August 2020 Archives

Watch | Moral Victory for Prashant Bhushan, SC Seeks Exit from Contempt Case With Re 1 Fine

Arfa Khanam Sherwani discusses the fine on Prashant Bhushan with Swaraj India’s national president Yogendra Yadav.

The Supreme Court on Monday fined senior advocate Prashant Bhushan Re 1 in the contempt case for his tweets on the Supreme Court. On August 25, the court had reserved its ruling after numerous arguments as Bhushan refused to apologise.

The bench of Justices Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai and Krishna Murari pronounced the judgement, saying that the senior lawyer would be imprisoned for three months and be debarred from practicing for three years if he defaults on the payment of the penalty. Bhushan was instructed to pay the fine by September 15.

The Wire‘s senior editor, Arfa Khanam Sherwani, discusses the development with Swaraj India’s national president Yogendra Yadav.

Charlie Parker: Celebrating a Century of the Genius Who Changed Jazz Forever

Though he lived hard and died young, Bird’s genre-busting style of sax playing ignited jazz’s bebop revolution.

His audience knew him as “Yardbird”, or more usually, just “Bird”. The variety of sobriquets given to jazz alto saxophonist Charlie Parker, who would have turned 100 on August 29, 2020, is indicative of his different personae – most important, of course, his musical personalities.

Parker was a legendary soloist, inspiring bandleader, daring composer, ingenious innovator and a source of inspiration for many generations still. A jazz idol, full stop. But his off-stage personality revealed a more tragic figure: a drug addict and alcoholic.

Bird lived hard and lost his performance licence, several jobs and attempted suicide twice. All in all, his physical and mental health were already waning at an early age. That he died young then, at just 34 years old, was not really a shock. He passed away a week after his last public performance, on March 12, 1955. This last concert took place in the famous New York nightclub Birdland – aptly named in his honour.

Charlie Parker is considered “one of the most striking performers in the entire history of jazz, and one of the most influential”, according to the Rough Guide to Jazz. The more authoritative encyclopedia in academic circles, The New Grove Dictionary of Jazz, qualifies him in comparable terms and characterises Bird as a “supremely creative improviser”.

Early bird

Parker was born and raised in a musical family in Kansas City, Missouri, which was known for its vibrant music scene. He started to play the saxophone when he was 11 years old, taking lessons at a local music school and joining high school bands.

But he chiefly developed as a musician by carefully studying his older peers. Inspired by the big bands of Bennie Moten and Count Basie, Parker embarked on the blues and swing tradition of his time. Yet he felt something was missing.

In Bhushan Sentence, Justice Mishra Criticises 2018 Judges’ Press Conference Too

The Supreme Court bench said that it hoped this was the ‘first and the last’ occasion where judges have gone to the press.

New Delhi: While sentencing senior advocate Prashant Bhushan in the case over two tweets, where the Supreme Court found him in contempt, the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra also adversely commented on the unprecedented press conference held by four senior judges of the apex court in January 2018 on issues surrounding the opaque manner in which politically sensitive cases were being assigned by the then chief justice, Dipak Misra. In particular, the four questioned the handling of the case concerning the mysterious death of special CBI Judge B.H. Loya. The CJI had marked it to Justice Arun Mishra.

Referring to the press conference held at the residence of Justice J. Chelameswar and also addressed by Justices Ranjan Gogoi (who later in the same year went on to become the Chief Justice of India), Madan B. Lokur and Kurian Joseph, the apex court remarked today that “we hope it was the first and the last occasion that the Judges have gone to press…”

The Bench also said, “God gives wisdom to protect its dignity by internal mechanism, particularly, when allegations made, if any, publicly cannot be met by sufferer Judges. It would cause suffering to them till eternity.”

Reacting to the bench’s observations, a former judge of the Supreme Court told The Wire, “So four judges condemned unheard. Unnatural justice? Or is it natural (in) justice?”

Also read: More Confident Now Than Ever Before That Truth Shall Prevail: Prashant Bhushan

In their press conference, four of the most senior judges after the then CJI Dipak Misra had come together to protest the functioning of the apex court. While Justice Gogoi acknowledged that the move was prompted by issues surrounding the death of judge Loya, Justice Chelameswar elaborated, saying, “We tried to persuade the CJI that some things are not in order and he needs to take remedial measures. Unfortunately, our efforts failed. We all believe that the SC must maintain its equanimity. Democracy will not survive without a free judiciary.”

The bench of Justices Mishra, B.R. Gavai and Krishna Murari, however, criticised that move made by the four senior judges in its order in the Bhushan contempt matter.

The bench referred to the ‘Restatement of Values of Judicial Life’, adopted in the Chief Justices’ Conference at New Delhi in September 1992 in its order. This statement had spelt out that, “A Judge shall not enter into a public debate or express his views in public on political matters or on matters that are pending or are likely to arise for judicial determination.”

Noted lawyer Prashant Bhushan with his advocate Rajeev Dhawan (behind) at the latter’s residence in New Delhi, Monday, August 31, 2020. Photo: PTI

Also, it had stated that, “A judge is expected to let his judgment speak for themselves. He shall not give interview to the media.”

The bench wrote in its judgment that Bhushan had tried to justify his averments on the basis of the press conference of January 12, 2018, by the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. It added, “Concept of equality before law, what is permissible not as to what is impermissible. It is settled that negative equality cannot be claimed as there is no concept of negative equality.”

“Truth can be the defence to the Judges also, but they are bound by their judicial norms, ethics, and code of conduct. Similarly, the code of conduct for advocates is equally applicable to the lawyers also, being part of the system.”

In fact, Justice Chelameswar was asked by the journalist Karan Thapar in a public forum in April 2018 – which he was still a judge of the Supreme Court – about the propriety of the judges’ press conference in the light of the 1992 values and this is what he had answered, as reported by The Wire at the time:

“Chelameswar’s reply was precise and to the point. Please read the guideline again, he said, it refers to judgments, and indeed judges should not say anything about them beyond what they have already written down. He reminded Thapar of his refusal – in this very interview – to say anything more about the Supreme Court’s judgment on the National Judicial Appointments Commission in which he had been the lone dissenting judge. But the bar on interviews could not possibly apply to a judge’s views on wider issues of relevance to the judiciary, he said. “I go somewhere, press would be there, they report something and if I interact with them, is it prohibited? Similarly, [the four judges] were talking about administrative problems. We were not breaching any of the time-honoured principles that we should not address the press,” he said.”

‘Registry also protected by contempt law’

The bench further ruled that “a lawyer is under obligation to do nothing that shall detract from the dignity of the Court. Contempt jurisdiction is for the purpose of upholding honour or dignity of the court…the contempt jurisdiction is not only to protect the reputation of the Judge concerned so that he can administer justice fearlessly and fairly, but also to protect ‘the fair name of the judiciary’.”

Also read: Supreme Court Fines Prashant Bhushan Re 1 in Contempt of Court Case

Stating that “the protection in a manner of speaking, extends even to the registry in the performance of its task,” it added that “false and unfair allegations which seek to impede the working of the registry and thus the administration of justice, made with oblique motives cannot be tolerated.”

While sentencing Bhushan, the bench also wrote that it was “not inclined to proceed further in the contempt jurisdiction except to caution the contemnor that this should be the first and the last time of such a misadventure.” It also remarked that the privilege of being an Advocate-on-Record under the rules “has clearly been abused by the contemnor” and that the conduct was not becoming of an advocate.

The court also stated that “the tweet has been made by the lawyer who has the standing of 35 years and who is involved in several public interest litigations. However, merely because a lawyer is involved in the filing of the public interest for the public good it does not arm him to harm the very system of which he is a part.”

UP Govt Asks for Data on Brahmins With Gun Licenses Only to Retract Request Later

A BJP MLA from Sultanpur asked if the state government has security plans for Brahmins and whether the community would get weapon licences on priority.

Mumbai: In an unusual move, the Uttar Pradesh government sent a letter to all district magistrates seeking details on the number of Brahmins who have applied and received arms licenses in the state. According to the Indian Express report, this information was shared in response to a query by BJP MLA Devmani Dwivedi on the “killing” of Brahmins, their insecurity and gun ownership data.

While an initial letter was sent out to all DMs, a senior official has informed the Indian Express that the government later backtracked. “The details are no longer being pursued,” the official told the Express. Prakash Chandra Agarwal, under secretary, state home department, sent out a letter on August 18 and according to the news report had sought details from the districts by August 21.

Although the government has claimed to have backtracked, the Express report states that at least one district has sent the data the letter had asked for.

Dwivedi, a BJP MLA from Lambhua in Sultanpur had sent a note on August 16 to UP Vidhan Sabha principal secretary Pradeep Dubey, raising questions as per assembly rules and procedures.

Also read: Alienated Brahmins May Alter BJP’s Electoral Prospects in Uttar Pradesh

In his letter, Dwivedi has sought specific information on how many Brahmins in the state were killed in the last three years; how many accused had been arrested and whether they had been convicted. He further inquired what the government’s plans for providing security to Brahmins are, whether the government provides arms licenses to Brahmins on priority basis, how many Brahmins applied for arms licenses and how many of them have been issued licenses.

However, in response to Indian Express’s queries, Dwivedi said, “I have no information about it and I am out of touch.”

This is not a standalone incident. Over the past few months, several opposition leaders have been critical of the state government’s approach towards the Brahmin community in the state. The issue has gained political momentum after the July 10 gunning down of gangster Vikas Dubey in Kanpur last month. Dubey and his five associates, who were killed in the police firing, were all Brahmins.

Watch | India’s Q1 GDP Shrinks a Record 23.9%, Sharpest Fall in 40 Years

India’s economy contracted by a whopping 23.9% in the first quarter of the 2021 financial year, in what is the latest sign of the toll that the COVID-19 lockdown has taken on economic activity.

According to data released by the statistics ministry on Monday evening, real GDP for the April-June 2021 quarter fell by 23.9% in comparison to the same quarter a year ago. By most estimates, this is the first time that the Indian economy has seen a contraction in at least four decades and is the first GDP decline since the country began publishing quarterly growth figures in 1996. India went into a full lockdown towards the end of March 2020, with the supply of all non-essential goods and services screeching to a near halt for most of April 2020 and May 2020.

Estimates put out by Bloomberg had predicted GDP for Q1 to slump by 19.2%, although other economists had pegged the fall slightly higher. In the January-March quarter of this year, the economy had grown by 3.1% on a year-on-year – the lowest rate in over 17 years – and by 5.2% in the June quarter of 2019-20.

India, China in Another Stand-Off in Eastern Ladakh as PLA Intrudes Into Pangong Tso Southern Bank

The Indian Army issued a statement on Monday morning that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army “carried out provocative military movements to change the status quo” on the night of August 29-30.

New Delhi: Two-and-a-half months after the violent clash at Galwan Valley, India and China are facing off at a new area on the border, after Chinese troops intruded into the southern bank of Pangong Tso on Saturday night.

“Indian troops pre-empted this PLA activity on the southern Bank of Pangong Tso Lake, undertook measures to strengthen our positions and thwart Chinese intentions to unilaterally change facts on ground,” said the statement.

Though the statement did not say so, the Indian Army is believed to have rushed some 800 soldiers to Chushul, just south of the lake.

Thakung, marked with a star, is the site of the latest standoff between Indian and Chinese soldiers along the Line of Actual Control near Pangong Tso in Ladakh. Points in blue are on the Indian side of the LAC, points in red on the Chinese side. Map: Adapted from an official Indian map by The Wire/Google Maps

The “provocative actions” were in violation of the “previous consensus arrived at during military and diplomatic engagements during the ongoing standoff in Eastern Ladakh”, the official release stated tersely, providing no further details. A brigade commander level flag meeting is in progress at Chushul to resolve the issues, the Indian Army said.

“The Indian Army is committed to maintaining peace and tranquility through dialogue, but is also equally determined to protect its territorial integrity,” it added.

The initial Chinese response had been muted, but then the statement from the PLA made it crystal clear that there was no intention to give ground.

“Indian troops have violated the consensus reached at the multi-level talks between India and China and again crossed the line of actual control at the border on Monday and purposely launched provocations,” said Senior Colonel Zhang Shuili of the PLA Western Theater Command on Monday evening.

Asserting that it was “counterproductive and treacherous”, the Chinese military spokesperson said that India’s actions “seriously violates China’s territorial sovereignty” and “undermines peace and stability in the border area”.

Mirroring the Indian statement, China accused Indian troops of having crossed the LAC.

“China strongly opposes the acts and urges India to immediately withdraw the troops that have illegally crossed the LAC,” he said.

The Chinese statement was different from the India in one important aspect – the timing of the incident.

While the Indian army said that Chinese soldiers had attempted to transgress on the night of August 29-30, the PLA officer stated India had crossed the LAC on August 31. It is not clear if the two sides are talking of the same incident, or two different events.

Earlier in the day in Beijing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson denied that the China had moved beyond its section of the LAC. “China’s border guards have always strictly abided by the actual line of control and have never crossed the line. The border forces of the two countries have been maintaining communication on the issue of the present,” said spokesperson Zhao Lijian.

As per Indian government sources quoted by PTI, a “sizeable” number of Chinese troops were moving towards the southern bank in an attempt to occupy the area. Sources added that there had been “no physical skirmishes”. While the Chinese were sent back to an extent, they continue to be in the vicinity.

Interestingly, Thakung, which lies firmly on the Indian side of the LAC, is within the China’s 1960 claim line. This suggests the PLA may be working to a plan on the south bank of Pangong Tso of pushing the LAC westward. On the north bank, however, the PLA has moved beyond even its traditional claim line.

China’s 1960 claim line in Ladakh is marked in yellow, the LAC at Pangong Tso in in pink. As can be seen, Thakung, the site of the latest standoff, is inside the LAC but within the 1960 Chinese claim line. Map: The Wire

Also read: A Few Questions on China That Narendra Modi Cannot Evade

The Indian Army and Chinese troops have been involved in multiple clashes since early May in eastern Ladakh, after Indian soldiers detected Chinese intrusion far beyond the usual patrolling points on the Line of Actual Control.

The most serious clash took place on June 15 at Galwan Valley, when a violent hand-to-hand fight led to the death of 20 Indian soldiers. China has admitted casualties on their side, but not revealed any numbers. These were the first military casualties along the India-China border in four decades.

Consequently, there have been high-level phone calls at the foreign minister and national security advisor level, which led to multiple rounds of military and diplomatic talks for disengagement of troops along the border.

So far, there has been five rounds of talks between military commanders and four rounds of Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on India-China Border Affairs.

While Chinese troops have gone back in Galwan, but the disengagement process has been largely stalled due to China refusing to go back to their previous positions on the ‘fingers’ on the Pangong Tso lake area, Depsang and other areas.

During the current stand-off, the first clash was recorded at Galwan valley on night of May 5-6.

The next stand-off took place at the north bank of Pangong Tso lake on May 10-11, near Finger 4, one of the mountainous spurs that jut out into the lake.

China had constructed a metalled road upto ‘Finger 4’ and set up defensive positions. Indian troops used to earlier regularly patrol till ‘finger 8’, but are now limited to ‘finger 4’ due to the new Chinese intrusion into the area.

India asserts that the Line of Actual Control passes through ‘Finger 8’, while China’s claim line is based at ‘Finger 2’.

While the earlier stand-offs had been on the northern bank along the ‘Fingers’, this is the first time during the current crisis that the southern bank has also publicly become an area of dispute.

The Indian Express had reported in June that China was “massing troops” on the southern bank of the lake, with a reciprocal response from the Indian side.

China, the LAC, and the Possibilities of Diplomacy

As far as China is concerned, it has deftly achieved its political objectives by unilaterally pushing LAC westwards, annexing several hundred kilometres of territory. At this juncture, will diplomacy work?

The Chinese attempt to intrude across LAC by stealth on the south bank of Pangong lake over the weekend was extremely provocative but was thwarted by the alertness of troops on heightened vigil following the PLA’s wholesale aggression in East Ladakh.

China has denied its troops violated LAC and Brigade Commander-level talks were held to defuse tensions. Clearly the PLA will not abandon its efforts to encroach into Indian territory. Wish our troops had reacted in May in the way they have acted now!

Still, the current debate in strategic circles is whether dialogue on disengagement and de-escalation has failed or if it can still be salvaged. Once the call is made, hard options like use of force and economic decoupling could come into play. Chief of Defence Staff General Bipin Rawat, four months after transgressions were declared intrusions became the first government official and senior most military commander to assert that if dialogue does not work, military force could be employed to vacate aggression.

Almost immediately after his statement, Minister for External Affairs, S. Jaishankar, chipped in to say that diplomacy could potentially resolve the border crisis provided China followed the rule book.

Also read: Disengagement: China Cites ‘Progress’, India Reminds Need for Mutually Agreed Upon Actions

He described the situation ‘most serious after 1962 with casualties occurring after 45 years with unprecedented deployment of troops on the border’.

He recalled that Depsang (2013), Chumar (2014) and Doklam (2017) were all resolved through diplomacy but for this it was essential that China honours the border protocols and agreements. He did not mention Wangdung, the first major intrusion by PLA in 1986 across McMahon Line which was also resolved through diplomacy laced with Indian coercion but took nine years.

The McMahon Line. Photo: File

While not giving up on negotiations, India has introduced an element of coercion but the threat of use of force as last resort has lost its sting and is past its use-by date as in such situations, speed of reaction is of essence as Wangdung demonstrated.

For the time being, two months before winter sets in across the frozen desert, by accident or design, both India and China are pursuing a common public policy on border tensions.

Also read: 5 Rounds of Military Talks Later, Army Prepares for Long Winter Deployment at Ladakh

New Delhi has shifted the focus from intrusions on LAC to the Galwan clash. This has allowed it to remain in denial about Chinese encroachment in sync with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s pivotal statement of June 19 to the all-party meeting virtually giving China a clean chit. The inadvertent admission by the MoD on its website detailing the profile on intrusions was suddenly removed.

From the ramparts of the Red Fort on August 15, Modi misinformed the people about the ground reality along the LAC and loss of territory to China. Not only did the government mishandle the initial response to intrusions, it also perpetuated the intelligence and operational lapses, believe it or not, by portraying disaster as success by separating intrusions from the Galwan clash. Incidentally, on the August 15 gallantry awards list, not a single person involved in the Galwan clash or in other face-offs in east Ladakh apparently made it.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi inspects the Guard of Honour during the 74th Independence Day celebrations, at Red Fort in New Delhi, August 15 2020. Photo: PTI

China’s envoy in New Delhi, Sun Weidong, sings to India’s tune, lyrics provided by Modi in June which were translated widely in Mandarin. Last week, Sun described the Galwan clash as an ‘unfortunate incident’ and ‘a brief moment from the perspective of history’. In the past, Chinese leaders have described relations with India as 99% perfect except the 1% bad, referring to the 1962 war.

Sun has continued couching bilateral relations in favourable terms and while commending dialogue cautioned it be handled properly. PLA Senior Colonel Wu Qian, spokesperson for MoD was prescriptive, in asking India to be cognisant of the ‘big picture’ and ‘put border dispute in appropriate position’’ and ‘take concrete steps to bring bilateral relations back to the right track’.

As far as China is concerned, it has deftly achieved its political objectives by unilaterally pushing LAC westwards, annexing several hundred kilometres of territory from Depsang to Galwan and imposing a lockdown on Indian forces on LAC.

India misread Chinese intentions even after witnessing multiple intrusions in the first week of May.

Also read: It Is Time to Accept How Badly India Misread Chinese Intentions in 1962 – and 2020

These were far removed from single intrusions of the past with multiple ones stretching from Ladakh to Sikkim. The Army should have occupied Galwan heights and carried out counter intrusions on the Chinese side of LAC to secure equity for bargaining during negotiations.

Just why no offensive action was taken will come out from the enquiry into multiple failures which the government at present is attempting to whitewash so that the muscular prowess of Modi government is not tarnished.

The comments of Gen. Rawat about military option being on the table days after President Ram Nath Kovind and Minister of Defence, Rajnath Singh, had said on eve of Independence Day that India is capable of giving befitting reply in case of military aggression were not surprising. Modi, of course, has stuck to his Galwan theme: ‘We have shown what we can do in Ladakh’.

Domestic political rhetoric is unlikely to impress Chinese who have studied with impeccable scrutiny Indian copybook of the past even as New Delhi failed to analyse Chinese strategy and tactics. Chinese leaders understand that while Indian military might have the capability to repeat Nathula (1967) it will not risk escalation even to a limited conflict at a time when it is deeply mired in COVID-19 pandemic and a debilitating economic recession.

Jaishankar in his new book, The India Way: Strategies for an Uncertain World to be released on September 4, has sought realism on India’s China policy and said the border and future of ties with China cannot be separated. The book was written before the current stand-off on LAC but but he is banking on diplomacy to resolve the existing stalemate provided the Chinese are willing to cooperate by adhering to agreements and border protocols.

Jaishankar is also expected to call upon Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, the External Affairs Ministry said in a statement on Saturday. Photo: PTI

Union Minister of External Affairs S. Jaishankar. Photo: PTI

He is also right that you may resolve the ongoing crisis like the past ones, but these could recur in the future at other places. In short, he is aiming at ending the luxury the Chinese enjoy of coercive diplomacy along an undefined LAC. While iron brother Pakistan has continued cross border terrorism for the last 70 years, China has now unleashed a new proxy war of land grab. It knows that India does not have the military strength to combat ‘a coupled-conflict’ given the comprehensive national power asymmetry with China and memory of 1962.

So while Sun will continue to blame India for Galwan and our Ambassador in Beijing Vikram Misri plead before Chinese officials to restore status quo on the border, 30,000 additional Indian troops will spend a harsh winter along LAC in conditions somewhat akin to Siachen at huge human cost. It is little comfort to them that they are better acclimatised at such torturous heights than the PLA which enjoys superior interior lines of communications and logistics but with less vigorous terrain familiarisation.

The ball is in Jaishankar’s court.

He is expected to meet Chinese counterpart Wang Yi in Moscow around September 10 for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Foreign Ministers conclave. Wang has been hyperactive in organising a south Asian QUAD – Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh – ostensibly on COVID-19 in India’s heartland and intermittently raised the ante on J&K in cahoots with Pakistan in New York but with little joy.

S. Jaishankar and Wang Yi. Photos: Twitter/@DrSjaishankar and Reuters

Jaishankar must persuade Wang into fulfilling commitments on restoring peace and tranquillity on the border. This should start an institutionalised dialogue process between the two for incremental progress, first in defusing and then defining the LAC, the former preferably before winter sets in.

For Jaishankar the challenge and genius lie in picking up the threads in India’s new map of J&K last year following which he said in Beijing that it does not materially change the border with China. To which Beijing retorted that status quo was unilaterally altered on map.

Jaishankar will have to make amends for Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s rhetoric in Parliament on Aksai Chin like Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh had to, in Beijing in 1999, when it came to his words on the China ‘threat’ following India’s nuclear tests.

We must remember, the Jaishankar way is diplomacy.

General Ashok K. Mehta was part of the monitoring team of Defence Planning Staff in MOD of the year long PLA intrusion at Sumdorong chu in 1987/88.

J&K: Slow Internet Is Impeding Issuance of Domicile Certificates

Apart from the 2G speeds, the process is also being slowed down by overburdened officials who are juggling many duties, insiders say.

Srinagar: While the government is putting pressure on the revenue department to verify applications for domicile certificates in Jammu & Kashmir quickly, insiders say slow 2G internet service speeds and overburdened revenue officers make the process difficult.

The J&K government last week made it mandatory for its officers to issue domicile certificates to permanent resident certificate (PRC) holders and migrants in just five days, against the earlier deadline of 15 days.

A Kashmir Administrative Officer (KAS) officer posted in south Kashmir told The Wire that issuing a domicile certificate within five days is a “Herculean task”.

“The government has taken us for a ride. We [KAS officers] are already burdened with many duties. Apart from resolving public issues, holding meetings, doing COVID-19 assignments, providing different certificates to the people and maintaining law and order in our jurisdictions, now we have also been assigned the additional task of issuing domicile certificates,” he said adding, “We are human beings, not machines.”

The domicile law entitles PRC holders and non-permanent residents who have residency proof of at least 15 years in J&K to get domicile certificates.

The senior KAS officer termed the lack of high-speed internet services a major hurdle for issuing timely domicile certificates. “Relying on 2G internet service to scrutinise the information of each person, get one time passwords (OTP) and upload e-signatures takes hours. In these circumstances, how is it possible to issue domicile certificates within a few days?” he asked.

Announcing the move on Twitter, the Department of Information and Public Relations said on August 25, “Govt fixes a time limit of 5 working days for issuing a domicile certificate to PRC holders and migrants. Reduces from earlier 15 days. Process made extremely simple.”

The announcement came a day after J&K Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha directed the officers concerned to speed up the process of issuance and delivery of domicile certificates in a hassle-free way, as he appreciated the enthusiasm shown by the applicants.

“All pending applicants be provided domicile certificates within 15 days, and deadline of September 10 is being set, after which no long pendency shall be excused and action against the responsible, underperforming officers shall be taken,” Sinha had said, chairing a meeting here to review ongoing development activities in Jammu district.

In May, the government gave officers just seven days to process the verification of certain classes of domicile applications, failing which a penalty of Rs 50,000 would be imposed.

Also Read: J&K’s Controversial New Domicile Law Faces a Legal Challenge

Vacant posts, overburdened officers

According to sources, hundreds of online domicile forms have not been processed due to many posts of revenue officers lying vacant in various districts. A source inside the revenue department said there are 36 tehsils in J&K without revenue officers and that KAS officers have been tasked with additional charges.

The revenue officers said that they are overburdened and are unable to handle the affairs in multiple tehsils, which not only hamper the official work but cause huge inconvenience to people. Many revenue officers have also delegated the responsibility of scrutinising the domicile applications to their assistants, which is a clear violation of rules.

“The revenue officials are experienced in their fields but the additional charge is a burden on them. It becomes difficult for an official to run two offices simultaneously,” the source said. While the government wants to make these officials accountable, the reality is that they cannot do justice to their duties if they are overburdened, the sources added.

“In view of the COVID-19 pandemic, people are preferring the online mode. They do not want to wait in long queues in government offices to submit the documents required to obtain domicile certificates. But due to the lack of 4G internet services, we have suggested that people apply through the offline mode,” said another south Kashmir based revenue officer, who claimed that no migrant or non-local has yet applied for a domicile certificate in his jurisdiction.

Till August 5, 2019, Article 370 and Article 35A secured certain privileges for local residents. This included complete reservation in local government jobs for permanent residents. On that day, along with the dilution of these Articles, the BJP-led Central government also scrapped the local special citizenship law.

The new domicile law allows outsiders to apply for local jobs if they fulfil certain conditions. From May to the end of June, 25,000 people were granted domicile certificates. By the end of July, 3.7 lakh domicile certificates were granted, of which 2.9 lakh were in Jammu division and 79,300 in Kashmir.

File photo of a protest against issuing domicile certificates to West Pakistani refugees in Srinagar on Thursday. Photo: PTI/S. Irfan

On June 26 this year, the J&K administration issued recruitment notice for over 8,500 posts in Class-IV category. The notification reads that the candidate should be a domicile certificate holder.

According to a local news gathering agency, until August 29, more than 7.27 lakh people registered as candidates for the Jammu and Kashmir Service Selection Board. Since the online application commenced on July 10, more than 4.04 lakh candidates used this method to apply. The Class IV application submission process was closed at 12 AM on August 29.

Several political parties in J&K have already demanded the rollback of the domicile rules, saying the BJP-led Central government is “sneakily” speeding up new ordinances to redesign the region’s demography amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

According to Census 2011, 68.3% of Jammu & Kashmir’s population is Muslim, while Hindus constitute nearly 30% and Sikhs nearly 2%.

Also Read: Throughout History, Demographic Changes to J&K Have Only Deepened Conflict

Officer suspended for ‘laziness’

The government on Sunday suspended a KAS officer for ‘laziness’ in issuing domicile certificates in J&K.

A local news agency reported that the tehsildar of Jammu (Khas) has been suspended and attached in the office of divisional commissioner (Jammu).

The suspension was allegedly for dereliction of duties involving disobedience and ‘poor performance’ in the issuance of the domicile certificates to the applicants, causing ‘huge suffering and inconvenience’ to the general public.

The deputy commissioner (Jammu) is now holding an inquiry into the officer’s conduct under the rules and will furnish a report accordingly to the government within a period of 15 days.

Meanwhile, the principal secretary of the Revenue Department, Pawan Kotwal, confirmed to The Wire that in 36 Tehsils of J&K, posts of revenue officers are vacant. The officer quickly added that the General Administration Department (GAD) has been notified and soon, these posts will be filled to mitigate the problems.

“I can understand that revenue officers are overburdened while working in multiple tehsil offices and that they are facing difficulties while issuing domicile certificates within the stipulated time. But let us hope the GAD fills these vacant posts very soon,” said Kotwal.

Irfan Amin Malik is a journalist based in Jammu and Kashmir and he tweets @irfanaminmalik.

Vijay Mallya Contempt Case: Supreme Court Rejects Plea To Review 2017 Decision

The fugitive businessman was held guilty of contempt for transferring $40 million to his children in violation of various judicial orders.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea of fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya seeking review of its 2017 order holding him guilty of contempt of court for transferring $40 million to his children.

A bench comprising Justices U.U. Lalit and Ashok Bhushan said, “We do not find any merits. Review petition dismissed.”

The apex court had reserved its verdict on the review plea on August 27, 2020, after hearing arguments from both sides.

Mallya had filed the petition seeking review of the apex court’s May 9, 2017 order by which he was held guilty of contempt of court for transferring $40 million to his children in violation of the order.

The fugitive businessman, who is an accused in a bank loan default case of over Rs 9,000 crore involving his defunct Kingfisher Airlines, is presently in the UK.

The apex court’s 2017 order had come on a plea by a consortium of banks led by the State Bank of India (SBI), which had said that Mallya had allegedly transferred $40 million received from British firm Diageo to his children in “flagrant violation” of various judicial orders.

(PTI)

Pranab Mukherjee, Last of the Grand Bengali Politicians of India

Mukherjee was considered by many – as well as by himself – as ideal prime ministerial material. He never got the top job, but his role as president disappointed many for the way he served as rubber-stamp for controversial decisions.

New Delhi: On August 31, Pranab Mukherjee, former president of India, former finance and external affairs minister and winner of India’s highest civilian honour, the Bharat Ratna, breathed his last. He was 84 years old.

Mukherjee had tested COVID-19 positive earlier this month and had had to undergo a brain surgery to remove a clot at the Army’s Research and Referral Hospital in New Delhi. He passed away after 21 days of hospitalisation, at around afternoon on Monday.

Mukherjee was India’s 13th president (July 2012 to July 2017) and by the time he took up the position, he had already had a long public life by dint of being a senior Congressman who held a number of important cabinet positions in four governments spanning from the early 1970s till the end-2000s.

Most importantly, Mukherjee, born in West Bengal’s Birbhum district, was the last prominent Bengali face in the political-scape of New Delhi. He became the first president of India from Bengal.

Also read: Wave of Peaceful Protests Will Help Deepen India’s Democratic Roots: Pranab Mukherjee

Born on December 11, 1935, to Rajalakhsmi Mukherjee and Kamada Kinkar Mukherjee, a former member of the West Bengal Legislative Council, Pranab da, as he was popularly known among his colleagues and in media circles, began his working life as an upper division clerk in the Post and Telegraph Office in Kolkata before taking up the job of a political science lecturer at the city’s Vidya Sagar College in 1963. Mukherjee was a postgraduate in political science from Calcutta University and later acquired a law degree too.

Before joining the Indian National Congress (INC) in 1969, he was involved in the successful election of V.K. Krishna Menon as an independent from Bengal’s Midnapore Lok Sabha constituency. He became a founding member of Bengal Congress and successfully won a Rajya Sabha seat in July 1969 as a Bengal Congress member. Thereafter, at Indira Gandhi’s behest, he moved to the INC and since then, there was no looking back.

He went on to become one of the few Gandhi loyalists who managed to remain an MP and close to the power corridors of Delhi through the Upper House route for five consecutive terms.

1974 :: Transport Minister , Pranab Mukherjee Addressing Workers of Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) pic.twitter.com/HGpNWeH2Ug

— indianhistorypics (@IndiaHistorypic) August 31, 2020

Mukherjee, in his long political career, had barely fought an election and therefore was never counted as a mass leader. In 2004, he contested the Lok Sabha elections for the first time, from Jangipur, and was successful. He won the seat again in 2009.

Considered one from the close coterie around Indira Gandhi, Mukherjee became a Union minister in 1973. He went on to stand by her side during the controversial Emergency, when democratic rights were suspended from 1975 to 1977. He was indicted for his controversial role during that period by the Shah Commission set up by the Morarji Desai-led Janata government, though he succeeded in emerging from the matter unscathed as the Commission was disbanded by Indira Gandhi once she returned to power in 1980.

A soft speaking, pipe smoking, ambitious politician who maintained close relations with ‘7 RCR’, the prime minister’s residence, Mukherjee went on to become finance minister in the second Indira Gandhi government. It was during his tenure that Manmohan Singh was appointed governor of the Reserve Bank of India. That India could return the first IMF loan during his tenure is counted as one of his career feats.

Pranab Mukherjee and Dr Manmohan Singh. Photo: File

Mukherjee, however, lost his prominence in the party after the assassination of Indira Gandhi in 1984, which led to the rise of her son Rajiv Gandhi to the top post. Along came a new Congress power brigade, young and enthusiastic, eager to please a young prime minister hoping to take India on the technology highway.

The grapevine had it that Mukherjee had been keen to succeed Indira Gandhi, something he always denied, but the rumours might have played a part in Rajiv Gandhis’ decision to pack him off to West Bengal as head of the state Pradesh Congress Committee. A peeved Mukherjee left the Congress to start the Rashtriya Samajwadi Congress in his home state. Though the party fought the assembly polls in 1987, it met with a drubbing.

Following Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination in 1991, Mukherjee worked his way back to the Congress in Delhi under P.V. Narashima Rao. After a stint in the Planning Commission as deputy chairman (1991), he returned to the cabinet in 1995 and served as external affairs minister for the first time.

Mukherjee is considered to be a factor behind bringing Sonia Gandhi to politics in 1998 and served as the All India Congress Committee general secretary when she became party president that year. Between 2000 and 2010, he continued to also be the president of the Congress unit in Bengal. He was the Congress’s leader in the Lok Sabha in 2004.

Sonia Gandhi and Pranab Mukherjee. Photo: Reuters

In a dramatic move, when Sonia Gandhi, setting aside all expectations, refused to sit on the prime minister’s chair after the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) win in 2004, many in media and party circles had speculated that Mukherjee would be keen to take it up. Instead, she pinned her hopes on Manmohan Singh.

Though Mukherjee virtually became the second in command in the two successive Singh governments, with high profile portfolios like external affairs, defence and finance, his supposed hopes for the prime ministerial post were dashed. Though in 2007, his name did do the rounds as a Congress nominee for the presidential elections that year, he was formally chosen as the party’s candidate in 2012.

During his term at the Rashtrapati Bhavan, Mukherjee had a cordial relationship with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. So much so that his government awarded him the Bharat Ratna in 2019.

As president, Mukherjee went along with the controversial imposition of president’s rule in Arunachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, decisions which the courts reversed because they were plainly untenable. He was also criticised for allowing the Modi government to repeatedly re-promulgate its eventually withdrawn land acquisition ordinance.

Pranab Mukherjee with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Photo: pranabmukherjee.nic.in

In journalist Sonia Singh’s book Defining India Through their Eyes, Mukherjee was asked about the political messaging behind the Modi government’s move. He had said, “I feel this is a larger recognition, not a recognition of an individual.”

“In fact, in this case, I entirely agree with Rahul Gandhi. I felt this was one of the best tweets that ever came complimenting me, when he tweeted shortly after the announcement— “Congratulations to Pranab Da on being awarded the Bharat Ratna. The Congress takes great pride in the fact that the immense contribution to public service and nation building of one of our own, has been recognized and honoured.”

“This is the recognition of one of our man’s contribution,” Pranab Mukherjee says. ‘That means a recognition of a Congressman’s contribution. I take it in that way.’

The BJP and its ideological fount, the RSS, continued to cultivate Mukherjee even after his retirement as the president, for his sheer appeal to his community as a chip-off-the-old-block of the tall Bengali bhadralok and influencer nationally. In 2018, the veteran former Congressman was invited to the RSS’s founding day at Nagpur.

Former president Pranab Mukherjee with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat at the Sangh’s headquarters in Nagpur. Credit: PTI

Mukherjee, playing ball, called the Hindutva outfit’s founder K.B. Hedgewar “a great son of Mother India”. After his speech from the RSS platform to its cadres, and one by the RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat, the RSS spokesman said that their speeches complemented each other.

At the meeting, held clearly to pander to the Hindu Bengali sentiments to augment the scope of the BJP to further strengthen itself in West Bengal, the family of Subhash Chandra Bose was also invited as special guests.

Also read: Pranab Mukherjee’s Visit to Nagpur a Win-Win for RSS

In the 2019 general elections, the bonhomie between Mukherjee and the RSS-BJP did help the BJP corner votes from Bengali Hindu dominated areas in several states for Modi’s re-election.

Today, on his passing, it can safely be said that the last of the stalwarts from Bengal to have commanded power in Delhi has departed.