Testing times ahead for Congress

It has taken a series of electoral debacles to shake India’s Grand Old Party, the Congress, from its political slumber of denial mode and complacence.
Despite cross-country hut hopping by the heir apparent Rahul Gandhi and charm offensive by his sister Priyanka, the voters chose to bring non-Congress alliances to power.
The emphatic defeat for the 127-year-old party has been in the national capital, where the BJP swept to power in the local body elections.
Long has the era passed when the public tended to forgive and forget or get swayed by the personal charisma of Congress leaders. Uttar Pradesh voters refused to buy the ‘yuvraj’s’ charm offensive of mingling with the crowds and dining at Dalit huts.
For all the efforts that Rahul put in, the party was reduced to the fourth place after SP, BSP and BJP. Even the last-moment marriage of convenience with the RLD failed to draw the caste votes to the party.
Another area where the party keeps getting beaten black and blue is its alliances with regional parties — the most glaring example being that with West Bengal. Stuck with Mamata for meeting the magic numbers in Lok Sabha, the Congress is constantly humiliated without ‘mamta’ at the Centre and state.
She blocked a river water sharing deal with Bangladesh, got a sensible Railway minister sacked, is blocking several key policies in segments such as FDI and counter-terrorism. The latest whimsical threat was a 15-day deadline to the Centre to waive the state’s debt to the tune of Rs22,000 crore.
In Tamil Nadu too, the picture is not much different. The Centre’s hands are tied on ties with Sri Lanka owing to pressure from the state’s two major parties, the DMK and the AIADMK.
The Congress is perceived as weak because of its failure to get even the UPA allies on board regarding key policies. Key areas such as legal reforms, disinvestment, FDI, counter-terrorism, anti-graft law and police reforms have been languishing without policy commitments.
The constant announcements of new policies and subsequent volte-face due to pressure from allies have hit the credibility of the party. Massive cases of fraud at the Centre running into lakhs of crores of rupees have definitely put the party on the back foot.
When senior party leader and telecom minister Kapil Sibal said the loss to the government in 2G spectrum auction was ‘zero’, whereas the CAG put it at Rs1.76 lakh crore, it came as a shock even to the Opposition.
Maybe the firebrand Supreme Court lawyer has forgotten that gone are the days when an elephant in the room would not be seen by the public.
The infighting in state units and lack of party discipline has left the party in a lurch. While loose cannons like Digvijay Singh go on the warpath firing salvos at anything that moves and manages to capture his fancy, senior leadership is forced to do the damage control.
The party’s inability to make its leaders toe its line is threatening the survival of its government in Andhra Pradesh. The Congress has been forced to swallow its pride and take the help of its rivals in Parliament to suspend eight of its MPs from Parliament as they refused to obey party directives and stalled the House demanding for a separate Telangana state.
An organisation is usually able to tide over crises when there is clarity regarding leadership and a vision for the future. In the case of Congress, there is a lot of ambiguity surrounding leadership. With the scion Rahul failing to sway votes and shying away from any executive post, the focus has shifted to Priyanka.
However, Congress president Sonia Gandhi hasn’t cleared the air about who is going to take over the party reins. For all the reform and internal democracy Rahul has been championing, the party is still practicing nepotism and favouritism in selecting its low- and middle-rung leaders — and the lack of quality is showing in its poll performances.
India’s oldest party has a Herculean task of cleaning its Augean Stables. If it fails to put its house in order, it will share the fate of several dynasties that had their share of glory before becoming extinct.
(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on April 25, 2012)

NCTC split will cripple counter-terror ops

‘United to protect’ is the motto of the National Counterterrorism Center of the United States which was formed in 2003 to co-ordinate national and international counter-terrorism efforts of the country in the wake of 9/11.
However, ‘united’ would be an oxymoron if used in the motto for its Indian counterpart of the same name — thanks to the states which put their ‘autonomy’ before a threat that does not discriminate between the Union or states.
The contention of the states is that a Central body that operates independently and to which all official machinery of the states have to extend co-operation is an infringement on their longstanding monopoly on the ‘law and order’ segment. In their rush to preserve their autonomy, the states are forgetting that trying to put terrorism under law and order is like trying to control a tyrannosaurus rex with a dog leash.
Whether the ever-politically-correct intelligentsia of the country agrees to call them terrorists or not, we are faced with dozens of forms of terrorism across the country.
From the Maoists who have killed thousands of civilians and security personnel to religious/ cultural fundamentalists who kill, maim and strip people of their dignity, the population is being subject to terrorism that takes away the Constitution-guaranteed rights of the citizens.
Over the years, the states have shown a continuing trend of forgetting the bigger picture of national security and giving in to populism — usually based on vote-bank politics.
Though the activists who campaign against death penalty may differ, the sheer lack of political cojones to execute terrorists who have been convicted of role in plots to assassinate national/ state leaders and facilitating attack on Parliament may die of old age if the present indecisiveness continues.
If it is coalition concerns from the south that extends life for some, it’s minority vote bank that proves the saviour for another, a third is being kept alive owing to resurgence in his community’s new-found belief in his innocence.
One way or the other, regional sentiments have proven detrimental to sending out a clear message on perpetrators of terrorism. Despite national counter-terror and investigation agencies unearthing evidence of Hidutva outfits in terror attacks, the political leaders are too scared to call it ‘saffron terror’ for fear of alienating their vote bank. The lack of spine to call a spade a spade is an inherent disgusting feature of our leaders who are more concerned about attaining and sustaining power than national interests.
After the 26/11 attacks the country’s security apparatus went into an overhaul, especially the coastal security. In a recently-held security drill to test the preparedness of the system, three ‘terrorist teams’ managed to evade all the preventive mechanisms and reach their ‘targets’. This clearly shows that we have miles to go before claiming to have a foolproof system in place.
One major reason for the limited success of counter-terror measures is the time lost in the maze of procedures and clearances. When more parties are involved in intelligence sharing, the likelihood of leaks and failed operations too increase.
For example, Maoists have deeply penetrated several states’ administrative cadre and police forces. If information on planned operations is shared with the administration in advance, the result would be jeopardising the mission with the inevitable result of massive loss of life for the security forces.
Across the world, the security interests of the country are given priority over the autonomy of the federating units and it should be no different in the case of India too. The current rebellion of dissenting chief ministers is like limbs seeking a consultative process on action when someone’s about to smash the head.
(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on April 18, 2012)

Hand-outs shouldn’t be taken for granted

The ignorant mind, with its infinite afflictions, passions and evils, is rooted in the three poisons: greed, anger and delusion. Bodhidharma

There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed. Mahatma Gandhi Two Indian greats, who walked this world 14 centuries apart, were apt in their summary of human nature of greed and avarice. For some, it is acquiring wealth in different forms; others seek pleasure in enjoying hand-out privileges that their positions command.
There are two classes in the country to which expecting almost everything as complimentary comes naturally. Yes, they are politicians and bureaucrats.
The former consider invitations and complimentary passes as their right for being the representatives of the people, while the latter seek it for being the indispensible cogs that ensure efficient governance.
Both are under the grip of a post-colonial hangover, high on the nostalgia of the days when the ruling class enjoyed unfettered power, privileges and concessions for “bearing the burden of governing and civilising the ignorant masses”.
We are 12 years into a new century, yet little has changed in the way politicians and babus think. Latterly, a national daily reported that the Karnataka State Cricket Association has been forced to outsource to private contractors the task of clearing about 18 tonnes of garbage from the Chinnaswamy Stadium.
The BBMP, controlled by Bangalore corporators, that cleaned the stadium after matches till recently, has refused to continue their services. Why? Because the corporators we­r­e denied ‘complimentary’ VIP passes for the IPL matches held in the city.
Also, officials have suddenly woken up to the Karnataka State Cricket Association’s long-pending tax dues to the tune of Rs6.5 crore. One cannot deny that the timing was excellent, or that it’s “sheer coincidence”.
The corporators and babus deny that notifying the cricket body about the dues was done in retribution for refusing them passes. They claim that it’s all part of their smart plan of shaming the association into coughing up taxes, as it would not risk sullying its name during the IPL, for deals worth crores would be at stake.
Both parties may have several excuses. However, a bigger question emerges: Why present such freebies and privileges to politicians and bureaucrats?
Government officials are paid for their service to the nation and its people. It is an open secret that apart from their salaries and perks, these mandarins amass wealth via bribes and other underhand ways. Yet they want more.
There have been numerous instances where aircraft and trains were delayed to ensure boarding of politicians who turned up late. Recently a Union minister courted controversy when records revealed that an aircraft of the national carrier was diverted to fly a group of his relatives.
Only a few may not have had to suffer for the reservations and concessions made for VIPs, especially at places of worship. The sight of a cop not paying for the food or tea he helps himself to at an eatery is far too familiar.
It’s high time something’s done. The privileged ones may protest that they are entitled to such special treatment, for they bear the burden of leading and serving the nation.
Well, no one asked these folks to lead and serve us. And if they cannot do without it, they may sit at home. (This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on April 11, 2012)

Uncle Sam roars at terror, India purrs

The US announcement of $10 million bounty on Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafeez Sayeed has sent the entire Indian government, security and diplomatic circles into an applause overdrive. Little time was lost in appreciating the US gesture while reiterating New Delhi’s demand to Pakistan to bring the mastermind of 26/11 attacks to justice.
However, India’s reaction and subsequent rhetoric from various quarters resembles a kitten baring its claws in the shadow of a roaring lion and expecting to generate equal amount of awe.
Global diplomatic circles and definitely Pakistan are not fooled by the Indian sabre rattling. India has an abysmal record of following up its threats of punitive action and retaliation.
This was last evident when Pakistani terrorists attacked the Parliament in 2001. India mounted its biggest ever mobilisation, termed Operation Parakram, threatening to react with force if Pakistan did not rein in the terror operatives.
However, India chickened out in the face of Pakistani threat of first use of nuclear weapons. The massive operation which saw almost half-a-million troops and war equipment moved to forward offensive positions fizzled out — the balance sheet was thousands of crores wasted, several lives lost in accidents and loss of face in front of the international community.
More than a decade has passed and there has been no dearth of Pakistan-sponsored terrorist attacks on Indian soil. India has been liberally handing out warnings and threats at each occasion — hot pursuit a favourite phrase.
Even on this doctrine, the Indian establishment has not been able to speak in one voice. When a General talks about targeting militant camps across the border, the bureaucratic and political leadership openly declare their commitment to self-restraint.
The ultimate result of lack of political will to pursue the country’s national interests is that neither Pakistan nor the terrorists groups it nurtures take India seriously. And we have an inglorious legacy of letting every terrorist group to slaughter and walk away with impunity.
The chiefs of all Pakistan-based terrorist outfits have been travelling all over Middle East raising funds and the super-secretive RAW’s operatives have not even plucked a hair of any one of them.
Indian public could watch only with helplessness when Dawood Ibrahim and his confidants, who engineered the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts, were seen LIVE on TV cheering during a Sharjah Cup match. This was at a time when Indian sleuths and international agencies such as the Interpol were following every procedure in the book to get him extradited (if they could locate him in the first place) for crimes committed in India.
No country allows terrorists to mess with it and walk away unscathed. After 9/11, the Americans launched a global war on terror and did not rest till Osama bin Laden was killed. The Russians, the French, the British and the Israelis go to any extent to seek and destroy the elements who threaten national security.
However, India is content with cumbersome procedures and strict adherence to international covenants, and that too in a complacent manner which would make the techniques of the 19th century Congress moderates look like militant nationalists.
After begging all over the world for information and extraditions, our result is always blank. India’s ‘most wanted’ criminals and terrorist operatives continue to ply their trade without any interruption. At times one can’t help but wonder if our government is waiting for god to punish them.
For all the touting of our military might and the elite special forces, we remain toothless by choice while the enemies of the country continue to bleed us through a thousand wounds.

(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on April 4, 2012)

Just let them be happy and gay

In a landmark judgment in the Naz Foundation v/s Government of NCT of Delhi on July 2, 2009, the Delhi High Court struck down most of the provisions of Section 377 of the IPC, holding it violation of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
The verdict came as a major relief to the covert and overt homosexuals in the country, who have been stigmatised by society and persecuted by the draconian law introduced during British Rule.
It was also hailed across the world by political leaders and human rights organisations as a right move in the direction of inclusive policy empowering minorities of all hues.
However, the revolutionary ruling was too much for religious leaders to stomach and they soon moved the Supreme Court challenging the decision.
The apex court sought the stand of the Central government on decriminalising homosexuality — and that is where the drama unfolds. Ever since the SC directive to seek its opinion, the Centre has been shuttling the issue from ministry to ministry, and has been delaying the decision. Opinions on the issue differ between ministries and there has not been a consensus yet.
At a hearing on February 28, 2012, addition solicitor-general PP Malhotra, who appeared for the Home ministry said, "Gay sex is highly immoral and against social order and there is a high chance of spreading of diseases (like AIDS) through such acts."
As civil society breathed fire over his ‘inputs’, the government distance itself from the controversial remarks — the apex court came down heavily on the flip-flop. Even a month after that, the Centre was not able to come out with a clear stand, and this angered the Supreme Court.
In a scathing observation, the SC on Tuesday rapped the Centre for its ‘casual approach’.
All across the world, countries are decriminalising homosexuality and giving legal recognition to same-sex unions. Such moves will ensure that they are not discriminated against and can enjoy their rights like any other person.
Homosexuality is a reality that cannot be wished away, whether the self-appointed guardians of social moral fabric like it or not. If an adult can make a choice to follow a religion, elect political representatives and take decisions on numerous life-altering choices, he/she can decide on what their sexual orientation should be. What’s the point in calling yourself a democracy when all voices aren’t allowed to be heard?
Nothing unnatural about it

Canadian biologist Bruce Bagemihl who has authored Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity has documented evidence of homosexual behaviour among at least 1,500 species of animals. Therefore the argument that homosexuality is ‘against the order of nature’ or ‘unnatural’ doesn’t hold ground. While we are still stuck in a time warp trying to call homosexuality unnatural and immoral, other countries have move far ahead — using scientific logic rather than emotion. In a 2003 landmark judgment, the US Supreme Court cited documented evidence of homosexuality among animals to strike down sodomy laws of Texas and 13 other states in Lawrence vs Texas. Sculptures and Khajuraho, which date back to 9th Century BC, vividly display several representations of homosexual intercourse among both men and women.

Salient features of Delhi HC verdict on Section 377

Criminalisation of consensual gay sex violates rights to dignity and privacy, which falls within the right to life and liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. Section 377 runs contrary to equality guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution, because it creates an unreasonable classification and targets homosexuals as a class. Public hostility or contempt for a particular social group is not a valid ground for discrimination by State. Discrimination based on sex, prohibited by Article 15 of the Constitution includes discrimination based on sexual orientation. The right to life under Article 21 of Constitution includes the right to health, and Section 377 of IPC is an impediment to public health because it hinders HIV-prevention efforts. Section 377 is unconstitutional to the extent where it criminalises consensual sex between adults in private. None of the above exemptions apply to non-consensual non-vaginal intercourse and intercourse with minors.

  (This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on March 21, 2012)

Why I wouldn’t cry for the clan of the Tiger

The Rajya Sabha was yesterday forced to adjourn after the DMK and the AIADMK created a ruckus over a recently released footage of LTTE chief Prabhakaran’s 12-year-old son, who was allegedly executed by the Lankan army in the concluding phase of the civil war. They wanted India to take a pro-active stand against Sri Lanka over the alleged war crimes that took place.
While there is no justification of the murder of a boy who wasn’t even an adolescent, the gory fate of Prabhakaran and his kin were sealed when the rebel chief embarked on his inglorious path of ruthless violence for his cause.
From a small-time militant activist who shot to fame (or notoriety) with the assassination of the mayor of Jaffna in 1975, Prabhakaran grew into a megalomaniac warlord who dealt with dissent through brutal killing of his opponents and their families.
The LTTE chief did not believe in sharing ‘revolutionary’ space with any other organisation and systematically annihilated all other outfits. Tamil organisations based in the US and Europe allege that more Tamils have been killed by the LTTE than by the Sri Lankan army and Sinhalese violence put together.
In making its presence felt, the LTTE employed methods that would put world’s most infamous dictators to shame. The Tigers never had any qualms in attacking the civilian population and they never spared women, aged or children.
Thousands of civilians — a substantial chunk of them women and children —have been clubbed, axed, stabbed and shot by the Tigers to enforce their reign of terror and ensure allegiance to the outfit.
Anyone who questioned their methods were tried in Kangaroo courts and were either maimed or executed; even their families were not spared.
For a group that pioneered suicide bombings, which kill scores of civilians along with the intended target, LTTE stood little chance of mercy at the hands of their enemies.
The LTTE also forcibly took away children from their homes and used them as child soldiers and suicide bombers. Bullets will kill whether the hand that pulls the trigger belongs to a 12-year-old or an adult and bitter experience had taught the Lankan forces that hesitation will prove too costly.
Maybe our southern politicos who are crying hoarse over the war crimes of the Lankan army would like to explain the international procedure followed by the LTTE in 1990 when at least 800 Sri Lankan police personnel, who had surrendered on promise of safe passage, were executed.
Or they could try talking to the relatives of the Kattankudy mosque massacre where an LTTE squad mowed down worshippers as they knelt in prayer and lobbed grenades to finish off survivors. About 150 Muslims were killed in the attack.
The commuters at Anuradhapura bus station or the child monks at the nearby shrine were not combatants. Death toll; 150. Any explanations?
Why don’t the regional satraps explain how key state leaders, especially the Congress heavyweights, miraculously escaped the blast that blew Rajiv Gandhi to shreds?
The Rajiv assassination proved counter-productive to the Tigers as it pitted India’s entire machinery against them. Despite a ‘hands off’ policy since then in the island’s internal matters, India clearly switched sides to throw its weight behind the Lankan government — covertly though, owing to ‘regional sensitivities’.
Awash with cash from Tamil diaspora and various businesses across the world, the LTTE ensured that funds flowed to its paid barking dogs in the region, the minor chauvinistic groups who are open in their adulation for the rebels.
Let this be crystal clear. The Tigers were no saints. Their track record on human rights and war crimes would match any dictatorship. Prabhakaran was instrumental in ruthless execution of hundreds of civilians and dissidents — something that would come back to him and his family in an equally gory manner.
Note to the venerated parliamentarians: 
We have a lot of business in the House that is of paramount importance to national interests. Terrorism, corruption, education, food security, national budget, governance, infrastructure and economy are among the key issues that need to be addressed by the elected representatives. Those who want to woo vote banks with eulogies for the slain terrorist and his kin please do that outside the Parliament at their own time. The taxpayer doesn't spend Rs1.5 crore per day to keep the Parliament running to hear paeans to terrorists.

(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on March 14, 2012)

Think twice before you pull that trigger

When 75-year-old Sriramulu Patel was woken by the incessant barking of his dog, he knew something was amiss. The septuagenarian took his licenced revolver and went to check the source of disturbance. Barely did he open the door, a man tried to push past him into the house.
Patel fired twice and the intruder collapsed on the floor. After dragging him inside, Patel called the police.
The burglar survived the gunshot wounds and was taken into custody after being discharged from hospital. He was booked under Section 457 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code for ‘trespassing with the intention of committing a crime’.
So far, the police have refrained from filing charges against Patel as their preliminary investigation revealed that the act was in self-defence.
However, legal luminaries beg to differ. M Ranga Reddy and Justice Iyaapu Panduranga Rao, former High Court judges opine that Patel should be charged under relevant sections of the IPC. They are of the opinion that it should be the courts, which should judge Patel’s actions and no the police.
The whole episode calls our attention to the injury or death caused while exercising the right to self-defence. The Constitution provides us with the right to life. Naturally we have the right to defend it when someone threatens it.
When the threat materialises in the form of a physical confrontation, it is only natural that resistance to it will result in use of force — injury or death of assailant is always a possibility.
The question is; where do you draw the line between a desperate action to survive and intentional attempt to murder? Burglars or assailants don’t give notice before they strike. Under usual circumstances, the civilian gun-wielder has only a few seconds to react before pulling the trigger.
Therefore, following the legal procedure, of shouting out a warning followed by firing in the air and then, as a last resort, firing below the knees, is practically impossible.
One also has to take into consideration that the assailant/burglar is likely to be a hardened criminal with no qualms to kill you. He is likely to be better than you in close-quarters combat and use of knives/firearms — the worst part is that there is no way you can know.
Since most such incidents occur at night when visibility levels are low, judging the level of threat posed by the assailant becomes even trickier. The only option before the victim of an attack is to target the attacker with the intent to cause maximum damage.
All rules, though created with the best of intentions, can be bent and the laws providing for the right to self-defence are no exception to this.
Ours is a country (in)famous for ‘staged encounters’. Every year there are more exposes of the police, armed forces and intelligence agencies faking circumstantial evidence for illegal executions.
If those killing in self-defence are allowed to walk free even without the botheration of registering a case, it is only a matter of time before the rich and the well-connected start fabricating circumstantial evidence and bumping off their opponents.
Due course of law must be followed when injury or death is caused by an act of self-defence. Instead of taking the incident at face value, the investigative agencies must conduct an objective and thorough probe. Then it should be left to the courts to consider the merit of the case and arrive at a decision.

(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on March 7, 2012)