|
|
A Tribune Special |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Of moderation, tolerance and human rights
Patronage in universities
On Record
|
A Tribune Special Let’s elect educated and upright candidates to Parliament, says Ram Jethmalani THE current elections are important. The country is facing international and domestic terrorism, economic depression, price inflation and total collapse of the moral backbone of most politicians. If we don’t choose the right candidates, the nation will disintegrate. The folly of the next few days will invite severe punishment for many decades. The parliamentary system of government unfortunately means the party system. But parties are dangerous too. Parties are to be tolerated only if they live up to the twin dreams of Mahatma Gandhi:
Wipe the tears of sorrow from the eyes of the poor, and in the comity of nations act as the conscience of the world. Sadly, most political parties are involved in an unseemly scramble for power, its perks and avenues of amassing illegitimate wealth.
Nearly three years ago, the Swiss Banks disclosed that Indians have concealed wealth to the tune of $1500 billion in their banks. It is 13 times our total national debt. If this wealth is seized and repatriated to India, from where it has been stolen, India will be debt-free and the interest on the balance can give us a tax-free budget for the next quarter century. Distributed amongst the people, every family can get Rs 2 lakh. What has the government done? This is just one example of failure of governance. Externally we do not have the courage to tick off governments which foster and finance dangerous terrorists. China is not only in occupation of large chunks of Indian territory but has an evil eye on Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and other parts of Bharat Mata. The ruling coalition has cohabited with traitors who are in constant collaboration with our enemies and act as their agents inside the national borders. Parties are not an end in themselves but are only a means. We have first to decide the qualifications of a candidate. Ultimately, it is the elected representatives who collectively make the face of the party in action. A candidate for Parliament must have the highest educational and intellectual qualifications. He must be economically independent so that he has no motive to make politics his source of livelihood or to steal the poor man’s property. He must be able to stand up in Parliament and speak to the nation about his party’s promises and personal pledges to the people. Above all, he must be able to stand up to his own party if it deviates from the path of public rectitude or national good. He should be ready to give up political office rather than be a party to betrayal of the nation. Then comes the selection of the party. Every party must be able to declare who will lead it if and when it comes to power. Those who cannot do this cannot be trusted. We cannot take the risk of a rich criminal or a dumb entertainer occupying the serious and responsible position of controlling the destiny of a billion citizens. In addition, the party must have a consistent and conspicuous record of public probity and fulfillment of its pledges. No political party has during the recent confabulations displayed attachment to any sensible ideology or a set of political principles. Nor has any one even formulated and published a minimum programme of action for the next five years which will be immune from any deviation or dilution just to conjure up a coalition. Every declared manifesto seems subordinated to the paramount need to create a parliamentary majority. No firm agreement on measures of rescuing the country from the current mess is thus in sight.
The search for a stable party is futile. The concentration must essentially be on selecting good candidates in the hope that they will not break the pledges made to the people. There is need for a common minimum programme. It should consist broadly of the following agenda: We should make it clear to the whole world that India is committed to constitutional democracy, inalienable human rights and independent judiciary to uphold the country’s basic law. The superior court judges will be selected not according to the existing procedures but by a broad-based National Judicial Commission. Their rights and obligations should be that of other judges and public servants. The process of selection must be transparent and periodic disclosure of assets All vestiges of political non-alignment must disappear from the conduct of
our A bold and forthright effort must be made to destroy their doctrinal base. Jihad which involves murder of innocent men, women and children to achieve some political or social objective is opposed to the Holy Quran and every other scripture. Its practitioners ought to be told that God is not maintaining a whore-house for their benefit. The reward of a Jihadi is not paradise but eternal damnation. Since most Jihadis profess Islam, Muslim intellectuals should cleanse the brains of the Jihadis of the gibberish filled into them by scheming politicians and clerics. Harsh laws are just not the solution. If rational persuasion does not change the Corruption must be treated on par with terrorism. Much of terrorism flourishes because of it. Corruption also leads to poverty and unemployment which, in turn, become a fertile recruiting ground for terrorists and suicide bombers. Urgent attention must be given to environment. Let’s stop pumping excessive dozes of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and switch over to cleaner and safer techniques for production of electricity. Every year we destroy 44 million acres of forest, lose 100 million acres of farm land and 24 billion tones of top soil. Similarly, we are creating 15 million acres of desert around the world. We are using more water each year than is being replenished by rain. Global warming will bring hurricanes, lower crop yields in the world’s poorest countries and the misery caused may even generate religious belligerence and suicidal terrorism.
The most frightful scenario is that a nuclear bomb may get into the hands of a In short, we must speedily institute actions recommended by the Earth Charter Commission (ECC) and observe its principles of sustainable development. Every political party must unhesitatingly and honestly dedicate itself to the creation of a truly secular society. Our secularism has been as counterfeit and insincere as political non-alignment. The true secularism of the Indian Constitution means the subordination of all religious faith and practice to the rule of reason. Freedom of religion has been expressly subordinated by our Constitution to the needs of public order, health and morality. Secularism, without intense secular education is limitless deception. Imparting of any education, inconsistent with true secularism should be prohibited and punished by law. Public pressure must be built up to compel the government to take immediate steps to freeze the stolen wealth lying in foreign banks and to take every diplomatic and legal action to repatriate the money to India along with the names of the criminals so that Indian legal processes can begin to operate and inflict on them the maximum punishment which they justly
deserve. The writer is a jurist and Member of Parliament (Rajya
Sabha) |
|
Of moderation, tolerance and human rights
WITH the collapse of the Soviet Union, a new enemy had to be invented. For the West, Islam fitted the inevitable need to have an antagonist. In such circumstances we find ourselves at a historical moment in the process of major change. In the regime of right-wing politicians like George Bush and Tony Blair, a democratisation of violence had become the rule of social behaviour with the mistaken impression that the old imperial order had passed and that we were embarking on a ‘New World Order’. What they did not foresee is the economic and political instability as well as the racial and ethnic discord that raged around the globe. In a post-modern climate, Fukuyama’s universalism, his interpretation of the end of history, along with his assertion of progress within the renaissance of liberal democracy, had never seemed more incongruous and inordinately optimistic. Within such a context, Samuel Huntington’s thesis on the clash of civilisation made the intellectual world sit up and take notice. Huntington, who died a few months ago, received world-wide attention with his bestseller The Clash of Civilsations and the Remaking of World Order that was translated into over 30 languages. Though he had already written his first book in 1957, The Soldier and the State: the Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations, his voice began to be heard only in 1993 after writing an article in Foreign Affairs predicting that the only natural course of history would have to be the conflict between Islam and the West. Clearly, 9/11 corroborated what Huntington had propounded. No longer would there be wars between political systems, ideologies or nation states. History had arrived at a juncture when culture of religious difference would be Western triumphalism and predominance would adversely affect the politics of identity and provoke a racial resentment towards the ideologies of the West. Since the 7th century, Islam had been trying to make inroads into the West To counter this invasion, European or Christian discourse strategically initiated Islam has always been an enemy in the European psyche and it would become all the more brutal as years went by. Huntington’s prediction caused many to accept a thesis that had a readymade historical background and a legitimacy that went unquestioned. He emphasised that conflict is not only limited between Islam and the West: “Violence also occurs between Muslims, on the one hand, and Orthodox Serbs in the Balkans, Jews in Israel, Hindus in India, Buddhists in Burma and Catholics in the Philippines. Islam has bloody borders.” It became clear to the intellectuals on the Left that Huntington had been a strong supporter of American foreign policy of intervention and preemptive action but in a remarkable volte face he began to see the dangers of intervention: “Western intervention in the affairs of other civilisations is probably the single most dangerous source of instability and potential global conflict in a multi-civilisational world.” Undoubtedly, the clash of civilisations is born of a burning resentment of injustice or an overpowering vision of an independent and more prosperous future. The religious and social contexts largely differ, yet the premises are more or less similar. Though the nature of violence may vary from country to country, it finds Paradoxically, the notion of tolerance which all religions preach is turned into intolerance within the confines of identity politics. Ultimately, the objective in these cases is that of gaining power and the Any opposition to this would be considered with utmost intolerance as an act of blasphemy, only to be castigated and brutally punished. The important question that one must ask is: why do people feel threatened, and in the face of what kind of opposition to their identity do they take steps which are defensive and compulsively fundamental? Are the Christians not accountable for the escalation of Muslim fundamentalism The issue, as this writer sees it, is not that of merely putting down the threat issuing from a minority of Muslims but of understanding the attitude of the majority of the white population which is indirectly responsible for the rise of terrorism. It could, in fact, be argued that there is a legitimacy of all such protests, and to understand them it becomes vital to go into the socio-politico-economic causes. As witness to the recent Mumbai terrorist attacks, any solution to contemporary crises must take recourse to fighting the feelings of fear and hatred and encouraging the opposing forces to adhere to values of moderation, religious tolerance and sanctity of human rights. Unless dialogue prevails, the current conflagration has every chance of ending The writer is Professor of English, Panjab University, Chandigarh |
Patronage in universities
INDIA is perpetually fighting a civil war within itself. While a part of it strives to build institutions, the other part — bigger, more powerful and adamant — tries even harder to subvert them. If India has survived as a state, it is because of the innate strength of institutions such as the military, higher judiciary, Election Commission, RBI and the like. Some time ago, at a conference in Malaysia, I met a retired Pakistani science administrator who had spent some time in Indian labs using his pre-Partition connections. He felt that unlike the Pakistanis who subordinated their institutions to their personal egos, Indians tended to place theirs above themselves. This observation describes the situation as it obtained in the years immediately after Independence. At the time Indian institutions were still influenced by traditions established during the colonial period. The new helmsmen, guided by a spirit of nation building, saw the institutions under their charge as powerful instruments of change. The phenomenon, however, was short-lived. Like most others, academic institutions were also made part of the patronage system. Earlier, students sitting in the cafeteria and teachers in their tea clubs speculated on whether on the coming Republic
Day, their Vice-Chancellor would receive a Padma Shri or a Padma
Bhushan. The Vice-Chancellor still remains the main topic of conversation, but very often the speculation is whether on coming Monday he would get anticipatory bail from the High Court or not. Earlier, there were court pronouncements that the state Governor served as the Chancellor of the universities in his individual capacity, meaning thereby that he was not bound by the Cabinet advice while appointing Vice-Chancellors. Reacting with promptitude, the state legislatures amended the laws to make the Vice-Chancellor’s appointment a political prerogative. Recently, a chief minister magnanimously allocated the vice-chancellorship of a state university to his coalition partner. The media blandly reported the development without any sense of shock or outrage. And now even Central and semi-central academic institutions have been made part of patronage system. A Governor may be legally bound to act on the Cabinet advice, but there is a willing surrender of moral and legal authority even in cases where the appointing authority is the President or the Vice-President of India. The bulk establishment of a dozen new Central universities has largely been seen as politically motivated. To compound matters further, the Vice-Chancellors’ appointment was rushed through to beat the model code of conduct. The whole exercise, which bordered on the farcical, has predictably been challenged before the Supreme Court. One of the new universities remains headless. In this case, the selected While the Visitor of the Central Universities was at least mindful of the impending clamping of the election code, the Chancellor of a semi-Central university has decided to respect it selectively. He has postponed the interviews for the posts of professor and reader on the ground that the election code has come into operation. At the same time, the code notwithstanding, he has gone ahead and offered a full-term extension, amounting to a fresh appointment, to the present incumbent Disrespect for the election code becomes more noticeable when it is realised that there was no urgency. The vacancy is non-existent! It would arise only in July by which time the elections would be over and a new government installed. The matter is now before the Election Commission which has reportedly issued notices to parties concerned. One would have thought that purely academic appointments should be made, elections or no elections, while executive appointments would be subject to the election code. That the reverse has happened is significant. May be, the university authorities felt that before they appoint/promote professors, it would be advantageous to know who the new political bosses are. British Prime Minister Harold Wilson aptly said that a week is a long time in politics. India has extended the dictum to education as well. The methods and the vocabulary being employed in defining and describing There is a fundamental difference in the case of powers of the President and the Vice-President as appointing authorities of Vice-Chancellors. A clear-cut procedure exists in the case of Central Universities where the President makes the final appointment. Unlike the Governor, the President is within her rights to return the panel submitted to her. This has happened in the past. In the solitary case where the Vice-President is the appointing authority, the power to appoint the Vice-Chancellor and extend his term any number of times vests in the Chancellor. No procedure is manifestly laid down. However, this does not mean that the Chancellor cannot lay down a suitable procedure on his own and follow it as a matter of convention. Indeed, some procedure has been followed in the past whenever a fresh appointment was made. If a position is taken that no procedure needs to be followed for the grant of subsequent terms, it can only be called disingenuous. The executive heads of academic institutions should be appointed in a manner that commands universal respect. A Vice-Chancellor exercises more powers than any functionary in the government in a similar or higher pay-scale. He has to make important appointments under his charge and provide leadership to academics and students. While first-rate persons appoint first-rate ones, second-raters appoint third-raters. Also, if a person obtains an appointment by belittling himself, his only revenge can be the humiliation of those under him. If the President and the Vice-President do not exercise moral authority, who would? Is it appropriate for the highest functionaries of the country to take morally indefensible decisions and then dare bodies like the higher courts and the Election Commission to annul them? Is it the responsibility of only such bodies to uphold the rule of law? If these bodies buckle under pressure, are we ready to go the Pakistan
way? The writer is CSIR Emeritus Scientist, Indian Institute of Science Education |
|
On Record
Somanahalli Mallaiah Krishna
is a former Chief Minister of Karnataka and Krishna studied in the United States, graduating from the Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas and George Washington University, Washington D.C., where he was a Fulbright Scholar. Krishna has served as MP in both Houses of Parliament. He was also a He resigned as Governor of Maharashtra in March 2008 on the eve of the Karnataka Assembly polls. Though the Congress high command was interested in enlisting his support for the elections, it did not offer him any party position. He got married in 1964 and has two daughters. An avid sportsperson, he plays tennis regularly. In an interview to The Sunday Tribune in his beautiful bungalow in Bangalore, Krishna sounded bitter while talking about his role in the last elections. Later in the year, Krishna became Member (Rajya Sabha) from Karnataka as a Congress nominee. Excerpts: Q: What do you think about the BJP’s emergence in the South and Karnataka becoming the first southern state to have a BJP government? A: The BJP could form the government in Karnataka because of the Congress’ failure to properly strategise the last Assembly elections. I was brought in from Maharashtra but nobody knew why I returned to Karnataka. I think political parties should have a system of internal elections which would be something like a barometer to assess the relative strength of individual leaders. The rank and file of the party must identify with the leader who should be someone with goodwill and respectability. Q: What about the selection of Congress candidates in Karnataka for the current Lok Sabha polls? A: Well, I don’t think that in every constituency the Congress candidates chosen reflect the liking of the rank and file of the party. Since the candidates have been finalised, I shall not like to go into any more detail on this subject. Q: Will the BJP further grow in the southern states? A: If the Congress does not put its house in order, the BJP will, certainly, consolidate its position in the South. Q: Were you asked to contest the Lok Sabha elections from Karnataka by your party leadership this time? A: Myself and those in the party who decide who should be given the ticket came to an understanding that since I was having more than five years left in the Rajya Sabha, it would be better if I remained there and did not contest for the Lok Sabha. However, as you know, I am actively campaigning for the party in the state. Q: Of late, there is a lot of talk whether Rahul Gandhi should be the Prime A: Rahul Gandhi has the ability to take over as the Prime Minister of India. The The only argument against Rahul could be his lack of experience. But the way he has toured the country in the last five to six years is amazing. The tours must have given him a lot of insight about the conditions of people at the ground level. Q: Will the results of the Lok Sabha polls in Karnataka be a referendum on the A: I can sense a strong anti-incumbency mood among the people against the BJP government in the state. But I cannot say for sure whether the mood can be converted into votes for those who are challenging the BJP. Q: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said that voters must shun Independent candidates. What is your take on this? A: I agree with Dr Singh. In a party system, Independents can do precious little on matters of governance. I am glad that of late lesser number of Independents are getting elected. It is a healthy
trend. |
|
Profile
Mallika
SarabhAi, who is taking on the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate L.K. Advani in Gandhinagar, Gujarat, is a multi-faceted personality. For the first time, she has ventured into the uncertain world of elections, that too, against one of the tallest leaders of the country. What chance she could have against Advani? Mallika is on her own, an independent candidate, and has no backing of a political party; nor she has resources to match that of the Congress or the BJP. Her assets are her standing as a multi-talented personality. A well-known Kuchipudi and Bharatanatyam dancer, she is an MBA and Ph.D from IIM, Ahmedabad. Besides dance, she has proved her worth in other streams such as editing, anchoring, film-making, acting and social activism. Mallika is the daughter of classical danseuse Mrinalini Sarabhai and well-known space scientist, Vikram Sarabhai. She inherited the dance talent from his mother. Mallika started dancing when she was just 15-year-old. And she began her film career in parallel cinema. She took up the acting assignment to play the role of Draupadi in Peter Brook’s film Mahabharata. As a social activist, Mallika manages, along with her mother, the Darpan Academy of Performing Arts, in Ahmedabad. She wrote the script of the play — UNSUNI — on Harsh Mander’s book, Unheard Voices. Arvind Gaur translated it in Hindi and Mallika directed the play for Darpan Academy. “UNSUNI” travels all over India and Darpan has launched the people awareness movement through its production. Mallika never tries to hide her disgust for the BJP, especially Gujarat Chief She has been a staunch critic of Modi ever since the Gujarat riots in 2002. She made headlines when she complained that the Narendra Modi government was harassing her due to her public criticism of Modi’s role during the 2002 riots. So much so that the government accused her of human trafficking but dropped the case in December 2004. A plank of her campaign is to register her strong protest against criminalisation of politics and reducing the common man to the level of a non-entity. Mallika’s personal life has been tragic. She met Bipin Shah during her college days, and married him. But she divorced him after seven years. They have two children son Revanta and daughter Anahita. They are budding In her interviews, she has expressed the view that she does not have faith in marriage as an institution. Even though she has still faith in relationships, she considers marriage an outdated institution and restrictive of women’s freedom. She has been quoted as saying, “Marriage does not have any relevance in today’s context and certainly in my life. Why do I need marriage? The reason for which people get married are not why I would get married. I am economically independent and am having a ball”. In 1989, Mallika performed her hard-hitting solo theatrical work — Shakti (power of women). Subsequently, she directed and acted in numerous productions based on current issues and which raised awareness for social change. She has challenged audiences to sit up and think, and to realign themselves to critical question of gender bias, communal hatred, the environment and violence. Fifty-five-year-old Mallika, who has been allocated harmonium as her symbol, recently released her manifesto. She aspires to be the people’s voice which will be able to empower them and enable them to get benefit of government schemes. According to her manifesto, she aims to make politicians more accountable and bring transparency to the way they function. For rural folks, she promises to build toilets, sort out drinking and bathing water problems and build drainage and
gutters. |
|
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
THE current elections are
by Shubhadeep Choudhury
Profile
