Tag: Delhi migrant workers

Widening the Food Security Net: Lessons From Delhi’s 2020 Lockdown

The Delhi government’s efforts to expand food security benefits offer a unique vantage point to understand issues in universalising access to food and arriving at solutions that will regain the trust of the urban poor and migrants.

Delhi is under lockdown, as are many other cities and towns ravaged by COVID-19.

This lockdown has disproportionately affected the livelihoods of migrants; more than 8 lakh of whom reportedly left the city in an act of distress between mid-April and mid-May 2021. While the focus of this brutal second wave remained on the severe paucity of medical infrastructure, another crucial aspect – food relief to underserved populations, that was a key policy concern last year – has only recently garnered some attention with the ongoing hunger crisis.

At the beginning of May this year, the chief minister of Delhi announced that ration card holders in the city will get free foodgrain for two months to mitigate economic problems that the poor and daily wage earners were facing on account of the lockdown. While this offered relief to the city’s 72 lakh ration card holders, a misreading of the message led to many, without ration cards, attempting to seek assistance; and to disappointment when they realised that the promised relief was out of reach.

Considering that the Delhi government had successfully executed a large-scale food support for non-ration card holders in 2020, such reactions to the announcement reflect sheer desperation when lockdowns hit livelihoods, resulting in food shortages. On May 25, 2021, when the disease situation had largely stabilised, the Delhi government issued guidelines for a scheme to offer foodgrains’ support initially to 200,000 (2 lakh) people without ration cards. This is said to be extendable later to a maximum of 20 lakh based on the “demand and need assessment from the field”.

While this initial number of 2 lakh is intriguing considering that the Delhi government provided non-PDS (public distribution system) food relief to over 30 lakh unique beneficiaries last year, as per data available from the Food & Civil Supplies Department website, the current scheme differs from last year on another significant point.

Also read: Lack of Political Will, Not Grains, Is Why We Do Not Have Universal PDS

It is a “one-time relief measure”, in comparison to last year’s relief measure that continued for around three months. Keeping in view the long-term effects of the pandemic and lockdown, a more sustained food security intervention to cover those who are currently left out of the PDS is necessary.

With this background, it is worthwhile to look at how Delhi, a city of more than 200 lakhs, widened its food security net under the 2020 lockdown? What lessons are in sight for administrators to serve the scores of migrants, daily wage earners and others whose sources of livelihood have dried up once again? How can the government’s vision that aims: “to ensure the welfare of daily wagers and migrants staying in Delhi” in the backdrop of a recent Delhi Disaster Management Authority order be fulfilled? Can good practices be efficiently implemented to set up a sustainable safety net against ongoing hunger challenges, rather than ad-hoc arrangements of relief at the onset of each wave of pandemic surges?

People wait to receive free food at an industrial area, during an extended nationwide lockdown to slow the spreading of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in New Delhi, India, April 23, 2020. Photo: Reuters/Danish Siddiqui

While nearly 2000 Hunger Relief Centres where cooked meals were distributed sprung up last year, these are less conspicuous this time with just about 200-odd centres operating currently. During the 2020 lockdown, the city’s 7.20 lakh ration card holders were to receive their regular PDS foodgrain allocation for free; alongside an additional allocation under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana (PMGKAY) free of cost.

Both these government initiatives are being implemented again during the current lockdown. Further, the Delhi government had sought to provide temporary ration support to around 30 lakh people outside the PDS net through e-coupons last year; however, while guidelines for a similar scheme have been announced, as mentioned above, its scope appears limited, and it has not yet been operationalised.

The 2020 experience offers lessons that underscore the huge potential of outreach when the state machinery is cranked up, while overcoming challenges in the form of unequal supplies to demands at relief centres, and hold-ups in the disbursement of e-coupons compounded by technical snags.

Also read: Ration Supply Still Eludes Most Poor in Delhi as They Battle COVID, Job Losses

Essentially, there are three challenges in dealing with issues around food security and related welfare measures reaching the intended beneficiaries. Given the challenges of governing a metropolis like Delhi, the first issue is that of how to ensure portability of benefits; second, streamlining of facilities providing cooked food during the lockdown period; and the third, optimum interaction between various departments for efficacious last-mile delivery.

In the first case, the city administrators have quite a task at hand in ensuring that the benefits accruing under food security measures would reach even those who did not have any documentation proof of a residential address in Delhi. The challenge arises in the form of an inability to serve migrants who are typically registered for PDS benefits in their states of origin, and those who might have moved locations within the city either voluntarily or on account of forced relocations. Additionally, outdated datasets determining the eligibility of beneficiaries to be included under PDS can cause further exclusions. Moreover, if a person or household’s category of allocation (i.e, Antyodaya Anna Yojana or priority households) is also decided using old datasets, there are chances of incorrect categorisation and continuing food insecurity.

During the previous lockdown, the Delhi government addressed this through a temporary ration system through e-coupons, which required a single identity proof – the Aadhaar card – that did not need to have a Delhi address. With this minimum requirement backed by technology-enabled solutions and political will, the benefit under the scheme could reach a vast majority of the underserved.

A spin-off feature of this scheme was that the government relied on potential beneficiaries self-selecting into the scheme as against the existing mechanism under the targeted Public Distribution System (PDS). As for the cooked meals at Hunger Relief Centres (HRCs), there was no documentation requirement at all; subject to availability of food, anyone who queued up for the cooked food could access it.

Secondly, publicly available data revealed that during the 2020 lockdown and initial part of unlock phases, a daily average of around 3.6 lakh cooked daytime meals were distributed through the HRCs. At its highest single-day capacity, an impressive distribution of nearly 9.2 lakh cooked meals during the daytime of May 3, 2020, was organised. A district-wise analysis further shows that in Delhi’s districts where the level of impoverished population was high (such as in North-West, North-East and South-West), the delivery of cooked meals too was higher.

Also read: Out of Work, Poor Not Getting Rations, Information on Schemes: Food Rights Activists

Under the current lockdown, the Delhi government can consider prioritising available resources in a spatially targeted manner, using updated data to assess the demand for cooked food across districts. At the same time, there is a need to step-up supply and distribution of cooked food in districts (such as North-West and West) where the demand was more in relation to the population not covered under PDS.

Representative image. Credit: Reuters

Representative image. Photo: Reuters

Third, the Delhi government’s food relief efforts during the 2020 lockdown demonstrate a high degree of convergence among different departments and redeployment of available physical infrastructure. For instance, if the Department of Food and Civil Supplies oversaw the distribution of cooked food, the centres were run in schools under the Department of Education or in night shelters operated by the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board. Integrated and dynamic data-sharing across departments is key to addressing food security challenges, alongside coordination among public and private agencies, and civil society organisations.

The Delhi government’s efforts to expand food security benefits offer a unique vantage point to understand issues in universalising access to food. Notwithstanding recent changes in Delhi’s governance model, challenges would remain in the form of multiple administrative controls between the Centre, the State and urban local bodies. Policymakers could lean on lessons from Delhi’s 2020 efforts to widen the food security net to arrive at solutions that will regain the trust of the urban poor and migrants in the city’s governance systems.

Eesha Kunduri is a PhD student at University of Minnesota, Twin Cities; Shamindra Nath Roy is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi; and Shahana Sheikh is a PhD candidate at Yale University. The authors gratefully acknowledge comments from Partha Mukhopadhyay and K.V. Prasad. Views expressed are the authors’ own. 

Should Delhi’s Poor Expect Its Chief Minister to Live up to His Promise?

Five tenants and one landlord have approached the Delhi high court asking it to direct the state government to fulfil a ‘legitimate expectation’ promised by the chief minister.

Can, or should, the poor of Delhi have any expectations at all from the Delhi government?

Five tenants and one landlord, living in the area of Palam village and Chirag Dilli, think that they can; and that too not as a dole, but as their right. They believe that when a government makes a promise, it gives rise to an expectation amongst people which in turn imposes a duty on the government to honour that promise. Therefore, they have requested the Delhi high court to direct the Delhi government to fulfil what they consider to be a ‘legitimate expectation’. How did this happen?

On March 24, 2020, the prime minister declared a nationwide COVID-19-induced lockdown, a decision which left people across the country stunned. Delhi was no exception.

The population of Delhi is estimated to be around three crore. A survey carried out by the Directorate of Economics & Statistics (DES) of the Delhi government between November 2018 and November 2019, found that around 33% of the residents in Delhi were living in rented accommodations. This means that there were around one crore tenants in Delhi.

Obviously, and mercifully, not all of the one crore tenants would have been severely affected by the lockdown. Similarly, not all would have been completely unaffected. There seems to be no data available in the public domain to assess how many tenants were badly affected.

So, resorting to estimation, let us assume that about 20% of the tenants were really badly affected. Even by such a conservative estimate, about 20 lakh, or 2 million people are struggling to pay their rent after having lost their jobs and livelihoods as well as savings. These would largely be daily-wage workers, rickshaw pullers, street vendors, etc. who are paid every day for the work that they do. Several of them, working as maids, cooks, delivery boys, etc. may not have a regular source of income, forcing them to look for work frequently.

Also read: Covid’s Lockdown: Hell Hath No Fury Like a Landlord Scorned

Some of them might have had some meagre savings to sustain themselves for a few days. Once these savings were exhausted, they were not able to pay their rents, and thus faced the spectre of eviction with no place to go to! They were, and still are, living under the constant fear of being evicted from their rented accommodation in this biting cold weather while all their belongings are being withheld as collateral. To avoid this nightmare, some of them have had to resort to seeking large amounts of loan or debt at high interest rates.

The chief minister’s promise

It was under these circumstances that just five days after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the lockdown, Delhi’s chief minister Arvind Kejriwal made a public announcement on March 29, 2020, requesting all landlords to postpone rent collection for some time and not to pressure their tenants. In a very considerate and thoughtful gesture, the chief minister went on to promise that if any of the tenants were not able to pay their rents due to poverty, even after such postponement, the Delhi government would pay the landlords. This announcement was widely reported and lauded. All the tenants who were living under the spectre of eviction heaved a sigh of relief.

Representative image of a migrant family walking through a New Delhi road. Photo: PTI

The promise that the chief minister made was a part of an attempt to stop lakhs of people from leaving Delhi since they had lost their livelihood and had no ability to pay their rent, and sustain themselves through the lockdown. In the absence of public transportation, many of them decided to simply walk hundreds of miles to their native villages; many of them died. The health – and humanitarian – crisis triggered by this mass migration was a disgrace to the nation, the government, and its infrastructure was unable to cope with the pressure.

To persuade workers not to leave in panic, the chief minister said that they could continue to live in their rented accommodations without worrying about paying the rent. The assurance worked, and a lot of tenants decided to stay put while their rent continued to accumulate.

However, as time passed, the overall rent due continued to increase but no help seemed to be forthcoming from the government. The patience of the landlords started to run low and the pressure on the tenants started increasing. Finally, tenants and some landlords started writing letters and sending emails to the chief minister reminding him of his promise and asking him to honour it. Starting from the last week of August till the last day of October, the chief minister received more than 360 such letters and emails, but he failed to reply to them in any meaningful way.

Also read: The Right Time to Speak of Housing Rights in India is Right Now

Faced with this grave situation, five tenants and a landlord decided to approach the Delhi high court requesting the court to direct “the Government of NCT of Delhi to honour the promise made by its Chief Minister on 29.03.2020.” The petition, titled Najma v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi was listed for the first hearing on November 11, but could not be heard and was postponed to November 25. It was postponed again, twice, once to December 08 and then to December 17. Finally, the hon’ble court decided to issue a notice to the government on December 17.

The government of NCTD has to file a counter-affidavit within four weeks clarifying its stand on its promise. The government will have to explain why, despite the passage of over nine months, and receiving more than 360 requests from aggrieved tenants and landlords, it has failed to honour its promise.

The ‘Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation’

This is where the ‘Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation’ comes in. One of the earliest mentions of the “Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations” was in the English Law in the case of Schmidt v. Secretary of State for Home Affairs (1969). It was observed that a foreigner who had been given leave to enter the UK, had the right to be heard and had a legitimate expectation of being allowed to stay for the allowed time.

One of the most comprehensive discussions of this doctrine is found in Abdi v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2005). The judgment written by Lord Justice Laws, and agreed to by Lord Justice Thomas and Justice Nelson, devoted as many as 36 paragraphs (from paragraph 35 to 71) to a discussion of “Legitimate Expectation”.

Possibly the first discussion of the Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation in India was in the case of State of Kerala v. K.G. Madhavan Pillai (1988). In this case, sanction was issued for the respondents to open a new aided school and to upgrade the existing schools. Just after 15 days, another order was issued to keep the previous sanction in abeyance. This order was challenged by the respondents in lieu of violation of principles of natural justice. The Supreme Court ruled that the sanction had entitled the respondents with legitimate expectation and the second order violated principles of natural justice.

Delhi slum urbanisation

A woman hangs a blanket out to dry, at a slum in New Delhi, India January 2, 2020. Photo: Reuters/Danish Siddiqui

Subsequently, there were other judgments, some of the notable ones being:

Navjyoti Coop. Group Housing Society v. Union of India (1992); Food Corporation of India v. Kamdhenu Cattle Feed Industries (1993); Union of India v. Hindustan Development Corporation (1993); and Madras City Wine Merchants v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994).

The most recent and comprehensive analysis and discussion of the ‘Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation’ came on December 01, 2020, in the case State of Jharkhand v. Brahmputra Metallics Ltd., Ranchi. Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, writing on behalf of a division bench consisting of himself and Justice Indu Malhotra made some very significant observations. A few of these deserve to be reproduced here:

“The doctrine of legitimate expectations is founded on the principles of fairness in government dealings. It comes into play if a public body leads an individual to believe that they will be a recipient of a substantive benefit” (Paragraph 32).

“(T)he basis of the doctrine of legitimate expectation in public law is premised on the principles of fairness and non-arbitrariness surrounding the conduct of public authorities” (Paragraph 35).

“Representations by public authorities need to be held to scrupulous standards, since citizens continue to live their lives based on the trust they repose in the State. … When public authorities fail to adhere to their representations without providing an adequate reason to the citizens for this failure, it violates the trust reposed by citizens in the State” (Paragraph 37).

Most significantly, Justice Chandrachud counselled the governments and instrumentalities of the state in very clear terms: “The state must discard the colonial notion that it is a sovereign handing out doles at its will. Its policies give rise to legitimate expectations that the state will act according to what it puts forth in the public realm.” (Paragraph 45).

Also read: Tenancy Agreements and COVID-19 Lockdown: A ‘Majeure’ Headache

It is now up to the Delhi high court to determine if the landlords and tenants of Delhi are justified in having developed a “legitimate expectation” that the promise made by the chief minister on March 29, 2020, just five days after the prime minister announced the unprecedented lockdown, will be honoured!

If the high court takes the view that this “expectation” on the part of the landlords and tenants is indeed “legitimate”, and directs the government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, to fulfil the promise made by its chief minister, then millions of tenants would be able to live with dignity and peace of mind, and not under the constant fear of being evicted from their rented accommodation while all their belongings getting withheld as collateral.

The hon’ble high court’s acceptance of the ‘Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation’ as elucidated by Justice Chandrachud of the Supreme Court in the Brahmputra Metallics judgment, has the potential of making a very significant and fundamental change in the way this country is governed. This may well, we say this with great trepidation as well as hope, make political leaders feel responsible for and accountable for what they say. They would be required to match their actions with their words. It is only then that the state would have discarded “the colonial notion that it is a sovereign handing out doles at its will”.

Jagdeep S. Chhokar is a former professor, dean, and director in-charge of IIM, Ahmedabad, and was the first chairperson of Aajeevika Bureau, an organisation that works on issues related to migrant workers. He is also an advocate. Views are personal. Gaurav Jain is an advocate, practicing at the Delhi high court. He is the counsel for the petitioners (tenants and landlords) in the case in the Delhi high court.

Disclosure: The second author is the counsel for the petitioners in Najma v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi.

Review: ‘Eeb Allay Ooo!’ Is a Satire Whose Heart Beats for the Marginalised

Migrant lives can get dehumanized in a world that sees them just as machines.

A man and a monkey, in Lutyens’ Delhi. Man proposes, monkey disposes. The man calls, distracts, threatens: the monkey stays put. He jumps, squeals, shoos: no difference. It’s a live broadcast of different stages of grief. There’s denial and anger, despair and bargain. The man accepts and moves on; the money stays. It’s a bright afternoon, the country’s most hallowed corner resembles a jungle, where a man has become a monkey.

That man, Anjani (Shardul Bhardwaj), a recent migrant to Delhi, is just doing his job. He’s a professional ‘monkey repeller’, stationed outside government buildings – Rail Bhawan, Vigyan Bhawan, Nirman Bhawan – so that the sarkari babus can work undisturbed. In a democracy, all people are equal, but some more equal than others; In Indian democracy, though, not all people are even people. Prateek Vats’ debut, Eeb Allay Ooo!, which recently played at YouTube’s We Are One steaming event, sets up a fascinating, unsettling premise: it pricks Darwin’s theory of evolution.

Anjani got this job, because it was the only job available – and the only one he could do. He hasn’t finished school, can’t cook, can’t drive: he can’t ‘serve’ the city slickers in any useful way. His home state, presumably Bihar, had nothing for him, and Anjani has nothing for the city. That makes him uniquely homeless, a man resembling a milestone, a desperate in-betweener. The motif of transition – of constant movement and tiredness – runs throughout the film. Anjani takes long metro rides to work. Several scenes have shots of passenger trains moving past level crossings, carrying with them thousands of Anjanis: invisible people from an invisible nation.

Even though Anjani is the main character, Eeb Allay Ooo! broadens its canvas, telling the stories of his brother-in-law and sister: migrants turned settlers. His brother-in-law works as a security guard. The pay is modest, and a possible increment of Rs 1,000 means a lot for the family. But that comes with a catch, for he’ll have to own a gun – a condition that distresses his pregnant wife. The brother-in-law is where Anjani would like to be – well-settled, connected, married – yet Eeb Allay Ooo! shows the outcome of that success: less pay, limited upward mobility, casual dehumanisation by his boss. A life that keeps crunching him in a corner, a life where surviving is winning. Seen from that viewpoint, Anjani fighting with monkeys feels discomfiting; the binaries of his life – the chasm between expectations and reality, appearance and feeling – seem relentless and cruel.

Cinematographer Saumyananda Sahi depicts that contrast well. Anjani’s workplace, Lutyens’ Delhi, is captured through long and wide shots – admiring the country’s iconic buildings, Rashtrapati Bhavan and India Gate, from afar, exuding a sense of magnificence. His home on the other hand, which he shares with his sister and brother-in-law, is cramped; the shot lengths are longer here, making you as suffocated as the dwellers. The camera is a silent, inquisitive presence around the monkeys – following them climb electric wires, jump on ledges, stand on sheds – making this fictional feature cinéma verité.

Also Read: ‘Gulabo Sitabo’ Drifts Along, Picking Up Some Rhythm Only Towards the End

Primarily a funny, penetrating satire

Eeb Allay Ooo! is primarily a funny, penetrating satire. The scenes of Anjani struggling with monkeys are underpinned by grave misfortune, but they’re overshadowed by absurdity and inanity. Further, the set-up – a hapless young man, the people in power, monkeys – provides ample scope for social commentary. At one point, you hear, “Raisina Hill is ruled by monkeys”, a dialogue that could be true one way or the other. Then, of course, there’s Hanuman. Unlike Anjani, some people outside the government buildings feed the monkeys, for they feel they’re serving the god. Worshipping gods but deriding people – a constant expression of Indian reverence and indifference, a reality so ubiquitous that it’s terrifying. It’s quite telling in fact that the current state of the country can be summed up in six simple words: ‘the government, god, and marginalised citizens’. Eeb Allay Ooo! circles around each one of them.

But the best and most affecting portion of the movie centres on Anjani navigating the city: asking people for jobs; hanging placards, listing his name and phone number, in front of houses; falling in love with a woman; exploring a softer side of the city with her. It’s a refreshing change, because our films treat the migrant workers the way we treat them: as service-providing machines; machines that should stay silent and invisible, machines that should work and evaporate. But Eeb Allay Ooo! cares, lifting the migrant from the trappings of political abstractions, dignifying his fight and making him a person.

A still from ‘Eeb Allay Ooo!’

The movie is also a nuanced commentary on success. For a country battling the eternal postcolonial condition, success is often equated to escape – or any state that doesn’t suffocate or enslave. For the upper-middle class, that could be America; for the lower-middle class, that could be an Indian metropolis. Eeb Allay Ooo! understands this obsession with destination. Anjani’s sister feels proud that her brother does a “government job”, and in a way she’s right. It’s another matter altogether that Anjani loathes it and desperately craves another escape. The business of life then becomes a cyclical beast. Makes you shuttle from one place to another, no permanency, no solace; a person becomes a bus stop.

The acting is impressive across characters, but Bhardwaj’s performance is particularly memorable. He nails the grand and the minute: moments of mischief and curiosity, of sincerity and despair and desperation. There are so many Indian expressions – sentiments between sentiments – that don’t come on screen, because Hindi cinema mostly believes in a final product. But Bhardwaj’s vocabulary, mimicking the man he plays, is one of constant search; the result is spellbinding.

Eeb Allay Ooo! is a sharp condemnation of the Indian state, but it’s not angry or bitter. Those emotions are reserved for people who have agency, people who are considered… people. The movie instead offers disenchantment and dejection, wrapped in absurdist whims. Stranded between two jungles – populated by literal and metaphorical animals – the migrant worker is once more in a state of transition: the journey is a joke, the destination a cruel, consolation prize.

Yogi’s Office Promised ‘1000 Buses’, Yet MHA Blames ‘Fake Media Reports’ for Delhi Crowd

A home ministry affidavit in the Supreme Court avoids mentioning the UP government’s tweet on the morning of March 28 – the day crowds ended up at Anand Vihar terminal – of buses to take migrants home.

New Delhi: Conveniently ignoring the fact that it was the Uttar Pradesh government of Yogi Adityanath which had tweeted out an assurance of “1000 buses” for migrants on the morning of March 28, the Ministry of Home Affairs has told the Supreme Court that “fake media reports” and “misinformation” were to blame for the large number of desperate workers seen at the Anand Vihar bus terminal and Ghazipur border area in Delhi that evening.

Apart from sidestepping the root cause of the migrant worker crisis – the uncertainty over employment caused by the lockdown, companies and factories laying them off, and their dwindling stock of food and money – this is second time in nine weeks that the Modi government has sought to mislead the apex court about the role of the media.

In a hearing at the end of March, solicitor general Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court that the exodus of migrant workers from Delhi and other cities which started after Prime Minister Modi announced the first lockdown from March 25 was triggered by “fake news” in the media. Though the government provided no evidence to back up this claim, the bench headed by Chef Justice S.A. Bobde took Mehta’s words at face value and declared “it… is not possible for us to overlook this menace of fake news either by electronic, print or social media”.

This charge of ‘fake news’ has now been repeated again with the MHA –  as first reported by The Hindu – submitting an affidavit to the court on June 5 asserting that “due to circulation of certain misinformation in the area of GNCT (Delhi), thousands of migrants gathered at Anand Vihar bus terminal and Ghazipur border area on March 28. This gathering occurred due to fake media reports that 1,000 buses for travel of stranded migrants to their home State have been arranged and would be available at the said points.”

UP government had promised buses

While terming reports of buses being arranged as “fake”, the affidavit remained silent on the fact that the UP government on March 28 had made a public promise about providing transportation and that even the figure of  “1,000 buses” was put out by Yogi Adityanath’s office.

The chief minister’s office posted a message on its official Twitter page at 11.51 am on March 28 to this effect:

(Translation: “In order to help workers migrating due to the lockdown imposed as part of efforts to combat the Coronavirus, the UP government has made arrangements for 1000 buses which people can use to reach their destinations without any difficulty. CM @myogiadityanath personally monitored this arrangement the whole night”.

Watch | ‘No Work, No Money’: Thousands Stranded on Anand Vihar Bus Stand

The MHA affidavit similarly ignores the fact that the Delhi government had also made a public announcement about buses being arranged to take the migrant workers home.

Upon seeing thousands of migrants who had started to walk back home, the Delhi government too announced that it would arrange buses for them. Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia and transport minister Kailash Gehlot had both tweeted about these arrangements.

In a tweet at 12.24 pm on March 28, Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia had said that 100 buses have been arranged by the Delhi government and 200 by the UP government to transport the migrants.

Sticking to the official narrative of tens of thousands of people rendered jobless and even homeless by the suddent lockdown having been misled into setting off from Delhi and elsewhere, the MHA affidavit said, “migrant workers not only in Delhi but also in other parts of the country due to anxiety, instigation and other psychological reasons started a journey to their home town on foot”. (emphasis added)

According to The Hindu, the MHA affidavit also appended a letter written by the Delhi lieutenant governor Anil Baijal to chief minister Arvind Kejriwal on March 29 in which he said, “fears and anxieties were further compounded by the unsubstantial [sic] rumours floating on social media that the lockdown is to be extended for three months”.

Incidentally, the lockdown is now already in its third month.

Though it is now amply clear that the solicitor general had misled the Supreme Court by claiming on March 31 that ‘no one is now on the road’, the affidavit repeats the claim made by the government  then and in a subsequent status report that “no migrant worker was on road walking” [sic].

What migrant workers at Anand Vihar said

Apart from its unsubstantiated allegations against the media and its failure to disclose the UP government’s official assurances of “1,000 buses” for migrant workers, the MHA affidavit also runs contrary to what the situation on the ground was.

When correspondents of The Wire visited Anand Vihar on March 28, the migrant workers had a different story to narrate. Most of the daily-wage labourers and migrant workers said that with no assurances of food and little money in hand, they had no choice but to return to their homes, even if it risked carrying the virus to their village.

Many workers also said that their livelihoods and earnings had been impacted by the riots in north east Delhi. With no money to pay their rent or buy food, and the lack of a contingency plan by the government to cater to the needs of daily wage labourers during the lockdown, many decided to head off to their native villages, on foot if need be.

Also read: In Photos: With No Govt Aid, Locals Come Together to Help Labourers Leaving Delhi

MHA had earlier acknowledged promise of buses

In order to sustain its claim that “fake media reports” were to blame for the crowds which thronged the bus terminal in an attempt to get home, the MHA’s affidavit avoids mentioning the ministry’s own status report of April 29 in which it had acknowledged that it was the state governments themselves which had made arrangements for buses:

“With a view to initially disperse gathering of such migrant workers at the state borders, some state governments did make arrangement for their travel by bus but eventually a final decision was taken not to permit further movement of such migrant workers and required them to stay wherever they have reached while providing for food, shelter and medical facilities.”

From demand for pre-censorship to criminal cases against media

In its submissions to the court at the end of March, the Modi government had asked the CJI’s bench to direct the media to refrain from publishing anything about the pandemic “without first ascertaining the true factual position from the … Central government.”

“In an unprecedented situation of this nature, any deliberate or unintended fake or inaccurate reporting either in electronic, print or social media and, particularly in web portals has a serious and inevitable potential of causing panic in large sections of the society.  Considering the very nature of the infectious disease which the world is struggling to deal with, any panic reaction by any section of the society based upon such reporting would not only be harmful for such section but would harm the entire nation.

“It is, therefore, in the larger interest of justice that when this Hon’ble Court has taken cognizance, this Hon’ble Court is pleased to issue a direction that no electronic/print media/web portal or social media shall print/publish or telecast anything without first ascertaining the true factual position from the separate mechanism provided by the Central Government as stated hereinabove.”

Though the court refused to accept this demand for pre-censorship, it drew attention to Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (“disobedience to an order promulgated by a public servant”) and section 54 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 which provides for punishment to a person who makes or circulates “a false alarm or warning as to disaster or its severity or magnitude, leading to panic.  Such person shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to one year or with fine.”

Since then, these and other provisions of law have been invoked by the police across the country against scores of journalists to file criminal cases against nearly two dozen journalists whose reports on the pandemic and lockdown have highlighted official acts of negligence by the authorities.

Note: This article expands on the earlier published version, including adding more detail from the MHA affidavit and the tweets by the UP and Delhi governments promising buses for migrant workers.

Watch | COVID-19 Bulletin: One in Four Returning Migrants From Delhi Test Positive in Bihar

Until May 18, the state had tested 8,337 people who had come from outside the state. Of these, 651 tested positive.

According to data released by the Bihar government, one in four migrants returning from Delhi in Bihar have been found positive. The state has tested 835 Delhi returnees, of which 218 or 26% have the infection. Until May 18, the state had tested 8,337 people who had come from outside the state. Of these, 651 tested positive. Of the 265 samples of migrant workers who returned from West Bengal, 33 tested positive. Reportedly, the count of migrants tested from each state is not proportional to the total number who have returned from that state. Yet, Delhi is an outlier along with Bengal and Haryana. This data also indicates there is a presence of a large asymptomatic population in Delhi of which some are making the move to Bihar and other states. A senior official in the Delhi health department told Scroll that “While 26% is no doubt a high number, these people would have picked it up during the journey back, not in Delhi.” Sanjay Kumar who heads Bihar’s health department also told the media website that on their front, they have drawn the attention of the concerned states to this and asked them to ensure immaculate pre-boarding screening.

South Delhi Builder Held for Assaulting Woman Migrant Labourer

A public health counsellor said she felt the need to intervene as the family wanted to return to their native place in Bihar, but couldn’t, and the incident was a snapshot of what migrants were dealing with.

New Delhi: Hours after a family of labourers who wanted to return home to Purnea district in Bihar, came back to their temporary home at a construction site in South Extension Part II after making a failed attempt to find a train, they were assaulted by the builder, who wanted them to vacate the premises.

The incident would have passed off like any other assault, but for a public health counsellor who works with WHO and UNICEF and who took the case up with the police, got a case registered and had the builder arrested.

The doctor, Sonali Vaid, who stays three houses from the P-23 South Extension Part II construction site said it was important to come to the aid of the workers when there are no trains to take them home.

“I asked the family and they said they had gone to make enquiries about getting a train to their district but returned this afternoon when they were told that the train would only be going up to Muzaffarpur district, which is nearly 300 kilometres from their native place. How would they have managed on reaching there? They would have had to walk like millions others,” Vaid told The Wire.

But, she said, the family was allegedly assaulted by the builder on returning to the site. “On hearing the commotion, when I reached the site, I saw the woman, Meera, wailing. She claimed that the builder had beaten and kicked her. He left in a car after that.”

Vaid, who recorded her conversation with the woman labourer, then shared it with her friends through social media. “I learnt that there was an ongoing dispute between them and the builder as he had paid them only partial wages.”

Also read: Here’s Why Trade Unions Have Called for a Nationwide Protest on May 22

This afternoon, she said, the builder, who the family identified as Lota Batra came to the site and allegedly assaulted the woman while her children were around. He asked them to vacate the premises.

In a message to her friends, Vaid further wrote: “At 4 pm 19th May woman was sleeping – she alleges builder came and started kicking her – she woke up. He ordered them to leave – they pleaded – he threw a brick at the woman. I (Sonali) got a call from them asking for help. When I reached site she was crying & in distress. And narrated the incident to me.”

A complaint was subsequently lodged with the police. The woman was taken to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences for a medical examination. The Hauz Khas police later registered an FIR and arrested the builder.

Vaid said she was not an activist or someone who regularly helped migrant workers. “Today, I thought I have to intervene. This case provided a snapshot of what the migrants are dealing with. There are no trains for them to go home. And on the other hand there is violence and oppression at the hands of builders.”

What the Modi Govt Could Learn From Kautilya and His Take on the Role of Experts

Kautilya’s prescribes that ‘in an urgent matter, the king should seek opinions and make a decision based on what the majority among them declare or what the ruler thinks would be conducive’.

The decisions that the Narendra Modi government makes in the coming months could save the lives of thousands and also whether the economy holds up.

The stakes have never been this high. The initial decision of a complete lockdown garnered popular support in the wake of confusion and fear of the unknown.

But as the panic eases and fatigue sets in, every decision of the political leadership will be judged minutely. Kautilya’s Arthashastra offers a ready guide to sound decision making based on knowledge; an aspect of power which the political realist rates higher than armed might and raw energy.

Kautilyan Framework

For Kautilya, power is threefold: the power of knowledge (mantrashakti) is the power of counsel; the power of the treasury and the army (prabhavashakti) is the power of might; the power of valour (utsahshakti) is the power of energy.

Among these, the power of counsel is superior to others. Greater importance is given to the intangible factor affecting policy choices – intellectual strength based on the collection of information, assessment and judgement.

“One wheel alone does not turn and keep the cart in motion” – therefore, rulership should be carried out with the help of associates. The ruler arrives at a policy choice through an analysis of information that he directly perceives, indirectly through communication by others, and through inference (forming an idea of what has not been done from what is done).

This combination of empiricism and inferential logic renders the procedure scientific and holistic.

The council of ministers was the highest deliberative body which assisted the ruler in decision making. The qualities essential for appointment as councillors were detailed and well deliberated upon and included boldness with a presence of mind, energetic and powerful with ability to bear troubles during a calamity. The number of councillors that the king should seek advice from is calculated too, depending on the context.

Kautilya advises against holding consultations with one (only) as he may not be able to reach a decision in difficult matters; a single councillor behaves as he pleases without restraint. In holding consultations with two, the king may be controlled by them if united or ruined if disunited. Decision making with three or four becomes possible with difficulty and with more than that, counsel becomes susceptible to leakage. However, in conformity with the place, time and work to be done, the ruler should deliberate with one or two, or alone by himself, according to (their or his own) competence.

Kautilya advises the ruler to take opinions from the councillors both individually and jointly along with their reasons for holding them.

Timeliness is also greatly emphasised; the king is advised not to deliberate for too long a time.

In an urgent matter, the king should seek opinion and make a decision based on what the majority among them declare or what the ruler thinks would be conducive for the achievement of the task.

Dichotomy of COVID-19 context

COVID-19 has presented a situation of immense uncertainty and Modi’s decision making has to navigate the dichotomy between the advice of public health advisers and his own capacity for risk.

Also read: Will Migrants’ Lockdown Experiences Become the Debris of History That Reaches the Sky?

Public health specialists are naturally inclined to base their advice on zero risk, if feasible or adopt the path of least risk. If Modi did base his decision only on public health experts, it was a decision that was focused only on saving lives from COVID-19. In hindsight it is apparent that the decision for a 21-day national lockdown from March 25 with four-hours’ notice was one such decision and it is borne out by the tone of his address to the nation.

Modi has also been handicapped due to his cabinet colleagues’ inability to formulate a way forward. A Group of Ministers formed in early April met twice but was unproductive. Kautilya’s advice of shunning single point (expert) advice was infringed and a holistic perspective overlooked.

What Kautilya advised about experts has resonance in the early 20th century quote – ‘Experts should be on tap not on top’.

The quote was used widely to explain that in making difficult decisions, consultation of experts is necessary but decisions that follow should not overly be dictated by their narrow perspectives and should instead be derived from as wide a perspective as possible.

Although this is wisdom in hindsight, a wider perspective may have reduced the impact on the economy and perhaps prevented to some extent the mass dislocation of migrant labour, a tragic spectacle that is still unfolding and has adversely effected a large mass of people. In fact, decisions taken on the return of migrant labour reveals the tension between expert advice and risk.

The first phase of the three-week lockdown till April 14, was extended by 19 days till May 3 with very limited relaxations to revive the economy. The stranded migrants got no relief till April 29 when the government suddenly permitted movement.

Migrant labourers travel by a modified vehicle to reach a bus station on their way to their native villages in Jharkhand, amid ongoing COVID-19 lockdown in Birbhum district of West Bengal, Monday, May 11, 2020.

This decision was definitely not based on expert opinion but was instead a political one after a meeting with some functionaries of the BJP. The experts however continued to impose their views and was reflected in the initial decision to negate rail travel.

However, the political risk apparently outweighed medical risks.

By the end of the second phase of lockdown, the fear that public health infrastructure would be overwhelmed had receded, though the possibility endures.

Also read: Politics and COVID-19: Will the Pandemic Result in State Power Expanding?

Yet, the decision to extend the lockdown for two more weeks till May 17 though accompanied by calibrated relaxations aimed at economic recovery, revealed that despite the enormous damage to the economy, Modi was not willing to take any greater risk. Experts were more or less still on top.

Going forward, the uneven geographic spread of COVID-19, places extraordinary demands on Centre-states cooperation, due to the inter-connectivity of supply chains needed to revive the economy. The challenge for Modi now is to get the States to take more risks while still keeping the experts on tap.

As stated earlier, Kautilya’s prescribes that ‘in an urgent matter, the king should seek opinions and make a decision based on what the majority among them declare or what the ruler thinks would be conducive for the achievement of work’. In the extant federal context, achievement of work translated as economic revival but involves public health risks that Modi and the Chief Ministers must take as was done for the decision to facilitate migrant labour movement. The problem is of convincing those risk averse and expert-reliant chief ministers. Moreover, the pot cannot call the kettle black.

The devastating impact on India’s economy and its consequences may no longer afford sole reliance on ‘saving lives’ logic. Fear of COVID-19 was politically injected into the Indian psyche and was useful to enforce the lockdown.

Reviving the economy will require a narrative of safety based on the surprisingly lower death rates that has bucked expert projections. There are no easy decisions to seek but it is prudent to remember that the main threat to India’s development and security would be its weakened economy.

Lt Gen (Dr) Prakash Menon is the Director, Strategic Studies Programme, Takshashila Institution, Bangalore and former Military Adviser in the National Security Council Secretariat.

Dr Kajari Kamal is a Research Faculty at Takshashila Institution

Delhi’s Food Scheme for the Poor is Better on Paper than on the Ground

As gaping holes emerge in the Delhi Corona Sahayata Yojana, daily wage earners remain unpaid, hungry and helpless.

New Delhi: A month ago, on April 7, Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde asked public interest lawyer Prashant Bhushan: “If they are being provided meals, then why do they need money for meals?”

Bhushan had represented a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed jointly by civil rights activists Harsh Mander and Anjali Bharadwaj to demand the payment of wages to migrant workers and minimum wage earners who have no income due to the lockdown and therefore no food.

Laxmi.

Given the opportunity, Laxmi could explain the situation to the Supreme Court. Laxmi is a homemaker and her husband has not received his wages since March 26, despite several directives by both the Delhi government and the Centre that workers must continue to be paid during the lockdown.

Since April 9, Laxmi has been going from one municipal school to another to collect rations that the Delhi government promised to provide citizens without an income during the lockdown. She first went to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) school in Pana Udyan, Narela, from where she was directed to the MCD school in Pana Paposiyan. By the time she arrived, there were no rations left. Every day she returned; every day she was told she was too late. Finally, on April 26, she was told she had already received her rations – which she had not, When she went back to the school on April 27, she was rudely told not to return.

Harassed and hungry

Under the Delhi Corona Sahayata Yojana announced by the Delhi government on April 6 for non-public distribution system ration distribution, e-coupons have been given to the needy, guaranteeing rations of four kilos of rice, one kilo of wheat, one kilo of refined oil, one kilo of chana, one kilo of sugar, one kilo of salt, 200 grams of haldi powder, 200 grams of dhania powder, 200 grams of chili powder and two 65-70 gram bars of soap.

While this looks good on paper, the distribution of these essentials is filled with discrepancies. What happened to Laxmi was not an aberration.

Arun Verma, a migrant worker in Paschim Vihar, lined up for his rations every day from April 10 to April 26. On April 27, the school authorities told him he had already received his rations and shooed him away.

On April 24, when Chandan, a factory labourer and resident of Narela, went to collect his wife Shanti’s rations with her coupon, he accidentally went to the wrong school. Later that day, the school administration demanded the return of the rations because he had been given the kit for another cardholder named Shanti. When he went to the correct school the next day, he was told he had already been given Shanti’s rations.

The notice of no food distribution.

According to Ravinder Hummana, a volunteer with Delhi’s Rozi Roti Adhikar Abhiyan, a network of organisations working on food security, no ration kits were distributed at Pana Paposiyan school on April 7. A notice placed at the school gate stated this clearly.

But the records of the Delhi government show that 713 kilos of rice were distributed at the school that day.

Hummana says the school began issuing e-coupons for this area on April 7, but the head of the school in Manmohini says ration distribution officially began from April 8 and this was confirmed by an official from Circle-01 of Food Supplies and Consumer Complaints, Department of Food and Supplies, Delhi.

However, an Aam Aadmi Party volunteer group has a document dated April 7 signed by an official from the same circle that show details of food distribution in the Narela area on that day.

The amount of distribution on April 7.

E-paperwork problems

E-coupons are the Delhi government’s way to ensure that people without ration cards still have access to essential supplies. However, registration for an e-coupon requires a functioning mobile phone with an active sim card and internet access. The person applying for the coupon must have the ability to follow an e-application process that needs an OTP. Only the head of the household can apply for an e-coupon, an Aadhaar number is essential and photos of other members of the family must be uploaded as well.

Also read: Food Rights Activists Ask Why Delhi Hasn’t Distributed Additional Foodgrains

Even this measure has problems. Some people don’t have an Aadhaar number at all. Others have changed their phone numbers since they registered for Aadhaar and now their phone number does not match the one listed in their Aadhaar records. And some people have been unable to recharge their phones, so they cannot make the application.

This means that the most vulnerable people of all, the very people for whom this scheme was created in the first place, do not have access to rations that will help them survive.

Istekar Har.

For instance, Istekar Har, a resident of Narela, has not been able to collect rations for the whole family because there is a problem with the Aadhaar records for one member of his family. Since no one in the family has received wages since March, this family of three is surviving on rations meant for two.

Istekar Har’s fellow Narela resident Shahanaj is a homemaker with the same problem. Her husband has not been paid by the construction company he works for and one of her four family members has been denied rations because his Aadhaar details are apparently incorrect. Shahanaj has proof that all her family’s Aadhaar numbers are the same as those that had been registered, but this has not been accepted.

According to a Rozi Roti Adhikar Abhiyan survey, carried out in the first week of April, of the 15 shops in Munirka which were open and distributing grains, only 13 were distributing the additional kit containing oil, chana, sugar, salt, soap and masalas, while one shop was distributing less than the stipulated quantity of food grains on the priority category ration cards.

Vani Iyer, a social worker distributing rations in Paschim Vihar, alleges that richer households claim more rations than they need by enrolling more members of their families in the scheme and this causes a shortage for people from the lower income groups.

No wages, poor grain

According to its workers, the Vijay Shirke Construction Company in Narela has refused to pay wages since March 22. Sumit, a labourer at the construction site, says he receives only two kilos of poor quality rice once every 10 days.

“Our contractor has been giving us Rs 600 per week but that is not enough. How much can I send back home?” asks Sumit.

Also read: Delhi Govt Urges Migrant Workers to Stay, Promises Food and Shelter

The quality of rations at this labour camp in Narela is so poor that Khursheed, another labourer at the site, says he cannot eat properly and one of the residents says even pigeons will not touch the rice.

About 500 people live in this camp. All allege that they receive rations only once in 10-15 days and only half the amount stipulated by the Delhi government. So far, they claim, they have received 2.5 kilos of rice, three kilos of atta, and one kilo of dal.

Though the North Delhi District Magistrate office has taken cognisance of the issues faced by the people at the camp, they still have no hope of receiving their factory wages and better quality grain. Both the sub divisional magistrate and the official from Circle-01 of Food Supplies and Consumer Complaints say they have received no complaints of harassment at the ration distribution booths.

Suchitra is a freelance journalist.

‘Prove Charges or Apologise’: TMC to Amit Shah’s Claim of Bengal Not Allowing Migrants’ Trains

The home minister wrote to the Bengal CM, alleging that the state was not allowing Shramik Special trains carrying migrants.

Kolkata: Stating that Amit Shah should apologise or prove his allegations that the West Bengal government was not allowing trains with migrant workers, TMC leader Abhishek Banerjee alleged on Saturday the home minister was spreading a “bundle of lies” after staying silent for weeks.

Banerjee, the nephew of chief minister Mamata Banerjee, said Shah was talking about the very people who have been left to fate by the Centre.


Union Home Minister Shah, in a letter to chief minister Mamata Banerjee, said the West Bengal government is not allowing trains with migrant workers to reach the state that may further create hardship for the labourers.

Referring to the ‘Shramik Special’ trains being run by the central government to facilitate transport of migrant workers from different parts of the country to various destinations, Shah said the Centre has facilitated more than two lakh migrants workers to reach home.

Also read: Fact Check: No, the Centre Isn’t Paying for Migrant Workers’ Train Journeys Home

Shah also said migrant workers from West Bengal are eager to reach home and the central government is also facilitating the train services.

“But we are not getting expected support from the West Bengal. The state government of West Bengal is not allowing the trains reaching to West Bengal. This is injustice with West Bengal migrant labourers. This will create further hardship for them,” Shah wrote.

COVID-19 Briefing: Health Ministry Notes Rise in Recovery Rate to 25%

The government refused to shed light on loosening of lockdown norms since May 3.

New Delhi: The Union health ministry on Thursday asserted that the recovery rate for COVID-19 has improved to 25%, while the fatality rate has been recorded at 3.2%.

In the last 24 hours, India’s total number of recorded cases has gone up to 33,050, after 1,718 new cases were reported, health ministry joint secretary Lav Agarwal told reporters.

He further claimed that the recovery rate for COVID-19 has improved from 13.06% to over 25% in the last two weeks. “[As many as] 8,324 COVID-19 patients, which is 25.19% of the total cases, have recovered so far,” he added. There have been 630 recoveries in the last one day.

Besides, 67 news deaths have been reported nationwide. The senior health ministry official said that the fatality rate stands at 3.2%.

Giving an analysis of ages of patients who have died due to coronavirus infection, he said that majority of the deaths had occurred in the age bracket of above 60 years. While 42% of the deaths occurred in the 60 to 75 years age group, the oldest bracket – 75 plus – accounted for just 9.2% of fatalities.

Also read: The Public Sector Is Crucial for Self-Reliance in Vaccines and Public Health

Besides, the age distribution study shows that those between 45 to 60 years account for 34.8%, while 14% cases occurred in patients below 45 years.

“It is important to note that when it comes to COVID-19, both age and co-morbidities are risk factors,” said Agarwal.

He also stated that national average of doubling time has gone up to 11 days, from 3.4 days before lockdown.

Among states, Assam, Telangana, Chhattisgarh and Himachal Pradesh have a doubling rate of over 40 days, while Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Odisha, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Punjab have doubling time between 10 to 20 days.

In answer to a question whether health ministry has any position on whether the national lockdown period should be extended beyond May 3, Agarwal vacillated. “Health ministry is very clear that we have to make physical distancing a part of our life, as a behaviour change. Along with that, it is equally important to focus on containment measures, in order to break the chain of transmission”.

The home ministry joint secretary Punya Salila Srivastava also was tight-lipped on whether there will be a loosening of restrictions on e-commerce in zones which have not been severely affected. “Please wait for the new orders,” she said.

She also deflected a question on the request of state governments to use the Railways to transport stranded migrants and other categories of persons. “Our order only deals with buses”.

With experimental drug Remdesivir getting good reviews in US as a possible coronavirus treatment, the health ministry official indicated that any celebrations were premature.

Also read: India’s Glenmark to Conduct Trials for Potential COVID-19 Drug

“As of now, there is no confirmed treatment protocol for COVID-19. Remdesivir is one of the various protocols which are being examined. Even the study on Remdesivir by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, USA, has not conclusively proved the effectiveness of the drug in curing COVID-19. We are waiting for larger evidence to take meaningful action at the field level.”

On another question that certain private health centres were charging more than the prescribed limit for rapid antibody tests, Agarwal replied that the role of these tests in detecting COVID-19 infection was highly limited.

The health ministry official also said that while several candidate vaccines have been identified, “nothing conclusive has come up”.

“Multiple stages have to be passed, to conclude safe and efficacious use of a vaccine by human beings. As far as India is concerned, we have identified Hydroxychloroquine to begin with, as a prophylaxis treatment”.

India has also exported HCQ and paracetamol tablets to 87 countries on a commercial basis during this pandemic. Besides, New Delhi will also provide 2.8 million HCQ tables as grant assistance to 25 countries, while 1.9 million tables of paracetamol is to be donated to 31 countries.