Home Blog Page 721

Australia’s legacy of on-field dishonesty

abhishekdalal
-
0
Australia’s legacy of on-field dishonesty

The recent ball-tampering scandal in Cape Town was both shocking and not at all surprising at the same time. In brief, Australia’s captain Steve Smith admitted to an elaborate plan hatched by the entire team leadership to change the physical texture of the ball in order to force the umpires to intervene and request a change.

This plan would be carried out by rookie opener Cameron Bancroft, who would use sticky tape to ensure that particles of the pitch would attach themselves to one side of the ball. Unfortunately, for Smith and Bancroft, they were caught red-handed and quite literally, with their pants down.

Reactions poured in from all quarters of the world, with the regulars criticizing Smith and calling for his immediate sacking. A particular comment from Australia’s Prime Minister stood out, however. “How can our team be engaged in cheating like this? It beggars belief”.

Really, Mr. Prime Minister? You may notice that yesterday’s actions are entirely consistent with what I would call, a systemic problem of playing thick and fast with the rules of the game. The only difference this time was the level of planning that actually went into actively breaking the rules. It was an act of disgusting brazenness that rightly deserved your attention. Maybe it is time to revisit some other instances of high profile misconduct and yes, cheating carried out by none other than Australian cricketers over the last several years.

I could start with the famous underarm incident of 1981 when Greg Chappell instructed his brother to literally roll the ball along the pitch in order to prevent New Zealand from hitting a boundary to tie a game. Though at the time this wasn’t exactly against the rules, it was a dishonesty, which would continue to inspire similar acts by future generations of Australian cricketers. Mr. Prime Minister, let us now focus on two more recent examples of flagrant “cheating” by your esteemed baggy green holders. Fast forward to 2008, when in the backdrop of racism allegations against members of the Australian team deliberately lied to the umpires often claiming catches that were clearly illegitimate. In that instance, it was the umpires’ naivety which robbed India of a chance to save or win the final test, and yet, it can hardly be claimed that the Aussies played with honor.

More recently in India, serial offender Smith was accused of communicating with the team coach illegally from the field before challenging a marginal LBW decision using DRS. The Indian team argued that Smith had taken this route on two other occasions in the same game in flagrant violation of the rules. While the Indian captain stopped short of calling his counterpart a cheater on that occasion, he was well within his rights to do so. To merely brush off this behavior as a “brain fade” was irresponsible. Clearly, it has enabled Smith to repeat such flagrant violations of cricketing ethics and rules with impunity.

 Having said this, I tend to agree that this time is different. By asking a rookie within his team to carry out the actions that he did, Steve Smith abused his authority and risked the career of a subordinate. He has also subverted trust in the rules of the game, shamed his country and embarrassed all of his ardent supporters. Clearly, his role as captain is no longer tenable. It is, however, misleading to suggest that this is a one-off instance by a rogue element in the team.

No need to tinker with the changes made by the apex court in SC/ST (Prevention of atrocity) Act

Jai prakash Ojha
-
0
No need to tinker with the changes made by the apex court in SC/ST (Prevention of atrocity) Act

Dilution of some of the most stringent provisions of the SC/ST act by the apex judiciary has created apprehensions in the minds of dalit activists and leaders.

What did the court say? Automatic arrests on the lodging of mere complaints under this act should stop and FIR should not be filed before conducting a preliminary enquiry into the matter. Public servants should not be arrested before taking the consent of their appointing authorities. When a private individual is concerned, nod has to come from the SSP of the district.

I don’t think what the court said is bad law. The changed provisions are as per the principles of natural justice and would go a long in the strengthening of individual rights. The ongoing protests against the changes in the Act are guided by malicious agenda and reflect very poorly on the modus operandi of dalit activism which has lost track due to excessive state appeasement and is resorting to blackmail to arm twist the state.

More than 70 years have passed since independence; it’s a pity that dalit agitations are yet to come out of the victimhood mindset. The dalit movement suffers from psychological problems while confronting the upper castes. It is yet to get out of the world of hallucination and sees or imagine things that do not exist in reality or else, what explains its belligerence against the invisible Manuwad? Any attempt to seek review or bypass the verdict would be regressive and not in accordance with well established norms of democracy.

Looking at the ground realities, it’s a stark reality that despite the lapse of seven decades after independence, atrocities do take place against the dalits. It’s not only the upper castes but also powerful dominant backward and intermediate castes who are guilty. As per NCRB figures 2016, more than 47000 crimes took place against dalits and the trend of late is alarmingly high. Conviction rate is also very low hovering around 25 percent. Reasons for atrocities against dalits are not what they used to be in yesteryears.

The rises in income levels and lifestyle of the dalits with their increased visibility in public employment have created heartburn among non dalit communities who feel that dalits have been unduly favored and given reservation. World wide experience manifests that positive affirmative action programmes initially benefits the society but after a certain time, it tends to perpetuate the domination of beneficiaries. The new wave of militant dalit activism that does not shy away from confrontation with its eye for eye approach has also unnerved the dominant communities.

violence by dalits
A child injured during protests by Dalit groups

Moreover, it would be naive to underestimate the clout of dalits today and think that they can be beaten into submission. Politically they are a powerful community. The deepening of social democracy and implementation of local self government acts meant that there was always an option for the dalits to organize at local levels. Years of reservation has created an educated middle class among dalits who are well networked through unions and cells. The democratization of information through spread of social media has also provided a platform to the young educated dalits to organize quickly on issues related to them.

The atrocity figures may show an upward trend but don’t forget that nowadays the lower castes are much more vocal and the incidents of reporting have gone up. Crimes are a lot more visible now. The low conviction rate of crimes under this act may show the prejudiced mindset of the state and courts but it may also be construed that most of the cases filed under this act are on whimsical and frivolous grounds. Today most of the public organizations have SC/ST unions/cells. Fear of this act has prevented non dalit superiors from acting tough against their dalit subordinates even in matters of inefficiency, indiscipline and gross negligence of duties. Debates over necessity of this act or misuse of this act would continue but I think time is ripe for Indian democracy to take some tough decisions.

Let’s start with individual rights. This very notion of community rights /entitlements needs to be done away with. Individual rights needs to be strengthened and spotlight should be on empowerment of the individuals. Entitlements like reservation should be based on inclusive and secular criteria. One of the main factors that have led to hostility against dalits is reservation. Review of reservation is necessary to remove the grievances of the non reserved classes. The practice of creating special laws for special category of citizens needs to be stopped.

The fundamental purpose of any democracy should be to merge the differences between Hindus/Muslims and dalit /backward /upper castes and transform them into citizens. Steps that sharpen identity divides like issues related to caste, religion, language and region need to put on the back burner. Perpetuation of caste prejudices in the name of social justice has already torn the social fabric of the country. There is a widespread feeling among non dalits that the provisions of the Atrocity act are being misused to fix non dalits even in petty cases. No wonder from time to time voices have been raised by the Marathas, Vanniyar and other communities for the repeal of the act. This act has perpetuated mindless dalit aggression. The individual liberties of non dalits are threatened.

Its high time efforts are made to abolish bodies like National Commission for SC /ST, disband Dalit unions and cells and stop welfare schemes, education, jobs in the name of caste. Human Rights Commissions should cater to the needs of all individuals and all welfare schemes should be universalized. The state policies should be designed so as to take out the castes from their self created ghettos and change them into citizens. Caste is always anti national, religion is always anti national for they tend to buttress the sharp identity divides and prevents amalgamation on the basis of shared nationhood.

The state must protect the sanctity of its institutions……caste politics must not be allowed to ride roughshod over it. What the SC verdict delivered has to be accepted and its rulings should not be circumscribed by vote bank compulsions.

Grand Opposition Alliance? You must be joking

Ashish Shukla
-
0
Grand Opposition Alliance? You must be joking

Indian Express ran a front-page story on Tuesday with the screaming headline: “Maya to Party: Back SP again in coming bypolls…” Times of India, the same day, ran the headline “Maya won’t support SP in bypolls.” One of them for sure is lying.

It doesn’t take long to detect who’s lying. The Times of India story is based on a press statement by the BSP. Its exact words are: “BSP will not activate its cadres in any bypolls in future, the way it did it in Gorakhpur and Phulpur.” The backdrop of these developments in the upcoming bypolls in Kairana and Noorpur assembly seats in UP.

Yet Indian Express has completely ignored the press statement. It’s telling its readers—in line with its primary function of propaganda abroad—of a communion between the two “warring kingdoms” even though a schism has occurred. (Meanwhile, it’s gleefully jumping up and down in concocting a schism between Reserve Bank of India and the government as its second front-page lead).

So create a schism where none exist and bury a schism where it does exist!!! Who bells the cat? Surely not your sanctimonious Editors’ Guild or Press Council of India!

Mayawati may change her mind and support SP in UP bypolls in coming days. But that’s a different matter altogether. The issue for the moment is that Indian Express willfully spikes a story which shows not all is well between “babua and bua.” It also ignores Mayawati chiding an “immature Akhilesh Yadav” for SP’s devious role in the recent Rajya Sabha poll.

Meanwhile Indian Express, which catches even a sneeze of the “pidi”, completely ignores the words of Ranjan Chowdhury. The West Bengal Congress chief has plainly said that “Mamata Banerjee is an opportunist leader.” Chowdhary has claimed that Mamata can’t be trusted as anti-BJP voice. He has cited the instance of Mamata siding with Telangana Rashtriya Samithi (TRS) which in turn supports BJP inside the Parliament. He has accused Ms Banerjee of inviting BJP in West Bengal in the first place, “who espoused the policy that BJP was not untouchable;” and during her regime “hundreds of RSS shakhas were opened.” Chowdhury further says: “In future, if she thinks she will gain more benefit by allying with BJP, she will do it.”

Tellingly, Chowdhury says: “Mamata is aspirational and wants to become the PM. She does not express her desire for words but her actions make her ambition amply clear.”

So there you are: BSP doesn’t trust SP; Congress doesn’t trust Mamata; one part of the left says join Congress, the other says don’t.  And we have Congress declaring in plain words—in the words of Chowdhury—that all “the regional parties want is to ensure that they are able to extract their pounds of flesh whoever comes to power. Or, if they are lucky somebody can become a Chandrashekhar or Deve Gowda (as PM).”  Chowdhury’s words betray the Congress anxiety in case Rahul Gandhi misses out on Prime Ministership.

So this is the bunch of opportunist opposition who don’t care a hoot about what happens to you or me or to this country. All they want is to extract their “pounds of flesh,” as Chowdhury says. Yet our English mainstream media is swooning over the Grand Alliance in offing.

I mean how shameless could they really get!

My concerns and suggestions to Smriti Irani regarding ‘fake news’ circular

anonBrook
-
0
My concerns and suggestions to Smriti Irani regarding ‘fake news’ circular

Recently, the Information and Broadcast Ministry under Minister Smriti Irani has issued new guidelines, which were later canceled upon PM’s directions, in order to punish accredited journalists, who peddle fake news, which suspension of their accreditation with a provision of permanently revoking their accreditation upon repeated instances of peddling fake news. I welcome the intent behind this move but I have some concerns.

There are three major concerns for me; firstly, the guideline is obviously useless against those journalists who are not accredited. Secondly and more importantly, there is no real punishment for peddling fake news. Thirdly and the most disconcerting is that the method proposed by the Ministry for determination of whether a news is fake and the duration of suspension that shall be received by the responsible person is biased against right wing leaning media persons and organisations, in my opinion.

I will explain the reasons for each of these concerns.

The reason for my first concern is self explanatory and so I will not get into the details of it.

As for the second issue, it is more to do with knowledge in the general public about accreditation. Most people do not know what accreditation is or how a journalist get accredited and what are the benefits of accreditation. And as such the general public will not know nor care if somebody’s accreditation has been suspended or revoked permanently. Thus, unless there is a provision of naming and shaming such journalists along with suspension and revocation of accreditation the guidelines will remain too soft.

Here I’d like to clarify that I am not in favour of actual punishments such as fines or jail time because free speech should be protected and free speech includes the right to lie. However, people who are charged with and have taken up the duty to bring truth out do not get this right. Therefore, fake news must be punished by way of dent in their reputation and social standing only and not actual physical punishment like jail etc.

My third concern and the one that I am most worried about is bias. And although I said earlier that there will be bias against Right leaning media persons and organisations, my concern is more to do with bias against new age media.

I say there might be a bias, due to the composition of the bodies that will decide not only whether accreditation is to be suspended but also the duration of said suspension.

For fake news in print media like newspapers, the matter will be referred to Press Council of India in which apart from the Chairman who is a retired judge and 5 MPs (3 from LS & 2 from RS) all the members are from the media (Editors of media houses and active journalist). And herein lies the bias against Right Wing ideology. As we know, most of Indian media not only has strong left wing ideological bias but also a strong connection (both familial & otherwise) to the GoP & Communist Party.

If you think my concern is misplaced, ask yourself this: does one of the major right wing magazine, which has been a mentor to many new upcoming Right Wing media, Swarajya, have representative in the PCI? Are there any other RW representatives in PCI? How can we expect fairness from such a body when, recently a journalist Aditya Raj Kaul was not allowed entry in Press Club of India by other journalists and no organisation came to support Aditya?

For fake news in electronic media, it gets even messier, because here the bias may not be only of ideology but that of medium also. The matters will be referred to National Broadcasters’ Association (NBA). NBA is a private body made up of Broadcasters. New age media and web based journalism are in direct financial conflict with traditional media (print & TV). Globally the advertisement revenue is moving towards personalized adverts on the internet through SM and individual online creators.

A recent international example of the viciousness this can bring was seen in case of massive Youtuber Felix Kjellberg aka PewDiePie when many reputed news agencies including NYT & WaPo purposefully took parts of his videos out of context and tried to portray him as a Neo-Nazi so that advertisers move away from YouTube and back to newspapers. This wasn’t an isolated incident. Felix was targeted earlier too when he accidentally said “nigger” in one of his gaming streams and a controversy was created by legacy media leading to what is popularly called ‘ad-pocalyps’ in the YouTube community which saw advertisers pulling out of YouTube on a large-scale.

Not just the financial conflict, there is also an issue of representation. The new age media has no representation in NBA. How can a private body pass orders relating to people who are not its members? This also applies to broadcasters also that are not part of NBA.

Can we expect fairness from NBA towards YouTube or internet based agencies like PostCard, OpIndia, RightLog or AltNews and TheWire etc.?

Other than these concerns there are also many other questions that I have, such as: What’s the statute of limitations on this? Can people like Shekhar Gupta who peddled fake news (fake military coup story) before these guidelines also be punished? What happens when lives are lost due to these fake news (not too long ago, a soldier committed suicide due to a story, but the journalist responsible did not face any repercussions)? Is simply suspending accreditation enough in that case? What is the complaint procedure? Can regular citizens file complains, seeing as most fake news and propaganda is busted online by regular people? What about personal SM accounts of such journalists who spread fake news, knowingly or inadvertently, as their opinions or preface it by “shocking if true”/“received via WhatsApp” or something like that?

Any law, rule or guideline cannot be subjective. Even if they become less effective, they must be made objective with the answers clear and specific for each situation related to them.

Now, how do we address these issues? Here’s my suggestions that may solve some of the many issues:

1. All proceedings related to all such cases, irrespective of the scale or magnitude of the fake news must be streamed live online on the websites of PCI & NBA. These same should be available unedited for later viewing.

2. The transcripts of all proceedings should also be available and that too without any redactions.

3. An appellate body that is separate from both PCI & NBA should be created that shall deal, in a time bound manner, with appeals against the decisions of these bodies. And its proceedings, obviously, should also be streamed and transcripts should be available.

Some other very reasonable and, in my view, more effective solutions to the fake news menace were proposed by DD News journalist and anchor Ashok Srivastava, in his change.org petition and letter to the Government that property of accredited journalists must be publicly declared and audited.

Shashi Tharoor’s book ‘Why I am a Hindu’ is more a political stunt than book

G Indira
-
0
Shashi Tharoor’s book ‘Why I am a Hindu’ is more a political stunt than book

I have read the Congress’ tall liberal-secular leader of International-fame, Shri Shashi Tharoor’s book, “Why I am a Hindu?” with a keen intent to know what is in his mind. The book appeared to be more of a political stunt than an ideological battle.

Shri Tharoor tried in vain to demolish Hindutva ideology with his erudition and verbose. He did not mention anywhere why the Congress government’s secularism failed so miserably in 2014 reducing the party to 44 MPs. He did not mention about Shah Bano and Ayodhya Temple related sentiments of the people anywhere in the book. He was partial and tried to shield the Congress party to the best of his abilities. The Congress never ever thought that the Hindus would have sensibilities until it was trounced in last Lok Sabha elections. Now, after a belated recognition, the party is trying to willy-nilly grab power in some states (eg: Karnataka) by dividing Hindus into caste lines.

Shri Tharoor began writing his book eulogising Hindu religion and its eclectic approach of many gods, many rituals and many modes of worship, then he moved on to his next section (section-II) to bait Hindutva by calling the ideology as political Hinduism. In the same section he brought his cocooned liberal-fanatic thoughts out in lashing the BJP. He is unabashed in venting his ire on the Hindus that are with the BJP.

It’s amazing, being a liberal he opposed bringing in Uniform Civil Code in the country. For which (for the implementation), he says, he needs consent of the “affected communities” (read Muslims). He writes, the idea of Uniform Civil Code needed to be deferred indefinitely, until the time was ripe. The ripe-time is always questionable, indefinite and infinite. After 70 years of Independence, it is still being debated? Marriage, inheritance, divorce and maintenance are secular issues. They can all be same (come under the same law) for all citizens in a secular democracy anywhere in the world.

The scholar-MP says unlike in France (the concept of secularism which keeps religion out of government institutions like schools), the Indian secularism “cheerfully embraces” financial support to religious schools and the persistence of ‘personal law’ for different religious communities. This statement of Indian secularism which he gleefully states is absurd anywhere in the world. When we have borrowed our secularism, socialism, all Freedoms from the West, why this minorities – appeasement clause of government-funding to minority-religious institutions be present as part of secularism practised in India?

He criticises David Frawley for stating that sarva dharma samabhava is asked to be practised only by Hindus in India. What David Frawley said is what is happening in India. It warrants no criticism by the Congressman. The point Frawley has made should be taken into cognisance for soul searching by the Congress.

He goes against nationalism that is very much pronounced now in the country and quotes Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru to have warned that the communalism of the majority was especially dangerous because it could present itself as nationalist. That statement of Nehru is bizarre. If the majority do not stand up for nationalism, how could the country survive?

It is strange to read from a person who wrote a book on, ‘Why I am a Hindu?’ to support religious conversions not only by individual choice but also en masse (in mass scale). He justified block, blanket conversion by saying that for spiritual or material gain they all can get converted. Thus, he tried to please the Congress President and the Chairperson. Throughout the book, he tried to please his political bosses by singing their tunes or by being their voice. A la’ “His Master’s Voice”.

Right from MF Hussain, Taj Mahal and Padmavat controversy, Nayanatara Sahgal’s writings – all his pet iconic projects and discourses were in the book. Those were answered many a time befittingly by Hindutva proponents earlier (some of them decades ago). Why raking up afresh? MF Hussain being a Muslim, in Tharoor’s view he had all freedom to draw goddess Saraswati the manner he liked. Since the controversy of Taj Mahal and Padmavat were raised by some Hindu outfits they should be countered and condemned. Why? He should know their freedom of expression is as gifted as MF Hussain’s. To a degree if they violated their freedom, so also, MF Hussain to a larger degree in the manner he painted the goddess Saraswati in Hindu-India. It is unbecoming of liberals to bring in always Khajuraho-sculpture, if they like so much, they can live there.

Wendy Doniger, to Tharoor, did erudite study in Hinduism. To majority of Hindus her derogatory references of Hindu gods did not go down well. Quite often, in his book, Tharoor used terms like “lumpen elements”, “narrow-minded”,” bigots” etc when he wrote about his opponents. Who he is he to label people? Is such name-calling a trend associated to the sophisticated elite of his cult? He spared none. Even the ‘puppy-reference’ of the Prime Minister which seemed normal to me was bashed unnecessarily to please his masters by making it convoluted. The PM said, ‘even if a small living being like a puppy comes under the wheels of car and dies, we (the people in the car) feel sorry and get disturbed, when so many men died in the riots, why can’t a person like him feel for them’? – That was his explanation in the interview, which was a fair explanation. The kind of agenda driven inference given by Tharoor in his book pleases none.

In the last section, Tharoor writes about ‘Taking Back Hinduism’. My question is to -where? He says Hindus should adopt once again the philosophical Hinduism what their gurus had taught them (meaning to say- to me–so that they would be blind to the secular-faults committed by the Congress). He quoted in his book extensively the Adwaitha philosophy of Adi Shankaracharya and also of Swami Vivekananda which took Hindu-mind to greater heights.

It is agreed that the philosophy gives much solace to mind. However, they (both Shankara and Vivekananda) never taught people to be passive or to sit at a corner. They (Adi Shankara and Swami Vivekananda) were active in their lives and passed on their message to the world. Adi Shankaracharya revived Sanatana Dharma through a dialogue and discourse throughout the country by travelling on foot from Kanyakumari to Kashmir. The seer had the courage of conviction to establish Dharma in this land. He did not relent till he established Shakthi Peethas in all the corners of Bharath. Similarly, in the modern- day world, i.e in the nineteenth century, Vivekananda did the same job of propagating the Adwaitha philosophy in the world by going to Chicago, USA and addressing the world Parliament of Religions. He enthralled the audiences there and won the hearts of people. So, people should strive to do what they believe in. Being passive is not specific to Hindus when it comes up to their Dharma.

कांग्रेस के इस षड्यंत्र से मोदीजी अनजान हैं क्या?

RAJEEV GUPTA
-
0
कांग्रेस के इस षड्यंत्र से मोदीजी अनजान हैं क्या?

2 अप्रैल 2018 को कांग्रेस पार्टी एवं उसके कुछ अन्य सहयोगी दलों द्वारा प्रायोजित “भारत बंद” मे कम से कम 12 निर्दोष देशवासियों की जान चली गयी है. लेकिन कांग्रेस पार्टी के नेताओं को इससे क्या मतलब है.

कभी नकली किसान आन्दोलन, कभी नकली दलित आन्दोलन और कभी करनी सेना का आन्दोलन, जैसे प्रायोजित षड्यंत्र करके कांग्रेस पार्टी अपनी बौखलाहट का बेशर्म प्रदर्शन करती आई है. इसके चलते अगर निर्दोष लोगों की जान भी चली जाये तो उससे कांग्रेस पार्टी और उसके नेताओं को कोई फर्क नही पड़ता है.

जब यह लोग इस तरह की नौटंकी करते हैं तो इतनी मूर्खता के साथ करते हैं कि तुरंत ही पकड भी लिये जाते हैं. कल का भारत बंद सिर्फ भाजपा शासित राज्यों मे ही हुआ. जिन राज्यों मे भाजपा की सरकारें नही हैं, वहां यह “भारत बंद” क्यों नही हुआ? क्या वहां दलित नही हैं? इसका सीधा सीधा मतलब यही है कि यह सारी नौटंकी कांग्रेस द्वारा प्रायोजित साज़िश का एक हिस्सा थी.

सोशल मीडिया पर ऐसी तस्वीरें भी वायरल हो रही हैं जिनमे एक ही आदमी “करनी सेना के आन्दोलन” मे राजपूत बना हुआ है और वही आदमी भारत बंद मे दलित बना हुआ है. कांग्रेसी गुंडे कभी नकली किसान बन जाते हैं, कभी करनी सेना के गुंडे बन जाते है और कभी भारत बंद कराने के लिये दलित बन जाते हैं. कुछ भी करना पड जाये, बस किसी तरह अगले साल 2019 मे होने वाले चुनावों मे मोदी जी हार जाएं और इनकी जीत हो जाये ताकि जिस तरह से यह देश और जनता को पिछले 60 सालों से लूटते आये थे, उसे आगे भी लूटने का मौका मिल जाये.

पाठकों को यह अच्छी तरह याद होगा कि कांग्रेस के एक वरिष्ठ नेता और पूर्व केन्द्रिय मंत्री मणि शंकर अय्यर पाकिस्तान गये थे और वहां जाकर यह अपील की थी कि मोदी को हटाने मे पाकिस्तान उनकी मदद करे. पाकिस्तान हैरान था उनकी इस देशद्रोह की हरकत पर. लेकिन जब अपील कर ही दी गयी तो कुछ ना कुछ तो करना था.

कुछ ही दिनो बाद पाकिस्तान के एक बहुत बड़े राजनीतिक रणनीतिकार और विश्लेषक सैयद तारिक पीरज़ादा के नाम से चल रहे ट्वीटर अकाउंट पे 25 अगस्त 2015 को एक ट्वीट आया। उसमें अय्यर जी की समस्या का हल बता दिया गया. ट्वीट था- ”मोदी को हराने का सिर्फ एक ही तरीका है और वह यह कि हिन्दुओं को जात-पात के आधार पर बांट दिया जाये.”

अब इसे संयोग कहें या क्या कि तब से ऐसा ही चल रहा है. इन लोगों के हौसले और भी अधिक बुलंद होते जा रहे हैं और जब भी कोई चुनाव सर पर होता है, कोई ना कोई आन्दोलन या बंद प्रायोजित कर देते हैं. इन सभी आंदोलनो मे आदमी या कहिये कि अभिनेता वही होते है. बस जरूरत के हिसाब से कभी वे किसान बन जाते हैं, कभी करनी सेना के राजपूत बन जाते हैं और कभी वे दलित बन जाते हैं.

देखा जाये तो यह कांग्रेस की चाल है. कांग्रेस यह चाहती है कि दलितों को बदनाम करके वह दलितों और गैर दलितों को अलग कर दिया जाये ताकि हिन्दुओं के वोट बैंक का बंटवारा हो जाये. करनी सेना के आन्दोलन के जरिये राजस्थान उपचुनावों मे जो सफलता कांग्रेस को मिली है और इसी देश विभाजन की नीति के चलते कुछ सफलता गुजरात मे कांग्रेस को मिली है. इन छोटी मोटी सफलताओं से कांग्रेस को यह लग रहा है कि पाकिस्तान का सुझाया गया फॉर्मूला रामबाण है और उसकी 2019 की नैया भी पार करा देगा.

The Rashtriya in our Rifles

mihirujjainwal
-
0
The Rashtriya in our Rifles

There is always a silence on the Sundays for everyone, but not when you are a soldier in the counter-insurgency operation, looking for terrorists who are hidden in the remote area of Kashmir, Monday’s headlines were pretty dark as what the weekend witnessed, can be called quite a boost start for April, 13 terrorists were killed by the Armed forces including the killers of Lt. Ummer Fayaz Parray, almost a year after the death of the soldier.

But, I wanted to communicate about something much different from the search operations, I would today want to talk about the relations between Indian authorities and the local Kashmiris, one of the most strangled tie, but since it’s a tie, we all are still together.

I would be referring soldiers from Rashtriya Rifles as “Rashtriyan(s)” and Rashtriya Rifles as RR, thought this article is different from the previous ones as we will also throw some light on the faults from the side of India too. But, any of it doesn’t change my love, loyalty, and respect to the Indian Army and to the tricolour, my words shall only be considered as constructive criticism, not anything against the country.

The whole of the story starts from the 1990’s, yes, the decade, where the Indian democracy, secularism, and harmonization failed in front of the terror and only because of our unpreparedness and blind faith on Pakistan, there is nothing to hide from anyone, what occurred on the 19th January, 1990, when the real, radical face of blew straight in our face, lakhs of Kashmiri Pandits had to fly away, many of them were killed, women were raped but still, the whole India stayed silent like a puppet, even if today, the Pandits are upset with the Indian authorities, it’s very fine, cause we all just failed to provide home to the people who became refugees in their own land, successively, the face of terror had bitten Kashmir and the blood was flowing all over, the Indian government had failed to secure a safe stand for the country and once again, all the stress came on the shoulders of Indian Army.

It is when the Rashtriya Rifles were created if you have ever heard of the term counter-terrorists? The Rashtriyans were the CT in very real terms, they were like the terrorists who were born to destroy the terrorists, a terror for the terror itself. It would be right if I said that the RR today are much more at ease than the ones at the early stage of the RR. This Rifle doesn’t have any special code of dressing, you might see one with a nice beard and long hair, but mostly they do hide their face and head with cloth, so you can maybe assume a Rashtriyan as a guerilla soldier, but a very specially trained guerilla soldier, who doesn’t have room for mistakes and errors on his battlefield. RR was nothing that the forces ever wanted to have, but it was the only thing which Kashmir needed, nobody knew that there would be a team of soldiers with only AK-47 in their hands that would cleanse and save the Kashmir from the hell.

RR is something very heroic in the terms of laymen, I myself love the RR and hope that would be attached to them and work forward to bring peace in the valleys, but this peace-bringing force isn’t “white”, its “grey”, RR has spots on it and we have had to it accept it naturally, you would be wondering that why would I say something like that, so I must answer this question: The noise created by the footsteps of an RR unit patrolling can literally give you an anxiety attack, harassing or even disturbing the locals or innocents in the valley was never the goal of this force, but such desperate times of the 90’s had left the army nothing but with limited options.

The options were to either give up Kashmir, or to gun-down every single terrorist, who was sticking to the valley like chewing gum to hair, every terrorist has been taken down, personally, with great efforts and the great local self-intelligence of RR, but obviously, the locals had to pay a price for it, apart from some human-right violations which were actuals crimes committed, I am talking about the CASO, Combine And Search Operations, the limited and only option left to Indian force was this. CASO in the words of the laymen is: force based on their intelligence reports chose an area and do deep search interrogation, most cases, the villagers are taken outside of their homes to conduct the search, CASO was brought back by COAS Gen. Bipin Rawat after the increasing rate of casualties at the LoC, it’s nothing like the Chief is fond of COAS, neither I am but what would you do when your neighbor country sends cut heads of your soldiers? There is a limit to something, and Pakistan has crossed it over and over again.

CASO does create a bad image of the army in front of the civilians and also a disturbance in daily life maybe that is the reason why such highly result yielding type of search operation is taken as the last option, not to forget, these search operations saved the valleys in 90’s, when the terrorists were hidden through all the remote places of Kashmir. After slaying over 21,000 terrorists (still counting), the RR creates deep fear in the heart of its enemies, the number also indicate the desperation of Pakistan trying to destroy India, yet failing at the every attempt, even today, RR has developed and has become even more sturdy and stable, it’s foot in the valley is now ten toes down, still taking about 90’s always feel like opening old wounds.

Coming to today, Rashtriyans have learned and experienced a lot, even better, their intelligence and communication with the local Kashmiris have got better, they are more stable and even humanitarian, there wouldn’t be any force in the world who asked let the family of the terrorist convince him to give up arms.

Conclusively, the armed forces is already doing their job, but the guns are only useful when to kill the terrorists, but when it comes change the local Kashmiris, the ones without guns or stones in their hand, the one live ordinary lives like us, they need a narrative, a peaceful patriotic soothing narrative, to attract them and show them that India is their own and with us, as Indians, they can achieve great heights.

Till next time, vive la Indie, Vande mantram !

Why we must welcome SC’s direction on prevention of misuse ST/SC Act

myancientaryavarta
-
0
Why we must welcome SC’s direction on prevention of misuse ST/SC Act

Supreme Court of India, on 20th March 2018, issued several directions to prevent misuse of ST/SC Act.

Basically, Supreme Court issued 4 major directions [1]:

1. There is no absolute bar against grant of anticipatory bail in cases under the Atrocities Act if no prima facie case is made out or where on judicial scrutiny the complaint is found to be prima facie mala fide (By issuing this direction, the honourable court approved view taken by Gujarat High Court).

2. In view of acknowledged abuse of law of arrest in cases under the Atrocities Act, arrest of a public servant can only be after approval of the appointing authority and of a non-public servant after approval by the S.S.P. which may be granted in appropriate cases if considered necessary for reasons recorded. Such reasons must be scrutinized by the Magistrate for permitting further detention.

3. To avoid false implication of an innocent, a preliminary enquiry may be conducted by the DSP concerned to find out whether the allegations make out a case under the Atrocities Act and that the allegations are not frivolous or motivated.

4. Any violation of direction (iii) and (iv) will be actionable by way of disciplinary action as well as contempt (direction (iii) and (iv) are point number 2 and 3 mentioned above).

What is ST/SC Act?

To say it in the most simple terms, ST/SC act is an extremely powerful tool for the members of belonging community which grants protection and assure their well-being. To read about this act in detail, click Here

What made Supreme Court to issue guidelines on prevention of misuse of ST/SC Act?

The massive misuse of this act made court to issue such guidelines. Supreme Court on paragraph 22 of the judgement said “It was, thus, submitted that above judgments are merely illustrations to show that the abuse of law was rampant.” Supreme court in its judgement even cited several observations of High courts which reflects how ST/SC law is misused.

What is the evidence of any misuse of ST/SC Act?

The evidence of its misuse is the data produced by National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).

There are misuses of many other acts, why ST/SC Act is so special?

This question is extremely important.

1. The misuse of ST/SC Act is more than misuse of any other Major Act.

2. But the most important reason behind why this ST/SC is different and special from any other act is, explained by Supreme Court itself on paragraph 49 of the judgement: “If a person is accused having committed murder, dacoity, rape, etc., he can pray for anticipatory bail under Section-438 of the Cr.P.C. on the ground that he is innocent and has been falsely involved, but if a person alleged to have committed an offence under the Atrocities Act, cannot pray for an anticipatory bail because of the bar of Section-18 of the Act, and he would get arrested. This is the reason for the authorities to guard against any misuse of the Provisions of the Atrocities Act.”

What data says? And how do we understand it?

The NCRB data is alarming and easy to understand.

Let’s take for example, the NCRB data of 2016, which speaks of how members “Schedule Caste” community used ST/SC Act (1+2) [2]:

The total number of cases for trials in various Courts (in 2016) for “crimes committed against Schedule Caste” was 144387.

Out of which, 15087 cases were disposed off in the respective year.

Now it’s extremely shocking that out of 15087 cases, people were Acquitted/Discharged in 10802 cases. This means that the innocent people were dragged into court in 71.5% of the cases. Isn’t it absolute misuse of the Law? Yes, it is.

Now let’s take NCRB data of 2016 and study how people of Schedule Tribe community used ST/SC Act (1+2) [3]:

Out of 3022 cases which were disposed off in various courts of the country, it was found that people in 2293 cases were acquitted/discharged, which means that innocent people in 75.8% of the cases were falsely accused by people of Schedule Tribe community.

To conclude 2016:

In the year of 2016, people of Schedule Caste made false allegations in 71.5% of the cases & people of Schedule Tribe made false allegations in 75.8% of the cases involving ST/SC Act (1+2)

Now let’s examine NCRB data of 2015:

Here is how people of Schedule Caste used ST/SC Act (1+2) in 2015 [4]:

Various courts in our nation disposed off 15723 cases related to ST/SC act in 2015, it was found that out of 15723 cases, people in 11024 cases were acquitted/discharged.

Here is how people of Schedule Tribe used ST/SC Act (1+2) in 2015 [5]:

Various court disposed off 3555 cases in 2015, out of that, people involved in 2760 cases were acquitted/discharged.

To conclude 2015:

In 2015, people of Schedule Caste made wrong allegations against innocent people in 70.1% of the cases and people belonging to Schedule Tribe made false allegations against innocent people in 77.6% of the cases involving ST/SC Act (1+2).

Now let’s example NCRB data of 2014:

Here is how people of Schedule Caste used ST/SC Act (1+2) [6]:

Out of 17407 cases which were disposed by various Courts, people involved in 11911 cases were acquitted/discharged.

Here is how people of Schedule Tribe used ST/SC Act (1+2) [7]:

Out of 3291 cases which were completed by several courts of the country, it was found that people involved in 2226 cases were acquitted/discharged.

To conclude 2014:

People of Schedule Caste made false allegations against innocent people in 68.4% of the cases dealing with ST/SC Act (1+2). And people of Schedule Tribe made false allegations against innocent people in 67.6% of the cases dealing with ST/SC Act (1+2).

Important Note: When it’s comes to the data of “Disposal of Crimes Committed Against ST/SC Cases by Courts” we don’t get separate data of those cases where people were ‘Acquitted’ and ‘Discharged’, we get the combined data of Acquitted and discharged cases. This is because there are very rare cases when people gets discharged”.

Now let me share another very shocking NCRB data with you:

If we combine the number of innocent persons those who were acquitted) who were falsely accused by members of ST+SC community under ST/SC Act (1+2) in 2014+2015+2016, then the number we get is: 79588

This simply means that 79588 innocent people were falsely accused by members of ST+SC community under ST/SC Act (1+2) within 3 years (2014+2015+2016).

And out of those 79588 people, 1766 were females.

Just imagine the magnitude of pain and disgrace these 79588 people would have went through because of false accusations under ST/SC Act!

And let me put one more fact on the table, the number of those innocent people who were falsely accused by members of ST/SC community will go further up if I add even those cases where ST/SC’s withdrawn their complaints and those cases where police disposed off their cases.

As you have read above, within the scale of just 3 years, around 80000 people were troubled because of misuse of ST/SC Act. Now tell me, was it unfair of Supreme Court to issue certain directions to prevent misuse of ST/SC Act? Absolutely no! In fact, in my view, it was the duty of court to issue certain directions to restrict misuse of ST/SC Act.

–

Was that fair of Modi Government to file a review petition?

Well, my answer is, a big NO. Instead of scoring the so-called “Dalit Vote-bank”, Modi Government should have gone through data and made a right choice of welcoming these directions issued by Supreme Court. And by not doing so, the government is sacrificing wellness of all Non-ST/SC communities which maybe troubled extensively by just a false allegation by any member of ST/SC community.

Last Remarks:

Dear readers, I have provided references of all my claims and you can verify them. But, please note that when you will cross-check my claims with original data, you may find certain difficulties because the “statistic table” which carry all this data was created little differently in 2014-15 and then in 2016. So in case of any query, feel free to contact me at: [email protected]

Reference:

[1]: Supreme Court Judgement, DR. SUBHASH KASHINATH MAHAJAN VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR., pp.88-89

[2]: Crimes in India 2016, Statistics, NCRB, pp. 302-303

[3]: Crimes in India 2016, Statistics, NCRB, pp.346-347

[4]: Crimes in India 2015, Statistics, NCRB, pp.249-250

[5]: Crimes in India 2015, Statistics, NCRB, pp.281-282

[6]: Crimes in India 2014, Statistics, NCRB, pp.234-235

[7]: Crimes in India 2014, Statistics, NCRB, pp.266-267

Clampdown on fake news has begun on the right note

harsh_shah811
-
0
Clampdown on fake news has begun on the right note

Lutyens media, as Arnab Goswami likes to call them, was hit by a bombshell yesterday. Yes, the same set of journalists who are part of the Left liberal ecosystem, who do not have a shred of morality or neutrality left in their journalism, if you can call it that.

A new notification from the I&B ministry states that journalists found to be peddling fake news stand to lose their accreditation if they are found to be repeat offenders. And this hasn’t amused them. And as expected, they are up in arms crying “Clampdown on the freedom of the press” and to take it a step further, a “blow to democracy and the freedom of expression”. Why should one be against the clampdown on “FAKE” news is beyond me.

What exactly are the benefits of an accreditation? Concessions in air and rail tickets, free parking at certain places, exclusive access to some government functions. These benefits are not that much of a deal, but the sense of entitlement that comes with these perks, is. And that’s where it hurts them. Why exactly does an “accredited” journalist need these perks is a question for some other day.

In their over zealous attempt to paint the Modi government as the villain, one thing they tend to miss, is that freedom of speech never has been, nor can be absolute. There is a reason defamation is classified as a criminal offence and Arvind Kejriwal is signing apologies instead of files. If I abuse you in private, it’s my freedom of speech, but you won’t like it. If I do the same in public, you will most likely retaliate in some fashion. And wait, the notification only targets “fake news”, not “defamatory statements”.

You cannot just go about saying what you like, print what you imagined in your unemployment period. as a fact. There’s a category called “fiction” for that. But if you claim a person was lynched to death for sitting on a horse because he was a Dalit, or twist facts that a person was killed for following a religion, instead of a seat quarrel, you better have facts to prove it. Communally or caste sensitive news cannot be dished out just because you hate a party, and your paymasters have ordered you to publish such content.

Every journalist tweeted the same, but did not clarify later.

In the times of the internet, where content takes merely a few seconds to go viral, fake news can be dangerous.  Even apologizing does not compensate for it, because the damage has already been done. Some journalists refuse to tender even the apology when they are caught lying. They instead brazen it out. No wonder they are feeling threatened.

Some eminent “journalists” are nothing but mouthpieces of a political party, all in the hope of a Rajya Sabha ticket, or a regular flow of cash. Be it collections of GST, growth rate, engineered stories of deaths due to demonetization, fake tales about the atrocities of the Army in Kashmir, or the exaggerated farmers’ distress or the recent violent Bharat Bandh, and the list goes on. And the culprits are always the usual gang.

Most of the journalists do not have a problem with the notification because they work hard to verify the content of their story through sources or their own investigation. It is only this mafia centered in Lutyens Delhi that feels vulnerable, and rightly so. The monopoly must end. And Smriti Irani must be congratulated for this brave decision.

As they say, yeh darr dekh kar accha laga. Yeh darr hona chahiye.

Impeachment of the CJI is nothing but a desperate attempt by opposition to stay relevant

vishwas
-
0
Impeachment of the CJI is nothing but a desperate attempt by opposition to stay relevant

Chief Justice Dipak Mishra (64) is facing impeachment motion initiated by opposition parties of India led by CPI  Sitaram Yechury who is trying to garner support of congress and Samajwadi Party etc.

Judges Enquiry Act 1968 which regulates the procedure of removal of Judges of Supreme Court via process of impeachment lays down some grounds on which a judge can be impeached. A signed motion of 100 members of Loksabha or 50 members of Rajyasabha has to be presented to Speaker or Chairman respectively. It is on discretion of speaker/ chairman to admit the motion or refuse it.

The independence of judiciary is protected by the constitution and removal of judges can only be on the grounds of misbehaviour or incapacity(loss of mind). The charges against the accused judge has to be proved in front of a committee consisting of a chief judge of Supreme court ( Senior Judge if chief justice is in question), a chief justice of High court and a distinguished jurist.

If the committee finds the judge guilty then the motion has to pass each house by special majority, that is majority of total membership of house and majority of two third of member of house present and voting. the motion after clearing the house has to be sent to president in same session for due process of removal of Judge.

The impeachment motion of Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra inspires from the famous press conference of January 2018 in which four senior judges of supreme court Justice Chelameswar, Justice Gogoi, Justice Lokur and Justice Kurian Joseph addressed the press conference first of its kind and levelled some accusation against Chief Justice Dipak Mishra.

If we look at the allegation made by the judges which is the basis of the charges against chief justice nothing amounts to misbehaviour or incapacity which are the grounds for impeachment.

The allegation of abuse of authority for assigning the cases and sending the controversial cases to desired bench were addressed when chief justice came up with new roster system.

The case of Judge Loya and Sohrabuddin encounter case is also said to be the reason of the motion. In both the cases chief justice was charged with allegation of bench fixing to particular judge for desired result. One cannot assume that the judge to whom these cases were assigned are corrupt until proven without doubt.

If we look at both the cases these cases are political in nature and draws large media reaction and often used by opposition to target the government. Just these cases were assigned to different bench that does not amount to any wrong doing.

Taking action on political issues does put a target on the back of judiciary but it does not qualify for calling for an impeachment of judge. If we look at working of judiciary in past few years all the chief justice took charge in solving some political issues. Justice Thakur issued a landmark judgement in BCCI case and was critical of government on appointment of judges, Justice Kehar gave priority to cases like Triple Talak, What’s app case. Justice Mishra since taking oath as chief justice tried to resolve the issues like Delhi government case, Aadhar Act, Babri Majid case, and issued notice on polygamy etc.

Most of these cases are tried by the Mp lawyer who are now in opposition parties. They try to align the cases in such a way that favours their own party agenda. Kabil sibbal even went on to ask CJI to defer the Babri Majid case till 2019 election. Bar council has recently asked Kapil Sibbal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Vivek Tankha to abstain from appearing in Chief Justice’s court. The bar council move was opposed by all three of them.

If we can’t put aside Judiciary from politics then this is going to set a very dangerous precedent that if a lawyer MP does not like the verdict given by justice they can start an impeachment motion in parliament to pressurize the judiciary.

The basis of the case against CJI should be beyond reasonable doubt and opposition should ensure the charges are not inspired by political vendetta. If the opposition is trying to impeach chief justice on the basis of the charges levied during press conference of january 2018 by senior 4 judges then they are lacking a strong case against chief justice. Those charges does not qualify for impeachment and if they proceed with these charges which has to undergo the scrutiny of the committee appointed by speaker/chairman which is responsible for framing charges and submitting the report.

There was a failed attempt to impeach justice V Ramaswami of Supreme Court (1991-1993) in which he was found guilty by the committee but the impeachment motion was defeated in-house.

So if the opposition can’t prove those serious allegation against chief justice , this attempt may bring a serious dent on Judicial System of the country which is the most pivotal institution of democracy.

1...720721722...889Page 721 of 889