painstaking apprenticeship and grinding ritual. No longer! Today’s music is mostly “dhak-dhak” type — transitory, flimsy, irrelevant, and even irreverent. Every neighbourhood warbler, with the capacity of shake his limbs and swagger his body, passes for an artiste.

A generation back, hapless, non-working remained busy with domestic chores and making things comfortable for the children and the husband. Now, they have an outlet in the shape of “kitty”. It gives them a platform to socialise, to indulge in gossip, flourish their outfits and adornments, exchange confidences, share tricks of the trade to handle the maid-servant or keep the daughter-in-law under leash.

Kitty party is not the only manifestation of social change. More women are now leaving the backyard of home and are out shopping, displaying their femininity on ads, fashion shows and TV, forcing attention, demanding a role in decision-making, and entering professions traditionally regarded as the preserve of men.

Just a few years back, a person’s name, postal address, telephone number established his identity in the world. Now, a whole lot of paraphernalia is tagged on to him — his pager, cellular phone, fax, e-mail, and web site. Indeed, these frills have become the defining symbols of one’s station in life, a passport to the exciting world of information technology.

One can go on and on. But, to cut a longer matter short, it need only be said that every situation, every circumstance is, for better or worse, subject to change — that is the cardinal principle, the inexorable law. All that a man can do it is control the direction and content of change. It is also important that “in our preoccupation with the past and the present,” as spoke John Kennedy, “we must not miss the future”.

Higher judiciary: curbs from within

by Anupam Gupta

“A FORM of life and conduct far more severe and restricted than that of ordinary people,” Winston Churchill told the House of Commons in 1954, “is required from Judges..... They are at once privileged and restricted. They have to present a continuous aspect of dignity and conduct.” Far more freedom, he added, is granted by convention to the Members of Parliament, to Ministers or to Privy Councillors. “The Judges have to maintain, though free from criticism (in Parliament), a far more rigorous standard than is required from any other class that I know of in this Realm.”

Judged by this rigorous standard set by a Conservative British politician for Her Majesty’s Judges 45 years ago, the code of conduct adopted by the all-India conference of High Court Chief Justices and announced last week contains nothing terribly impressive.

Titled “Restatement of Values of Judicial Life”, the code sacrifices the critical to the trite and the platitudinous. “Justice must not only be done (it declares) but it must also be seen to be done. The behaviour and conduct of members of the higher judiciary must reaffirm the people’s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary.”

Shored up by a ceaselessly expanding jurisprudence of contempt of court, the people’s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary is a highly relative social value. Relative to the appalling degradation and corruption of the executive and legislative branches of government, and to the fall in morals in society as a whole. Independent of this comparison, the judiciary, even the higher judiciary, has much to account for.

“In the first two decades of our Republic,” wrote N.A. Palkhivala in The Times of India in July, 1990, referring to the developments that year in the Bombay High Court, “it was the compulsion of veracity, not the fear of the law relating to contempt of court, which was responsible for the fact that no charges of corruption were levelled against the judiciary. Now the compulsion of veracity dictates such charges in defiance of the Contempt of Courts Act.”

At first blush, said his distinguished colleague and leading constitutional lawyer H.M. Seervai, touching on the subject in his Chimanlal Setalved lectures in 1970, “nothing seems easier than to expose a corrupt judge, but in fact few things are harder.”

All the forces of order, and respect for the judiciary, he said, are ranged against an enquiry into the conduct of a corrupt judge because it is generally believed that the proved corruption of a judge shakes the confidence of the public in the administration of justice.

Litigants are unlikely, he elaborated, to expose a corrupt judge for fear of contempt and because of the time, trouble and expense involved in the successful exposure of a judge. Members of the Bar are unwilling to expose a corrupt judge, for “if they fail, they would have to abandon his court.” As Emerson said to Oliver Wendell Holmes (one of the greatest Judges of all time): “If you shoot at a King, you must hit him.”

Drafted by judges for judges, last week’s code of conduct does not betray any intention of regicide. It is rather a hasty, self-protective move to pre-empt the imposition of a code of conduct by the Government through the proposed National Judicial Commission. Whatever be one’s views about the Commission, there cannot be any manner of doubt that the Judges have acted to regulate and discipline themselves only for fear of Parliament stepping in if they did not do so.

Albeit avoiding a direct reference to “favouritism” (a common judicial failing), the code advises judges to eschew close association with individual members of the Bar, particularly those practising in the same court.

Avoiding likewise a direct reference to “nepotism”, the code bars a Judge from allowing any member of the Bar closely related to him (or her) from appearing before the Judge or being otherwise “associated in any manner” with a cause to be dealt with by that Judge. Though welcome as a restatement, the clause hardly adds to the prohibition already contained in this behalf in the Bar Council of India Rules (“Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette”).

The prescriptions that a Judge shall not accept gifts or hospitality except from his family, close relations and friends; shall not speculate in shares, stocks or the like; and shall not ask for or accept contributions or actively associate himself with the raising of funds, unexceptionable as they are, remind one of the “Conduct Rules” long applicable to government servants.

There is one clause, however, which transcends the banal. And which, if properly understood and followed in letter and spirit, can act as a major corrective given the experience of recent years.

“A Judge (it reads) is expected to let his judgements speak for themselves.”

More on that profoundly simple canon next week.

B.C. Sanyal’s revealing memoirs

by Humra Quraishi

THE highlight of last week was the release of the second volume of the memoirs of the oldest surviving artist in our midst — the 97-year-old BC Sanyal. A neat, well arranged function, presided over by the Vice-President of the country, took place at the National Gallery of Modern Art. And Sanyal came up with his best in a short crisp speech. He began by saying how perturbed he was by the happenings around where the beast in the man seemed to be getting predominant. However, the next minute he realised that such talk was probably inappropriate during the function and quickly changed its course. But the memoirs definitely have a flow and more importantly a sense of honesty. Edited by the well-known art critic Santo Dutta to whom credit must be given for selecting the most relevant and the most hard hitting. Sanyal’s passages on both, Pritish Nandi and Menaka Gandhi, are definitely revealing. I quote:

“Earlier the modest Pritish Nandi, the immaculate actor, told me that he felt that his life was not worth living till he had my self portrait titled The Last Mughal on his wall. The painting could fetch more than Rs 1 lakh in current valuation in the art market but the tearful eyes of Nandi moved me when he humbly offered 25,000. He paid 10,000 and said the next week when he visited again from Bombay he would pay the rest. The next week never came. Menaka Gandhi met me at a party and gracefully told me the painting was in her collection! I offered to return the ten thousand and have the painting back. But a giggle was the only answer ... but Pritish Nandi wrote an excellent piece on the retrospective of my cats and kittens, but the artist was left high and dry and the paintings he collected from my studio were never returned. This is one side of ‘art appreciation’ today in India, among the smart set. Between Nandi and other sharks in the art market my cats and other pictorials missed their niche in my studio forever...”

I quote again, this time his target is DD:”In the beginning of the Independence celebrations I found my face on the TV screen uttering ‘Vandemataram’. Very soon it was discovered that my image was sponsored by Coca Cola! There was no mention of the GOI or DD ! Wrote a letter to the Hon’ble minister for I & B, requesting for the removal of my face. The minister was prompt enough to reply that it was so necessary to raise the revenue but was kind enough to omit showing my face...”

Though I’m quite tempted I’m afraid I really cannot quote anymore! However, the memoirs are definitely worth a detailed read for the man has seen the entire century and is remarkably honest in ripping apart the well-known and their doings.

Human rights day — happenings or otherwise

First of all people are justifiably curious about why Laloo Yadav got daughter Misa married on Human Rights Day. Feedback is yet to arrive from Patna, on the premarriage and more importantly on post marriage scenario. Except for the fact that no official could move from the city till the celebrations continued. Meanwhile, post mortem results of the three wedding receptions of junior Mulayam have revealed that those assembled to receive the baraat and the guests were none other than airhostesses and stewards of Sahara Airlines.

Moving on to other realities of the day. Perhaps, for the first time after tragedy struck in Orissa, six Delhi dancers — Bharati Shivaji, Ranjana Gauhar, Charu Sija Mathur, Veronique Azan, Kavita Dwibedi and Rama Vaidyanathan — put a joint dance show on the Human Rights Day, to raise funds for those affected. I think the lead in this has been taken by the well known Odissi dancer Kavita Dwibedi who hails from that particular state. More concern is forthcoming for the state of humans. And on December 12, Champa:‘The Amiya and B G Rao Foundation’ is holding a day long discussion on the militarisation in South Asia. Personally I feel that such talks don’t really affect the agendas , hidden or otherwise, that will inevitably be followed by the government to remain in power and atop the popular polls.

But if the ‘quality of life’ element with reference to artists from Rajasthan is to be taken seriously, then there certainly seems to be good news on that front... last week saw the release of Tripti Pandey’s book — “Where Silence Speaks” — on Rajasthan’s art and much more. And she revealed that gradually, as their art is being appreciated, there is a change coming about. “This kalbelia dancer, Gulabi, not only earns so well that her daughter is studying at the Maharani Gayatri Devi school but she has bought her own car and goes about in that... the rest too are generally doing so well that they call themselves kalakaars with a renewed sense of pride” says Pandey.

Special focus on Fabri, and...

And just as I was about to file this column came an invite from the Hungarian Information and Cultural Centre for the commemoration of the 100th birth anniversary of the well-known art historian, novelist and critic Charles Fabri. And at the same venue starts off an exhibition of the water-colour paintings of Hungarian artist Peter Kaubek. It is interesting to know that this artist lives in Nagymaros, a picturesque township on the Danube bend, near Zebegeny, where Amrita Sher Gill used to stay when in Hungary. And these water colours were painted when he undertook a bicycle ride along the roads of India and Nepal.

‘Captured’ old

And on December 12 starts off at the IIC an exhibition of photographs of the old and elderly, taken by students belonging to different schools of Delhi and Chandigarh. I am told that though only hundred photographs have been selected for display but the response had been overwhelming — over 5000 photographs clicked by 2500 students. At least it goes to prove that the elderly are not completely forgotten....

75 YEARS AGO

December 13, 1924
The Unity Committee

THE personnel of the Committee appointed by the All-Party Conference at Bombay for the purpose of considering the best way of re-uniting all political parties in the National Congress and preparing a scheme of Swaraj, including the solution of Hindu-Muslim relations, and like questions, in their political aspects is a guarantee that the subject will be considered in all its bearings and no stone will be left unturned to explore the possibilities of a decision acceptable to all those who desires self-government for India at an early date.

It is fairly representative of all parties, not excepting even the Europeans, though the participation of the latter is at best problematical.

It is some evidence of the spirit in which this Committee has accepted its task that it met immediately after the dissolution of the Conference and resolved to invite the various parties in the country to send to the Secretary of the Conference not later than December 20 the conditions on which they were willing to rejoin the Congress.

The idea presumably is to give to the Congress or, at any rate, to prominent Congressmen, an opportunity of considering these conditions on the occasion of the annual session. In this connection it is with pleasure we note that Lala Harkishen Lal has donated a sum of Rs 5,000 and Messrs Iyengar and Jayakar Rs. 1,000 each to promote the objects of the Committee.