July 2018 Archives

After TRAI Chief Fiasco, UIDAI Warns Others Not to Share Aadhaar Number

“Such activities are uncalled for and should be refrained as these are not in accordance with the law,” UIDAI said.

New Delhi: After TRAI chief R.S. Sharma’s Aadhaar dare on Twitter created a flutter, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) today asked people not to publicly share their 12-digit identifier on the internet and social media, or pose such challenges to others.

“Such activities are uncalled for and should be refrained as these are not in accordance with the law,” UIDAI said in a statement.

An all-out war has been raging on Twitter since Saturday after Sharma shared his Aadhaar number on Twitter, challenging anyone to show how mere knowledge of the number could be misused. While some claimed to have gotten access to his bank account number and emails, Sharma refuted the claims.

UIDAI also warned that doing Aadhaar authentication by using somebody else’s Aadhaar number or using someone else’s Aadhaar number for any purpose may amount to impersonation and thereby is a criminal offence under the Aadhaar Act and the Indian Penal Code. Any person indulging in such acts or abetting or inciting others to do so makes themselves liable for prosecution and penal action under the law. Therefore people should refrain from such acts, it added.

Aadhaar, it said, is a unique identity which can be authenticated to prove one’s identity for various services, benefits and subsidies. “UIDAI in its regular media campaigns have been consistently making people aware not to display or publish or share their Aadhaar number in public domain,” the statement said.

UIDAI said the 12-digit Aadhaar number “is personally sensitive information” just like bank account number, passport number, PAN number, which “should be strictly shared only on a need basis for a legitimate use for establishing identity and for legitimate transactions”.

Also, as per the Aadhaar Act and other IT rules, personally sensitive information should not be published or shared publicly, it said.

“Indiscriminate and unwanted publication of any personally sensitive information whether Aadhaar or any other, may render the concerned person vulnerable and, therefore, should be avoided.”

The Mystery of MH370: Highlights from the Malaysian Government’s Final Report

Even though the final report does not provide much new information, it does lay several conspiracy theories to rest.

New Delhi: The admission made by Malaysian safety investigators of their inability to explain the mystery of the missing flight MH370 has been greeted with relief and anger, even as a top aviation official stepped down from his post.

On March 7, 2014, 42 minutes after midnight in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysian Airlines MH370 departed for Beijing with 227 passengers and 12 crew members on board. The last recorded radio transmission was at 1.19 am MYT: “Good night Malaysian Three Seven Zero”. Three minutes later, MH370 fell off the radar, and has never been found since.

While there are no definite answers, the Malaysian investigators did conclude that the plane was being manually controlled when it changed its flight path.

MH370 – Curated tweets by thewire_in

The voluminous report finds that the recorded changes in the flight path, turning north-west towards Penang and then another turn towards the southern Indian ocean “was difficult to attribute to any specific aircraft system failures”.

“There is also no evidence to suggest that the aircraft was flown by anyone other than the designated MAS pilots. However, the Team does not exclude the possibility of intervention by a third party,” said the report.

The report was released at a press conference in Kuala Lumpur on Monday addressed by the lead investigator Kok So Chon.

While the Malaysian government has termed this as the final investigative report, Kok denied it. “This is not the final report It would be presumptuous of us to say it is. This is because there are no victims or wreckage found. There must be closure,” he said.

But relatives have been publicly unhappy that the report does not provide any “new” information and that there is still no clarity on the fate of the airplane even four years later.

Credit: Reuters

“In conclusion, the team is unable to determine the real cause for the disappearance of MH370,” said the report issued by the Malaysian International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 13 Safety Investigation Team.

The Star quoted the husband of a victim as saying that there was no answers in the report.

“The plane departed from Kuala Lumpur for Beijing on March 8, 2014. It turned back and then disappeared. Where did it go and why did it disappear? We do not know… After the release of today’s report, I do not think we are any wiser,” said K.S. Narendran, the author of Life After MH370: Journeying Through a Void. Narendran’s wife of over 25 years, Chandrika Sharma, was one of the passengers on the plane.

While the report could not come to any firm conclusion about the cause and final fate of MH370, the report did raise questions about the operations of Air Traffic Control and laid to rest some theories.

On Tuesday, Azharuddin Abd Rahman, the chairman of Civil Aviation Authority of Malaysia, resigned.

“While the report does not suggest that the accident is caused by the department of civil aviation then, nevertheless, there were some very apparent findings with regards to the operations of the Kuala Lumpur Air Traffic Control Centre, where it was stated that the Air Traffic Controller did not comply with certain standard operating procedures,” he said.

The lapses include the early transfer from the jurisdiction of MH370 Kuala Lumpur controllers to Vietnam’s area control centre (ACC).

When Ho Chi Minh’s ACC could not establish two-way communication with MH370, it did not inform Kuala Lumpur within five minutes as is required under international guidelines. Instead, it took about 20 minutes for Kuala Lumpur air traffic controllers to realise that MH370 could not be contacted.

In fact, the report said that one of the reasons for the delay, as deduced from the “direct line of communication transcripts”, was due to the lack of proficiency in English of the Vietnamese air traffic controllers.

“The Direct Line Coordination Communication transcripts between KL ACC and Ho Chi Minh ACC suggested that there were uncertainties on the position of the aircraft. This could come about from the level of understanding of the English language. The HCM Duty Controller also could not communicate effectively during the interviews and an interpreter was there to assist him,” said the report.

More so, the report found, Kuala Lumpur air traffic controllers were dependant on position information of the aircraft provided by MAS Flight Operations Despatch Centre instead of checking up with other ATC authorities.

According to the report, when the Kuala Lumpur controllers had asked the MAS flight operations despatch centre for the position of MH370, they were told that the plane was in Cambodian airspace. However, during the investigation, the MAS official said that his lack of training led to him presume that the position was “actually projected movement and not actual”.

It was also found that air traffic controllers in both Malaysia and Vietnam “did not initiate the various emergency phases as required then, thereby delaying the activation of the alerting search and rescue operations”.

Putting theories to bed

Media reports had claimed that one of two pilots had diverted the plane in a suicidal path.

However, the report discounted all such theories about abnormal behaviour from either captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah or his co-pilot first officer Fariq Abdul Hamid, after checking their medical, psychological, personal and financial history.

A Malaysia Airlines plane arrives at Kuala Lumpur International Airport in Sepang, Malaysia, March 2, 2016. Credit: Reuters/Olivia Harris/File Photo

A flight simulator seized from the resident of the chief pilot did not “find any data that aircraft was performing climb, attitude or heading manoeuvres, nor did they find any data that showed a similar route flown by MH370”.

The investigators had studied CCTV footage of the pilots at Kuala Lumpur airport on March 7, as well as in previous flights, but could not find any change in their behavioural pattern.

The MH370 captain had suffered a spinal injury in 2007, but was certified to have recovered from it. “There is no evidence to suggest a pattern of regular over-the-counter medication purchase by the PIC. However, the possibility that such medication may have been purchased by cash cannot be excluded,” said the report.

The family of Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah expressed relief that the report had cleared him of much the speculation.

Newspaper tabloids had also reported in 2014 that the co-pilot may have been trying to make a phone call near Penang, but there is no clarity if he had been trying to dial a number.

The Malaysian report says that a signal ‘hit’ was recorded from a phone number belonging to the co-pilot on March 8 at around 1.52 am However, the signal ‘hit’ did not record any communication except that it was in the ‘on’ mode.

Tests were carried out with different cell phones on the same area at different altitudes, but the telecom service provider cautioned that it “would be difficult to conclude and use as scientific/theoretical assumptions for the case of MH370, cautioned the Team that the tests would be difficult to conclude and use as scientific/theoretical assumptions for the case of MH370”.

Another pet theory that was ruled out was that a fire may have broken out in the cargo are due to the contamination by lithium ion batteries and mangosteen fruit.

“Extensive tests conducted on the mangosteens packed with water-soaked foam and juice extracts of mangosteens in contact with Lithium ion batteries revealed that this could only be hazardous if exposed to a certain extreme condition and over a long period of time. This was highly improbable on board MH370 which had a comparatively shorter duration of flight time and was under controlled conditions,” the report said.

Delhi University Cancels ‘Dialogue on Freedom of Expression’ After ABVP Protest

The event was finally held on the road outside the campus gate.

New Delhi: The formal launch of a magazine produced by Delhi University students and an accompanying event titled, ironically, ‘Dialogue on Freedom of Expression’ scheduled for Monday morning were cancelled by the DU administration in the wake of protests by the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad, the student wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.

The magazine, DYouth, was released subsequently by its editors and their invited panel of guests at an impromptu outdoor event where speakers condemned the manner in which the event had been scuttled.

The event’s organisers rejected the claim of the university administration that they had not formally got permission to hold the event. The hall was booked by the vice-president of Delhi University Students Union (DUSU), Kunal, they said. They also circulated photographs of the booking register with the relevant entry as well of the hall which had been decorated with a banner for the event – something which would not have been possible if they had not formally booked the hall, they said.

The magazine is the endeavour of an editorial board whose members say they have no affiliation to any of the student groups on campus. But they did manage to get the financial backing of DUSU, whose leadership is currently split between the National Students Union of India, which is affiliated to the Congress party, and the ABVP.

The register, where students say the hall booking was noted, and the stage decorated with a banner the previous night. Credit: DYouth

DYouth editors told The Wire that a group of students from the ABVP had objected to the event and the launch of the magazine. One of the objections they raised was the inclusion of a congratulatory letter from Rocky Tuseed, president of DUSU. Tuseed is from the NSUI and is currently locked in a legal battle over his status following a lower court setting aside his election. “We don’t know how anyone can object to his letter being there as he was the sitting president when the magazine was printed,” said one of the DYouth editors.

The magazine’s contents include articles by and interviews with a range of politicians and individuals — Subramanian Swamy, Jayant Sinha, Pinky Anand and Udit Raj are from the ruling establishment, Yashwant Sinha is a senior leader not currently affiliated with a party, and P. Chidambaram, Sheila Dikshit and Ruchi Gupta are from the Congress. There are others too, like Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav of the Swaraj Abhiyan. Besides these, student authors have written more than a dozen articles on a range of topics. “It is possible the ABVP is objecting to our cover story, which is titled ‘Promises Belied’, on the four years of the Modi government,” one of the magazine’s editors told The Wire.

DYouth editors release their magazine on the road outside the Arts Faculty. Credit: DYouth

Against the backdrop of yellow barricades and dozens of police constables, the magazine was finally released on the road outside the Arts Faculty complex of the university. Two student groups – NSUI and the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) (Liberation)-affiliated All-India Students Association (AISA) – mobilised their supporters and a truncated version of the ‘Dialogue on Freedom of Expression’ also took place. Among those who spoke were Professor Apoorvanand, The Wire’s founding editor Siddharth Varadarajan, Congress MP Rajeev Gowda, NSUI leader Ruchi Gupta and AISA’s Kanwalpreet Kaur.

Apoorvanand said that cancellation of the event showed how India’s universities were not immune to the attacks that were happening on freedom of speech and expression across the country.

‘RTI Amendment Bill Violates Constitution, Law Commission Recommendations’

Noted activist Venkatesh Nayak points out how the amendment Bill, which was listed in the business of the parliament but deferred in the wake of protests from the opposition and activists, also discriminates against information commissions on the basis of salaries.

New Delhi: While a number of Right to Information (RTI) activists have already spoken out against the RTI Amendment Bill 2018 diluting the provisions of the original RTI Act 2005 as it seeks to provide unbridled power to the Centre to decide on the salaries and tenures of the information commissioners, it has now been pointed out that the Bill also violates various constitutional provisions, Law Commission recommendations and the Centre’s own earlier actions of harmonising salaries of other statutory tribunals and adjudicating authorities.

Though in the wake of opposition from activists and political parties, the Centre had deferred the introduction of this Bill in the ongoing monsoon session of the parliament, programme coordinator at the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative Venkatesh Nayak has stated that apart from the concerns already raised regarding the proposal, there were five additional points which indicate the regressive nature of the latest proposals to amend the RTI Act.

He said the fact that even before the amendment Bill had been tabled in the parliament, the nodal department for RTI – Department of Personnel and Training – issued a controversial advertisement to fill up vacancies in the Central Information Commission (CIC), working on the presumption that these amendments will receive parliamentary approval. The advertisement stated that the salaries and tenure of the new appointees will be specified by the government, instead of going by the the current regulations under which the salary and allowances are equal to that of the election commissioners and the term is of five years.

Nayak said while the introduction of the Bill has been deferred, it remains on the list of legislation that the government seeks to introduce in the Rajya Sabha. As such, he has gone ahead to elaborate on the problematic areas of the draft amendment Bill.

Proposal contradicts harmonising of salary packages

Pointing out that the amendment proposals contradict the Centre’s action of 2017 upgrading and harmonising the salary packages of other statutory tribunals and adjudicating authorities established under various Central laws, he recalled how, in June 2017, the Centre had upgraded the salaries, allowances, eligibility criteria and the manner of appointment of the chairpersons or presiding officers and members of 19 tribunals and adjudicating authorities. All of these, he said, had been established under a specific law, and their members were not constitutional authorities.

These tribunals included the Central Administrative Tribunal, National Green Tribunal (NGT), Armed Forces Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, Railway Claims Tribunal, Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Central Excise and Customs Tribunal, Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunals, Securities Appellate Tribunal, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Authority on Advance Ruling and also the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT).

Venkatesh Nayak. Source: www.humanrightsinitiative.org

Nayak further stated that while the chief election commissioner (CEC) and election commissioners (ECs) are entitled to draw the same level of salaries as judges of the Supreme Court, the salaries of the chairpersons of 17 of these 19 tribunals were increased to the same levels as that of the election commissioners (Rs 2,50,000) while the salaries of the members were upgraded to the levels of high court judges (Rs 2,25,000).

In its statement of objectives for the amendment Bill, the Centre had stated that it wanted to rationalise the salaries of the information commissioners as while the information commissions are statutory authorities, the Election Commission was a constitutional body. Nayak said this argument does not sound convincing. “What is more intriguing is that the salaries of the chairpersons and members of these statutory tribunals were upgraded even before the President of India gave his assent to the law which upgraded the salaries of the Supreme Court and high court judges. This law was gazetted in January 2018, six months after the salaries of the statutory tribunals were hiked. It seems that the Centre has no problem raising the salaries of statutory tribunals mentioned above before upgrading the salaries of the SC and HC judges, who are constitutional authorities.”

Proposals contradict Law Commission recommendations

The RTI activist also insisted that the amendment proposals contradict the rationale behind the October 2017 recommendations of the Law Commission of India for harmonising the salaries and terms and conditions of service of other statutory tribunals established under various Central laws.

He said in the 272nd Report on Assessment of Statutory Frameworks of Tribunals in India, the Law Commission had called for the harmonisation of the salaries and allowances of many of the statutory tribunals. “By then the Central government had already taken action in this regard. LCI did not discuss the salaries and allowances paid to the information commissioners in its report. Perhaps this was omitted as their salaries already stood fixed at the same levels which they were recommending for other statutory tribunals. So the spirit of the recommendations of LCI applies equally to the Information Commissions and there is no reason to treat them differently,” Nayak argued.

Information commissioners have the right to be treated equally

Arguing that the information commissions perform quasi-judicial functions much like the statutory tribunals and adjudicating authorities, Nayak further said that “there is no reason why information commissioners should be subjected to a different treatment”.

He said the information commissions also deal with fundamental rights matters. He said that “Amendment proposals do not answer satisfactorily to the test of ‘intelligible differentia’, which is a requirement for treating unequals differently under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. So it is submitted that the amendments to the RTI Act if carried out may fall foul of the fundamental guarantee of the right to equality before law to every person.”

A blow to federal scheme of RTI Act

The CHRI programme coordinator said if enacted into law, the amendment proposals will create two sets of laws applicable to salaries paid in the state information commissions – one made by the state governments for staffers of SICs under Section 27(2) of the RTI Act and the other which the Centre hopes to make for the state information commissioners.

Further, the salaries of information commissioners in the states are paid out of the consolidated fund of the concerned state over which the Centre has no control. So the RTI Amendment Bill is another example of seeking excessive delegation of powers by the Centre. As such, he said, by seeking to delegate excessive powers in the hands of the Centre, the amendment proposals would deal a “blow to the federal scheme of the RTI Act.”

Lack of discussion marked violation of pre-legislative consultation policy

Nayak also said that as already pointed out by several critics, the Centre had not conducted any consultation with the primary stakeholders, namely the citizenry and the information commissions on the amendment proposals. “This is a clear violation of the 2014 policy on pre-legislative consultation, which must precede all law-making exercises or amendments to existing laws,” he added.

Attempts Being Made to Dilute Anti-Corruption Laws, A.P. Shah Writes to Modi

The letter by the former Delhi chief justice highlights the dangers of decriminalising the Companies Act, introducing electoral bonds, weakening the RTI Act and not implementing of the Lokpal Act and Whistleblowers Protection Act.

New Delhi: In a letter sent to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, former chief justice of Delhi high court and noted rights activist A.P. Shah has lamented that “instead of increasing transparency and accountability and making the deterrents for the wrong doers far more stiff, an attempt is being made to dilute various legislations which could result in a spurt in corporate offences especially”.

Writing to the PM in his capacity as chairman of Citizens Whistle Blowers Forum, Shah, who had also served as Chairman of the Law Commission, in his letter pointed out that “any campaign against corruption can become effective only when there is a basic change in the mindset of the government in favour of greater transparency and accountability through civil society participation at all levels of decision taking, devolution of authority and decentralisation of governance”.

Representing a forum whose other founder members include social activist Aruna Roy, former finance secretary E.A.S. Sarma, founder of Association for Democratic Reforms Jagdeep Chhokar, former admiral L. Ramdas, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, and the first chief information commissioner Wajahat Habibullah, Shah also called for “strengthening of the democratic processes in every sphere of activity of the government” and noted that “bits and pieces of legislation without an overarching objective” would not deliver.

‘Proposed decriminalisation of the Companies Act, 2013, will only take away with deterrence’

In the letter, Shah goes deep into the proposed decriminalisation of the Companies Act, 2013, and. In this regard, he said the 2013 Act had “promised to usher in a new era in corporate governance”. Referring to how the “Satyam” case, the “largest accounting fraud in the history of India”, had led to the need for strict compliance of the Act, he said “Section 447 was introduced in the Act to deal severely with cases of fraud”.

Stating that at a time when cases like “Kingfisher Airlines and United Spirits (Vijay Mallya Group), Nirav Modi, Mehul Chokso, Fortis healthcare, etc.” have come to light and the non performing assets (NPAs) of banks are at an all-time high of about Rs 10 lakh crore, the Companies Act, which was expected to arrest any further decay of the system, is “ironically proposed to be decriminalised, that too with undue haste”.

Shah said the corporate affairs ministry has, through a notification dated July 13, 2018, formed a committee to review the punishment prescribed for various offences under the Companies Act, 2013, and the panel is to submit its recommendations within 30 days.

He said while most of the offences are any way compoundable, the committee has to evaluate if existing compoundable offences can be treated as mere “civil offences” and if the existing non-compoundable offences can be categorised as “compoundable offences”.

Shah cautioned Modi that “if implemented, the Act will be severely diluted and the much needed deterrent of criminal punishment will be done away with.” As such, he demanded that “this must not be allowed to happen in the larger public interest.” He also demanded that the ministry of corporate affairs put on hold the decriminalisation of the Companies Act and hold public deliberations for strengthening the Act.

He also demanded that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) file an appeal against the orders of the Sessions Court in the Satyam scam to restore public confidence in the rule of law.

Appointment of BJP leaders on PSU boards opposed

Shah also accused the NDA government of showing “utter callousness” in dealing with the management of the public sector undertaking. Noting that “at least 10 BJP politicians/spokespersons have been nominated on the boards of important PSU” and that Sambit Patra and Shazia Ilmi have been “appointed as independent directors on the board of ONGC and Engineers India respectively”, Shah said such appointments “do not bode well for governance”. He said these appointees do not possess the required skills and capabilities to effectively discharge the role of directors.

The former judge also demanded that the provisions related to appointment of directors need to be tightened. He said Section 164 of the Companies Act lists the disqualification for appointment of directors whereby “disqualification is limited to conviction by a court of any offence involving moral turpitude or for any offence under the Companies Act alone”.

Stating that there is no bar at present on any person even if convicted by a court for tax evasion or money laundering from becoming a director, Shah said this anomaly needs to be corrected urgently.

Restore limits on political donations

Raising the issue of political donations, Shah charged that the Finance Act, 2017, had surreptitiously done away with the limits on political donations prescribed under Section 182 of the Companies Act. He said the earlier limit of 7.5% of the company’s average three-year net profits was done away with and companies are no longer required to disclose the names of the parties to which the political donations are made.

This, he said, has resulted in “complete opacity” to the detriment of the various corporate stakeholders. Cautioning that this provision would “drastically increase black money and corruption” as it will “lead to the creation of shell companies and rise of benami transactions” for channeling undocumented money into political and elector process, Shah called for restoring the earlier limit.

Electoral bonds open doors for unchecked, unknown funding to political parties

Shah also lamented that the Finance Act of 2017 had introduced the use of electoral bonds, which are exempt from disclosure under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, saying these have opened the doors for unchecked and unknown funding to political parties. “With electoral bonds,” he said, “the public will have no clue from where the money came and how much went to each political party.”

Also, he said, “the Finance Act, 2016 had amended the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) 2010 to allow foreign companies with subsidiaries in India to fund political parties in India, thereby exposing the Indian politics and democracy to international lobbyists who may want to further their agenda.”

These amendments, he cautioned, “pose a serious danger to the autonomy of the country and are bound to adversely affect national security, electoral transparency, encourage corrupt practices in politics and have made the unholy nexus between politics and corporate houses more opaque and treacherous”. Shah added that amendments made to the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and Income Tax Act 1961 have further affected transparency in political funding.

He said these legislations have also opened the possibility of companies being brought into existence by unscrupulous elements primarily for routing funds to political parties through anonymous and opaque instruments like electoral bonds.

Whistleblowers Protection Act not operationalised

Shah also raised the issue of the Whistleblowers Protection Act not being operationalised till date despite four years having passed since it was passed in February 2014. Pointing out how all these years, whistleblowers have been “attacked and killed for exposing corruption”, he reprimanded the government for moving an amendment bill in parliament in May 2015 which had sought to “severely dilute the Act by removing safeguards available to whistleblowers from prosecution under the Official Secrets Act”.

Shah also charged that attempts have been made to weaken the Right to Information Act by “empowering the central and state governments to decide the salaries and tenures of information commissioners”. Earlier, too, he said, the Rule 12 of the proposed RTI Rules of 2017 had suggested that “the proceedings pending before the Commission shall abate on the death of the appellant”. Shah said in country where RTI applicants are often harassed and even killed, “such provision provide a perverse incentive to vested interests to silence the information seeker”.

Modi government came to power on anti-corruption plank, but did not appoint Lokpal

Shah also noted that though the current government came to power on the anti-corruption plank, it has failed to operationalise the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 which was as it is a very diluted form of the Jan Lokpal Bill proposed by India Against Corruption. He demanded that the Lokpal be appointed immediately.

While no Lokpal has been appointed so far, Shah said the Act too was diluted by the present government in 2016 “to exempt public servants’ families from disclosing their assets and sources of income”.

Shah’s letter also raises questions about PwC in Satyam scam

The letter to the Prime Minister also dealt in detail with the Satyam scam. Shah said while the government is passing new laws such as in Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill to fight corruption the effective implementation of the existing laws left a lot to be desired. In this regard, he referred to the Satyam case of 2009 in which investors lost huge savings and Life Insurance Corporation alone lost Rs 950 crore.

Shah said “the Serious Frauds and Investigation office, an arm of MCA, submitted its report in April 2009 confirming: 1) Falsification of accounts, and 2) complicity of the auditors, Price Waterhouse, in the fraud.”

He said the Supreme Court had ordered the trial to be completed within two years. However, the CBI court gave its verdict on April9, 2015, almost 6 years after the fraud came to light. While the CBI court had handed out 7 year jail terms to Satyam Computers founder B. Ramalinga Raju and nince others, a month later the sessions court in Hyderabad had granted bail to all of them.

Despite such a strong verdict in its favour, Shah wrote, “the orders of the sessions court are yet to be appealed by the CBI”. He said it appears that an “invisible hand is protecting” the accused and demanded that the CBI immediately file an appeal against the sessions court order.

Makers of ‘Fanney Khan’ Release Two Songs on ‘Achhe Din’ to Avoid ‘Political Colour’

The first song, ‘Mere Acche Din Kab Ayenge’, was used by social media users to criticise Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Centre.

New Delhi: Just days after releasing a song called ‘Mere Achhe Din Kab Ayenge’, the filmmakers of Fanney Khan have released another song called ‘Mere Achhe Din Ab Aaye Re’ on Saturday.

According to a report in Mid Day, the song ‘Mere Achhe Din Kab Ayenge’ was used by social media users to criticise Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Centre. During the 2014 general elections, Modi had used “Achhe din aane waale hain” as his campaign slogan. While the filmmakers denied that the song had any political references, a source told Mid Day that the producers got calls from “high places”.

The two songs have a similar tune, but while the original song had grim lyrics, the newer one is uplifting. The film stars Anil Kapoor, Rajkummar Rao and Aishwarya Rai Bacchan. It is slated to be released this week.

The movie’s director Atul Manjrekar said that ‘Achhe Din Ab Aaye Re’ was supposed to be unveiled only after the movie hit the theatres, but the team had decided to advance its release because the original song was “unnecessarily taking a political colour”.

Manjrekar said, “Fanney Khan is a simple film about a cab driver and his dreams. I hope people see the song in the right context and not misconstrue it.”

Over the weekend, a rumoured bio-pic on Uttar Pradesh chief minister Adityanath was dropped after an FIR was filed against the director for “distorting the image” of Adityanath.

UK Court Asks India to Submit Video of Mallya’s Mumbai Jail Cell

The Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London has requested videos of the jail cell at Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai where Vijay Mallya is to be kept post extradition, as the court date for the Mallya case was set to be September 12th.

London: A UK court today asked the Indian authorities to submit a video of a cell at the Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai where they plan to keep Vijay Mallya post-extradition, as it set September 12 for closing arguments in his high-profile extradition trial.

Mallya, wanted in India on fraud charges, appeared before the Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London where both defence and prosecution presented clarifications on Barrack 12 at Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai, where Mallya is to be held post-extradition.

After hearing the arguments, judge Emma Arbuthnot asked the Indian authorities to submit a video of the Barrack 12 of the Arthur Road Jail within three weeks.

The judge set the next hearing for closing submissions on September 12 and extended Mallya’s bail until then.

Earlier, Mallya said the allegations of money laundering and stealing money against him are “completely false”. “At the end of the day, the courts will decide,” he told reporters outside the court.

The 62-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines boss, who has been on bail on an extradition warrant since his arrest in April last year, is fighting extradition to India on charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to around Rs 9,000 crore.

At the last hearing in the case on April 27, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had received a boost in the case as Judge Arbuthnot confirmed that the bulk of the evidence submitted by the Indian authorities will be admissible in the case.

The CBI had submitted a detailed set of documents to the UK court, which includes case of conspiracy against former IDBI Bank deputy managing director B.K. Batra, who was referred to in court as a new “villain” of sorts in the case.

As per the Indian authorities’ case of conspiracy, Batra reportedly colluded with Mallya in sanctioning some of the loans to the now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines without following due diligence procedures.

In the separate extradition proceedings, if the judge rules in favour of the Indian government, the UK home secretary will have two months to sign Mallya’s extradition order. However, both sides will have the chance to appeal in higher courts in the UK against the magistrates’ court verdict.

Mallya’s defence team, headed by barrister Clare Montgomery, has disputed the fraud allegations and also submitted further written material from UK-based prisons expert Dr. Alan Mitchell, challenging some of the photographs of Barrack 12 of Mumbai Central Prison on Arthur Road, where Mallya is to be held if he is extradited from the UK.

The CPS team, led by barrister Mark Summers, dismissed the additional material as an “attempt to criticise” the information provided by the Indian authorities.

The extradition trial, which opened at the London court on December 4 last year, is aimed at laying out a prima facie case of fraud against Mallya, who has been based in the UK since he left India in March 2016. It also seeks to prove there are no “bars to extradition” and that the tycoon is assured a fair trial in India over his now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines’ alleged default of over Rs 9,000 crores in loans from a consortium of Indian banks.

The CPS has argued that the evidence they have presented establishes “dishonesty” on the part of the businessman and that there are no bars to him being extradited from the UK to face Indian courts.

Mallya’s defence team has deposed a series of expert witnesses to claim he had no “fraudulent” intentions and that he is unlikely to get a fair trial in India.

Last month, after a prolonged period of silence, Mallya had issued a lengthy media statement, labelling the CBI and Enforcement Directorate (ED) charges against him as “untenable and blatantly false”.

He has since lost his appeal in the UK’s Court of Appeal against a high court order in favour of 13 Indian banks to recover funds amounting to nearly 1.145 billion pounds.

The high court order in favour of the State Bank of India (SBI) led consortium had reinforced a worldwide freezing order against Mallya’s assets.

It was followed by a related enforcement order last month granting permission to the UK High Court Enforcement Officer to enter Mallya’s properties in Hertfordshire, near London, where he is based.

Mallya has since said that he has handed over a full statement of his UK assets to the court and there was no question of use of force to enter his home, Ladywalk, in the village of Tewin in England.

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Judge Loya Death Case

A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud said it did not find any merit in the review petition filed by the Bombay Lawyers Association, one of the petitioners in the case.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today dismissed a plea seeking review of its April 19 verdict that had held that Special CBI Judge B.H. Loya had died of “natural causes” on December 1, 2014 and had rejected PILs seeking an SIT probe into the death, questioning their motive.

“We have carefully gone through the review petition and the connected papers, but we see no reason to interfere with the order impugned. The review petition is, accordingly, dismissed,” the bench said.

The apex court had rejected the PILs seeking probe into the death of Loya, ruling that he had died of “natural causes”, and held that the petitions were moved by political rivals to settle scores which was a serious attempt to scandalise the judiciary and obstruct the course of justice through a “frontal attack” on its independence.

Loya, who was hearing the high-profile Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case, had died of cardiac arrest in Nagpur on December 1, 2014 when he had gone to attend the wedding of a colleague’s daughter.

Sohrabuddin Sheikh, a suspected gangster, and his wife Kausar Bi were allegedly abducted and killed by a team of Gujarat and Rajasthan Police in November 2005.

The CBI filed a chargesheet against 38 persons for the alleged fake encounters. The trial court discharged 14 people, including BJP chief Amit Shah, in the case.

Art History and Practice Blend Seamlessly at JNU’s School of Arts and Aesthetics

SAA is an institutional innovation within JNU; its curricular resilience plays a role in conceptualising higher education in the field of the arts in India and abroad.

The Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) is perhaps best known for advanced studies in the social sciences, all aspects of which are embodied in its School of Social Sciences. At different periods, other schools and centres of the university have contributed to and strengthened its intellectual ethos. I write to bring the (relatively) more recent School of Arts and Aesthetics (SAA, established 2001) into public focus. And this focus is punctual: SAA is an institutional innovation within JNU; its curricular resilience plays a role in conceptualising higher education in the field of the arts in India and abroad.

Headed at its inception by Professor Jyotindra Jain, art historian and Indologist, the School of Arts and Aesthetics was conceived as a configuration of cross-disciplinary fields: Visual Studies (including, specifically, art history), Theatre and Performance Studies, and Cinema Studies. Each discipline within the School continues to appoint faculty members committed to an integrated curriculum of creative and critical discourse. Along with its own diverse faculty, SAA regularly invites visiting academics from universities across India and abroad to guide research, examine doctoral theses, lecture and teach for extended periods. Among the numerous scholars so invited, I mention just two whose lecture series I assiduously attended: Griselda Pollock (University of Leeds), distinguished feminist art historian; and Thierry de Duve (now Hunter College, City University of New York), art historian and theorist addressing twentieth-century aesthetics including the claims of the avant-garde.

SAA’s diversely equipped faculty offers straight pedagogy in the form of lectures and research, but it also, given the nature of the subjects taught and studied, organises marathon film screenings and student-curated exhibitions. This environment enables students to expand the pedagogical boundaries with experimental forms of practice and activism.

The School of Arts and Aesthetics auditorium at JNU. Credit: www.jnu.ac.in

Not surprisingly, students at SAA learn to appreciate the subtle nature of aesthetics and grasp, at the same time, the complex framework of cultural studies. The contextual rigour of JNU as an institution also empowers students to scale the historical, to examine societal structures and to critique ideology. This approach gives to ‘arts and aesthetics’ (often regarded as an esoteric or, alternatively, a ‘soft’ discipline where philosophical reflection and reclusive sensibilities are nurtured) the necessary edge.

A unique academic department in India, the School of Arts and Aesthetics at JNU fulfils the need for an institution addressing important areas of study that are still relatively scarce in Indian universities. In Visual Studies, it succeeds two institutions that set the precedent in the 20th century and where a substantial input of art history was a part of the fine arts courses, Kala Bhavan at Visva-Bharati University, Santiniketan and the Faculty of Fine Arts at the Maharaja Sayajirao University (MSU) of Baroda. In Theatre and Performance Studies, the antecedent would be the National School of Drama in New Delhi, though that is essentially practice-driven whereas SAA’s curriculum is primarily academic. In Cinema Studies, SAA follows the Department of Film Studies at Jadavpur University but adds Cultural Studies as an important aspect, akin to the Cultural Studies Department at the English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad.

Importantly, JNU’s SAA precedes and is complemented by the distinctly innovative School of Culture and Creative Expressions (SCCE) at Ambedkar University Delhi (AUD). Set up in 2012, SCCE’s curriculum includes Visual Art, Literary Art, Performance Art and Cinematic Art.

The SAA-administration tussle

JNU has been in turmoil ever since Professor M. Jagadesh Kumar took charge as the vice chancellor in February 2016. At that time, the then dean of SAA, Professor Bishnupriya Dutt (from Theatre and Performance Studies), joined her colleagues from SAA and from other Centres and Schools at JNU to challenge a slew of intimidating orders issued by the university administration. Today, SAA works closely with the democratically elected Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) and the Jawaharlal Nehru University Teachers’ Association (JNUTA) in fighting the anti-intellectual policies of the administration.

The dean of SAA, Professor Kavita Singh is a figure who signifies the present intellectual and administrative conflict at JNU. An art historian, she became the dean of SAA in July 2017. She is known internationally as a scholar of medieval miniatures (of schools and styles of painting practised across several cultures in West, Central and South Asia). She also works on museums as repositories of civilizational heritage, analysing their purpose and functioning in terms designated in contemporary discourse as Institutional Critique. I mention these details not only because I understand the modalities of scholarship in the visual arts best, but also because it may interest the general reader to appreciate how, in stressed circumstances, specialist knowledge extends itself to engage with urgent issues; how scholars take up contestatory positions when institutional upheaval demands intervention.

Prof. Kavita Singh speaks at JNUTA’s Aakrosh Dharna Credit: Samim Asgor Ali

On March 14, 2018, Professor Kavita Singh was removed from her deanship, along with six chairpersons of other departments, for objecting to the university administration’s attempt to impose a policy of mandatory attendance on students. Their contention is that the policy was neither discussed nor passed in the meeting of the Academic Council, and that the Minutes that claim otherwise are false. A petition, ‘Kavita Singh and Others Versus JNU’ was presented in April 2018 for hearing to the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.

Although Kavita Singh, along with her co-petitioners, was reinstated by a direction of the High Court on April 27, 2018, she was debarred from attending the 146th meeting of the JNU AC, held on July 13, 2018. Deans of schools have a mandated right to attend meetings of the AC, the highest decision-making body on academic matters. Singh’s debarment was attributed to her insistence during the previous AC meeting held on May 18, 2018, that the views of representatives of the teaching faculty be heard.

The matter at stake is the manner in which the present university administration is manipulating the proceedings of the Academic Council by stacking the meetings with special invitees who have no locus standi but to endorse the unilateral decisions announced by the Vice Chancellor. The imposition of mandatory attendance, first on students and now on faculty members, is but one of the many such arbitrary calculated decisions to destroy the academic status and distinctive reputation of JNU.

In their ‘prayer’ before the court, ‘Kavita Singh and Others’ are asking for the quashing of certain passages from the Minutes of the 144th Academic Council meeting (held on December 1, 2017) wherein it is claimed that an attendance policy was passed – and quashing thereby all related actions such as rule amendments, unsympathetic circulars and threats, etc. (see page 78 of the petition). The case will be heard on 29 October 2018.

Attendance is not an issue

It is entirely misleading to claim that students do not want to attend classes at JNU. They do attend classes, but they are well aware that classroom teaching is only one part of learning in institutions that deal with research, discourse and practice in context. Students of SAA, for instance, need to view situated performances, attend screenings, go to exhibitions, make study visits to sites of art-historical importance, and use dispersed and obscure archives. Demanding attendance from PhD students is not only absurd but the whole debate is also unnecessary. As a norm, learning systems extend beyond the classroom in universities across the world! The purpose, clearly, is not to ensure attendance but to instil in the students a culture of fear by threatening to expel them if they do not oblige.

JNU VC M. Jagadesh Kumar has faced criticism for his ‘anti-intellectual’ policies. Credit: Twitter

The present Vice Chancellor’s diktats are incremental. JNU teachers have been arguing against policies that undermine the democratic spirit in key bodies of the university such as Boards of Studies, the Academic Council and the Executive Council; they have been pointing to the interference with new appointments wherein advertised posts are hastily filled with candidates conducive to the interests of the ruling dispensation but lacking appropriate (and sometimes even the minimum required) qualifications.

Also at stake is JNU’s admissions policy, which is carefully calibrated to address gender imbalance and to bring socially disadvantaged students at par during the entrance procedure. The university’s curricula in diverse fields are attuned to a social justice mandate precisely through a structured discourse on the political. JNU’s developed system for entering into and imbibing disciplinary knowledge is sought to be annulled by the present administration – by retracting provisions for gaining equality as well as by the proposed ‘objective’-style examination system that not only devalues critical discourse but evacuates knowledge of its substantive content.

The faculty and students of JNU have put up an unrelenting struggle since 2016 against the present vice chancellor’s retrogressive policies. Case after case has gone up before the public, the government and the law. Those of us who support the cause and its purpose need to assert – in consort with the enlightened forces within the university – why a boldly erected structure of thought and practice must be defended. We need to determine that authoritarian rule in public institutions will be defeated.

Geeta Kapur is a Delhi-based critic and curator. Her essays are widely anthologised, and her books include Contemporary Indian Artists (1978), When Was Modernism (2000) and the forthcoming Critic’s Compass: Navigating Practice.

Question Raised in Rajya Sabha About Gold Biscuits Gifted to Hasmukh Adhia

The Wire had broken the story on how Union finance secretary Hasmukh Adhia received two gold biscuits of 20 grams each from a mystery giver during Diwali in 2016.

New Delhi: Samajwadi Party MP Javed Ali Khan raised a question in the Rajya Sabha on Tuesday, asking the finance minister whether any officials in the Ministry of Finance had received a gold biscuit as a gift on Diwali in 2016, just before demonetisation was announced.

Khan’s question was based on a story broken by The Wire, in which Swati Chaturvedi detailed how Union finance secretary Hasmukh Adhia received two gold biscuits of 20 grams each from a mysterious giver during Diwali in 2016 but neither he nor his minister, Arun Jaitley, sought to order an investigation into the identity and motive of the individual who evidently sought to influence him.

In a six-part question, Khan has sought information on whether such a gift was received, whether it was sent to the Ministry of External Affairs toshakhana, and whether investigations were carried out to find out who sent the gift.

Adhia had told The Wire that he had “deposited [the gifts] in [the] Toshakhana of [the] MEA” and that he has a “receipt of the same dated 07-11-2016 from them”. When he was asked then why he had not ordered a probe, Adhia had said, “The important thing is that I did not accept the gift. Such things are common during Diwali, and things like sweets we do not refuse out of courtesy, but then how many officials would have done what I did and send the gift to the Toshakhana?”

Javed Ali Khan’s question. Credit: Rajya Sabha website

Acting finance minister Piyush Goyal answered the question, saying, “One such case was reported where a letter dated 04.11.2016 was received in the Cabinet Secretariat from Dr. Hasmukh Adhia, then Revenue Secretary, addressed to Cabinet Secretary, informing that certain gifts were sent to him which were precious in nature and could not be accepted by him as per Conduct Rules. Dr. Adhia mentioned in his letter to Cabinet Secretary that these items were delivered to his house in his absence and therefore, he could not even refuse them.”

Goyal continued that no investigation was conducted because “the officer had not accepted the gift as per Conduct Rules and surrendered the same to the Toshakhana”.

Piyush Goyal’s response. Credit: Rajya Sabha website