Defence Ministry Inks Rs 2,580-Crore Deal To Procure Pinaka Rocket Launchers

The weapons systems will have 70% indigenous content and the project was approved by defence minister Rajnath Singh and finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman.

New Delhi: The defence ministry on Monday sealed a deal with two leading domestic defence majors to procure Pinaka rocket launchers for six Army regiments for Rs 2,580 crore, officials said.

They said the Pinaka regiments will deploy along India’s border with China and Pakistan to enhance operational preparedness of the armed forces.

The contract has been signed with Tata Power Company Ltd (TPCL) and engineering major Larsen & Toubro (L&T) while defence public sector undertaking Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (BEML) will be part of the project.

The BEML will supply the vehicles on which the rocket launchers will mount.

In a statement, the defence ministry said the six Pinaka regiments comprises 114 launchers with Automated Gun Aiming and Positioning System (AGAPS) and 45 command posts.

It said the missile regiments planned to be operationalised by 2024.

It said the weapons systems will have 70% indigenous content and that the project approved by defence minister Rajnath Singh and finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman.

The Pinaka Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) has been indigenously designed and developed by DRDO.

“This is a flagship project showcasing public-private partnership under the aegis of government of India (DRDO & MoD) enabling ‘Aatmanirbharta’ in cutting edge defence technologies,” the ministry said.

(PTI)

Allahabad High Court Sets Aside NSA Detention of Kafeel Khan

The court also observed that the Aligarh district magistrate was ‘selective’ in reading the ‘provocative’ speech for which the doctor was detained.

New Delhi: The Allahabad high court said the detention of Dr Kafeel Khan under the National Security Act (NSA) is “not sustainable in the eye of law”, ordering his immediate release.

The division bench of Chief Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh also noted that the Aligarh district magistrate had quoted selectively from a speech given by Khan at the Aligarh Muslim University to justify his detention.

The judges noted, according to Bar & Bench:

“We are having no hesitation in concluding that neither detention of Dr. Kafeel Khan under National Security Act, 1980 nor extension of the detention are sustainable in the eye of law.”

According to LiveLaw, the court, concluding that the order of detention is bad, adds:

“The writ petition for the reasons given above is allowed. The order of detention dated 13th February, 2020 passed by District Magistrate, Aligarh and confirmed by the State of Uttar Pradesh is set aside. The extension of the period of detention of detenue Dr. Kafeel Khan is also declared illegal. A writ in the nature of habeas corpus is hereby issued to release Dr. Kafeel Khan, the detenue from State custody forthwith.”

The order comes after the Supreme Court on August 11 asked the high court to decide on the plea for Khan’s release within fifteen days.

Khan, who first came to national attention during the Gorakhpur oxygen shortage tragedy, was arrested in January from Mumbai for an alleged ‘provocative speech’ that he delivered at the Aligarh Muslim University during an anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) protest.

Also Read: Jail, Attack on Family and NSA: Kafeel Khan is Paying the Price for Speaking Up

Though he was granted bail in the case, he was not released. The Aligarh administration then slapped the NSA on him on February 13. Under the law, a person can be detained for up to a year.

The order quotes the entire speech made by Khan to contextualise the comments which the prosecution says were ‘provocative’. The bench found that even prima facie, Khan’s speech “does not disclose any effort to promote hatred or violence. It also no where threatens peace and tranquillity of the city of Aligarh. The address gives a call for national integrity and unity among the citizens. The speech also deprecates any kind of violence.”

“No doubt, some part of the phrases used in the grounds for detention are there in speech, but apparently in different context. The speaker was certainly opposing the policies of the government and while doing so certain illustration are given by him, but that no where reflects the eventualities demanding detention,” the order notes.

The order adds:

“The speech also deprecates any kind of violence. It appears that the District Magistrate had selective reading and selective mention for few phrases from the speech ignoring its true intent. The entire speech being a subject matter of a criminal case pending against Dr. Kafeel Khan, therefore, it would not be appropriate for us to make much comments on that. Our anxiety is only to assess that as to whether a reasonable man could have arrived at a conclusion as arrived by the District Magistrate, Aligarh? Primafacie, the speech is not such that a reasonable man could have arrived at a conclusion as the inference drawn by the District Magistrate, Aligarh.”

India’s GDP Shock: Modi Cannot Adopt a Business As Usual Approach

The CEA assures us that the government is keeping a lot of powder dry, to be released in the future. But the economy, facing a once-in-a-100-year crisis, does not have the luxury of time.

The extent of fall (23.9%) in GDP growth for Q1 FY’21 shows that India is one of the slowest to recover among the major emerging market economies. China has shown positive growth (3.2%) in this period. The GDP of economies like Indonesia, South Korea, Philippines, Russia, Thailand show a negative growth of ranging from 3% to 12%. In fact, there is no comparable economy where growth has declined as much as in India.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi had made a public statement in mid-July that India’s economic recovery from the pandemic will be the fastest, probably based on a good Rabi harvest and Kharif sowing area.

Also Read: COVID-19 Blow: India’s GDP Shrinks a Record 23.9% in First Quarter of FY’21

Though agriculture output grew by 3.4% in Q1, it was hardly enough to make up for the devastation in services (-27%) and manufacturing (-39.3%) sectors. Within services, construction is a large component which is also employment-intensive, and this showed a 50% decline. In most growing economies, construction has a big contribution to growth and employment. One big mistake India made during its harsh lockdown was it allowed the ecosystem of construction, which included the well being of daily wage labour, to collapse. This differentiates India from other comparable countries which had a substantial lockdown but allowed construction activities – especially roads, metros, bridges, housing projects – to continue. The higher direct fiscal support in terms of providing money in the hand of the people also helped these economies cushion the GDP fall.

Overall, India is at a point where the economy is showing the weakest recovery and the number of new infections is the highest in the world. Compared to India, China has been very strategic in its approach and a recent Reuters report suggests the Chinese authorities realised the paramount role of the services sector in the economy and ensured that it did not close down completely. Little wonder, the latest PMI numbers for China show services expanding much faster than manufacturing.

Two women walk in front of closed shops in Kolkata, August 31, 2020. Photo: PTI/Ashok Bhaumik

Worrisome outlook for next two quarters

The chief economic advisor in the finance ministry has argued that some of the high frequency indicators for August show a possible V-shaped recovery. But he is still not sure whether India will have a positive GDP growth for the next two quarters. This is worrisome.

The corporate sector heads are also not sure when their production will come back to the pre-COVID-19 levels. The head of Hindustan Unilever, India’s largest fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) company, told a business channel he would wait to see how the real underlying demand shapes up toward the end of the year after the festive season. He was unwilling to bet that production would come back to pre-COVID-19 levels soon. You get an idea of the real situation on the ground from companies which interface with the consumers.

M.S. Unnikrishnan, the managing director of Thermax, a leading capital goods manufactuter, recently made a very perceptive observation. He said there are no signs yet of state governments placing orders for capital goods and machinery. This must be read in tandem with the state chief ministers uniformly saying they are shrinking their developmental or capital expenditure to meet basic current expenditure needs of paying for salary and meeting health-related costs.

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

In my view, this could become the cause of a prolonged recession because so far, whatever GDP growth India had managed in the pre-COVID-19 period was largely due to government spending. And this has also shrunk because government revenues have collapsed by over 50% against what was budgeted in the April-June quarter. The crises in the GST Council reflects this phenomenon.

As it is, we face a massive contraction in urban and semi-urban consumption and there is yet no sign of private investment picking up. The big degrowth, – 47% in capital goods production, is the most scary. Only government spending in infrastructure on a war footing can revive the capital goods sector. But where is the much-touted Rs 100 lakh crore spend on infrastructure over five years announced with much fanfare by Modi on August 15? The reality on the ground is that development spending is shrinking this year as revenues have shrunk and are just about enough to pay salaries and interest on past borrowings.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaking at the Red Fort on August 15, 2020. Photo: PTI

Economies work on sentiment and momentum

The chief economic advisor assures us that the government is keeping a lot of powder dry to be released at the right time in the future. But the economy, facing a once-in-a-100-year crisis, does not have the luxury of time. A crisis of this nature cannot be dealt with in phases because economies work on sentiment and momentum. If sentiment and momentum weaken, then no amount of post-facto fiscal or monetary dose would help lift spirits.

Modi must also keep in mind that he has already made many grave mistakes in the past five years. He faces the additional burden of overcoming the ill effects of those mistakes, which have devastated India’s small and informal economy. The stock market’s relentless rise largely reflects large companies – many potential oligopolies – becoming larger but making little difference to employment growth which is provided mostly by the small and informal sector.

If Modi chooses to remain blind to his past blunders, he will go down as a prime minister who destroyed the sinews of India’s small economy. Take GDP growth, employment, savings/investment or any other key macro indicator, India is seeing a secular and precipitous decline under Modi. This might be his lasting legacy in the end. Indeed, the PM cannot survive this with a business as usual approach.

In Comparative Study of Antibody Sensitivity, ‘Kavach’ Kit Scores Last

The DBT India Consortium for COVID-19 Research compared the performance of three test kits ICMR has approved for use in sero-surveys.

Bengaluru: In May, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) conducted a countrywide COVID-19 seroprevalence survey. Although the full details of this study haven’t yet been made available in the form of a paper, peer-reviewed or otherwise, ICMR has already announced a follow-up study as well.

In July-August, the municipal corporations of Delhi, Mumbai, Ahmedabad and Pune released some of the results of their respective citywide seroprevalence assays, which they had conducted together with different research institutes.

Seroprevalence surveys are useful to understand the extent to which a given population has contracted a specific infectious disease. These surveys use tests that detect the presence of antibodies, which the body’s immune system would have produced to fight the pathogen – in this case the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Upon infection, the body initially produces a class of antibodies called immunoglobulin M (IgM), which has a short lifespan and is eventually converted – seroconverted, in technical parlance – to immunoglobulin G (IgG). The presence of IgG is used as an indication by proxy of past exposure to the virus.

“Virus specific IgGs are produced in a later stage during the course of a virus infection, as a person slowly starts recovering. Antibodies by themselves are produced as a pool of different types, among which a fraction constitute the neutralising antibodies that prevent the entry of the virus inside host cells,” Upasana Ray, a senior scientist of infectious diseases and immunology at the Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (IICB), Kolkata, said.

“These are the ones that we need to look for if we want to determine whether an individual is protected or not.”

As on August 7, 2020, ICMR had approved 12 IgG test kits that could be used for seroprevalence surveys. One of them is the Kavach IgG ELISA kit, which ICMR developed in May and licensed to Zydus Cadila, Ahmedabad. Anecdotal reports suggest it’s one of the most commonly used kits in the surveys conducted thus far.

Since the results of seroprevalence surveys indicate what measures policymakers should institute to control the national COVID-19 epidemic, the kits play an outsize role in determining our course of action.

To this end, the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) India Consortium for COVID-19 Research recently compared the performance of three such test kits. The study was led by Shinjini Bhatnagar, a professor at the Translational Health Science and Technology Institute (THSTI), Faridabad, and Gagandeep Kang, an expert on viral infections in children who quit as the head of THSTI a month ago. They uploaded a preprint paper describing their findings on August 14 (the ‘published’ version has since become available here). The kits they tested were:

1. RBD ELISA – developed at THSTI

2. Diasorin LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 IgG CLIA – developed in Italy, meets the UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) criteria, has emergency-use approval from the US Food and Drug Administration

3. Zydus Kavach ELISA

The RBD ELISA and Diasorin CLIA assays attempt to detect the presence of the virus’s spike protein in a given sample. The RBD ELISA assay can detect antibodies against the receptor binding domain – the part of the spike protein that binds to the ACE2 receptors in humans. The Diasorin assay detects antibodies against S1/S2 regions of the spike protein. There are no details in the public domain about which viral proteins the Zydus Kavach assay looks for.

The researchers evaluated these assays on 379 COVID-19 positive samples and 184 COVID-19 negative samples.

If there was a test kit designated the ‘gold standard’ to detect SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, researchers could use it to see how accurately new kits could detect these antibodies in comparison. But since there is no such kit, the team followed the UK’s MHRA guidelines to define positive and negative samples.

“We used a positive reference panel which included samples from participants who had more than 20 days of duration of illness following RT-PCR positivity,” Bhatnagar said.

A man gets tested for the coronavirus at a camp in Patna. Photo: PTI

That is, members of the consortium considered samples collected more than 20 days after the onset of illness among symptomatic people and those from people who tested positive for COVID-19 by RT-PCR as being the positive samples for the antibody tests to work with. The COVID-19 negative samples had been collected before September 2019.

When they compared these kits, the team found that they were less sensitive than what the internal studies of the organisations that developed them had claimed.

Also read: What You Need to Know Before Trying to Make Sense of Sero-Survey Results

The researchers tested the samples using Zydus Kavach and Diasorin LIAISON assays, following instructions provided in the kit, and interpreted the results as positive or negative accordingly. When the results were ambiguous, or weren’t defined by the manufacturer, they considered them to be ‘negative’. With the RBD-ELISA kit – they defined a criterion and interpreted the results as positive or negative based on it.

The authors then compared how many of the samples had been  correctly identified by each of these assays as ‘positive’ or ‘negative’, and calculated their respective sensitivity and specificity.

When ICMR announced that it had built an antibody testing kit, its press release claimed a specificity and sensitivity of 100% and 98.7%, respectively. Following an investigation by The Wire Science, the kit’s makers at ICMR and the National Institute of Virology, Pune, admitted that the kit was 97.9% specific and 92.37% sensitive.

In the current study, the researchers found the kit was 99.5% specific and only 75.7% sensitive.

Also read: What Are Sensitivity and Specificity?

The published version of the researchers’ paper offers one explanation for why this difference could be so – because of the different methods with which the kits were validated: “The article reporting internal validation of Zydus Kavach ELISA reported a sensitivity of 92.37% based on samples that were positive in a micro-neutralisation assay as against 75.7% that we see in our study using sera collected [more than] 20 days post-RT-PCR positivity.”

RBD ELISA was found to be 84.7% sensitive. The Diasorin kit, which the maker had claimed was 97.4% sensitive, was found to be 82% sensitive. The team couldn’t check its specificity due to the limited availability of negative samples.

“While unlikely, the difference” in the Diasorin kit’s performance “could be attributed to false positives in our RT-PCR assay,” the paper noted.

About 14% of the samples obtained from asymptomatic people might have had low antibody levels and therefore might not have produced IgG antibodies at the time of sample collection. However, Bhatnagar, Kang and their team-mates also compared the three assays head-to-head to check which performed best. They found that the RBD ELISA and Diasorin CLIA kits could identify more positive IgG samples than Zydus Kavach.

A woman gives blood for a test for antibody against COVID-19. Photo: Martin Meissner/Pool via Reuters

“The performance of RBD-ELISA being on par with an MHRA-evaluated Diasorin assay and slightly better than the Zydus Kavach assay is encouraging,” Bhatnagar said. “This definitely provides an alternative to the existing options in the country, particularly in a scenario where more sero-surveillance studies are needed to understand the evolution of the pandemic better.”

THSTI has transferred the RBD ELISA assay for commercialisation.

“This study will definitely help improve the determination of seroprevalence, but in its own specific way,” Ray said.

That is, for example, RBD ELISA could help detect “the percentage of people who are recovering, have recovered or were asymptomatically infected and are producing IgG antibodies against the virus.” However, it may not be able to identify newly infected people who aren’t producing IgG antibodies yet.

Ray noted that another important aspect of developing antibody test assays is to ensure there is no cross-reactivity. This is the phenomenon whereby the kits misidentify antibodies against other common viruses to be antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. This will yield false positive results.

So studies conducted to develop these assays will specifically have a panel of negative samples known to contain antibodies against specific viruses other than the one that the test intends to detect. For example, in this case, you could conduct the test on a panel of SARS-CoV-2 IgG-negative samples that have antibodies against H1N1, dengue virus, rhinovirus, etc. – and see which antibodies the assay mistakes for the ones against the novel coronavirus.

“We did not specifically report cross-reactivities in this article. We used pre-pandemic samples that are assumed to have antibodies from other viral infections but not antibodies to SARS-CoV-2,” Bhatnagar said. “If a false positive result is obtained, it may be due to other viruses, including seasonal coronaviruses, which the individuals may have encountered.”

The assay also detects only possibly neutralising IgG antibodies – the kind produced only after some days of viral infection. But if the body doesn’t produce them, a kit might say ‘negative’ even as the individual may really be infected.

Also read: No COVID-19 Test Is 100% Right, so Their Errors and Results Are Both Important

So, Ray said, if a survey aims to study the spread of a virus in a population, it should employ kits that detect non-neutralising antibodies as well – and researchers should study the link between these molecules and a COVID-19 infection more.

“During a survey or diagnosis, the objective could be different, and the diagnostic methods should be adjusted to the required agenda. So, availability of different methods using different rationale would provide the chance to choose an assay type most suitable for a certain study,” Ray said.

For example, in a population in which the virus’s prevalence is low, an assay with high specificity could be more useful, since it will return fewer false positives. Also, SARS-CoV-2 IgM assays can detect persistent infections in the population – whereas SARS-CoV-2 IgG assays can detect those who are recovering or have recovered.

The Indian Council of Medical Research, the National Institute of Virology and Diasorin didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Joel P. Joseph is a science writer.

Watch | The Indian Kho Kho Team Captain and Her Struggles During COVID-19 Lockdown

Nasreen Sheikh’s life has come to a standstill since her father, a daily wage labourer and the sole earning member of the family, hasn’t been able to earn any money.

Meet Nasreen Sheikh, Indian women’s kho kho team captain. So far, she has played 40 national and 3 international kho kho tournaments.

As a Muslim, she faced difficulty in following her passion for kho kho due to pressure from family and society. In spite of all odds, she has made India proud many times by winning several gold medals.

Her favourite memory is when she won a gold medal for her country for the first time, and the Indian national anthem played in the stadium. “I cried tears of joy in that moment,” she recalled.

But during the nationwide lockdown in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, her life came to a standstill. Her father, the sole earning member of the family, is a daily wage earner. He hasn’t earned any money since March.

The family of fourteen has suffered since.

Her diet, designed to keep her healthy and fit for her sport, has also suffered. Her hopes are still high, and she wants to make India proud again in the future.

Are we treating our national champions right?

Aarushi Talwar To Rhea Chakraborty: A Tale of Two Media Trials and Zero Lessons Learnt

Covering women in high-profile cases has never been the Indian media’s forte. Twelve years after the deplorable treatment of the Aarushi Talwar murder case, journalism is at its lowest ebb again.

The year was 2008 and my brother (nine at that time), was fixated on the television screen showing minute-by-minute dramatisation of how Rajesh and Nupur Talwar plotted the murder of their only daughter. As soon as my father returned from work that day, my brother looked at him (petrified) and said, “You’ll also kill me one day!” My father promptly switched the TV off, hugged his little one, and cut the cable connection the next day.

The story had everything to have that kind of an impact on a child – a victim, a villain, a perfect murder motive, intense background music, explicit graphics and godly narration – the kind of stuff ideal Friday movie nights were made of. Except that it was coming from a mainstream news channel. To be fair to them, they did put a disclaimer saying it was a ‘creative reconstruction’ for representative purposes only.

Cut to 2020. One would think that with better technology, connectivity and feedback mechanisms, media coverage would have gradually transitioned towards more responsible, ethical and sensitive discourse. Turns out it’s an even better circus with an even bigger compromise on the duty that journalism once used to be.

On June 14, Bollywood actor Sushant Singh Rajput was found dead in his Bandra apartment. The same week, Rajput’s father filed a case against co-actor Rhea Chakraborty, accusing her of abetment in his alleged suicide. Rajput’s sister even claimed that Chakraborty, also his partner at that time, was ‘into’ using black magic.

What followed was a whirlpool of misreported facts, concocted lies, and sheer entertainment in the name of news. News channels shamelessly ran provocative headlines like “Sushant par Rhea ka kaala jaadu” (Rhea’s black magic on Sushant) and “Rhea ke jhooth par kya kehta hai India?” (What does India have to say about Rhea’s lies?) The first code of conduct was broken soon after graphic details about his alleged suicide were discussed like dinner-table gossip.

Sushant Singh Rajput. Photo: PTI

‘Failed to follow guidelines’

Dr Soumitra Pathare, the director of the Centre for Mental Health Law and Policy at the Indian Law Society, said, “Media needs to improve its reporting of suicides and attempted suicides in India. We have seen that the media fails to adhere to both the international guidelines for suicide reporting (WHO guidelines) as well as national guidelines from the Press Council of India. Research has shown that responsible media reporting of suicides can reduce suicides by 1-2%. That would mean a saving 2,500-5,000 lives each year. The media needs to use the opportunity to raise awareness about suicide prevention, rather than focus on sensationalising suicide deaths.”

While the Mumbai police was investigating the actor’s death, TV channels were busy running parallel investigations in newsrooms. From reading his personal diary to calling a ‘paranormal expert’ who spoke with his spirit, every week a new narrative was served fresh to equally hungry audiences. First, they vilified the “Bollywood mafia” for plotting against him, then they added an underworld connection to it. But it got worse once the case was transferred to the CBI, the moment which republic TV anchor Arnab Goswami famously referred to as “an incredible moment in our country’s history”. On the same day, the Supreme Court had rejected the plea of students to postpone JEE and NEET exams, saying that “life has to go on”.

Also Read: Editorial: Time to Show Media Bullies Their Place

News channels conveniently cast Chakraborty as the perfect villain. One such skit saw Times Now’s Navika Kumar crashing into a live telecast with a (literal) bag full of evidence. The “explosive” info turned out to be a 2017 chat between Rhea and her friends allegedly talking about marijuana, which Kumar later dissected, down to every emoji. “Weed is also called green. It’s a pure coincidence that I’m wearing green tonight,” she said. What was actually CBD oil prescribed by Ayurvedic doctors, she made it look like Rhea was talking about giving drugs to Sushant. Any gossip-mongering anchor dressed in green cannot assume the role of the Narcotics Control Bureau that’s still investigating whether she’s guilty or not.

From sexist to origin-based slurs, Rhea was subjected to widespread social media hate campaign fuelled by these media channels. They have a tendency to use question marks to rid themselves of making verified claims. For example, saying “Sushant ko Rhea ke jeher ne mara?” or “Riya ne Sushant par kia jaadu tona?” is like saying: “Have the media channels sold their soul to gain more TRPs?” I’m totally not suggesting they have.

Representative image of what is playing out on Indian news television night after night. Source: YouTube screengrab

Nobody is spared

They didn’t even spare delivery boys, locksmiths, security guards or neighbours. Without an iota of proof, each one of them was given legitimacy on national news channels. For instance, a random Facebook page ran a fake story about the rape and murder of Disha Salian, Rajput’s ex-manager. The post – that claims Salian’s murderers also killed Rajput – comes with a disclaimer that this could either be a factual or a fictional account. News channels like Republic TV called the writer to discuss his theory, only to be converted into high-decibel debates moments later. Between July 24 and July 29, the channel conducted 45 out of 50 debates on the Rajput case, one on NEET/JEE student protests and one on the coronavirus. This did help Republic TV gain a 50% market share though, according to the latest TRP figures. In the name of super and ultra-exclusives, news channels were running a witch-hunt and provoking people with hashtags like ‘ArrestRheaNow’.

More than a decade ago, SMSs did the same job. While the investigation of the Aarushi-Hemraj double murder case was on, media channels were busy asking viewers to send SMSs guessing who the murderer was. On May 15, 2008, Aarushi Talwar’s body was found along with the household help Hemraj. Three teams – one from the UP Police, and two from the CBI – probed the murders, yet the investigation ended with the CBI’s closure report citing insufficient evidence. Later, the Talwars – accused of Aarushi’s murder by the media – were acquitted in 2017. In this case, too, the media viciously played up different angles like honour killing, her father’s alleged extra-marital affair, fake news that Aarushi was an adopted child, demonised the Talwars for not crying enough on TV. A few channels even flashed her 17-year-old friend’s number live on-screen.

A memorial for Aarushi Talwar. Credit: PTI

A memorial for Aarushi Talwar. Photo: PTI

Supreme Court’s caution

In August 2010, the Supreme Court cautioned the media against irresponsible reporting affecting the victim’s honour. In this case, too, Chakraborty has filed a case with the apex court, saying the ‘media trial’ was attempting to pronounce her guilty of Sushant’s death.

“Can freedom of press be allowed to degenerate into a license to malign the character of a dead person? Does our Constitution not guarantee the right to privacy even to the dead?” these were some questioned posed by advocate Surat Singh in 2008 while seeking a restraint on the media while the Talwar investigation was on.

The media hasn’t learned any lessons and is showing once again how deaths must not be reported. The real question for any responsible media outlet would be to ask how did news anchors get access to confidential call records, bank statements, WhatsApp messages and post-mortem photographs.

Also Read: Rhea Chakraborty’s Trial by Media Reflects Entrenched Misogyny

What could have been a debate about suicide prevention policy and a raging mental health crisis in India turned into a public court, discussing gossip like a cheap tabloid. “Questions have been raised whether it was a suicide or homicide. Whatever the cause, I am quite clear that Rajput’s medical history should not have been put in the public domain without consent from his legal heirs/executors of his estate,” Pathare said. “The fundamental right to privacy and the provisions of the Mental Healthcare Act should mean that this is protected information. Sharing someone’s medical history in the public domain increases stigma and is likely to dissuade people from seeking help.”

In cases of trial by media, justice is often not only denied but also derailed by reducing a tragedy into a sensational drama. Legal experts believe that media does influence in forming public opinion. Former solicitor general of India Harish Salve, in a 2015 interview with Shekhar Gupta, said, “The problem today is that the small screen has become the judge and jury of everything… and I confess, that the fact that these perceptions do not affect the final decision-making is a ‘legal fiction’. They do affect and this is my feeling as a lawyer.”

Supreme Court building. Photo: The Wire

Disregard for watchdogs

Media watchdog Press Council of India has issued an advisory saying that media should not conduct their own parallel trial or foretell the decision to avoid pressure during investigation and trial. Industry body News Broadcasters Association that has listed detailed guidelines on areas where broadcasters need to self-regulate.

More than 80 days of prejudiced media coverage of this case give the impression that media watchdogs are hardly taken seriously by those running the show. Whether it was the Indrani Mukherjea-Sheena Bora case, the deaths of Sunanda Pushkar or Sri Devi, Indian news media has been at its sensationalist best.

This is in sharp contrast with the cases of Priyadarshini Mattoo, Nitish Katara, Bijal Joshi, and Jessica Lal, where the guilty would have gone unpunished had it not been for the media’s intervention. But the buck stops with the media if it wants to recoup its position as the ‘fourth estate’ in the real sense. There is an innate need for stronger media watchdogs, editors’ guilds and industry bodies with tangible influence. I’m not arguing in favour of regulating the freedom of press, but irresponsible reporting needs to be countered with a checks-and-balance mechanism in the form of compensation, public outcry or injunction.

The solution, lawyer Sanjay Hegde says in a YouTube discussion, “People need to stop watching push TV and start watching pull TV and maybe that’s the only way.” Meanwhile, leading news channels will keep feeding viewers with news flashes of Rhea Chakraborty in a bikini with headers like “What is the sly girl’s source of income?” and all this amidst a pandemic when India is dealing with one of its worst economic crises, job losses, flooding and student protests.

If you know someone – friend or family member – at risk of suicide, please reach out to them. The Suicide Prevention India Foundation maintains a list of telephone numbers (www.spif.in/seek-help/) they can call to speak in confidence. You could also refer them to the nearest hospital.

Prerna Lidhoo is a journalist based in Delhi. She tweets @PLidhoo.

It’s Time To Make Punjab Agriculture Great Again. But How To Do So?

A recent report by a committee of experts headed by Montek Singh Ahluwalia, which has sparked debate, offers some hints as to a roadmap.

Note: This is the first in a two-part series on Punjab’s agriculture economy and the road ahead for the state.

“Status quos are made to be broken”, said Ray A. Davis, an American thinker and writer. Sadly, this quote does not apply to Punjab, which has been struggling with a way to break with the status quo in agriculture for at least three decades but has not found an acceptable way of doing that.

During the nationwide COVID-19 lockdown, the Punjab government appointed a group of experts headed by economist Montek Singh Ahluwalia to prepare a strategy for the state’s economic revival.

The group’s first report was submitted to the Punjab government in early August 2020. No other subject covered in the report has generated as much heat as its recommendations about the agriculture sector.

Indeed, it is tragic that a state which was the harbinger of the green revolution in India and which brought food security to the nation, is struggling to find a prudent path to sustainable agriculture, while still providing a decent opportunity to its farmers to maintain their current level of income, primarily coming from the wheat and rice cycle. Punjab achieved a growth rate of 5.7% during 1971-72 to 1985-86, which was much higher than the all-India growth rate (2.31%).

Also Read: Punjab: Montek-Led Panel’s Prescription for Agri Reform ‘Is the Only Way Out’, Says Member

There is no doubt that the state government made large investments in roads, mandis and electricity networks while the Centre also contributed through investment in dams and its policies of MSP and subsidies. For long years, Punjab remained at the forefront of food security to India by procuring wheat and rice at MSP and providing it to FCI to transport it to other states.

The expert committee group’s first recommendation is to allow leasing of agricultural land, geo-tagging of all farmers to land records and making the conversion to non-agricultural use more predictable. As per agricultural census 2015-16, Punjab had 10.93 lakh operational holdings but under PM Kisan, 15.58 lakh land holders have been registered. The average size of land holding is 3.62 hectare, much higher than the all India average of 1.08 hectare. An NSSO report of 2016 found that 24.16% of the operated area was on lease in Punjab.

It is clear that the leasing of agricultural land is quite common but the same is not recorded. A model leasing law was circulated by the NITI Aayog in 2016 but it has not made any headway. A fair law will provide legal protection to landowners while enabling investment by lessees on leased land. No one can have any serious objection to such a law.

A farmer walks through a paddy field at Tannaurah village in Punjab. Photo: Reuters/Ajay Verma

Electricity and agriculture

The second major recommendation of the Group relates to free electricity. It says that Punjab should strive to reduce the area under paddy by about 1 million ha, out of 3.1 million ha. This is proposed to be achieved over the next seven years by diversification from paddy to less water-guzzling crops. The Group has suggested several measures including separation of electricity feeder lines, Direct Seeded Rice (DSR) and drip irrigation in paddy.

In June 2019, the state government launched the ‘Pani bachao, Paisa kamao’ pilot scheme under which farmers are eligible to get Rs 4 per every unit of electricity they consume less than a fixed amount, based on their current level of consumption. About 80% of the geographical area in Punjab is over-utilised for water and the water table declined by 70 cm per year from 2008 to 2012. With one kilogram of rice consuming 3000-5000 litres of groundwater, Punjab has no option but to reduce the area under paddy.

The State Farmers Commission under Ajay Jakhar had also noted in its report of 2018 that 110 out of 148 blocks are overexploited for groundwater and a shift from existing cropping pattern is necessary ‘so that the next generation has adequate natural resources for its use’. A task force set up by the state government on the directions of NITI Aayog (2016-17) also noted that if the area under paddy is not diverted, the productivity levels will fall back to that of the 1960s. So, there is no reason for commotion due to this recommendation of the expert group.

In November 2015, the Union government launched an ambitious programme of electricity reforms (Ujwal Discom Assurance Yojana, UDAY) but it made no effort to convince its own partner, Akali Dal, to implement the same. In the absence of a political consensus, little headway was made in this critical area. The Centre is now considering a draft Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2020 which will constitute an Electricity Contract Enforcement Authority to decide the matters pertaining to sale, purchase and supply of electricity. If the Centre is able to actually reform the electricity sector at least in the states run by its own party, Punjab may also be convinced that it cannot afford to supply free electricity to all farmers.

As a state which has provided food security to the nation for three decades, Punjab, however, deserves a special package from the Centre for reducing the area under paddy over the next seven years so that the farmers can be compensated for the loss of income due to switching from paddy to an alternative crop.

Conserving water is one of the expert group’s recommendations.

Marketing crops

The third major set of reforms suggested by the expert group relates to agricultural marketing. On August 28, the Punjab assembly passed a resolution rejecting the Centre’s proposed Electricity (Amendment) Bill and the three recent ordinances on marketing, essential commodities and contract farming. The assembly held that these are against the federal spirit of the constitution. It means that the sale and purchase of agricultural produce in Punjab will continue to take place only in APMCs and it will continue to attract a tax of 6% along with arhatiya (middlemen) commission of 2.5%.

In 2019-20, the Mandi Board and the state government earned Rs 3,800 crore from mandi fee and rural development cess. The board’s main source of income is from the procurement of wheat and paddy for central pool stocks. If the Union government does not force setting up of procurement centres outside APMCs (i.e. in the trade area), Punjab will continue to earn this revenue. 

Several states have exempted fruits and vegetables from mandi fee. In the budget speech of 2020, Punjab’s finance minister also announced that mandi fee on fruits and vegetables will be reduced from 4% to 1% but it has not been implemented. Last year, the Punjab Mandi Board earned about Rs 120 crore from fruits and vegetables.

The expert group is correct in noting that Punjab will not be able to attract any investment in supply chain and food processing due to high taxes in mandis. Thus, the expert group’s assessment that Punjab may lose the opportunity to create jobs and attract investment is correct. The food demand of northern India will then be met from other states like Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan, which have lower taxes.  

Diversification

The fourth major recommendation is to double the area under high-value fruits like plums, peaches, litchi, guava and vegetables like potatoes, peas and chilli etc. Vegetable cultivation is much more labour intensive than food grains and farmers do not have any assurance of MSP. Frequent fluctuations in prices of perishables also affect their income. Amritsar and Malerkotla are important centres of vegetable production in Punjab. The group has recommended air freight subsidy for export from Punjab, but the state government is not in a position to bear this. As long as India’s relations with Pakistan remain tense, the farmers of perishables cannot access markets in Central Asia. Punjab would be the biggest beneficiary of better India-Pakistan trade relations.

The fifth recommendation is about direct benefit transfer (DBT) of fertilizer subsidy. This subject has been under discussion for several years but the Centre has not found it possible to charge market prices for urea and pay the subsidy through DBT. The Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) for phosphatic and potassic fertilisers (P&K) was introduced by the UPA government in 2010. It was followed by the decision in January 2013 to raise diesel prices by up to 50 paise per litre per month, till the entire losses on diesel are wiped out. Due to the high level of tenancy in Punjab, direct cash transfer of fertilizer subsidy to land-holders will further increase the cost of cultivation for tenants. The experience of Rythu Bandhu and PM Kisan shows that direct income support has not brought down the rates of leasing for tenants. 

The most contentious recommendation of the expert group is to move to cash transfers instead of the distribution of food grain under PDS. There is merit in the argument that in a food surplus state like Punjab, it is rather awkward that wheat and rice are supplied under the National Food Security Act. Cash transfer of food subsidy may enable the beneficiaries to buy more diversified food like eggs, milk, fruits, pulses, chicken and meat. Punjab could be the right place to experiment with this.

Cash transfer of food subsidy may enable the beneficiaries to buy more diversified food. Photo: Reuters

In Punjab, however, this recommendation is seen as a step towards dismantling the procurement system which enables farmers to realise the MSP for wheat and paddy. In the next 15 years, production of paddy will have to come down anyway due to reasons of sustainability. If the Centre promotes the cultivation of oilseeds and pulses and if better seeds are available, Punjab farmers may grow less wheat in rabi season. Since the domestic demand for oilseeds and pulses will continue, procurement of 90% of market arrivals (as in the case of wheat) may not be needed.

At present, Punjab’s agriculture is the least diversified. As a result of this and high taxes, the private sector has not invested in agri-infrastructure in the state. Out of about 1,800 warehouses registered with Warehousing Development and Regulatory Authority (WDRA) on March 31, 2020, Punjab had just six warehouses, all of them belonging to Central Warehousing Corporation (CWC). Madhya Pradesh had 340!

On the National Food Security Act and public distribution system, several recommendations were made by the Shanta Kumar Committee (2015). These have remained largely on paper as the Centre could not find a way to proceed with DBT for PDS and reduce open-ended procurement of rice and wheat. As a result, much more wheat and rice is being procured than required under the PDS and the Centre incurs a large amount as food subsidy due to high carrying cost. 

For a roadmap to achieve the reforms suggested by the Group of Experts, deeper consultation and consensus-building between the Centre and the states is needed, which was demonstrated in negotiations leading to the implementation of GST. It is a different matter that the GST regime is itself stressed due to the Centre’s inability to pay the compensation due to the states.

Siraj Hussain retired from the Indian government as Union agriculture secretary. At present, he is visiting senior fellow at ICRIER.

Greece Is Dropping Migrants into the Sea – And Europe Is Turning a Blind Eye

Reports this month showed how Greek authorities have pushed at least 1,072 migrants into the sea, forcing them to fend for their lives on rickety rafts and dinghies. The policy is a gross violation of international law.

On August 14, the New York Times published a report documenting the Greek government’s illegal measures to keep refugees and migrants away from its borders. Backed up by firsthand interviews with survivors, three independent watchdogs, two academic researchers, and the Turkish Coast Guard, the article claims that at least 1,072 asylum seekers have been pushed back into the water to fend for themselves. In at least thirty-one separate expulsions, migrants have been forced into the sea on sometimes leaky life rafts or left to drift in their boats, after Greek officials disabled the engines.

Such actions are illegal under international law. Even beyond the immediate danger they pose to human life, they contradict the principle of “non-refoulement,” which bans such pushbacks.  Before its election victory in July 2019, the right-wing New Democracy party had promised such a “tough” approach to migrants. But faced with press coverage of recent expulsions, the Greek government was keen to deny any accusation of illegality.

First was minister of migration and asylum Notis Mitarakis; he issued a statement declaring that “Greece implements a tough but fair migration policy and fully respects its obligations under international law.” Mitarakis cast doubt on the credibility of the Turkish Coast Guard as a source for such claims, adding that “interviews published by refugees currently residing in Turkey do not provide any evidence that those persons are at risk in Turkey and therefore can seek refugee status there.” In the same vein, speaking to CNN on August 22, prime minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis painted Greece as the victim of a misinformation campaign — part of Turkey’s efforts to “weaponise the migration issue“.

In reality, the allegations of Greek officials intercepting and expelling migrants are all too accurate — and they have been circulating for years. But since the incidents this March — when Turkey declared it would open its land border with Greece and thousands of people found themselves stranded between the two countries — such illegal practices have now become systematic across Greece’s land and sea borders. The fact that such moves are even possible, and indeed tolerated by other EU member states, is also a grave illustration of how hostility to migrants has been normalised, in Greece and around the continent.

Pushback

In international law, the principle of “non-refoulement” guarantees that no one should be returned to a country where they would face torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, and other irreparable harm. It is binding on those countries — including Greece — that are signatories to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, or the 1984 Convention Against Torture. Decisively, this principle applies to all migrants at all times, irrespective of their migration status.

The Greek government’s actions are trashing this principle — and drawing international condemnation. Already on March 10, the New York Times had warned about the toughening line adopted by Athens. It revealed that the Greek government detains migrants at a secret extrajudicial location before expelling them to Turkey, without following due process. Several migrants were interviewed: they each spoke of being captured, stripped of their belongings, beaten, and expelled from Greece, while their right to claim asylum or speak to a lawyer was completely bypassed.

Also read: ‘A Cynical Game’, Say Syrians in Germany on Refugees at the Greek-Turkish Border

On June 12, the UNHCR called on Greece to investigate pushbacks at sea and land borders with Turkey and the possibility of Greece returning migrants and asylum seekers to Turkey after they had reached Greek territory or territorial waters. The UNHCR repeated this call on August 21, underlining the increase in allegations from reliable sources reporting that men, women, and children are being expelled to Turkey without access to asylum-related processes after their arrival in Greece.

On June 16, an investigation by German liberal magazine Der Spiegel revealed that the Greek Coast Guard intercepts refugee boats, puts the migrants in life rafts, pulls them toward Turkey, and abandons them in the open sea. The investigation reports that masked men, almost certainly Greek border control officials, routinely attack refugee boats in the Eastern Aegean Sea, which are often pulled ashore by the Turkish Coast Guard.

The most disturbing point made by Der Spiegel’s investigation, though, is not that Greek authorities are in clear breach of their international obligations regarding human rights, but that they are putting the lives of migrants at risk using equipment meant for lifesaving.

Deportation targets

These are not just isolated incidents taking place at the borders. Rather, they are part and parcel of a wider strategy that capitalises on the rampant xenophobic political climate in Greece. This atmosphere has culminated in violent attacks on refugees at the Greek islands and at the Greek-Turkish border at Evros this March. The erection, in early July, of a floating barrier — essentially an artificial border, almost 2,700 meters long and more than a meter high — northeast of the island of Lesbos falls within the same logic of deterrence. Little regard is shown for human suffering, or even for life itself.

This same logic was apparent during the COVID-19 crisis, as the Greek government declined to evacuate or even decongest the overpopulated refugee camps. Despite numerous calls from international organizations, human rights groups, medical experts, and activists, the European parliament’s civil liberties, justice, and home affairs committee, and the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the government refused to bend to pressure. Rather, the government boasted of the protests of asylum seekers whose applications had been rejected — taking their complaints as a success story. This sent a message to its electorate that “deportation targets” are being met and anti-immigration promises fulfilled.

Also read: Voices of Despair From a Refugee Camp in Greece

“Integration policies” have also hardened, in a cruel effort to show potential asylum seekers that their life in Greece would be made impossible, even if their claims were recognised. The new Greek law on asylum reduced from six months to just one the length of time recognised refugees are allowed to stay in camps or UN-managed accommodation after securing state protection. Emergency benefits are also discontinued after a month, since refugees are nominally entitled to apply for Greek tax and social insurance numbers — allowing them, in theory at least, to find work. In reality, absurd bureaucratic demands and contradictory requirements on refugees are designed to make it practically impossible for them to secure accommodation or employment.

This punitive approach was further illustrated by the actions of the mayor of Athens — the prime minister’s nephew, also affiliated with the governing New Democracy party. He removed the benches in the city’s Victoria Square in a bid to stop refugees loitering there. This public square was a focal point of solidarity for refugees during the 2015–2016 crisis and was a place recognised refugees turned to once again to find temporary refuge once they were thrown out of the camps.

Far-right influence

This hostility against migrants and refugees is not just a matter of public discourse, but also apparent in the choice of personnel to run the refugee camps across Greece. It was recently revealed that the appointed director of the refugee camp at Pyrgos, in the Peloponnese, had been published by a Nazi-affiliated publishing house, which had also published books by prominent members of the fascist Golden Dawn party.

Similarly, an education coordinator at the refugee camp in Malakasa, responding to comments made by the famous Greek NBA basketball player Giannis Antetokounmpo on his experience of racism in Greece as a child and young adult, described him as a “monkey” and  an “asshole n . . .” in a tweet that was later deleted (in fact, the official in question was first appointed in 2017 under the Syriza government).

The vast public outcry — unanimous among anti-racist activist groups as well as centrist and left-wing parties — forced his removal. Nonetheless, the fact that individuals with such views have been put in charge of the vulnerable refugee population is yet another indication of the xenophobia driving the current approach toward migrants and refugees in Greece.

Weaponised

et even more than the harm caused to vulnerable and helpless people, the most devastating effect of such practices is the normalisation of the far-right mentality that dehumanises migrants and refugees. The narrative that sees refugees and migrants as a “weapon” used by Turkey against Greece has become hegemonic, not only within the right-wing government but also among the left-wing opposition. Faced with the border incidents of this March, Syriza leader Alexis Tsipras stated that “the government was right in closing the borders” and that Greece is, indeed, “facing a geopolitical threat by Turkey.”

This narrative risks silencing as “unpatriotic” or “anti-Greek” any critical voices that place the emphasis on the drama of the new “wretched of the earth,” rather than the nationalist effervescence against the “Turkish threat.” For if Turkey is, indeed, instrumentalising the migrant and refugee population for its own geopolitical plans in the region, Greece instrumentalises them, too. On the domestic front, they have become a convenient scapegoat for Greece’s economic uncertainty and lack of clear prospects; on the external front, they are painted as Turkey’s human artillery against an assumed Greek cultural integrity.

Also read: Refugees Forced to Return to Syria Face Imprisonment, Death at the Hands of Assad

Amid the ongoing Greek-Turkish dispute around economic sovereignty on the Aegean Sea over the past few months, with attention turned to handling the COVID-19 pandemic, the ideological dehumanisation of refugees and migrants is escalating. For during the crisis, they are painted as “illegal” interlopers unworthy of assistance and protection. In this picture, they appear as a burden for the Greek economy, even if the cost of assistance to refugees is essentially covered by external donors and sources. But, more darkly, they are also portrayed as a threat to national security and the national existence of Greece itself.

European response

Ylva Johansson, who oversees migration policy at the European Commission, condemned the Greek government, insisting that “We cannot protect our European border by violating European values and by breaching people’s rights” and that “Border control can and must go hand in hand with respect for fundamental rights.” Yet Greece is hardly alone in this game — and the EU is no mere bystander. This is particularly clear in the case of its border and coast guard agency, Frontex, which is aware of illegal practices such as pushbacks.

This was clear from Der Spiegel’s investigation on the suspicions about Greece abandoning refugees at sea, which concludes that Frontex may bear some of the responsibility, since they refrained from intervening. It adds that while the German Coast Guard also operates in the area and are aware of the situation, they seem to be tolerating such practices. Let’s not forget that following the events at the Greek-Turkish border at Evros this March, European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen had no hesitation in congratulating Greece as “our European shield.” She offered it help to patrol those same borders — apparently at any cost.

What we are seeing in Greece is indicative of a more general sea change in attitudes toward refugees and migrants, evident in EU policies that put the emphasis on policing European borders rather than integrating migrants and refugees. This is the same logic that presents an alleged “European way of life” as under threat from outsiders — and thus in need of tough defenses. With the most destitute people dehumanised and represented as a threat, and far-right talking points normalised, any trace of European humanism is fast disappearing.

Rosa Vasilaki is an Athens-based sociologist and historian. She holds a PhD in history from Paris’s Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales and a PhD in sociology from the University of Bristol.

This article was first published on Jacobin. Read the original here