Home rule, BJP style
THE BJP-led alliance is seeking shelter behind a narrow interpretation of the Constitution to mute the criticism of its pro-active policy like the transfer of the Union Home Secretary on Monday. And frankly that would not do.

Inhuman catastrophe
DOES anyone at NATO headquarters remember that the aerial attacks on Yugoslavia were launched because of the atrocities heaped by Serbia on the hapless Albanians?

Match-fixers, beware
IN 1983 Wisden editors had offered to eat their hats if India won the World Cup. Some months ago they demanded the head of International Cricket Council President Jagmohan Dalmiya for not doing enough for investigating charges of match-fixing against players.

Challenges before judiciary-I
Need for caution, restraint
by A.S. Anand
FIVE major challenges face the Indian judiciary as it approaches the 21st century. The first and foremost is the need for restraint and caution. Judicial activism and judicial restraint are the two sides of the same coin. Judicial restraint in the exercise of its functions is as important for the judiciary as the discharge of its obligations under the Constitution.

Limits of US-China equation
by S.P. Seth
PRIME Minister Zhu Rongji’s recent US visit has simply reinforced the political chasm between China and the USA. The most China was hoping from that trip was an agreement to facilitate its entry into the World Trade Organisation.

Pokhran-II tests “1998 vintage”
by R. Chidambaram
THE Atomic Energy Commission chief, Dr Rajagopala Chidambaram, says that the nuclear establishment had recommended a moratorium on further nuclear tests as Pokhran II provided adequate database for developing devices that give India a credible nuclear deterrence.

Transparency in selection sought
by Maj-Gen Himmat Singh Gill
POOR senior leadership, an outdated promotion and appointment policy and the absence of a totally transparent grievances redressal system, should be some of the main concerns of the top brass of the armed forces, if they are serious about fielding a happy and contented fighting force in battles, and make the youth to have a career in uniform.

Haryana’s contribution
by Ahtesham Qureshy
A QUESTION that has often baffled me is as to why the legislators, MPs and MLAs alike, in Punjab do not indulge in the game of defection, while their counterparts in Haryana have mastered the art — or craft, if you prefer to call it that way.

75 Years Ago

Contempt of court
Lala Duni Chand of Ambala convicted
LALA Duni Chand, Vakil of Ambala and a member of the Legislative Assembly, was prosecuted last month and convicted and fined Rs 100 for contempt of court under section 480 Cr P.C by Khan Ahmed Khan, Junior Sub Judge, Ambala, under the following circumstance: -

Home rule, BJP style

THE BJP-led alliance is seeking shelter behind a narrow interpretation of the Constitution to mute the criticism of its pro-active policy like the transfer of the Union Home Secretary on Monday. And frankly that would not do. True. the Constitution is silent on a caretaker arrangement simply because the founding fathers could not anticipate the defeat of successive governments on the floor of the Lok Sabha, and weather and electoral roll revision combining to stall an early poll. But surely the Constitution does not equate a government which has lost majority support with the one which still enjoys the confidence of the House. To claim unfettered powers for a government that has failed the crucial test may pass muster in a very limited literal sense of the Constitution, but it would damage its spirit.

The Union Home Secretary is the lynchpin in organising and conducting the elections and it is through him that the Election Commission coordinates its work with the government. And in the coming elections, in which every seat will be bitterly fought and every favourable or unfavourable factor will be fully exploited, the sudden shifting of the key official is naturally being viewed with considerable political concern. The former incumbent, a Bihar-born but Assam cadre officer, is an amiable man, a consensus builder and a team player. In the initial months of its tenure, the relationship between the alliance government and the officer was at best tentative and often uneasy. But he quickly established a rapport with the Home Minister with his grasp of the subject and his capacity to work hard. The new choice for the post is from the UP cadre, a tough-talking, no-nonsense man and a known saffron sympathiser. He is also related to a Union Minister belonging to the BJP. Add to this what every freshman analyst knows: more than at any time in the past, UP will decide which will be the next ruling party or coalition. That is why ensconcing Mr Kamal Pande as the man to guide the coming elections has aroused so much bitterness and controversy.

The ruling alliance trots out three tired explanations. The government has the power, the model code of conduct is not in operation and it is a routine affair. Surely, the BJP does not believe in this hogwash. If it does, it would not have kept quiet when the Samata Party unleashed its fury over the transfer of the Chief Secretary and the DGP of Bihar by the Rabri Devi government. The silence was indirect support to the protest and Mr George Fernandes was so inspired as to carry his complaint to the President. In the past the BJP has scored several mishits over pre-poll transfer of senior officers. Or, is it the argument that what Mr Laloo Prasad Yadav does is wrong but when the ruling alliance repeats it, it becomes moral and routine? In the case of Mr Kamal Pande’s transfer, the Home Minister seems to have been bypassed or brought in rather late and the PMO took over the thinking and doing. When the PMO, and not the Cabinet secretariat, decides on a transfer, surely it is not routine.

Inhuman catastrophe

DOES anyone at NATO headquarters remember that the aerial attacks on Yugoslavia were launched because of the atrocities heaped by Serbia on the hapless Albanians? If someone did, the kind of inhuman bombing that has killed thousands of civilians would have never taken place. It is a bus one day, a bridge the other and a factory the next day. The death dance has gone on for far too long and a halt is called for at once. What is shocking is that the so-called pacifist countries of NATO had been railing at exactly this kind of brutality all along. While doing so, they had even lost sight of the fact that it was not only Serbs but also Albanians who violated human rights. Still, international humanitarian law has been violated with impunity by the well-oiled NATO war machine. In every war, there is some damage to the civilians. The US war machinery has even coined a sterilised word for it: collateral damage. But rarely has there been such concerted attack on civilian targets. What is worse is that now nobody even expresses regrets over them, as if such attacks were the most natural thing to do. Had any other country than the USA been involved, there would have been shrill cries demanding the dragging of persons responsible to the International War Crimes Tribunal at The Hague. But now that the NATO itself is the perpetrator, there is a deafening silence.

Things are worsening with every passing day. As the NATO juggernaut runs short of military targets and also of precision missiles and smart bombs, it would be pummelling the civilians with even greater brutality. Dumb bombs falling from the skies do not distinguish between military and civilian targets even at the sanest of times. Now that NATO has dropped the figleaf of avoiding such targets carefully, the rain of bombs has the potential of flattening the whole province. The question is: what will the world in general and NATO in particular gain from it? The original objectives of enforcing the Rambouillet agreement and preventing the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo have been lost sight of. On the contrary, the attack has been counter-productive. President Slobodan Milosevic is firmly in saddle and has rather become a hero for his people. The bombing has, in fact, strengthened the resolve of the people to defend their country. That was bound to happen. After all, see what Hitler’s carpet bombing of London did during World War II. NATO strategists handled the time-bomb called Yugoslavia without realising that it had been exploding off and on for centuries. To make matters worse, they were not in a position to commit ground forces. Not after the USA ended up with egg on its face in Vietnam. That had made it an unwinnable war from the very start. But so sure were they of winning it that they did not even obtain prior UN approval. The mistakes have been compounded over the past five weeks. Even the oil embargo against Yugoslavia by the USA and the EU is all wrong because it can only be announced by the UN Security Council. The Russian warnings in this regard have been merrily ignored. That country may be in no position to support its threats with deeds but what makes one apprehensive is that the Balkan wars have had a history of escalating into global conflagrations. One only hopes that the ominous predictions in this regard do not come true. Wars have never brought about peace. Right now, the treatment is proving to be worse than the disease.

Match-fixers, beware

IN 1983 Wisden editors had offered to eat their hats if India won the World Cup. Some months ago they demanded the head of International Cricket Council President Jagmohan Dalmiya for not doing enough for investigating charges of match-fixing against players. Will the worthy Wisden editors make a premature meal of the hats they may have saved for the ’99 World Cup final in June? They should, now that Mr Dalmiya has kept his promise of setting up a high-level committee for suggesting an effective mechanism for dealing with complaints of cheating by players and teams. Lord Griffiths, who will head the nine-member probe panel, is an able cricket administrator and a former president of the MCC. Mr N.K.P. Salve of India, Mr Richie Benaud of Australia and representatives of the remaining seven Test playing countries too have vast experience in dealing with cricket-related matters for them to be able to assist Lord Griffiths in assessing the veracity of current stories of match-fixing, the dimensions of the problem and how to make players remember the oath that “as a cricketer I will play the game like a gentleman”. In fact, it may not be a bad idea for the ICC to recommend a mandatory pledge which cricketers should take during their journey from the district to the national team.

The probe panel is expected to examine the findings of the judicial enquiry ordered by the Board of Control for Cricket in India following media reports about the involvement of senior players in money deals for throwing away matches. The Australian Cricket Board’s explanation why it tried to brush under the carpet the money-for-information deals Shane Warne and Mark Waugh entered into with an Indian bookie would provide useful material to the committee. The current judicial enquiry into match-fixing charges against senior Pakistan players too is expected to provide relevant clues to the Griffiths Committee. The problem can no longer be taken lightly in view of the involvement of commercial interests in the promotion of the game. A senior player at the fag end of his career and a junior player, who knows that he does not have a long career because of his lack of talent, can easily be “bought” for influencing the outcome of a match. During the Sharjah tournament Rashid Latif, the former Pakistani wicket-keeper, again charged the team of deliberately losing league matches after ensuring its place in the final. But players cannot be hanged on the basis of unsubstantiated accusations. The Griffiths Committee may find this aspect of its assignment a tough nut to crack. One remedy could be for the ICC to set up a permanent regulatory authority. If the authority is satisfied that there is enough circumstantial evidence, it should have the power to ask the selection committee of the board concerned to drop players of doubtful integrity from the team. The objective should not be to seek legal action against such cricketers, but to keep the game clean.

Challenges before judiciary-I
Need for caution, restraint
by A.S. Anand

FIVE major challenges face the Indian judiciary as it approaches the 21st century. The first and foremost is the need for restraint and caution. Judicial activism and judicial restraint are the two sides of the same coin. Judicial restraint in the exercise of its functions is as important for the judiciary as the discharge of its obligations under the Constitution. With a view to seeing that judicial activism does not become “judicial adventurism” and leads a judge to pursuing his own notions of justice and beauty, ignoring the limits of law, the bounds of his jurisdiction and the binding precedents, the courts must act with proper restraint and self-discipline.

The courts have to be careful that by their over-zealousness they do not cause any uncertainty or confusion either through their observations during the hearing of a case or through their written verdicts. If unmindful of the expected restraint, the courts make observations orally or through written decisions, one way or the other, they may consciously or unconsciously cause uncertainty and confusion in the law. In that event, the law will not only develop along uncertain lines instead of a straight and consistent path but the judiciary’s image may also, in the bargain, get tarnished and its respectability eroded. That would, indeed, be a sad day.

The courts should only create rights where they are certain that the right so created can be vindicated and the order of the court can be enforced. The danger of the judiciary creating a multiplicity of rights without the possibility of adequate enforcement is real. It must be guarded against. The judiciary should not become an institution of mere form bereft of substance. There are real limits to what the judicial process should attempt to accomplish, and the judiciary should resist the temptation to cross them. The decisions of the Courts should be within the zone of juridical legitimacy. The judiciary cannot give decisions that ignore authoritative sources and are inconsistent or incoherent with the larger body of law.

The judiciary can act only as an alarm-clock and not as a time-keeper. The courts can neither take over the functions of the government nor allow the administration to get away with its omissions and commissions.

Every judge must remain conscious of the limits of his jurisdiction and remember that his role is to uphold the majesty of the rule of law and his power is meant to be harnessed in public interest. There are certain tasks which it is not possible for the judiciary to perform. Complex problems of policy cannot be resolved with the limited data available within the confines of the judicial process. These kinds of problems are incapable of resolution by “judicially manageable standards” and the courts must tread carefully when confronted by them. We, in the judiciary, must forever remember the well-known saying that “absolute power corrupts absolutely”. It is, therefore, the duty of the courts to ensure that while exercising their powers, they do not overstep their permissible limits and act within the bounds of the Constitution and the law.

Greater the power, greater is the need for restraint. No civilised system of justice can permit judicial authoritarianism and, therefore, the judges at all levels are expected to be circumspect and self-disciplined in the discharge of their judicial functions. The function of a judge is divine, but the problem arises when the judge starts thinking that he himself has become divine! That is where ego takes over and rationality and logic, as also rules of constitutionalism, are placed on a back-burner. To retain public confidence in the institution, the judges must guard against such pitfalls.

With a view to retaining legitimacy and its efficacy, the potent weapon of PIL (public interest litigation) forged for the benefit of the weaker sections of society and those who, as a class, cannot agitate their legal problems by themselves has to be used carefully, so that it may not get blunted by wrong or over-use. It is necessary and essential that “public interest litigation” should develop on a consistent and firm path. Care has to be taken to see that PIL essentially remains public interest litigation and does not become either political interest litigation or personal interest litigation or publicity interest litigation or used for persecution. If that happens, it would be unfortunate. PIL would lose its legitimacy and the credibility of the courts would suffer. Finding the delicate balance between ensuring justice in society around us and yet maintaining institutional legitimacy is a continuing challenge for the higher judiciary. One can say that the court has maintained that balance remarkably well over the past 50 years.

The second challenge is one of accountability and transparency. It is well known that the rule of law sustains democracy. It is equally true that the task of maintaining the rule of law is assigned to a bold and independent judiciary. The impartiality and independence of the judiciary depends on the high standards of conduct followed by the judges. Only if the highest possible standards are adhered to will the faith of the common man in the judiciary be maintained. It is, therefore, imperative that the actions of judges are transparent and constitutionally sound. The judiciary cannot afford to adopt an uncritical attitude towards itself. We judges, at all levels, must make ourselves accountable and ensure that our actions are transparent and are within the parameters set by the Constitution. The judiciary must follow the standards of morality and behaviour which it sets for others. As a matter of fact, before laying down standards of behaviour for others, the judiciary must demonstrate that the same standards apply to it and are being followed by it. Constant evaluation of the functioning of the institution needs, therefore, to be encouraged if the high esteem conferred on the judiciary is to be justified.

The societal perception of the judges as being detached and impartial referees is the greatest strength of the judiciary. Every judge must ensure that this perception does not receive a setback on any account. The courts act for the people who have reposed confidence in them and, therefore, the greatest threat to the independence of the judiciary is the erosion of its credibility in public mind, for whatever reasons.

If a judge decides wrongly out of motives of self-promotion, he is no less corrupt than a judge who decides wrongly out of motives of financial gain. In either case, the incumbent of the office is not worthy of being a judge. His actions erode the credibility of the institution in public mind, and that is the greatest threat to the independence of the judiciary. Eternal vigilance by the judges to guard against such latent dangers is, therefore, necessary.

Now the issue of speedy justice. One of the greatest challenges that stares us in the face as we approach the 21st century is the failure of the judiciary to deliver justice expeditiously. This has brought about a sense of frustration among the litigants. Human hope has its limits, and waiting endlessly is not possible in the current life-style.

When the judicial administration enters the 21st century, in the not too distant future, the first thing to be kept in view by all concerned is that the arrears of court cases which have mounted up till now are eradicated at the earliest. This cannot be possible without the full and unstinted cooperation of the members of the Bar and the presiding judges as partners in the great task of administration of justice. The consumer of justice wants unpolluted, expeditious and inexpensive justice. In its absence, he may be tempted to take the law into his own hands, instead of taking recourse to law. The judicial system must guard against this so that people do not take recourse to extra judicial methods to settle scores and seek redress of their grievances.

It has been noticed with dismay in recent years that often landlords do not file suits in the rent courts but take the help of anti-social elements to throw out their tenants by force and coercion. This is nothing but resorting to the rule of the jungle. If this tendency proliferates, it would be a sad day for the constitutional democracy to which we are all wedded. The Bar and the Bench have together to resolve and remedy these ills to preserve the peoples’ faith in the rule of law. — INFA

(To be concluded)

The article is based on a lecture delivered in memory of the late D.M. Singhvi by the author, the Chief Justice of India.

Limits of US-China equation
by S.P. Seth

PRIME Minister Zhu Rongji’s recent US visit has simply reinforced the political chasm between China and the USA. The most China was hoping from that trip was an agreement to facilitate its entry into the World Trade Organisation. And even here there is only the possibility that the two countries might be able to sort out their differences by the end of this year. According to Premier Zhu, the gap between the two countries on the WTO was quite small. Though he conceded that, “President Clinton, however, thinks it is large.”

Even before setting on his US visit in April, Mr Zhu was conscious of its limited scope. He frankly told The Wall Street Journal, “I may be an unwelcome visitor, and some people may even look upon me as an enemy. But I’m still willing to make this trip.” Because: “I believe I can explain some issues, clarify the truth to enhance mutual understanding”.

And he went about his task of clarifying the issues, and putting forth his government’s viewpoint through a whole range of forums, to include state-level talks, media outlets, business gatherings and so on. He was simultaneously charming, persevering and seemingly accommodating in the course of his dealings with the US media. For instance, in a TV interview, he tended to evade a forthright opinion on the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, by maintaining that China was still awaiting material from US Secretary of State Albright about the facts regarding the Kosovo situation.

Premier Zhu was, therefore, careful not to unduly tread on US sensitivities on this highly charged issue, even though the Chinese media has equated it with Nazi Germany’s attacks on Yugoslavia during World War II. On the question of human rights violations in China (another sensitive issue), Mr Zhu avoided a prickly and combative response. He maintained that the human rights situation in China had improved considerably, though there was always scope for improvement.

According to Premier Zhu, the problems between China and the USA were not so much the gaps in their respective positions, but the political atmosphere in the USA. It is like the old egg and chicken story of which came first. In whatever way Mr Zhu might posit the question, the fact is that both are inter-related. The political atmosphere is vitiated because the two countries not only look at issues differently but also view them as rivals — now or in future.

Whether it is human rights (including Tibet), trade, nuclear spying, camping contributions to influence US presidential election, Taiwan, regional defence and any number of other issues (including US support of the democracy movement in China), China and the USA often come out as rivals seeking to limit the other’s role. And because the USA is more powerful of the two, China feels especially aggrieved. Its Middle Kingdom syndrome as a universalising civilisation comes into clash with the US view of itself as an upholder and promoter of democracy.

With such opposing worldviews, there is an in-built tension in Sino-US relations. There is a strong feeling in China that the USA stands in the way of its great power status, and tends to engage in a “containment” policy reminiscent of the Cold War era. At the same time, it is also felt that a continuing high-level dialogue, with the exchange of visits between their leaders, will help clarify issues and foster better political atmosphere. President Jiang Zemin favoured this approach in a 1995 interview with a US newspaper. Mr Zhu Rongji sought to follow it up during his recent US visit by seeking to clear the muddied political atmosphere in the USA where China was concerned.

In the same way, President Clinton tended to talk up his policy of “engagement” with China. Just before Premier Zhu’s April visit, Mr Clinton sought to play down the nuclear threat from China, notwithstanding the theft of nuclear secrets from the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory. He said that China had “at best only marginally increased its deployed nuclear threat in the past 15 years.” He added, “China has fewer than two dozen long-range nuclear weapons today” while the USA has “over 6,000”.

He implied that the danger from China was more from its weaknesses than its strengths. According to Mr Clinton, “the weaknesses of great nations can pose as big a challenge to America as their strengths,” citing Russia as an example. Therefore, “So as we focus on the potential challenge that a strong China could present, let us not forget the risk of a weak China —beset by internal conflicts, social dislocation and criminal activity — becoming a vast zone of instability in Asia.”

The problem with such a self-serving Clinton analysis, though, would be to over-estimate the US role in China’s likely rise and/or fall. The implication being that US engagement and/or disengagement could make all the difference for China’s future, thus conveniently ignoring the dynamics of its internal situation.

Haryana’s contribution
by Ahtesham Qureshy

A QUESTION that has often baffled me is as to why the legislators, MPs and MLAs alike, in Punjab do not indulge in the game of defection, while their counterparts in Haryana have mastered the art — or craft, if you prefer to call it that way. They rise from the common land, the land of five rivers. Till the recent past, they belonged to the state of Punjab, till new boundaries were drawn to divide them, geographically, into three states — Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh. They also belong to common ethnic stock; they share the common heritage, and common culture. And yet, when it comes to politics in Parliament and assemblies, they exhibit so different traits. Why?

The political phenomenon called defection is rather uncommon in Punjab. The legislators in that land do not commit the sin which would expose them to the penalty of disqualification under the anti-defection law. If the MPs and MLAs from Punjab alone were before the law makers sitting in Parliament, they would not have thought of enacting the law to banish the evil of defection, or of betraying the parent political organisation. And, interestingly, this is common virtue among the legislators, be they of the Akali Dal, the Congress, or the Bharatiya Janata Party (or even the erstwhile Jana Sangh). The Akalis are known for their infighting. The politicians are known for their habit of causing splits in the organisation. So many Akali Dals have been born out of the parent body. But what is, generally, unheard of is defection of a legislator, or a small cunning group of them comprising one-third of the main party in the Assembly or the Lok Sabha to avoid the penal clause of the anti-defection law.

As a contrast, the MLAs and even MPs, from Haryana defect at the slightest temptation. They have come to be known, not wrongly, as the “saleable commodity”. The vice took its birth in Haryana, and has been perfected in that land. The disease is infectious, and spreads fast among the legislators, be they young or veterans, and irrespective of the party to which they belong. The anti-defection law, with all its weaknesses, has failed to deter them.

Bhajan Lal has been identified as the father of wholesale defection. I was witness to the scene when, working as the Hindustan Times correspondent posted at Chandigarh, in 1980, the crafty Chief Minister led his stock of loyal Janata Party MLAs to the Congress camp soon after the return of Mrs Indira Gandhi to power at the Centre. But now, his arch rival, Om Prakash Chautala, has left far behind the author of the craft. I also remember the day when Chautala was detained at the Delhi airport by the Customs authorities while returning home from a foreign trip. His father, Devi Lal, who was then Chief Minister of Haryana, promptly called a press conference to declare that “I disown Om Prakash”. (The words Devi Lal used were “mein us ko Aaq karta hoon”) It meant forfeiture of his right to inherit from the huge ancestral property.

Gone are those bad days. Now, he heads a political outfit, called the Indian National Lok Dal, a small group of four MPs in the now dissolved 12th Lok Sabha. To begin with, this group was counted as supporters of the BJP-led ruling alliance. But the moment of crisis came for the Vajpayee Government, and it meant an opportunity for the leader of the group. One day, he broke away from the ruling coalition. One fine morning, a former Prime Minister tried to work out a patch up, to put the flock back into the BJP basket. But the arrangement broke down. The herd was moved away. It was left to an old friend, Punjab Chief Minister Prakash Singh Badal to win it back on the eve of that fateful day in the Lok Sabha, when every single head counted. What was a matter of common knowledge in Parliament lobbies, and outside, was that the deal was struck. In similar circumstances in 1993, Narasimha Rao had allegedly paid the bribe to JMM members and others to win the vote of confidence. But poor Atal Behari Vajpayee, he lost in the game.

Security and strategy

Transparency in selection sought
by Maj-Gen Himmat Singh Gill

POOR senior leadership, an outdated promotion and appointment policy and the absence of a totally transparent grievances redressal system, should be some of the main concerns of the top brass of the armed forces, if they are serious about fielding a happy and contented fighting force in battles, and make the youth to have a career in uniform.

Over the years we have been saddled with an indifferent to poor leadership at the top rung in the three services. I will just give one example from each service.

In 1962, in the war with China, the best the country could field against the Chinese sitting atop the Thagla Ridge in the then North-East Frontier Agency, was a General who had spent much of his time making houses for the troops in Ambala cantonment under “Project Amar” and such allied nothings. He had little professional competence or guts to carry out Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru’s directions.

Just as the late General Sunderji and many in his team had assured their chief at the time of the launching of Operation Bluestar that they would make quick work of the opposition, so also in the same fashion, General Kaul had assured Pt Nehru and Krishna Menon that throwing back the Chinese from the Thagla Ridge and the Namka Chu river would be an easy matter, and a very swift action at that.

The General was not even physically fit when he reached Tawang and as is wellknown in Army circles even today, had considerable difficulty in reaching the 14,000-feet-high Hathungla Ridge, where the Indian forces were positioned. Poor military leadership, foisted by a newly-in-the chair political hierarchy and a pliant ‘Army-cracy’ at the topmost level at Army Headquarters, landed all of us in a major military mess in NEFA. Nehru was not expected to know his military commanders, but surely General Thapar, the then chief, should have known who could win his wars for him and who could not.

The near-mutiny, (mutiny according to many), in the Air Force just some time ago during the tenure of Air Chief Marshal Sareen, does not speak well of the latter’s stewardship.

As far as the Navy is concerned, who by now has not heard of the Bhagwat episode. A Chief of Naval Staff who allowed his spouse to be his chief advocate, accused a regional political party of trying to assist Harinder Singh, the present DCNS, and just would not take orders from his Defence Minister had it coming to him all the time.

One is surprised how he lasted so long. At this level, a chief is expected to act maturely and not pin his whole case on the posting in of one officer. He was expected to take leave from the service when he found that the government was not agreeing with his views or actions. Bhagwat just did not leave until the Supreme Commander had to withdraw his pleasure over his being in office. But the damage inflicted on the entire fabric of the armed forces by one stubborn officer has been considerable.

Thus there is no substitute for the right kind of leadership in the armed forces and this leads me to question the outdated promotion and appointment policy that has often led to this sorry state of affairs. Who has not heard of the one-time aberration perpetuated by the so-called “thinking” Generals and Air Marshals, in their innovations of the “command and staff” stream concept and the “deep selection”, respectively.

Many suffered from natural death as soon as the chief concerned retired, and in the process damage to the morale of the forces was done. The Army had its share of the “cadre review” (where officers were promoted overnight with the job content remaining constant). The three services have been ‘gifted’ with the two-year extension in service. With no continuity of any kind in policy, the promotion policy has to be examined. First and foremost, the selections made by the three service chiefs with senior Commanders must be respected, and the cases of the Ministry of Defence, MoD, turning down one person or super-imposing (in a horse-trading deal) another, should be the rarest of the rare, if not altogether eliminated. Surely the chief (and not the Defence Minister, the Home Minister or even the Prime Minister, who are some of those who comprise the Appointments Committee), knows who his competent Generals are.

All promotions up to the rank of Lieut-General and equivalent should be cleared at the level of the Defence Minister, once the Special Selection Boards have selected the best. Only the selection of the chiefs, in my opinion, need go up to the Cabinet. Here too, the views and recommendations of the outgoing chief must be duly noted. The soldiery that is going to win the next war for you, does not appreciate any tinkering from outside. It certainly wishes to be led by its ablest, Generals, Admirals and Air Marshals, who have been selected by their own superiors in uniform, who understand and know them best. Any political overtones, even by inference in the promotion of senior officers of the armed forces, must be done away with. As it is, a vocal segment in the Army and even outside it, has started to ask why they have had no Chief of the Army Staff to date, when a Parsi and Christian have already occupied this high post. Or as to why the Military Secretary’s branch which deals with the career prospects, promotions and postings of the officers of the entire Army, has not had an incumbent from their ranks, after Major-General Amrik Singh last occupied the chair of Military Secretary, nearly three decades back. The topmost appointment in this all-important and crucial branch of the Army should really be open to the meritorious.

The results of the selection boards must be announced expeditiously and those not selected must be told in writing why they did not make it. Any drop in performance, in an otherwise outstanding officer who has excelled for long in the field, must be viewed with suspicion and caution, and seen to it, that a clash of personality or such like reason, is not allowed to suddenly mar a promising career.

The ‘grievances redressal system’ is more establishment and system oriented. An officer’s complaint on promotion is routed to the same chief who has rejected him, in the case of a non-statutory complaint. When officers do not get justice through these channels they move court.

Pokhran-II tests “1998 vintage”
by R. Chidambaram

THE Atomic Energy Commission chief, Dr Rajagopala Chidambaram, says that the nuclear establishment had recommended a moratorium on further nuclear tests as Pokhran II provided adequate database for developing devices that give India a credible nuclear deterrence. Dr Chidambaram calls the May 11 and 13 tests as of “1998 vintage”, incorporating careful planning and inputs of explosive ballistics, neutron physics, neutron kinetics, high-pressure physics and, in the case of thermonuclear device, radiation hydrodynamics. The tests ensure building of simulation capability on nuclear devices.

In an interview to O.P. Sabherwal, the AEC chairman examines the entire nuclear spectrum, including the atomic power programme and measures for environmental safety. French and American lightwater reactors would be welcome if offered on suitable commercial terms, he says.

Excerpts:

Q: A year after the event, Pokhran II is still reverberating worldwide. Can you give a fuller view and sizing-up of the tests?

A: The tests that we carried out on May 11 and 13 last year were a very carefully planned series in order to design the types of devices that India would need to develop a credible nuclear deterrent. We tested a fission device of 15 kilotons, a thermonuclear device of 45 kilotons and three sub-kiloton devices i.e. devices whose yields are less than one kiloton. These are robust designs based on today’s knowledge of physics, engineering, electronics and material science and that is why I call them of 1998 vintage. Another very satisfying thing for us was the very good match between the calculated yields and the measured yields of each one of these tests. The experiments were also planned in such a way because these were carried out underground and we had chosen the depths of burial in such a way that there was no venting of radioactivity. In fact, on May 20, when Prime Minister Vajpayee visited the site, we took him straight on to the crater and health physicists measured the level of radiation on the ground and compared it to what you find 4 km away from the site. And this is based on another kind of calculation, the computer simulation calculation which takes into account the properties of geological medium, the strength of the rock and the composition of the rock. Computer simulation is done taking into account the propagation of the shockwave in order to ensure that the fractures that you create in the medium do not link up with the cavity which contains these radioactive gases. So that was again extremely successful in terms of what I called optimum emplacement design technology.

These tests are one expression of the exceptionally wide-ranging scientific and technological capability that is there in the nuclear establishment, and a very large number of people were involved in preparing for these tests and in designing these devices. These tests were carried out in cooperation with the Defence Research and Development Organisation. That is an example of the synergy which I think is required within the Indian S and T system. At the site, we had tremendous logistic support from the Army.

Q: It has been widely noted that the Indian nuclear establishment could give out precise data very soon after the tests whereas even countries like the USA and former Soviet Union withheld data of their first tests. What does this imply?

A: That certainly is an indication of the confidence that we had both in our design calculation and the measurements that we had made immediately after the test-closing measurements. But these are very complex computer programmes which had as inputs information on explosive ballistics, condensed matter physics, high pressure physics, neutron physics, neutron kinetics and in the case of the thermonuclear device, radiation hydrodynamics in order to calculate the yield of the device.

Q: There is still an ongoing controversy on the yield of the May 11 tests, and specifically the thermonuclear fission/fusion test. Doubts have been expressed whether it was a genuine thermonuclear test or a boosted fission device. Could you put the record straight by a definitive statement?

A: The major tests we carried out on May 11 were a 15 kiloton fission device and a 45 kiloton thermo-nuclear device. There was also a small sub-kiloton device which was detonated simultaneously. The total adds up to about 60 kiloton. Now this is done underground at the Pokhran geological medium and if the seismic signal is picked up at a distant place a few thousand km away, the shock wave travels from the explosion site through the earth and reaches the seismic stations and there is no global model of the earth. If you want to predict the yield exactly, you must have a knowledge of the geological medium where the experimental tests have been carried out and you must also have an idea about the attenuation along the path. These are extremely difficult parameters to calculate ab initio.

Even though several groups abroad had got the yields right, there was one group which I think made a serious mistake in calculating the yields of the device. Now using internationally available seismic data, we have used several different methods in order to calculate the yield of the device. For instance, there are at least nine global stations which have recorded the signals from Pokhran-I which was carried out in May, 1974, and Pokhran-II on May 11, 1998. Actual body-wave magnitude measurements can be in error but as long as from the same site, you have measured the signal for both these occasions, all the variable factors get cancelled out. So, you can now calculate what is the difference of the body-wave magnitude, each one of these stations have measured, from 1974 event and for the 1998 event. From that you can calculate what is the ratio of the two yields. And this ratio comes out very clearly as 4½ times. And you know that Pokhran-I was 10 to 15 kiloton, according to the International Data Centre. Of course, we know much better — 12 to 13 kiloton. You multiply it by 4½ times and you get the kind of yield that we had predicted i.e. 60 kiloton. And there are other methods that we have used and there is no question that the yield is right.

The other question you asked about the nature of the thermonuclear device. This was a two-stage device, the first stage is always fission device — a fission trigger and in advanced thermo-nuclear devices, it is a boosted fission device. That is, you put inside it some fusion material which releases neutrons, and these neutrons cause further fission. Thereby you can increase the yield of the device, and this increases the radiation that is emitted by the device which is required to implode to the second stage, which is the thermonuclear stage. And, in our case, the boosted fission device was the first stage of the thermonuclear device. Otherwise it was a standard two-stage thermonuclear device.

Q: A debate is on regarding India’s participation in the CTBT and the FMCT. Do you think that India’s signing the CTBT will weaken its nuclear deterrence capability?

A: On May 11 and 13, we tested a dozen new ideas and sub-systems and everyone of them worked perfectly. As a result of these tests now we have generated a very valuable scientific database on which you can base a credible nuclear deterrent. That is why we advised the government that it can now declare a moratorium on further testing. But the CTBT is a political issue and that has to be dealt with at the political level.

Q: Another important aspect. What is the load on the Indian economy of the nuclear tests and the accompanying programme? There are two views: one, that the load is unbearable; another, that the Indian route is a spin-off from the peaceful programme and the cheapest weaponisation in the world, no burden for the economy. Your comments.

A: Unlike the five nuclear weapon states as defined by the NPT which carried out the nuclear weapons related work first — they started with that and then they went on to a peaceful programme. India, on the other hand, thanks to the great foresight of Dr Homi Bhabha and other leaders of the atomic energy programme who followed him, has laid a very wide scientific and technological infrastructure in what we call the complete nuclear fuel cycle. And we have experts in every area related to nuclear science and technology. So, now if you go ahead with nuclear weapons programme the cost of this will be relatively modest compared to what has been incurred by the other nuclear weapon states.

Q: What is the updated atomic power generation target and time frame? Where does the import of light water reactor technology stand?

A: We have created, as I said, a very strong infrastructure for the development of safe and economical nuclear power. We have now 10 reactors which are operating, capacity factors which are comparable to high international standards. The total production of course is only a little under 2000 MWe but we want to raise it to something like 20,000 MWe by the year 2020. We must raise the present power production in India by at least 8 to 10 times so that the people in our rural areas have a quality of life comparable to what you find in non-urban areas of developed countries. And as I look into the future, our coal-reserves are down and hydro-electric projects have become more and more difficult to build because inevitably you have to displace people. One feels an inevitable option to satisfy the future energy needs of this country is atomic power. It appears to me that this is entirely feasible in a time frame, say 20,000 MWe by the year 2020.

Our programme is based on a pressurised heavy water reactor for which we now have the full and mature capability. We have introduced fast breeder reactor development because the plutonium that comes out of the heavy water reactor must Raghbir file Must be put back into the FBRs and then make a beginning in thorium utilisation. That will be totally based on self-reliance. In addition we would like to introduce light water reactor technology for which we are making a beginning by two 1000 MWe reactors with Russian cooperation that we are planning to set up in Tamil Nadu.

Q: French and American too?

A:Yes. India’s energy needs are enormous and it is very clear that the energy demand in the immediate future, the next few decades, will be in Asia — in China and in India. Of course we have our own self-reliance technology but it is likely that other countries will see useful commercial possibilities here. And if we come upon proposals which are satisfactory, we will certainly welcome them.

Q: How do you ensure that there are no adverse environmental effects from nuclear operations? There have been reports that in uranium mining in Jaduguda, the local population has somewhat been affected. Is there any substance in the report?

A: We have had 140 reactor-years of experience and our safety record is excellent. There has been no accident. There are three dimensions to safety. First, design and engineering safety and we are very good in designing reactors with all safety features. Second is operational safety. Our operators are among the best trained in the world. The third is regulatory safety. We have got a strong and independent regulatory board, which ensures that all safety directives are complied with. In every nuclear installation, whether it is a reactor or mining, we have an environmental survey lab which looks at the radioactivity in the environment, in the soil, in the water and in the vegetation. But sometimes there are wrong reports, which come in the papers — like the one on Jaduguda mine that you mentioned. But in November, 1998, a team of doctors went and looked into all these reports. And this team included civil surgeons of the Bihar Government and some doctors from Tata Memorial Hospital in Jamshedpur. They came to the conclusion that none of the things that have been reported, the diseases which they have blamed the radioactivity for, can be ascribed to them. These are types of diseases which are not caused by radiation. As I have said, our environmental survey ensures that there is not even the possibility of any such thing. — (IPA)

75 YEARS AGO

Contempt of court
Lala Duni Chand of Ambala convicted

LALA Duni Chand, Vakil of Ambala and a member of the Legislative Assembly, was prosecuted last month and convicted and fined Rs 100 for contempt of court under section 480 Cr P.C by Khan Ahmed Khan, Junior Sub Judge, Ambala, under the following circumstance: -

In a suit for the rendition of account brought by a firm of Jagadhari against a firm of Jagraon, Lala Murli Dhar Vakil, appeared for the plaintiff and Lala Duni Chand Vakil for the defendant.

The latter pleaded for want of jurisdiction of the court on the ground that the residence of the defendant’s agents legally determined the jurisdiction.

L. Murli Dhar commented that the residence of the plaintiff determines the jurisdiction. Lala Duni Chand requested the court to record the statement of Lala Murli Dhar in reply, but it declined to do so and insisted on his filing a full written statement.

On this Lala Duni Chand, while saying that if the court passed such an order, he would have to obey it, urged that the statement of L. Murli Dhar should be recorded and an issue as to the jurisdiction be framed.

On this the court said, “I have heard you.”

L. Duni Chand replied, “Yes, Sir, you have heard me, but you do not pay the least attention to my contention.”

Immediately after this, the court started criminal proceedings against Lala Duni Chand on account of the above remarks. The case lasted for over four hours and the judgement was scheduled to be announced the next day.