September 2020 Archives

Watch | ‘I’m Optimistic About Fall in Active Cases, but It’s Clear Lockdown Was a Terrible Mistake’

In an interview, India’s top epidemiologist Jayaprakash Muliyil sharply criticised the nationwide lockdown and said he did not accept the government’s claim that it resulted in fewer cases and fewer deaths.

In an interview that will cheer the government and give reassurance to the Indian people, an expert considered the country’s top epidemiologist by his peers has said the fact that India’s daily tally of COVID-19 cases has been declining for 11 days is “quite exciting, it means well and I am optimistic”. Prof. Jayaprakash Muliyil, the former Principal, Christian Medical College, Vellore and the Chairman of Scientific Advisory Committee of the National Institute of Epidemiology, did, however, add two notes of caution. He said he would like “to wait a few more days to finally make up my mind”. He also pointed out that the data largely reports what’s happening in India’s cities and rural areas are not adequately reflected.

However, what will make the government bristle is the strong and unequivocal words with which Prof. Muliyil criticised the nationwide lockdown imposed on the country at the end of March, which lasted for almost 60 days. He said, “What we did wrong was to impose a nationwide lockdown. It was not called for.”

He said the lockdown “unnecessarily tortured the economy and cost people their livelihood”. When told the government and the prime minister in particular have claimed the lockdown ensured the number of cases was small and the number of deaths limited, Prof. Muliyil unabashedly made clear that he disagrees with the government. He said the cases and deaths would have been limited without a lockdown. It was not necessary, he insisted.

In a 35-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Prof. Muliyil said he was not worried that the heavy reliance on rapid antigen testing, where up to 50% tests can show a false negative, raises doubts about whether the numbers are actually falling in reality or because of faulty and poor testing. He said, “The ones you miss out on are not likely to be infectious.”

He added that RT-PCR tests have a tendency to show false positives. He said the reliance on antigen testing did not worry him.

Speaking about the op-ed in The Hindu’s September 29 edition by T. Jacob John and M.S. Seshadri which claims India peaked in the middle of September and is now slowly but steadily declining, Prof. Muliyil said this was probably true of urban India but he was not at all sure if it was true of the situation in rural India.

Watch: ‘It’s Expected That Ultimately, Half of India Will Get COVID-19’

Asked by The Wire if there was some discordance between the fact the seven-day rolling average of daily cases is declining whilst the seven-day average of daily deaths has increased and, as a result, deaths per million increased in September alone by 42% from 50 per million to 71 per million, Prof. Muliyil said, “New cases and deaths are not correlated in time, they are sequential.” He said in a week or two, the deaths would also start coming down.

Speaking specifically about the situation in Kerala, where cases are increasing by over 7,000 a day, the positivity rate has crossed 13% and the government is said to be considering another lockdown, Prof. Muliyil said he had told the authorities in the state that “it’s possible the virus may return”. He said, “I told them it would not be a failure on your part. It’s in the nature of the virus”. He praised the Kerala government for the good job it has done in handling cases and ensuring the state has the lowest Covid death toll in south India. However, he warned that another lockdown would be a mistake.

Prof. Muliyil told The Wire that there are two reasons that can explain the differences between the two serological surveys conducted by the Indian Council of Medical Research in terms of how many undetected cases there are likely to be for every confirmed case. He said the first survey clearly suffered from sampling errors. He said it lacked precision because it was done when the frequency of the disease was less than 1%. The second survey, which was done much later, when the frequency was higher, would reflect better precision. Secondly, Prof. Muliyil said at the time of the first survey testing had not reached village level. Data from there was not available. At the time of the second survey the outreach was much better.

Prof. Muliyil said one can estimate the number of undetected cases in India by extrapolating from the second ICMR serological survey. The survey has said that for every known case there are perhaps something between 26 and 32 undetected cases. On that basis if India has 6 million confirmed cases then one can estimate that the number of undetected cases would be between 156 million and 192 million. As he put it: “The actual number of cases would be very large … this is like an iceberg, you only see the top. The bottom is hidden from view.”

Speaking about claims made the article in The Hindu, that in six month’s time 70% of the country’s population could be infected and herd immunity levels reached, Prof. Muliyil pointed out that herd immunity depends on the density of the population and that differs from place to place. In villages, the density is very low, in cities its very high. He said in considering herd immunity it’s a mistake to take India as a whole. Instead, the country should be considered in terms of specific regions or even individual cities and rural areas.

Prof. Muliyil told The Wire that the time has come to rethink the country’s strategy of handling the Covid problem. He said the old strategy has a tendency to stigmatise the disease and that must change and that we should now focus on protecting the elderly and those with co-morbidities, whilst telling everyone else to wear masks and maintain social distancing and get back to their lives. He said India’s comparatively low mortality rate supports and corroborates this approach.

However, Prof. Muliyil said some restrictions would be necessary over Dussehra and Diwali largely because many Indian people do not exercise discipline and self-control.

Asked how he would assess the government’s strategy to tackle the Covid crisis over the last six months, Prof. Muliyil praised the government for its management of cases and for the way it has handled testing. He said: “India is a tough country to handle because people vary in terms of information, knowledge, capacity and ability”. However, he said the fairly widespread variability between states in terms of their Covid response is “worrying”.

It was in this context that Prof. Muliyil strongly and sharply criticised the nationwide lockdown. He said he did not accept the government’s claim that the lockdown resulted in fewer cases and fewer deaths. That, he said, would anyway have been the case.

Finally, in a very carefully nuanced answer, Prof. Muliyil said when the head of the ICMR, Dr. Balram Bhargava, said to the British paper The Financial Times that India has “shown the world how to fight emerging diseases” he would like to believe that Dr. Bhargava was referring to doctors, nurses, healthcare staff and hospitals. He very pointedly did not mention the lockdown, which the government has frequently said is the centre point of its strategy. Instead he added that the Indian people are “resilient” and “have suffered in silence and took it all”. He concluded his answer by saying “anywhere else there would have been violence.”

The above is a paraphrased precis of Prof. Jayaprakash Muliyil’s interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire. Please see the full interview for a proper appreciation of Prof. Muliyil’s arguments and a better understanding of his position.

‘Serious Men’ is a Tale of Upper Caste Privilege and One Man’s Subversion

The film retains a darkly comic tone, even though the final outcome looks rushed and too neat.

Ayyan Mani (Nawazuddin Siddiqui), a clerk at a premier research institute, has the ringside view of an elite Indian circus. Its chief participants, Brahmins — beneficiaries of the country’s caste divide — irk Ayyan, a Dalit. Every day at work feels like a brutal history lesson, a reminder of social and economic hierarchy — the equivalent of a band-aid abandoning fresh wounds.

His boss, Arvind (Nassar), is researching the possibility of alien microbes in Earth’s stratosphere. The irony of the entire enterprise — of infinitesimal aliens acquiring more significance than many microbe-like humans — fills Ayyan with rage. But he has learnt from the best; like his sophisticated masters, he hardly gets angry. Because a 3,000-year-old rigged system, dancing to the tune of ancient myths, can’t be upended by anger. That fight needs a secret life and a solid weapon. Ayyan has both: aspiration and resentment.

Sudhir Mishra’s latest, Serious Men, an adaptation of Manu Joseph’s debut novel, is centred on two scams. The first — perpetuated by people like Arvind — is self-mythologising and self-congratulatory: the illusion of meritocracy, the willful ignorance of historical inequity, the deception of faux compassion, the exclusion via coded communication. Unlike a joint entrance test, this exam can feel endless and random to an outsider; there are no rules and no syllabus.

But Ayyan knows that no structure can survive without a scripture, and he has mastered the fine print. Yet the divide is so huge, bordering on ridiculous, that Ayyan is never not amused: of serious men hiding behind laptops, elevating absurd work to monumental importance; relying on English to relay authority, poise, and ‘Beautiful Feelings’; broadcasting their narcissism without a smidgen of self-awareness, managing to name even the smallest, mundane things (a longish conversation between a husband and wife, for instance, becomes “Quality Time”).

Ayyan has taken the philosophy of “if you can’t beat them, join them” a step further. He intends to first join and then beat them. He knows that this is a game of deception and confidence — and he channelises that realisation to its most logical conclusion. He talks in enough English to negotiate sticky situations; he guilt-trips the lackeys of the system to win a conversation; he declares, fibs, and fabricates with smooth confidence. At one point, he literally repeats Arvind’s line (“if you could do it, you’d be me”). And then one day, Ayyan finds a perfect ally, one used by countless upper-caste men to further their ambition, to regain control, to take revenge: He becomes a father.

That boy, Adi (Aakshath Das), is Ayyan’s answer to the Institute — and the country’s many invisible barriers. Less of a child and more of a lab experiment, a mediocre student, Adi, is trained by his father to look like a child prodigy. Modelled after Tathagat Avatar Tulsi in the novel, Adi was the most riveting part of the book — and so is the case with the film, too. The rules of the game, as explained by Ayyan, are pretty simple: drop big words, float random scientific facts, talk in English, own the room, and use arrogance to bail yourself out. It’s not too surprising that Adi, a modern-day response to an old scam, says, “I can’t deal with primitive minds” whenever he’s cornered.

The film opens to Ayyan’s acerbic voiceover and maintains a darkly comic tone. Siddiqui, usually known for playing characters erupting with anger, softens his forte here. His Ayyan — an unlit cracker oscillating between water and flame — is always on the edge. But the film becomes even more lively and unpredictable when Das, the film’s best performer, enters the picture. His interactions with teachers and politicians, where he flummoxes them with preternatural intellect, materialise with memorable humour and a sobering takeaway: that true success in India, irrespective of profession, only comes to good actors.

Also read: Halahal: A Death in Ghaziabad and a Search for Elusive Truths

Serious Men is also about the naïve, gullible media hungry for ‘success stories’ — a sign of promise in a country that, despite periodic predictions of shining future, lives in waves of hope. This optimism is all the more significant (and self-serving) because Adi, a Dalit boy, will allow the country’s elites to parrot their patented paternalistic lines: that “caste is a thing of the past”, that every Indian has an equal chance at success, that merit must not be compromised — and brute merit is anyway never ignored. Serious Men, seeing through such phonies with impressive clarity, busts those myths with discomfiting humour. In one scene, a photographer snaps Adi standing behind the window grills holding a blackboard that reads, “100%, pure Dalit.”

The drama is a bleak, cynical look at a lopsided power structure. It’s not interested in misguided hope or simplistic solutions — so much so that you’d be strained to find scenes marked by pathos. In fact, when Adi does show some compassion, and allows himself to be vulnerable, that almost exposes his fraud. The message, known to Ayyan but not Adi, is clear: if you drop your guard even for a second, they’ll eat you. The film knows that the pursuit of uncompromising truth is often uncomfortable, and it’s not interested in the business of simpleton allies.

It’s also a largely accomplished adaptation. It erases a few subplots of the novel to tell a focused story. The movie is much gentler than its source material; it ignores the book’s overlong, petulant sexism — which soon gets repetitive — and concentrates on its strengths.

But this arrow-like approach also makes the drama too neat, too assembly-line, for its own good. Some transitions as a result — especially Ayyan’s crafty manoeuvres to help his son and Adi’s rise to stardom — feel rushed and unconvincing. Adi’s meltdown, too, lacks build-up and context; in such portions, you long for the novel’s leisurely pace and subtle, credible plot turns. Some discordance, though, is embedded into the very process of this adaptation that attempts a negotiation between literary and commercial fiction.

That uncomfortable marriage of form is inadvertently echoed by a tiered story whose principal character, Ayyan, keeps shuttling between the two worlds. One that rejects him, and the other that he rejects. The final scene then, on a vast desolate beach, feels like a fitting finale: an abandoned child of a callous country now truly on his own — free from false institutional promise, liberated to find his own insanity.

Petition in SC Seeks CBI or SIT Probe Into Hathras Crime, Transfer of Trial Outside UP

The news comes in the direct aftermath of reports that Uttar Pradesh police cremated the victim’s body without allowing her family to see her.

New Delhi: A petition has been filed before the Supreme Court asking for stronger investigation into the Hathras brutality by four upper caste Thakur men that led to the death of a 19-year-old Dalit woman. LiveLaw has reported that the petition also seeks for the transfer of the trial from Uttar Pradesh to Delhi.

The news comes in the direct aftermath of reports that Uttar Pradesh police cremated the victim’s body without allowing her family to see her. The Wire has reported her family’s allegations, that they were locked up while the cremation was held at 3 am, without the rituals that the family wanted honoured.

Advocate Sanjeev Malhotra, who filed the petition on behalf of social activist Satyama Dubey, was quoted by LiveLaw as having said that the statement of the UP police that the cremation was carried out “as per the wishes of the family” is false. Successive ground reports by several outlets have in fact proven that the victim’s family were denied the right to organise her cremation.

“The plea underlines the issue that the police authorities have not performed their duties and are shielding the accused. Additionally, the family of the victim is being victimised by upper-caste persons,” LiveLaw quoted Malhotra as having said.

The Wire’s report, too, notes the victim’s family as having alleged that the rest of the village has not communicated with them since the crime. Reports have also said that one of the upper-caste accused, Sandeep, would harass the girl so consistently that she could not step out of the house.

The petition thus seeks the transfer of investigation to CBI or a Special Investigation Team under a sitting or a retired judge of the Supreme Court or a high court.

Mohammad Khalid Akhtar’s ‘2011’: Satire for Old Pakistan, a Prophecy for Naya Pakistan

Akhtar’s dystopian satire has a power, prescience and timeliness which George Orwell’s classic ‘1984’ could not have.

When famed Pakistani writer Mohammad Khalid Akhtar (whose birth centenary is being celebrated in 2020) wrote his much-neglected novel Bees Sau Gayara (2011), regarded as Urdu’s first social and political satire back in 1950, 70 years ago this month, the model of George Orwell’s Airstrip One in his famous novel Nineteen Eighty Four was before him in newly established Pakistan. Yet 70 years on, it is the risk of government overreach, creeping totalitarianism, the policies of newspapers, the system of educational textbooks, the tactics and wilfulness of ministers and repressive regimentation of persons and sexual behaviours in Naya Pakistani society which has now given Akhtar’s dystopian satire a power, prescience and timeliness which Orwell’s classic probably could not have.

It has had a largely neglected and marginalised run as a work of political prophecy, unlike its British counterpart, even in its author’s birth centenary year. This, despite the fact that there are no other contenders in public awareness from its era, at least in South Asia. 2011 is obviously a Cold War book, but the Cold War ended 30 years ago. What accounts for its astonishing neglect and staying power simultaneously, 70 years on?

Akhtar went against the grain in conceiving of Pakistan as a totalitarian state 70 years ago, in the same manner and at the same time his contemporary Orwell envisaged the shape Britain could take in the future. Yet 2011 is obviously a fantasy. A fantasy meaning writing in which the writer, by the force of his observation and the high flight of imagination, sometimes pulls the future into the present and presents circumstances and events in the manner of prediction before us.

In Urdu literature, one does not find any systematic writing of this nature before 2011, although we do see this type of style in the writings of a few writers. First of all, we find samples of this with Muhammad Husain Azad, especially his essay Shohrat-e-Aam Au Baqaa-e-Davaam Ka Darbar (The Court of Popularity and Immortality), which is a beautiful example in this connection. Then one also finds an excellent use of this very imaginative style in Mirza Farhatullah Beg’s Dilli Ka Aik Yadgaar Mushaira (A Memorable Mushaira of Delhi).

After Akhtar’s book, one also finds a bit of a cautious tradition in the making in this regard. For example, Rafiq Hussain’s short story Aaina-e-Hairat (The Mirror of Wonder) is an interesting work in this connection. A column of Ata-ul-Haq Qasmi Aah Ata-ul-Haq Qasmi (Alas Ata-ul-Haq Qasmi) is also a link in this series and then with Mohammad Khalid Akhtar; his published essay in the journal Funoon titled Tazkira-e-Ahl-e-Lahore (Memory of the People of Lahore) consisting of two parts also assumes the colour and form of fantasy, in which along with talking about the art and personality of a few famous writers and poets living in Lahore, the death of a few of them has also been predicted. In addition, one finds in various short-stories, dramas and films something of a colour of fantasy. Though in this genre, after 2011, there is no systematic publication apart from Naseem Hijazi’s Sau Saal Baad (After A Hundred Years) and Sufaid Jazeera (The White Island).

Also read: Love of Urdu in Times of Shrinking Diversity

2011 is something very near a novel due to its structure, arrangement of events, plot, dialogic style, suspense and illustration of social problems. Mohammad Kazim has indeed deemed it a systematic novel, which has been given the form of a fantasy in a metaphorical manner. Mohammad Khalid Akhtar himself too has referred to it as a novel at many places. For this reason, we will discuss and analyse this work in the genre of the novel.

This fantasy of Mohammad Khalid Akhtar has been written in imitation of Western writer George Orwell’s 1984. This is a result of the writer’s innovative disposition and singular imagination that till now it is a unique and unparalleled creation of its type in Urdu literature. Kanhaiya Lal Kapoor, the eminent Urdu satirist loved this style so much that he wrote expressing his wish to be the writer of this novel. Ibne Insha deemed it as ‘delightful satire’.

On the other hand, Akhtar’s contemporary Mohammad Kazim, collectively analysing Akhtar’s art said so about this fantasy:

‘In our new country, the brand new democratic rule was going through stages of experimentation. The free and careless atmosphere of democracy had given birth to an agreeable attitude towards government and politics, with which sensitive temperaments could no but be influenced. An atmosphere of every sort of freedom and waywardness carries the same sort of impression for a satirist, which the morning breeze has for the flowers of the garden. He finds the instigation for his critical beauty therein and his art continues to find new forms of expression. These were the conditions in which Mohammad Khalid Akhtar wrote his novel ‘Bees Sau Gayara’, which was ostensibly a fantasy but actually a good-natured but strong satire in metaphorical style and on this basis, a totally novel thing in Urdu literature.

The formalities, display and traditions in the protocol of governments which have continued since time immemorial; and the styles of ministers and the manners of thinking and working of new democratic governments, which can be seen even today everywhere; all of them are the subject of ‘Bees Sau Gayara’. In addition, a special religious mentality, the uncompromising image of the woman and purdah among the people, the style of working of the political parties, especially the Communists, and the groupings of writers and their mutual disputes, all of these aspects of life at the time come under the target of the act of sarcasm and satire.’

In this fantasy, Akhtar while narrating the tale of the tour of the president of an imaginary 21st-century state ‘Yoknapatawha’ (clearly inspired from William Faulkner’s fictional Mississippi county) to another state ‘Maznine’ as told by himself, has beautifully unveiled the paucities and perversities of society. One also finds an attack on some Eastern manners and a deep satire too on the Western mode of life; the blind race of materialism in which humanity and sincerity began to depart and which made human life to be all but a machine, crushed human feelings and emotions and struck a huge blow upon social, moral and cultural values.

All this was definitely very painful for a sensitive man. Before this, Allama Iqbal’s poetry too expresses this tragedy with great intensity. In this work, one finds the struggle of great powers, the exploitation of smaller nations, female emancipation, rebellion against religion, so-called pir-worship, Western democracy, socialism and imperialism, conflict on the basis of colour and race, the Westernisation of Muslims, the prejudiced manner of India, the efficiencies of assertive leaders and the arms race between various great powers which, by spending millions billions on it is bringing human life closest to death.

In short that the topics which the Allama (Iqbal) had made the target of satire in his poetry, are seen to be discussed in a slightly different and delightful manner by Akhtar. Allama Iqbal had been educated in Western institutions; he had observed its subsistence very closely, therefore he had given us news in his poetry about the Western civilisation committing suicide with its own dagger. Over there Akhtar too had closely studied their culture and society through Western literature. He also had the chance to visit Europe, therefore he adopted the style of fantasy to narrate his point of view about Western society. His skill lies in the fact that the metaphorical style which he adopted at the beginning of the book, he maintained with great success till the end.

Also read: The Hindi Film Industry Should Mind Its Ks and Qs When Using Urdu Words

According to Akhtar’s own point of view regarding literature, he seems to be convinced of literature for life at all times and he is of the opinion that what use is that literature which does not possess the razzle-dazzle of life. Then this is also a reality that despite all his purposiveness in literature, Akhtar is romantic by disposition; and this romanticism is reflected in nearly all his writings. In this book too, his romantic style can be clearly felt in that when the world is destroyed on a large scale in the struggle for firearms, he feels the greatest regret for the destruction of France, because France is famous throughout the world for culture, civilisation and art. Vide an extract:

‘The destruction of France was truly the biggest tragedy, the culture and morals of the French, their literature and art were unique in the world. They had made the worship of beauty and woman a ‘cult’ and in my opinion it was the sole one nation which knew how to love women.’

He praises the Africans in that they know how to preserve their literature, music and culture. In addition to 2011, Mohammad Khalid Akhtar also attempted to write pure romantic novels because on the last page of 2011 there is an advertisement for a novel named Shahanshah Ka Ghulam (The Emperor’s Slave), about which it can be opined that this novel will be helpful in removing literary suffocation and darkness to a great extent. Akhtar is convinced of bringing back the romantic period in Urdu literature.

But with the passage of time, his idea and ideologies changed, so he destroyed the manuscript of this novel even before publishing it. When Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi dedicated his maiden short-story collection Chaupal to Akhtar, he also included a few extracts of his letters along with it, which too indicate Akhtar’s ideology of writing. One of these extracts goes such:

‘Literature should be a mirror of life but life is bitter and some colour in it is needed. If sugar is coated over a quinine tablet, even children swallow it.’

In this book, the writer has also made the struggle between the blacks and the whites a topic of discussion. Since the beginning, the whites have had a prejudiced attitude about the blacks and especially in South Africa, when the blacks were deprived of all human rights, Akhtar developed a vengeful manner against this prejudiced attitude. This is the reason that in this book, the writer has shown the blacks ruling over the whites in an imaginative manner; and who have made a law in their land that when a white man sees a black man coming before him, the former should immediately ‘take the oath of allegiance’ by kneeling on the ground.

Also read: Fahmida Riaz Has Left Behind ‘A World of Possibilities’

One also finds Akhtar’s progressive tendencies in this work, as well as a romantic point of view, but within both these points of view, his manner is greatly balanced. In this novel, he has made the poets and writers who display extremism in the two aforementioned tendencies a target of satire. For example here are his view on the romantic movement:

‘The advent of the existing literature happened because there were women in Maznine. A few women, whose glimpse they could sometimes see in their quarter would make them crazy and captivated, and they would think many a night the things they would do with them should they obtain them. Therefore they started writing short-stories. In these stories, they fearlessly began to write all those things which to practically perform they neither had opportunities nor ability.’

At some places, his manner has become quite harsh due to the negative effects of this movement; and a manner of rage and hatred has emerged in his satire.

‘A few short-stories of that period like ‘Behind the Brassiere’, etc created an excitement among young Mazninians and many writers became famous like renowned prostitutes.’

Though Khalid Akhtar seems closer to the progressives than romanticism, but here too he does not tolerate extremism, because of which literature becomes all but mere propaganda. He writes about such people, ‘Many writers of this school are truly sincere, but most of them are those who wish to be accepted. These last in my opinion are some third-class drummers.’

In this book, we also find a direct reference to some eminent progressive poets; the parodies of Faiz Ahmad Faiz and Noon Meem Rashid are there without mentioning their names, wherein there is just a harmless parody of Faiz’s poem; while there is a light suspicion of satire in the parody of Rashid. For example, Faiz’s poem:

‘Muj se pehli si mohabbat meri Mehboob na maang
Main ne samjha tha ke tu hai to darakhshaan hai hayaat’

(My love, do not ask me for that old love again
I had felt that with you around, the world would be luminous)

Mohammad Khalid Akhtar wrote:

‘Mujh se pehli si aqeedat mere Manato na maang
Main ne samjha tha ke tujh main himmat hogi
Magar yeh mera khayal ghalat tha’

(My love, do not ask me for that old affection again
I had felt that you will possess courage
But I was wrong in my imagination)

Then a piece from Noon Meem Rashid’s famous poem Intiqaam (Revenge):

‘Ik barahna jism ab tak yaad hai
Ajnabi aurat ka jism
Mere honton ne lia tha raat bhar
Jis se arbaab-e-vatan ki bebasi ka intiqaam
Voh barahna jism ab tak yaad hai’

(I still remember a naked body
The body of an unknown woman
All night my lips
Took revenge for the helplessness of my countrymen
I still remember that naked body)

Now see what Akhtar does:

‘Aaj main le kar rahoonga intiqaam
Kiyaask main rehne vaaliyon kin aa-rasai ka
In sab rangeen honton vaaliyon se
Le kar rahoonga intiqaam’

(Today I will definitely take revenge
From these kiosk-inhabiting women for their failure
From all these with coloured lips
Will definitely take revenge)

This is a complete satirical work, in which one finds very lively and grand satire on various aspects of life. The Westernisation of the Arabs, the wilfulness of the rulers of great countries, the Marxist system, newspaper policies, the educational curriculum, philosophy, historians, police, the strategies and stupidities of ministers; all of these have come under the range of his scalpel-pen. He has also mentioned sex but his manner related to sex feels tired.

Then one also finds in the same novel a very beautiful portrait of human psychology; he has shone a light upon various psychological aspects of Man. A person Mogilevich who destroys the whole world due to selfishness is mentioned in the following words: ‘Our most powerful feeling even more powerful than sexual desire, is the desire for power and fame; to rule over other humans and to order them here and there.’

Watch: Krishan Chander’s Nephew Believes If His Uncle Were Writing Today, He Would Be in Jail

At another place he writes: ‘Every single person is selfish and every single person is a sadist; everyone of us too has a Mogilevich present within us.’

At one place, while describing women, he writes:

‘Women are so empty-minded and silly that to win them, high philosophy, literary taste or grand conversation and Josephic features do not work. Their preferring a male is dependent generally upon that man patting the mustaches or some similar absurd habit.’

Akhtar has maintained an air of suspense in this novel from start to finish, though to explain the situation of the world 60 years ago on the strength of imagination is itself an astonishing thing. The language of this novel is of general conversation, in which there is a very fearless use of English words as well. Some sentences indeed feel wholly like a literal translation. This is the reason Muhammad Kazim thinks that to translate Mohammad Khalid Akhtar’s works into English is perhaps the easiest task in the world.

Englishness pervades every vein of this work. Perhaps this is because he thinks in English and writes in Urdu. There is a rebellion-like manner in the matter of the structure of his sentences and his language and description. He has done all of this intentionally, because according to him, to acquit an obligation with the ‘strange atmosphere’ of his world needed an erroneous and astonishing language. He writes: ‘Urdu has for too long been treated as a pure virgin. I do not regard Urdu a so sensitive as to be unable to bear a bit of informality and ill-manneredness.’

So as justification for using such type of language, he gives examples of Quratulain Hyder, Sir Syed and Shibli Nomani, etc. who present these things for the expansion and evolution of the Urdu language. In my opinion, any language accepts only those rules of expansion and evolution which are natural, otherwise words used in the taste for fashion or innovation become a cause of strangeness and alienation for any writing. Had Mohammad Khalid Akhtar too kept the natural demands of language in mind rather than following a few exceptional examples, this first-ever fantasy in Urdu literature would have been a masterpiece in every way.

And as far as the question of its ‘strange atmosphere’ and astonishing readers is concerned, so these qualities should be there in the plot, events, characters and milieu of any work, not in the language.

This is a novel of fast tempo and consistent plot, in which events move forward with great speed. In it, all the force has been spent on the actions and pauses of the characters. In most of Akhtar’s works, the whole story generally revolves around characters. Eminent humourist Ibne Insha had written on the flap of Akhtar’s novel Chakiwara Main Visaal (Love in Chakiwara) that the renowned characters of Akhtar Chacha Abdul Baqi and nephew Bakhtiar Khilji prior to this, meaning in Chakiwara Main Visal, are seen in the form of Qurban Ali Kattar and Mr Changezi. But in my opinion, both these characters even before that appear in Akhtar’s fantasy 2011 as Mr Popo and Sgt. Buzzfir. The same simple-naturedness, the same naivete, the same idiotic actions; their new projects and schemes and failures. In addition to these two main characters, the characters of F.L. Patakha, Hoot, Chhota Kabo, Bada Kabo, Vazir-e-Jhoot (Minister of Lies) and Vazir-e-Jahalat (Minister of Ignorance) are important.

Khalid Akhtar never lets purposiveness in his writings disappear from sight. Perhaps the reason for this is his guru Robert Louis Stevenson’s quote that: ‘And a well-written novel calls out and repeats its purpose and responsibility from every chapter, every page and sentence.’

Akhtar’s ideas about the Muslim nation in this novel are very enlightened and he is very optimistic about international Muslim unity. He has named the Muslim world as ‘Islamistan’. In short, 2011 for all its wonders and defects and strangeness of language is a singular and unique work of Urdu literature, which Akhtar too was very fond of. He writes at a place, ‘’2011’ which I wrote in a narrow and dark flat of Karachi, is the most prized of my books.’

Then in one of his essays, while discussing this fantasy in detail, he writes:

‘In 1950, I wrote a fantasy ‘2011’, influences by Orwell’s ‘1984’. I wrote ‘2011’ with a poison-dipped pen in rage. It is said to be a fantasy but actually a satire on the national circumstances, political scene and society of that time. Despite the defects of language and narrative, I had this kind of feeling that my book is good. Upon my prompting, the publisher sent a copy to Kanhaiya Lal Kapoor in Jalandhar. Kapoor realized what I had written under the cover of fantasy. He wrote to my publisher in a letter that ‘2011’ is the first political and social satire in the Urdu language and would that he be its author. That is, I got a reward for my labour. I no longer felt bad that most of the readers do not get what I want to say.’

That’s Akhtarian. And it’s no longer a prophecy. And 70 years later in Naya Pakistan, that no longer feels like a very large if.

Note: All translations from the Urdu are by the writer.

Raza Naeem is a Pakistani social scientist, activist, book critic, and an award-winning translator and dramatic reader currently based in Lahore, where he is the President of the Progressive Writers Association (Anjuman Taraqqi Pasand Musannifeen). He is currently translating Muhammad Khalid Akhtar’s ‘Bees Sau Gayara’ into English and can be reached at razanaeem@hotmail.com.

After LVB, Dhanlaxmi Bank Also Sees Shareholders Voting Out Newly Appointed CEO

Small, older-generation private sector lenders with a regional identity are seeing rough times.

All of a sudden, old-generation private sector banks are hitting national headlines. Tamilnad Mercantile Bank (TMB), Lakshmi Vilas Bank (LVB) and now Dhanlaxmi Bank – all these small private sector lenders of very long standing have come into focus for all wrong reasons.

TMB – a bank promoted by members of the Nadar community – occupied headlines a few days ago when authorities slapped multi-national Standard Chartered Bank with a penalty of Rs. 100 crore for violation of the provisions of the FEMA (Foreign Exchange Management Act) in a case relating to unauthorised allocation of shares in the Tuticorin-headquartered TMB. Besides imposing the penalty on Standard Chartered Bank, the adjudicating authority under FEMA also levied a fine of Rs 17 crore on TMB and Rs 35 crore on M.G.M. Maran, the former chairman of the South Indian private sector lender.

And just last week, India’s banking industry was stunned when shareholders threw out the resolutions relating to the appointment of Lakshmi Vilas Bank’s CEO and six directors.

Now comes the news that shareholders of Thrissur-based Dhanlaxmi Bank have ousted its Managing Director and CEO Sunil Gurbaxani at the annual general meeting (AGM) of the lender on Wednesday. In the voting, 90.49% of the votes were polled against Gurbaxani. While voting out the resolution pertaining to his appointment, the shareholders, however, cleared all other resolutions at the meeting.

If what happened at LVB was unprecedented, the removal of an RBI-cleared CEO by Dhanlaxmi Bank’s shareholders will be remembered as equally significant in the annals of the Indian banking industry.

The general-secretary of the All-India Bank Employees’ Association (AIBEA), C.H. Venkatachalam, has said that Gurbaxani must go now that the shareholders have voted against him.

Somewhere along, Venkatachalam said, the bank was led into the wrong direction. If this was allowed to continue, it could eventually lead to mismanagement, he added. He reckoned that the shareholders had done the right thing in removing Gurbaxani.

“They (old private banks) aren’t big. They can’t grow beyond. For, they need capital to grow,” Venkatachalam said, articulating the predicament of the old generation private banks which came into being in a different time period and with a specific purpose.

Also read: Rs 100 Crore Fine on Standard Chartered Puts Spotlight Back on Tamilnad Mercantile Bank

Implanting the western banking concepts on them was not correct, he felt, adding that one possible option could be to merge them with the nationalised banks.

Major shareholders of the bank are reportedly upset with the way Gurbaxani led Dhanlaxmi Bank, with apparently a distinct bias towards investors from the “North Indian lobby”. Like many of the older generation private banks, Dhanlaxmi has an identity of its own, which is strongly rooted to its Kerala origins.

Shareholders somehow fear that this identity will get lost under the current management dispensation. Hence, they seem to have shown the door to Gurbaxani, who assumed office as CEO in February 2020. A veteran banker, he has 35 years of experience with the State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (now State Bank of India), and Axis Bank.

The Reserve Bank of India appears to have been appraised of matters. Only yesterday, on Tuesday, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) appointed one of its officers on the board of Dhanlaxmi Bank for a period of two years from September 28. And earlier last week, the central bank asked the board of Dhanlaxmi Bank to terminate the services of P. Manikandan, chief general manager – an unprecedented step. The banking regulator was reportedly extremely unhappy with his interference in board matters.

Also read: Yes Bank: Another Crisis, Another Larger-Than-Life Promoter

Since June, the bank has seen a series of exits. Sajeev Krishnan, part-time chairman and independent director, was the first to go. Krishnan had joined the Kerala-headquartered bank in February 2018 for a three-year spell. He had around eight months left in his term. Two more resignations followed. The two were: K.N. Murali, independent director, and G. Venkatanarayanan, an additional director. Following their exit, the bank had appointed new board members. These include P.K. Vijayakumar, G. Rajagopalan Nair, G. Subramonia Iyer and Suseela Menon.

As of March 2020, prominent investors in the bank include: B. Ravindra Pillai (10%), Gopinathan C. K. (7.5%) and Kapilkumar Wadhawan (5%). Foreign portfolio investors hold 11.4%. This is according to a bank filing with the BSE.

The AIBEA, had, in fact, sought the RBI to intervene and carry out course correction. “In the beginning of this year, the top management has changed, and, in the recent months we are concerned to observe that perhaps the bank once again is heading in the wrong direction,” it said in a recent letter to the RBI. “Instead of consolidating the gains and further strengthening the bank, we observe that efforts are on to change the business profile, which is bound to land the bank into difficulties,” it added.

Small is beautiful, it is often said. But small is posing problems to these older generation private banks. Scale requires fresh capital. But the shareholders of the original kind don’t have the capacity to bring in fresh funds to push growth in a highly competitive environment. Clearly, the big guys have an advantage here. So how to navigate without losing one’s identity? That is easier said than done for these so-called old generation private banks.

Govt to Borrow Rs 4.34 Lakh-Crore in Second Half of 2020-2021 to Meet Fiscal Deficit

Hard-pressed for funds to combat rising coronavirus infections, the government in May had increased its market borrowing programme.

New Delhi: The Finance Ministry on Wednesday said the government will borrow Rs 4.34 lakh crore in the second half of the current fiscal to meet its expenditure requirement amid COVID-19 crisis afflicting the country’s economy.

The government is sticking to Rs 12 lakh crore borrowing target for the current fiscal, Economic Affairs Secretary Tarun Bajaj said.

In the first half ended September, the government has done borrowing of Rs 7.66 lakh crore and remaining Rs 4.34 lakh crore will be mobilised during the second half of the current fiscal, he said.

The government had envisaged to raise 58% of the total borrowing target of Rs 6.98 lakh crore from the dated securities in the first half of the current fiscal. Against this, the government has borrowed Rs 7.66 lakh crore during April-September.

Hard-pressed for funds to combat rising coronavirus infections, the government in May increased its market borrowing programme for the current financial year by more than 50% to Rs 12 lakh crore.

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in the 2020-21 Budget had pegged the gross market borrowing which is also a reflection of fiscal deficit, for the current fiscal at Rs 7.80 lakh crore. The amount was up from Rs 7.1 lakh crore in 2019-20.

The government raises money from the market to fund its fiscal deficit through dated securities and treasury bills.

The Budget has pegged fiscal deficit at 3.5% for the current fiscal, down from 3.8% of the GDP in the last financial year.

While BJP Celebrates Babri Verdict, Others Criticise CBI for Diluting Evidence

Madhav Godbole, the home secretary when the mosque was demolished, and Justice M.S. Liberhan, who presided over the commission of inquiry into the demolition, expressed their shock at the court’s decision.

New Delhi: The special Central Bureau of Investigation court which acquitted all 32 accused persons, including Bharatiya Janata Party leaders L.K.Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Kalyan Singh and Uma Bharati, in the case of criminal conspiracy to raze the Babri Masjid down has evoked varied responses on Wednesday.

BJP leaders naturally welcomed the judgement, while once again pledging their allegiance to the Advani-led Ram Janmabhoomi movement that eventually became the reason for the demolition of the mosque. Opposition parties criticised the CBI for having allegedly diluted incriminating evidence against the accused in its chargesheet, while terming the verdict as yet another blow to the secular fabric of India.

At the same time, Madhav Godbole, the home secretary when the mosque was demolished, and Justice M.S. Liberhan, who presided over the commission of inquiry into the demolition, expressed their shock at the court’s decision. They thought that the verdict is completely contrary to the evidence that was gathered over the last two decades.

What did the BJP leaders say?

One of the accused, senior BJP leader Advani, while welcoming the verdict, said that it “vindicated” his personal and BJP’s “belief and commitment towards the Ram Janmabhoomi movement”. He added that he feels “blessed” that the CBI court’s verdict came on the heels of last year’s Supreme Court judgement which paved the way for his “long cherished dream” of seeing a grand Ram temple in Ayodhya.

“Along with millions of my countrymen, I now look forward to the completion of the beautiful Shri Ram Mandir at Ayodhya. May Shri Ram keep us blessed always,” the 92-year-old leader said.

Joshi, who was also one of the accused persons, told The Print, ““This is a victory of every Indian. Ram is not confined to Hindus only and Ayodhya belongs to everyone.”

Speaking to a television channel, he said that the verdict is proof that the events at Ayodhya on December 6, 1992 was not a conspiracy, and that it happened suddenly. “Our own movement for the Ram Mandir under the leadership of Advaniji was only meant to create a consciousness and an environment to build a Ram temple,” he said, adding that the nation should now prepare itself to see a Ram temple at Ayodhya.

Also read: L.K. Advani, the Provocateur in Chief

Vinay Katiyar, who was also one of the accused and was the serving MP from Faizabad at the time of demolition said, “We are accepting the decision with grace.”

“I welcome the decision of the special court of Lucknow not to join any conspiracy of 32 people including Shri LK Advani, Shri Kalyan Singh, Dr Murali Manohar Joshi, Umaji in the Babri Masjid demolition case. The verdict has proved that justice prevailed even if it is late,” Union defence minister Rajnath Singh said on Twitter.

Union minister for civil aviation Hardeep Singh Puri, a former diplomat, also welcomed the judgement. “False narratives and conspiracy theories are finally laid to rest by the Hon’bl CBI Court in historic Babri Masjid Demolition Verdict,” he said.

Uttar Pradesh chief minister Adityanath, who is currently battling severe criticism over his administration’s alleged insensitive handling of the dead body of the Hathras rape victim, released a press statement, saying, “Satyamev Jayate- truth has won”. He further added that “the then Congress government acted with political bias, indulged in vote bank politics defamed the BJP leaders, saints, Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) leaders and various social organisations by lodging false cases”.

“The people involved in the conspiracy should apologise to the people of the country,” he demanded.

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh hailed the judgement as the flagbearer of national unity. “After this decision, all sections of the society should come together in unity and harmony and work successfully to face the challenges before the country, and work towards the progress of this country,” RSS general secretary Suresh ‘Bhaiyyaji’ Joshi tweeted.

Interestingly, Shiv Sena, who is currently a part of the Maharashtra government along with the Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party, also supported the verdict. Both chief minister Uddhav Thackeray and party spokesperson Sanjay Raut said that the CBI court’s verdict was welcome. “We should not forget the incident as grand Ram Mandir is now being built. If the Babri structure had not come down, we would not have seen the construction of the Ram temple,” said Raut.

Opposition criticises the verdict

The Left parties took the lead in lashing out at the verdict, while Congress held a press briefing to say that the CBI court’s verdict ran counter to last year’s apex court judgement that had categorically said that the demolition was illegal.

Terming the verdict as “a travesty of justice”, the polit bureau of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) said, “It took 28 long years for this verdict but not justice to be delivered. All the top leaders of the BJP-VHP-RSS who were present at the scene guiding the criminal act have been found to be innocent of the charge of conspiracy to demolish the mosque.”

“The Supreme Court in its Ayodhya judgment on November 8, last year had called the demolition an egregious violation of the law. Now, the Lucknow court has found the main perpetrators of this crime not guilty,” it said, adding that the judgement would be a “blemish” to India’s secular-democratic fabric and constitutional rule.

It demanded that the CBI must immediately appeal against this judgment.

Also read: Babri Masjid: The Timeline of a Demolition

Communist Party of India (ML-Liberation)’s general secretary Dipankar Bhattacharya said that the acquittal of all the accused is “another blow to India’s secular Constitution”

“This verdict, coming on top of the Supreme Court verdict handing over the mosque site to the Ram Temple Trust, is the final nail in the coffin of justice for victims of hate crimes in India. These verdicts are an incentive for perpetrators of hate crimes, assuring them that they can enjoy the political and material fruits of such crimes with total impunity,” he said.

He said that all the accused had openly built up a frenzied environment to build a Ram Temple at the site of the mosque ahead of the demolition. “This demand had the demolition embedded into its structure, and the Rath Yatra was accompanied by Hindu supremacist violence against Muslims which took many Muslim lives,” he said, adding that the CBI court has actually “endorsed” the BJP’s position that the demolition was spontaneous.

He further said while “Advani stood and watched as the supporters amassed by him used sophisticated tools to bring down the mosque”, Uma Bharti and Joshi were “caught on camera celebrating” and later boasting of their role in the demolition.

“Sadhvi Rithambara’s poisonous speeches calling for the massacre of Muslims and demolition of this and other mosques, are a matter of public record. Yet she stands acquitted,” Bhattacharya said.

Responding to the verdict, Congress’s chief spokesperson Randeep Surjewala called the CBI court judgement as one which is “founded in error”.

The verdict, he said, “runs counter to the Supreme Court judgement as also the constitutional spirit. The SC clearly held the demolition illegal and an “egregious violation of the rule of law”.

“The entire country witnessed a deep rooted political conspiracy by BJP-RSS and its leaders to destroy the country’s communal amity and brotherhood to usurp power, he said. He added that the then BJP state government in Uttar Pradesh was “a co-conspirator, so much so that the Supreme Court was misled by filing a wrong affidavit on oath by the then UP government”.

He demanded that both the state and central governments should appeal against the CBI court’s decision without “any partiality and premeditated prejudice”.

Former officials speak

Speaking to Outlook, Justice Liberhan said that the verdict was an “utter farce”. The retired judge, who headed the commission of inquiry and took 17 years to submit his report to the Union government, said that there was “ample evidence available to prove complicity and culpability of these leaders” and to “demonstrate conclusively the pre-planned conspiracy behind the destruction of the disputed structure (the Babri Masjid)”.

He said that the court’s verdict is “completely contrary to the conclusions of the commission”.

The home secretary at the time of demolition, Madhav Godbole, too said that he was “aghast” at the CBI court’s judgement. Speaking to Huffington Post, he said, “Quite frankly, I am aghast with this verdict because, firstly, a huge mosque of this size coming down within a period of five hours without any planning or without any preparation on the part of anybody is impossible to believe.”

“Secondly the fact that, after 28 years this decision has come, is a commentary on our judicial system, criminal law system,” he added.

Commenting on whether the Centre and the state would appeal against the verdict or not, he said given both the dispensations are currently led by the BJP, the chances of appeal are highly unlikely. “Obviously, one would have normally expected that an appeal will be filed against this judgment in the high court or in the Supreme Court but looking at the power dispensation which is there both in the state and the centre, it is unlikely that any appeal will be filed,” he said.

Production of Eight Core Industries Contracted 8.5% in August, 2020

Barring coal and fertiliser, all sectors – crude oil, natural gas, refinery products, steel, cement and electricity – recorded negative growth in August.

New Delhi: Contracting for the sixth consecutive month, the output of eight core infrastructure sectors dropped by 8.5% in August, mainly due to decline in production of steel, refinery products and cement.

The production of eight core sectors had contracted 0.2% in August 2019, showed data released by the Commerce and Industry Ministry on Wednesday.

Barring coal and fertiliser, all sectors – crude oil, natural gas, refinery products, steel, cement and electricity – recorded negative growth in August.

During April-August 2020-21, the sectors’ output dipped by 17.8% as compared to a growth of 2.5% in the same period previous year.

The rate of contraction in the eight key sectors has increased from July (- 8%).

Also read: ‘We Have Been Sitting Idle’: Without Work, Migrants From Odisha Return to Surat Mills

The output of steel, refinery products, cement, natural gas, crude oil and electricity declined by 6.3%, 19.1%, 14.6%, 9.5%, 6.3% and 2.7%, respectively.

On the other hand, coal and fertiliser sector production grew by 3.6% and 7.3%, respectively, during the month under review as against (-) 8.6% and 2.9% rise in August 2019.

Commenting on the numbers, Icra Ltd Principal Economist Aditi Nayar said that based on these mixed trends, “We expect the contraction in the Index of Industrial Production (IIP) to ease modestly to 6-8% in August 2020, from the initial 10.4% in July 2020”.

The eight core industries accounts for 40.27% in the IIP.

Kolkata Trans Woman’s Harassment by Cop Raises Questions on Whether Rules Are Enough

Ranjita Sinha and her friends thought that police would come and take some action against the harasser. To their shock, they addressed him as ‘sir’ and even saluted him.

Kolkata: Ranjita Sinha, a transgender woman, a former member of the West Bengal Transgender Development Board and director of Association of Transgender/Hijras of Bengal (ATHB) has been distributing rations to members of the trans community in Kolkata since the lockdown began in March.

“A lot of them have lost their livelihoods due to the pandemic. They can no longer beg, perform or earn a livelihood through sex work,” she says.

On Monday, September 21, Sinha and two of her friends, while on their way back from distributing relief, decided to stop for a cup of coffee at the C.R. Avenue in central Kolkata. As their driver was parking the car by the road, a man came and tapped on the window. As soon as the driver rolled down the window, the man grabbed him by the collar, alleges Sinha.

“We thought maybe he was the parking attendant and our driver was parking at the wrong spot. Or maybe that it was someone who had unresolved issues with him (the driver),” says Moon Saha, Sinha’s friend who was seated in the front.

“I asked him who he was and what he wanted,” says Sinha.

“He then came over to my side, touched my cheeks, and said, ‘What happened?’ His breath was reeking of alcohol and before I could react, his hands were grazing down my neck. I immediately alerted everyone to roll up their windows,” she adds.

He then started tapping Saha’s window asking for it to be opened. “He went over to the driver’s side and was trying to get his hands inside the car. He bent down and started mouthing kisses,” she says. When her driver protested he twisted his arm and said, ‘You think you can stop me? Do you know who I am?’ He pointed at me and said, ‘I want her’,” says Saha.

The physical altercation left the driver with a fractured wrist.

“It was so scary. Even now I am upset thinking about it,” she adds.

The man blocked their way and continued making comments. “I can’t describe the lewd and sexually laced comments he was making,” says Sinha.

The women dialled 100 and explained their predicament. Meanwhile, the man continued pounding and kicking the bonnet of the car. When no one showed up for almost 20 minutes, Niharika Mukherjee who was seated in the back beside Sinha dialled the Bowbazar Police Station.

“I live in the area and know the head sergeant and the OC. I explained our situation to the sergeant. Within 10 minutes the police arrived,” she says.

All three women were hoping the police would come and take some action against the man. To their shock, the police personnel addressed him as “sir” and even saluted him.

The man who was harassing them turned out to be Abhishek Bhattacharya, an additional officer-in-charge of the south west traffic guard.

The policeman, Abhishek Bhattacharya, who harassed Ranjita Sinha. Photo: By special arrangement

Infuriated with the police response, Sinha started a live video on Facebook where she and her companions are seen confronting him about his behaviour. Two uniformed police officers can be seen standing in the background watching the confrontation. A few minutes later, a man in civilian clothes is seen leading him away.

The women followed him to the Bowbazar police station where they demanded an FIR be lodged against the person.

“We had to wait a long time at the police station. We were rigid in our demand for an FIR,” says Saha.

The police, they allege, even called the errant cop’s mother and wife to the station to try and emotionally pressure them to not lodge a complaint. “His family was trying to get us to drop the case. We said this was not only about us but the entire community. If we don’t take action against this, he will repeat this kind of behaviour,” says Saha.

The police, says Sinha, finally told her that they will lodge a general diary and ‘treat it as an FIR’. “They thought that I don’t know anything. I have helped countless trans brothers and sisters to lodge FIRs. An FIR means the police have to immediately take action on the complaint,” says Sinha.

“We reached the Bowbazar police station at 8 pm. Our FIR was lodged at midnight. Till then the police were trying to dismiss the case.”

Bhattacharya was produced at a City Sessions Court and granted bail the next day.

In an email, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Division, Kolkata told The Wire that Bhattacharya has been booked under Section 18 of the Transgender Act 2019.

Departmental disciplinary proceedings have also been initiated against him.

“Traffic police have an important role. If we face any danger in the roads, they are the first people we approach for help,” says Anindya Hajra, a transgender rights and social justice activist based in Kolkata.

According to her, not everyone can manage to register a complaint. “Ranjita and her friends are much empowered and showed a lot of courage to pursue the complaint.”

Also read: This Lesbian Policewoman Couple in Gujarat Fought for Their Right to Be Together – and Won

“We know a lot of trans people who have faced similar situations but have not been able to follow through with the complaint. We don’t ever find out (about such incidents), and they don’t get involved in the justice mechanism,” she adds.

This incident, she says, is not about trans or cis people. “This is about all those who are considered vulnerable. This happens irrespective of whether the person is identifies as trans.”

‘A police officer is always on duty’

Under a lot of police Acts and rules that govern various state police departments, a police officer is usually considered always on duty, says Sai Bouruthu, Bahujan trans woman and Project Officer, Prison Reforms Programme, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI).

“He was using his authority as a police officer to assert power over the women. That is precisely why accountability mechanisms have become central,” she says.

In response to a PIL, the Supreme Court had laid down seven directives on police reforms for the Central and state governments in 2006. One of the directives was to set up a Police Complaints Authority (PCA) at state and district levels to look into public complaints against police officers of and above the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.

According to a CHRI report released in September 2020, 22 states have constituted State Police Complaints Authority (SPCA) on paper, while 17 states have constituted District Police Complaints Authority (DPCA) on paper. The report notes that the “compromised composition dominated by members of the government/police, weakened authority and lack of independent expertise, the Police Complaints Authorities will unlikely be able to emerge as an effective remedy against police misconduct and brutality.”

Also read: Police Violence Against LGTBQIA+ People in Kolkata Highlights Need for Sensitisation

The latest available data in the National Crime Records Bureau records show a total of nine cases registered against the state police for assault on women with intent to outrage her modesty and insult to the modesty of women respectively in Cases Reported of Human Rights Violations by Police and Their Disposal During 2015 (All India). Though 34 state police personnel were charge-sheeted for human rights violations, none of them were convicted. More than 50,000 cases were registered against police personnel in 2015 in India.

“In this case, one way this could be addressed is by including norms for the protection of trans people while interacting with police and prison authorities. The second thing that can be done is actually include trans people in the police. That would create an atmosphere of inclusivity or understanding within police departments,” says Bouruthu.

The third thing that could be done, says Bouruthu, is the sensitivising police officers. “We need to have very precise and sensitive modules that train police officers regarding the conditions of trans people and how to address them.”

Apart from all this, accountability of police is key. “Whenever a police officer or a person who is in a position of power like that violates somebody’s right, they have to be held accountable. Accountability measures must be non-negotiable irrespective of who the citizen is,” she says.

Puja Bhattacharjee is a multimedia freelance journalist based in Kolkata, who covers politics, policies, health, social justice and art and culture.

India, China Hold Another Round of WMCC Talks, Agree to Strengthen Ground Communication

The WMCC was convened on Wednesday for the fifth time since the military stand-off began in May.

New Delhi: A day after both sides exchanged verbal salvos over the Line of Actual Control, Indian and Chinese officials sat down for another meeting of the Working Mechanism for Consultation & Coordination on India-China Border Affairs during the current stand-off – and agreed to strengthen ground communication between frontline commanders.

The WMCC was convened on Wednesday for the fifth time since the military stand-off began in May, but is the 19th edition of this institutional mechanism since it was constituted.

According to the Indian read-out of the meeting that was held through video conference, both sides “positively evaluated” the results of the senior commanders’ meeting on September 21.

“They emphasised the need to implement the steps outlined in the joint press release issued after the last meeting of the senior commanders so as to avoid misunderstandings and to maintain stability on the ground. In this context, the need to strengthen communication, especially between the ground commanders, was emphasised by both sides,” said the MEA press note.

As per the joint press release issued after the senior commanders’ meeting, the two countries had agreed to implement the consensus reached by leadership, strengthen communication on the ground, avoid misunderstandings and misjudgments, stop sending additional troops to the frontline, refrain from unilaterally changing the ground situation and avoid taking any actions that may complicate the situation.

Also read: As LAC Standoff Forces Deployment of More Troops, Winter Presents a Daunting Challenge

The separate statements from Chinese and Indian foreign ministries also said that the next round of senior commanders’ meetings should be held at an early date.

“…[T]hey [China] agreed that the next [7th] round of the meeting of Senior Commanders should be held at an early date so that both sides can work towards early and complete disengagement of the troops along the LAC in accordance with the existing bilateral agreement and protocols, and fully restore peace and tranquility,” said the MEA statement.

The Chinese read-out stated that the two sides exchanged “candid and in-depth views” and agreed to implement the five point consensus reached by the foreign ministers in Moscow. It added that the neighbours should “take practical measures to promote further de-escalation and cooling of the border situation and avoid any action that could complicate the situation”.

“The two sides positively evaluated the results of the sixth round of military-level talks and agreed to continue to maintain dialogue and consultation through diplomatic and military channels, hold the seventh round of military-level talks at an early stage, urgently handle the remaining issues on the ground and jointly safeguard peace and tranquillity in the border areas,” said the Chinese language statement issued by the foreign ministry in Beijing, as per a rough translation.

On Tuesday, Chinese foreign ministry had asserted that the Line of Actual Control was based on the letter sent by then Premier Zhou Enlai on November 7, 1959.

India had responded that New Delhi had never accepted the 1959 LAC, with even China accepting in various border agreements that the boundary had been clarified and confirmed through exchange of maps.