P A G E
Monday, September 6, 1999
spotlighttoday's calendar
|
E D I T O R I A L P A G E |
Monday, September 6, 1999 |
| weather spotlight today's calendar |
||
|
Discipline
first
LIMITATIONS
OF POLL PANEL |
 |
The
Taj gets humane treatment
Protest
marches over Orissa killings
Name
is the problem
Bengal
Council destroyed |
||||||||
 |
|
|
A MAJOR casualty of the Kargil crisis has been the truth — not about the Indian success but about certain basic facts before and after “Operation Vijay”. Success, as expected, has several claimants. What is disquieting is the way in which the Army’s success in the inhospitable altitudes of Kargil is being sought to be politicised both by the government and the Opposition. The Congress as the main Opposition party has its narrow angularities of looking at the events. Its response has been both erratic and confusing, giving in the process mixed signals, the net effect of which is hardly flattering to the 113-year-old party. Even as an election issue, it has lacked grace. The party has often tried to belittle the importance of the Army’s triumph. The ruling BJP-led coalition has overstretched itself to bask in the reflected glory of the victory, achieved the hard way and at the cost of more than 400 lives of the soldiers. The officers and jawans have indeed kept up the rich tradition of the Indian Army. It is also a fact that the Kargil success was built on certain lapses of policy-makers and inadequate response from intelligence and command quarters. We shall probably have a full picture of the events once the Subrahmanyam Committee completes its probe. What is, however, disturbing is when sensitive matters become points of debate prematurely, that too, on the basis of certain disclosures and selective leaks. Brig Surinder Singh, then Brigade Commander of the Kargil sector, has reportedly claimed that he had sent six letters to his superiors, the Army Chief and the Defence Ministry, informing them of increasing threat perception along the Line of Control. The natural query here will be: did adequate response come from the high-ups? As Commander of the 121 (I) Infantry Brigade deployed in the Mushkoh-Batalik belt in north Kashmir, he was supposed to respond first to any threat perception. Was he genuinely handicapped in his task? Also, was his moving the court and courting the media an afterthought, since his removal from his command and being subjected to an inquiry? The Subrahmanyam Committee will obviously examine all these aspects. The Army too has initiated its own inquiry by a serving General into the leakage of the letters. The latest developments
have brought the Army into sharp public focus. First, the
working of the defence services has become the subject of
scrutiny in the media and beyond. Second, the
politicisation of the Kargil success has by now brought
about distortions in facts. Third, the lack of
appreciation of the long tradition of professionalism in
the Army on the part of the bureaucracy and the political
leadership has unnecessarily over-exposed it. This is
surely not a healthy development for the professional
working of the armed forces. It all started with the
inept handling of the Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat affair. Even
the Defence Minister’s role in certain areas remains
unexplained. Over-enthusiasm during election time has
only added to the problems. Political leaders apparently
do not know the damage they have inflicted on our armed
forces’ rich tradition and professionalism by their
competitive politics. The nation will have to find fresh
answers and look for the necessary correctives when a new
government is installed after the election. Otherwise,
even routine matters of transfer, promotions and changes
will be treated with suspicion. And when professional
moves and counter-moves are viewed with preconceived
notions, the morale of the armed forces is bound to
suffer. The country cannot afford such a drift. Matters
of policy certainly need constant public and media
scrutiny. Even failures and lapses have to be assessed
objectively, without any blinkers. But a public debate
bereft of respect for facts can give misleading signals
which may not be in the interest of the country’s
security. While lessons from failures have to be learnt
fast, discipline of the armed forces cannot be pawned. |
Benazir roots for minorities IT is surprising that Ms Benazir Bhutto has taken the initiative of reminding Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif about the “fundamental principles of citizenship” enunciated by Mohammad Ali Jinnah. It is indeed true that Jinnah wanted the citizens of the new country to have equal rights. In his book the Hindus and other religious minorities were to have the same rights as were available to the Muslims. However, Jinnah’s dream of a secular Pakistan was destroyed in his lifetime by the hardliners in the ruling establishment. The reason why Ms Bhutto is trying to resurrect the Qaid-e-Azam’s dream is at best a cheap political gimmick for embarrassing Mr Nawaz Sharif. When her father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was in power he made no attempt whatsoever to secure for the minorities the rights promised to them by the founder of Pakistan. Ms Bhutto’s heart too did not bleed for the minorities when she was in power. Justice Bhagwan Das of the Sindh High Court is not so naive as to not understand the reason why the former Pakistan Prime Minister has brought up the question of likely “judicial discrimination” against him and why she is trying to turn it into the larger issue of the “trampling of rights of the religious minorities” in the country. Justice Bhagwan Das is third in the order of seniority of judges of the Sindh High Court. The two senior-most judges are likely to be sent to the Pakistan Supreme Court which would entitle Justice Bhagwan Das to become the next Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court. A law suit challenging the status of a Hindu judge in Islamic Pakistan is currently being heard by the superior judiciary. The filing of the law
suit has provided Ms Bhutto the opportunity to emerge as
“the champion of the rights of the religious
minorities and women who are being recklessly victimised
under the Taliban model of administration adopted by
Nawaz Sharif”. In any case, it is premature for the
Pakistan opposition leader to take up the cudgels on
behalf of Justice Bhagwan Das. She would have the legal
right to appeal as a concerned citizen only in the event
of the Supreme Court ruling against Justice Bhagwan
Das’ appointment as judge and likely elevation as
Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court. As of today, her
apparent concern for the plight of the minorities in
Pakistan sounds phoney and politically motivated. Anyone
in India who is familiar with the situation in Pakistan
should logically be surprised that a Hindu was made a
judge of a high court in a country where a distorted form
of Islamic jurisprudence is sought to be forced on the
people by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. And if Mr Bhagwan
Das could be allowed to become a judge, Islamic Pakistan
should have no problem in letting him become Chief
Justice of the Sindh High Court. What can be said about
Ms Bhutto’s stand on the issue is that the wrong
person is championing the right cause. Those in Pakistan
who express, often misplaced, concern of the plight of
Muslims in India ignore the victimisation of the
minorities in their own country as also the simple fact
Islamic fundamentalism is no different in form and
content from Hindu fundamentalism. If Pakistan really
cares for the Muslims in India, it should give up the
policy of Talibanising the polity and resurrect
Jinnah’s dream of a secular state in which a Hindu
judge’s likely elevation as Chief Justice of a high
court is treated as a routine judicial decision. |
LIMITATIONS OF POLL PANEL BY the time these lines appear in print, the first phase of the parliamentary elections shall have been completed. The results will be known only on October 6 or later, but the 1999 elections shall be remembered, first, for singular lack of issues that concern the people, especially the “other half”, and, second, for a new ethical law in campaigning. There is nothing surprising about the elections being personality, rather than issue, oriented; that has always been so in Indian politics. Also there has always been an appeal to narrow considerations such as caste, community and religion, irrespective of the prevailing law or code of ethics. But, then, the 1999 campaign has crossed all bounds of decency. A case in point is the campaign oration of Mr Pramod Mahajan, the voluble Information Minister. Even he admits that he did utter the names of Tony Blair, Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky while making the point that foreigners simply could not be the Prime Minister of this country. To go by the report of an Indian Express reporter who, apart from a Hindustan Times staffer, accompanied Mr Pramod Mahajan wherever he went on that particular day, the BJP leader harped on Mrs Sonia Gandhi’s foreign roots, Kargil, the indisputable leadership of Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee, Ms Jayalalitha’s “dirty” politics and Mr Sharad Pawar’s ambitions. At one place he said: “The BJP has nothing personal against Sonia. We respect her as bahu of the Gandhi family. But this does not mean we will accept her as the Prime Minister. She has no administrative skills. How can the country accept her in the highest post when Atalji has a career spanning 40 years in public life.” And further: “If we are really keen on accepting a foreigner, why not Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, or, for that matter, Monica Lewinsky?” The Prime Minister was prompt in publicly stating that “NDA partners and poll campaigners should desist from saying anything that is gender sensitive and lowers the standard of the campaign in the Lok Sabha elections.” Mr Mahajan took the message and stated that even though he did not compare Mrs Sonia Gandhi with Ms Lewinsky, he was sorry if he had hurt the feelings of others. However, in a never-say-die spirit, Mr Mahajan returned to the theme by releasing a letter of protest filed by the Hindustan Times correspondent to the paper’s Executive Editor which stated that interpolations in the report had distorted it and that this was fair neither to him nor to Mr Mahajan. Was that really so? Both Indian Express and Hindustan Times correspondents corroborate the fact that the reference to Lewinsky had Mr Mahajan’s listeners into splits of laughter. The HT correspondent had said in his report: “The audience even at such remote towns as Pandherthwala, and Rajura, bordering Andhra Pradesh, burst out laughing and cheering Mahajan wildly over his wisecrack on Monica and Bill.” I am not at all impressed by the HT Executive Editor’s defence of the printed version. It is elementary that a report must be fair and accurate,and must substantially reflect the basics of the speech as well as the atmosphere of a particular setting in which it was delivered. Selective quotes can distort the spirit of a speech or statement. It is clear that Mr Mahajan’s audience did not understand his reference to Monica in the way the Congress party or the dwellers of the metropolitises have (Mr Mahajan’s ingenuity in procuring an inter-office correspondence is a serious matter, which deserves separate treatment). Having said this, one must observe that Mr Mahajan ought to have realised that his speeches would be covered by the English Press — in fact, he took with him the two correspondents of the national dailies in order to ensure publicity. English, Mr Mahajan ought to know, is a language of understatement. What may pass as a good rustic joke can invite only raised eyebrows in the metropolises when it has been translated into English. He should have known that the Congress has put Mrs Sonia Gandhi on a pedestal, and even an indirect derogatory reference to her was certain to raise eyebrows in the party. It did. Worse, Mr Mahajan’s mind is full of colourful women these days. He compared Mr Sharad Pawar to Elizabeth Taylor, who had married and remarried again and again, and Ms Jayalalitha with “Vishkanya”. Not to be left behind, Mr George Fernandes thought Mrs Sonia Gandhi’s sole contribution to this country had been the gift of two children which, he thought, did not qualify her to become the Prime Minister of the country. While Mr Mahajan, at least for a while, apologised for his speech, Mr Fernandes has refused to do so. Then there is Mr Ghulam Nabi Azad. He is stated to have observed that he and his partymen may have asked the Prime Minister how, without being married, he had a son-in-law. The Congress spokesman, Mr Kapil Sibal, had to condemn the statement, “if made”. The BJP has had banners in Gujarat: “... videshi nagarikon ko maro laat” (kick out foreign women”. This is the policy of the gutters. How low can you get! What can the Election Commission do? The uncodified code of conduct owes it legitimacy to its acceptance by the political parties. If they themselves so blatantly defy it, the commission can only point out to the agreed code of conduct and plead for its observance. The model code of conduct provides: “Criticism of other political parties, when made, shall be confined to their policies and programmes, past record and work; parties shall refrain from criticism of all aspects of private life, not connected with the public activities of the leaders or workers of the other parties. Criticism of other parties or their workers on unverified allegations or on distortions shall be avoided?” The Chief Election Commissioner is reduced to declaring all the parties guilty — “nobody is innocent and all are involved” — and appealing for a ceasefire. Let us see what happens
in the next phase of the elections. |
Factors behind population growth IT is often asserted by a section of activists that the under-privileged and the poor in our country procreate more because of their adverse socio-economic conditions. Therefore it is unjust and unethical for any government to put any kind of restriction or pressure on the poor people to make them follow the country’s small family norm. It is asserted that the state has failed in its duty to alleviate poverty which is the main cause of the high birth rate below the poverty line. Thus, the government should work sincerely and effectively for the speedy development of the underprivileged instead of imposing any disincentive on the poor to promote family planning, as development is the best contraception. The assertions are true but only partly. Hunger and sex are two basic attributes of human physiology. While hunger pertains to the most fundamental instinct of survival, sex is integral to the other basic instinct — procreation. However, with the development of birth control methods, sex and procreational instincts in human beings are now de facto separated and this needs to be understood clearly by all those concerned with the population problem. The socio-economic conditionalities do have an influence on the procreational urges in human beings but not on their libidinal impulses. People are known to moderate their procreational desires in accordance with their socio-economic development and constraints. For instance, confidence in the future, associated with a sense of well-being and fulfilment of material needs that a rise in the standard of living implies, becomes a powerful and effective motivation for limiting the size of the family and vice versa. Female foeticide is another example — though a despicable one — of social conditions restricting, albeit selectively, the basic procreational instinct. But libidinal urges are independent of any such moderations except, perhaps, of religious beliefs and constraints. In a country like ours where over 50 per cent of the people are illiterate and around 40 per cent are still below the poverty line, it is extremely important to understand and appreciate the difference between the libidinal and procreational factors contributing to our population crisis. A very large percentage of maternities in India is caused just as result of sheer and often crude sexual impulses. On the other hand, procreational reproductions, where couple consciously decide and procreate, are rather much less in number than the libidinal reproductions. Indeed, a very high percentage of pregnancies in our society are the consequence of the male’s irresponsible sexual behaviour and not borne of any conscious decision of couples to have a child as an economic necessity as has been exaggerated by many activists. The fact that about 22 per cent of the total pregnancies in India are terminated by inducing abortion confirms the above statement because this is so in spite of the fact that most families do not like to resort to abortion to terminate a pregnancy even if it be libidinal and not a consciously desired one. Mahatma Gandhi, unlike many present-day pseudo-Gandhians, was fully aware of the magnitude and undesirability of these libidinal maternities. He considered these libidinal reproductions sinful and harmful for two main reasons. First, he was of the view that children must be brought up and cared for properly, and not the way crores of children in India are being looked after by subjecting them to child labour or even beggary. About 70 per cent of our children are malnourished and underweight, and a very large percentage of them suffer from preventable disabilities like polio and blindness. Secondly, Mahatma Gandhi was averse to the male (i.e. husband) aggression inherent in the libidinal maternities. Therefore, in spite of being opposed to the use of contraceptives, he gave tacit approval to male sterilisation. While opposing female sterilisation Mahatma Gandhi said that he would not care if the husbands, who were after all the “aakramankari” (aggressors), got themselves sterilised voluntarily (Sarvodaya, page 71). Not only this. Bapu was quite aware of the large magnitude of libidinal pregnancies and the consequential child-birth or abortions which he considered inhuman. So much so that he emphatically said that there would be no need for contraceptives if only women could say “No” to their husbands (Sarvodaya, page 71). This also shows that Gandhiji was convinced that men were the real culprits in causing these unwanted maternities. It is indeed a pity that our modern social reformers and activists because of their lack of proper understanding have accepted abortion as a solution to the libidinal reproductions but have not even once advocated male sterilisation — the Gandhian solution to the problem. It is no wonder, therefore, that as against 25 million births in 1991 we had 11 million abortions out of which 6.7 million were induced abortions. Let me believe that the reformers and activists opposed to any hard measure on men to promote family planning would in future care to distinguish between the libidinal reproduction and the procreational reproduction, and to realise the violence on women inherent in libidinal reproduction (or alternatively in abortions) while commenting upon any governmental policy to promote family planning. Once this point is understood and comprehended, I am sure, no one would oppose even hard restrictions on libidinal reproduction which is mostly the consequence of the husband’s sexual aggression. But this does raise a legitimate question: how would the government distinguish libidinal reproduction from procreational reproduction? One way to do this is to put limits on the numbers of children a couple can have. Once a couple has procreated the specified number of children, any maternity after that would naturally be libidinal and the state should strictly check any violation of the norms. The most ethical and
safest way to check libidinal reproduction — as Bapu
would have insisted — is to promote male
sterilisation. But, alas! Vasectomy being the easiest,
cheapest and most efficient method of contraception is
unfortunately the most despised and dreaded technique of
birth control in India. The politicians consider
vasectomy a sure way to lose an election, the
intellectuals dread it even more than the internal
emergency, and the masses are scared of it as they
foolishly think that vasectomy would adversely affect
their virility. Women activists who could and ought to
have played an effective role in demanding the promotion
of vasectomy are more concerned with “winning”
the right to abortion. The Indian male must be feeling
gleefully “thankful” to these “wise”
women. |
Name
is the problem “THE Chief Minister remembers you, come at once”, was the message received from his Personal Secretary at Oakover. The frequent headache of the head of any department! What could I do? What cannot be cured must... Leaving my meetings and work in the directorate, I hurriedly left for Chhota Shimla. Since the route to the protected Oakover is sealed, I had to undergo an arduous foot-journey, climb, climb and still climb. When I reached there, I found my name-sake MLA also there, waiting in the lounge. “Two Atma Rams are waiting outside”, was the message I instantly sent to the Chief Minister inside. But to my utter agony and surprise, the honourable celebrity sent a chit, saying, Atma Ram, the MLA was called, not Atma Ram, the Director.” This was not the first time when the name caused me trouble. I still recall a telephone call received in the wee hours: “Atma Ram”? “Yes, Sir”. “Have’nt you gone? “Where should I go? ” I asked sleepily. “Oh, sorry, wrong... I was contacting the MLA Incharge, Municipal elections.” The confusion was always there — in whatever town I lived. That led to misplacement of daily mail, and often gave wrong communications. This is a long, continuous disease. And, it is not only with me. Many fall a prey to it. Once a student of mine came and asked for the procedure of changing one’s name. “What is your name, by the way” Rashtrapati Sharma,” he said. He wanted a change since people always jeered at his name. I suggested to him to change his name to “Pradhan Mantri Sharma.” “Sir, you are saying so in a lighter vein. Find out a solution to my problem,” he implored. “Then, call yourself R.P.Sharma, and no change is needed,” I recommended after some thought! This recipe is not workable in my case. In India, eight to 10 children are born every day, and parents give them meaningful names to fix their identity. Whatever the English Bard may have said, there is surely something in a name — to one it becomes the most musical and welcome sound. Atma means soul, conscience, and Ram to most Hindus and saints signifies God, the Creator. So Atma Ram means Soul’s Master, i.e. God. It is in keeping with the tradition of having the actual identity — each person is a soul, not a body — and the source-mention is at the end of a name. God is the source from where we have come — as such, we are all Atma Rams. Why to think of changing such an appropriate name? At times things are decided, names are arranged alphabetically. In all alphabets A comes first, so one may stand to gain. In a poem “Abou Ben Adam”, Abou’s name was found on the top of those persons whom God loved most. The name Atma Ram must also be there in the list. But since the names must have been arranged alphabetically, is the practice everywhere, Abou topped the list, Atma figured below. This name is brief, telling and takes no worldly caste, region, sex, gotra, community or sect indication. It is , indeed, secular in nature. It is also a great fun to have many or at least some name-sakes around. It gives one an idea that one is not all alone on this big, bright and beautiful earth. And, if many are Atma Rams, it is a very fine thing, as majority is authority. All are keen to have a good thing, good name. In Indian mythology,
wife’s name is mentioned first in case of gods
— Radheshyam, Sita Ram, so on. Soul; surat or atma
is also termed as consort of the Almighty, Ramatma is a
part of God. In that sense, Atma Ram connotes God. So the
name should be retained for His sake also!!! |
The Taj gets humane treatment
ONE thought it was over, but it is not. The Supreme Court has returned to the Taj Mahal. To its touching pre-occupation with the “life” and cleanliness of a lifeless wonder. After a long silence of two and a half years, the court decreed last week the closure of 53 iron foundries around the Taj Mahal which had failed to switch over from coal to natural gas. The last time the court had spoken comprehensively on the issue was December 30, 1996. “The atmospheric pollution in the TTZ (Taj Trapezium Zone) has to be eliminated at any cost,” it had ruled then. “Not even one per cent chance can be taken when....the preservation of a prestigious monument like the Taj is involved.” It is proved beyond doubt, it said, that the emissions caused by the use of coke/coal by the industries in the TTZ were the “main polluters of the ambient air”. The amount of time and energy the court had expended then on the stone mausoleum, at the expense of normal human litigation, was phenomenal indeed. “This Court”, said the December, 1996 order, “has monitored this petition for over three years with the sole object of preserving and protecting the Taj” from deterioration and damage due to environmental pollution. On the structural side, the court acknowledged, quoting the Archaeological Survey of India, the Taj Mahal is in a sound state of preservation. The only threat is from environmental pollution. Due primarily to the use of coal by small industries around the Taj, the suspended particulate matter (SPM) level was found to be higher than the maximum allowed and that had imparted a “yellowish appearance on the surface of the Taj”. The rapid industrial development of the Agra-Mathura region, said a NEERI report cited again by the court, had resulted in acidic emissions into the atmosphere at an alarming rate. “This causes serious concern on the well-being of the Taj Mahal”. The well-being of the Taj Mahal. As if the Taj Mahal were a human being or a community of people! This extraordinary use of language, this “humanisation” of a monument by a leading research institute specialising in the environment — the National Environmental Research Institute at Nagpur, or NEERI, so often relied upon by the Supreme Court — tells its own tale. It is, without the least exaggeration, a monumental misconception vitiating the Supreme Court’s entire approach and effort in the cause of the Taj Mahal. A mausoleum of marble. A stone tribute to the dead. An entombed capsule of Indian history three hundred and fifty years old. That is what the Taj Mahal is. A thing of incredible beauty, a wonder that was and shall forever remain but which shall never come to life. On what basis, by what sleight of reasoning, can the Supreme Court treat that which is not as that which is, a building as a human being, a non-person as a “person”, a monument as “life” within the meaning of Article 21 entitled to its protection? “No person (says Article 21 of the Constitution) shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” As in the case of human rights, so in the case of the environment the Supreme Court has employed Article 21 (and the concept of “life” therein) as its principal means of self-empowerment in the battle against pollution. “At this point of time,” ruled a three-member Bench headed by the then Chief Justice of India on November 18, 1997 (in M.C. Mehta vs Union of India), “the effect of the quality of the environment on the life of the inhabitants is much too obvious to require any emphasis or elaboration.” The duty cast on the State, it said, by Articles 47 and 48-A of the Constitution (directive principles concerning improvement of public health and the environment) must be read therefore as “conferring a corresponding right on the citizens” under Article 21. But the Taj Mahal is neither a person nor a citizen. And the judicial campaign to preserve and protect the “life” and “health” of the Taj Mahal at the expense of persons or citizens living and working in its environs must surely mark the vanishing point of jurisprudence. “It is too pure, too holy, said the Supreme Court of the Taj in December, 1996, citing a poet (not Sahir Ludhianvi), “to be the work of human hands. Angels must have brought it from heaven and a glass case should be thrown over it to preserve it from each breath of air.” Thus substituting poetry for law it ordered 292 industries (foundries, chemical and rubber factories, and engineering works) to switch over to natural gas or to “relocate” themselves in new industrial estates outside the Taj Trapezium Zone. Workmen employed in these industries would either shift with their masters or, in case of industries which opted for closure, would be deemed to have been retrenched with compensation of six years’ wages by way of a judicially-imposed exit policy. About the families of the workmen, their parents, spouses and children compelled to suffer destitution or displacement all for the sake of preventing the discolouration of the Taj, not a word was said in the judgement. Last week’s order
of the Supreme Court continues the same policy. |
Protest marches over Orissa killings
A SENSE of disgust followed by unease is prevailing here, especially amongst minority groups, as news trickled in of the murder of yet another Christian missionary in Orissa’s Mayurbhanj district. Almost as though a series of planned murders are being executed in that particular state — for let’s not overlook that Australian missionary Staines and his sons were torched in January, trader Sheikh Rahman killed in full public view in July and now on September 2 priest Arul Doss killed by bow and arrow-wielding men. And though our politicians are coming up with their patent set of condolences but they sound so hollow and feeble. In fact it has become a norm that after every such brutal hacking some finely worded speeches have to be delivered by men at the helm of affairs here. And not to miss those typical statements issued by men who sit manning toothless commissions — whether it is the Human Rights or the Minorities or the Scheduled Castes and Tribes Commissions. Leaving the citizen feeling hapless and frustrated, for if lives cannot be protected then what remains... As John Dayal, the national convener for The United Christian Forum for Human Rights, just told me: “I know politicians are coming up with their typical reactions but tell me, except for holding silent protest rallies what else can we do?....and on Saturday (September 4) not only Dalits, Muslims, Christians, human right activists but members from the majority community are going on protest marches all over the country. In Delhi it will be at the India Gate lawns and some cities like Bangalore are having protest marches on September 4 and 9.” And it seems almost an impossibility to see a reduction in the communal wave, for the men who drove us towards frenzied communal cries are the very ones who are at the helm. Also, with the present election scenario who would go about tracking down the culprits; in fact now almost all political parties would use this latest murder, of priest Arul Doss, to their political advantage. Also, isn’t it surprising that Staines’ and Rahman’s killers are still at large, although we boast of our know-how range? And till nexuses are not tracked and ripped asunder there seems very little sense and hope in this supposed knowhow. And till masks are not removed the real will never come up on the agenda. UN Days Just round the corner is the International Literacy Day (September 8). The International Day of Peace (September 14 — the day which will also see the launch of the international year for the culture of peace and it will also be the opening day of the 54th annual session of the UN General Assembly), International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer (September 16) and the World Maritime Day (last week of September). In the usual course of events such focus on literacy and peace and environment one would have felt reassured but seeing the track record of the implementation of UN’s days there is little to feel reassured about. Here I must add that Indians seem all the more enthusiastic about these ‘days’. So much so that last fortnight I got an invite from Dr Mulk Raj Anand and O P Paliwal “to join the worldwide preparations for the International Year for the Culture of Peace 2000”. Though I couldn’t make it to the function but I’m told that it took off with release of an anthology of peace poems. And if I am not mistaken many more such events would come up, for here in New Delhi don’t we all want to hook speeches and poetic verses around these days? Beyond that, seems a distant dream. Now even peace at our borders almost seems a distant dream with news of skirmishes continuing to trickle in. And coming closer to home realities I was pained to hear from Uma Vasudev that whilst shooting for the television serial `Qaidi ke khat’ (produced by her and based on Mohammad Yunus’ book by the same title) the jail premises where this serial was shot was in such a rotten condition that the artists had to spend a few days cleaning the place up! The conditions were very, every bad and even after cleaning up we had to put Dettol since the smell wouldn’t go ...” And I am sure this holds true for the majority of the jails and yet we call ourselves a cultured lot. A nation that cannot give its undertrials (mind you, those yet to be convicted and for all you know, perhaps totally innocent) and even those who are actually convicted even the basic civic amenities ought to indulge in some introspection. And, of course, the UN seems to have turned a blind eye and deaf ear to all those realities stretching around it to be precise brought to its notice by its very own agencies. Just for your sampling last fortnight’s UN Newsletter stresses on UNICEF’s latest findings that the numbers of those dying of malnutrition in Iraq are doubling up yet the sanctions continue. And so with this backdrop the very meaning of these ‘days’ fails. Fails miserably. The frayed ends With electioneering coming to a full stop here life returns to normal. Not that there was any special hangama, except in the Chandni Chowk constituency, where the BJP candidate left no stone unturned in importing heroes and heroines from the tinsel town.What upsets mindsets is the very thought that these Bollywood folk wouldn’t have come here for free, definitely not along the dosti plank, so who took care of their lodging and boarding bandobast? And it seems the Congress candidate from the same constituency too got infected with the Bollywood mania, for he roped in Sunil Dutt and Rajesh Khanna. You sure can pity the
poor electorate of Chandni Chowk — one of
Delhi’s most congested and overpopulated and
polluted areas. And then to top it all they had to bear
the burden from Bollywood. |
September
6, 1924 DYARCHY was killed yesterday and the Council was destroyed today” was the remark made by Mr C.R. Dass at a meeting of the Bengal Legislative Council when, after the official business was over, the President announced that he had it in command from His Excellency the Governor that the Council stood prorogued till such date as might be notified thereafter. Later in the evening, an official communique was issued announcing the assumption by the Governor of the charge of the transferred departments, and stating that “the people of Bengal have, through the action of their representatives, temporarily lost the advantages which Parliament intended to confer upon them.” It is really a pity that Lord Lytton has succumbed to the characteristically reactionary suggestion embodied in the “Times” threat to which we had occasion to advert recently. It is this infection of
the glamour of a style which is responsible more than
anything else, for the suspension of the Constitution of
which the communique speaks. We are sure this step will
not ruffle the mind of Bengal. |
 |
 |
| Nation
| Punjab | Haryana | Himachal Pradesh | Jammu & Kashmir | | Chandigarh | Business | Sport | | Mailbag | Spotlight | World | 50 years of Independence | Weather | | Search | Subscribe | Archive | Suggestion | Home | E-mail | |
