Tag: Lokesh Chandra

Taxpayers, Not Donors or Parties, Are Bearing the Cost of Printing Electoral Bonds: RTI

The government has incurred a cost of Rs 1.43 crore on printing low-denomination bonds, of which only 117 have been sold.

New Delhi: Despite the fact that the electoral bond scheme has been seriously questioned by different sections of society across the country and the petition challenging its legality in the Supreme Court is still pending, the Narendra Modi government is pressing ahead with it.

As per the response to an application filed under the Right to Information Act (RTI), electoral bonds worth Rs 19,000 crore have been printed so far. Of these, bonds worth more than Rs 6,200 crore have been sold in 13 phases altogether.

It is worth noting that the cost of printing the electoral bonds is not borne by the buyer but by the government. That means the printing cost is being borne by the people – taxpayer – indirectly.

The cost of printing one electoral bond comes to Rs 25, with an additional 6% GST charged both by the Centre and the state governments.

The State Bank of India (SBI) is the only bank authorised to sell electoral bonds. For the process by which individuals and entities can buy electoral bonds to make a donation to a political party and the party concerned can encash the bonds through a verified account with the bank, the SBI charges bank commission. These costs too are paid with taxpayers’ money.

Electoral Bond Sale and Pri… by The Wire on Scribd


Responding to an application filed by RTI activist Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retired), the SBI has disclosed that in 2018, a total of 6,04,250 electoral bonds worth Rs 7,131.50 crore were printed and the following year, 60,000 bonds totalling Rs 11,400 crore were printed.

Also Read: Electoral Bond Scheme Results in Visible Dip in Transparent Corporate Donations

The printing of electoral bonds is done at the Indian Security Press (ISP) located in Nashik. According to the documents received, the ISP’s print run thus far is as follows:

  • 2,56,000 electoral bonds of Rs 1,000;
  • 2,56,000 bonds of Rs 10,000;
  • 93,000 bonds of Rs 1 lakh;
  • 26,000 bonds of Rs 10 lakh; and
  • 14,650 bonds of Rs 1 crore.

In all, 6,64,250 election bonds have been printed at a cost of Rs 1.86 crore. And it is the Department of Economic Affairs in the Union Ministry of Finance, the taxpayer’s money, in other words, that pays for their printing. It is strange that the expense incurred in printing the electoral bonds is not recovered from the buyer or the political parties.

There have been 13 rounds of sale of electoral bonds so far in which 12,452 out of the 6,64,250 printed electoral bonds, worth Rs 6210.40 crore, have been purchased.

Interestingly, a staggering 91.81% of this amount has come through the sale of electoral bonds in the highest denomination of Rs 1 crore. The remaining 7.91%  is made up of bonds of Rs 10 lakh. The sales of bonds of Rs 10,000 and Rs 1000, have been so negligible as to be non-existent.

The documents provided by the SBI give a break-up of the number of electoral bonds sold denomination-wise:

  • 5,702 bonds of Rs 1 crore;
  • 4,911 bonds of Rs 10 lakh;
  • 1,722 bonds of Rs 1 lakh;
  • 70 bonds of Rs 10,000; and
  • 47 bonds of Rs 1000.

Printing of low-denomination bonds: an unnecessary burden on taxpayers

The above figures make it clear that the sale of the lowest-denomination bonds has been next to nothing. Since it is the Central government which pays for the printing of every electoral bond, its move to continue printing the Rs 1000 and Rs 10 bond is being seen as a waste of the taxpayer’s money.

The idea of going for low-denomination bonds was the brainchild of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which felt that it would enable people from every section of society to make contributions to political parties. This view had emerged at a time when the Modi government was thinking of launching an electoral bond scheme and had sought the opinion of all political parties.

On August 24, 2017, BJP general secretary, Bhupendra Yadav, in a letter to the then union finance minister, Arun Jaitley, had suggested that electoral bonds of Rs 10,000 and less should be considered in addition to high-denomination bonds.

Yadav wrote, “To encourage people of all strata to participate in the process, while protecting their identities from being disclosed, if that is the preference, the bonds should also be available in denomination of Rs 2,000/-, Rs 5,000/- and Rs 10,000/- in addition to the higher denomination.“ The Wire had provided this information in a report published in late November 2019.

Having accepted the suggestion, the Central government has ended up printing 2,56,000 electoral bonds of Rs 1,000 and the same amount in the denomination of Rs 10,000. The number of bonds sold in both denominations so far is only 47 and 70!

The cost incurred on the printing of bonds of these denominations is Rs 1.43 crore.

The taxpayer has to bear the cost of bank commission too

The documents procured under the RTI also reveal that the commission earned by the SBI in the sale and encashment of the electoral bond, too, is to be recovered from the Central government.

For 13 rounds of electoral bond sales held thus far, the SBI has sent the Centre a bill of Rs 3.48 crore. The SBI’s commission for the 13th round of electoral bond sale, from January 13, 2020, to January 22, 2020, is Rs 5.34 lakh.

SBI Electoral Bond Commission by The Wire on Scribd


According to a letter written by SBI chief general manager, Vasudha Bhat Kumar, to the joint secretary (budget) in the Department of Economic Affairs (Ministry of Finance), the bank has asked for the bill to be settled in full.

Also Read: PMO Told Finance Ministry to Break Rules, Sell Electoral Bonds Before Assembly Polls: Report

The documents show that the Centre has made a payment of Rs 77.44 lakh to the SBI thus far, which covers seven rounds of the electoral bond sale (until January 2019).

The SBI has asked the Union finance ministry to deposit the remaining amount of Rs 2.70 crore along with a GST of 18%, as well as 18% GST that had not been paid in the earlier instalment.

What also comes to light through the SBI chief general manager’s letter is that the Central government is deducting 5% TDS on the electoral bonds and not 10%. The bank has written to the department of economic affairs for reimbursement of 5% TDS as the Central government had deducted 10% TDS on the Rs 77.43 lakh payment it had deposited as the bank’s commission for seven rounds of electoral bond sales.

Not only that, SBI has even asked the Centre to pay the Rs 270 that the instalment of Rs 77.43 lakh had fallen short of.

The 14th round of sale of electoral bonds was to commence in April, which could not be held due to the coronavirus pandemic, although the banks have been open during this time. As of now, it is not clear whether the Centre plans to hold the next round after some time.

Although there is no provision pertaining to electoral bonds that a round of sale that is missed can be held at a later date, in 2018 the Central government did just that – the proposed sale of electoral bonds in January 2018, the first round, was actually conducted two months later, in March 2018. The framework governing the process of sale and purchase of electoral bonds was not ready by January.

Political funding and electoral bonds. Credit: PTI

For 13 rounds of electoral bond sales held thus far, the SBI has sent the Centre a bill of Rs 3.48 crore. Photo: PTI

The controversy over electoral bonds

According to election laws, if any individual or organisation makes a political donation of Rs 2,000 or more to any political party, then the party in question is required to furnish information about the donor.

The electoral bond scheme has done away with this ‘hurdle’. Now, through the electoral bond scheme, anyone can make a political donation ranging from Rs 1,000 to Rs 1 crore to any political party without his or her identity having to be revealed. All that a political party is required to disclose is the total amount of contribution that has been raised for it through the medium of electoral bonds.

It is precisely for this reason that electoral bonds are being considered a big threat to the idea of transparency in the area of political funding.

Following the launch of this scheme, there has been a distinct drop in political contributions made through other means, such as cheques, to the major political parties, and correspondingly, there has been a big spike in the donations coming through electoral bonds.

The facts speak for themselves. In 2018-19, almost 60% of the contributions raised by the BJP, amounting to Rs 1,450 crore, came from electoral funds. Contrast it with 2017-18, when the BJP declared Rs 210 crore as the donations received through electoral bonds.

Also Read: RTI Reveals Electoral Bond Scheme Passed After Only ‘Informal Discussion’ Among Officials

To introduce electoral bonds the Modi government amended several laws in 2017 (after making changes in the Finance Act, 2017, and corresponding amendments in statutes such as the Representation of People Act,1951, the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, the Income Tax Act, 1961, Foreign Contributions Regulation Act, 2010, and Companies Act, 2013. The scheme was notified in January 2018).

It is these very amendments that have been challenged in the Supreme Court by the non-governmental organisation, Association for Democratic Reform (ADR), which works towards electoral and political reform with a view to strengthening democracy and governance. However, on the last few occasions, the Supreme Court hearings have been continually put off.

In its petition, ADR has stated that the amendments to the statutes in question have opened doors for unlimited political donations by foreign companies and legitimised large-scale electoral corruption. The complete opacity built into this mode of political donations is a huge problem, the organisation has pointed out.

Last year several disclosures were made regarding electoral bonds which revealed that the RBI, Election Commission, law ministry, RBI governor, chief election commissioner and many political parties had written to the Central government to register their objections to the proposed electoral bond scheme. However, the union finance ministry had brushed aside those objections and gone ahead with their plan.

The RBI had stated that amending the RBI Act, 1934, in order to legalise anonymous donations under the electoral bond scheme would create a bad precedent – apart from encouraging money laundering it would pose a threat to the fundamental principles of the Central bank’s regulatory framework.

The Election Commission too filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court that the donations received by political parties through electoral bonds would be a threat to the very idea of transparency.

Apart from this, documents received through RTI applications show that when a draft of the proposed scheme was prepared, it had a provision for discussions and consultations with political parties and members of the public. After a sitting with Prime Minister Modi that provision was removed.

The documents also reveal that the BJP knew about the scheme even before the draft was prepared. Four days before the proposal was to be placed before the prime minister, BJP general secretary Bhupendra Yadav, as mentioned earlier, had written a letter to the then-finance minister, Arun Jaitley, with suggestions from the party for the electoral bond scheme.

Translated from the Hindi original by Chitra Padmanabhan.

Vijay Bhatkar, Head of RSS-Affiliated Science Body, Named Nalanda University Chancellor

Bhatkar is president of RSS-affiliated outfit Vijnana Bharati and was formerly chair of IIT Delhi’s board of governors.

Bhatkar is president of RSS-affiliated outfit Vijnana Bharati and was formerly chair of IIT Delhi’s board of governors.

Vijay P Bhatkar. Credit: Mahesh Mhatre/Twitter

Vijay P Bhatkar. Credit: Mahesh Mhatre/Twitter

New Delhi: Nalanda University’s third chancellor will be Vijay Bhatkar, a well-known computer scientist who is president of RSS-affiliated outfit Vijnana Bharati, which promotes ‘swadeshi’ science, and was formerly chair of IIT Delhi’s board of governors.

The university’s newly-constituted governing board recommended Bhatkar’s name to the Visitor, President Pranab Mukherjee, who then approved the appointment on Friday, January 27. There were no other choices, according to sources.

Bhatkar’s appointment was confirmed two months after George Yeo, former Singapore foreign minister, resigned from the post in protest, claiming that the Indian government had not consulted him before making a series of decisions, including deciding not to extend the term of the Nalanda Mentors Group-Governing Board, ending interim vice-chancellor Gopa Sabharwal’s extended term and determining the constitution of the new governing board.

Yeo had succeeded Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, after the latter withdrew himself from consideration for a second term, accusing the government of intervening in the university’s affairs.

Who is Vijay Bhatkar?

According to Bhatkar’s profile on his personal website, he led India’s supercomputing initiative by setting up the Center for Development of Advanced Computing in Pune in 1987, which is responsible for creating Param 8000 and Param 10000, India’s first supercomputers.

Bhatkar received a Padmashri in 2000 and a Padma Bhushan in 2015.

The Narendra Modi government appointed him to revamp the country’s highest educational policymaking body, the Central Advisory Board for Education, in February 2015. Last year, the government even forwarded his name for a vacant seat in Aligarh Muslim University’s executive council, but it was turned down by the president, according to several media reports.

As the president of Vijnana Bharati, Bhatkar spoke at a session called ‘Ancient Indian Sciences through Sanskrit’ at the 2015 Indian Science Congress in Mumbai, lamenting that it took the convention over 100 years to discuss the subject.

It was at this session that a paper claiming that ancient Indians built airplanes was presented to the attendees and its authors also called for harnessing that technology to make an indigenous aircraft under the ‘Make in India’ initiative.

Bhatkar was appointed as IIT board chair in December 2012. However, it was only after the NDA government came to power again that the role of RSS-affiliated organisations with IIT became more visible.

In January 2015, Bhatkar invited Yoga guru Baba Ramdev and the RSS’s Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram for a meeting to discuss the implementation of Unnat Bharat Abhiyan. According to a media report, Ramdev suggested that the genetic code of cows be studied, with Bhatkar echoing this idea and emphasising the need to pursue bovine research for cow-based agriculture.

The relevance of the cow for Indian agriculture seems to be pet subject for Bhatkar, as he repeated it again at the inaugural speech at the Bharatiya Vijnana Sammelan in February 2015.

“The IITs have laboratories. There are labs and labs. There are bio-tech reactors. But have you studied the cow as a reactor, bio-reactor,” he said.

He noted that cow-based agriculture was necessary for the growth of Indian agriculture. “Cow has panch dravyas (five liquids) from gomutra (cow urine) to dung to milk, curd and ghee. They have such properties and (can help) creating an alternative system for agriculture, for the health system and future healthy population of the country,” Bhatkar said, according to IANS.

Vijnana Bharati also organised a five-day science festival at IIT Delhi, in collaboration with Minister of Earth Sciences and Ministry of Science and Technology.

At the 2015 festival, the organisers attempted a Guinness record for the world’s largest science practical lesson. This ‘record’, however, caused the Prime Minister’s Office to get a verbal lashing from the RSS outfit after it was denied an award at the Indian Science Congress.

“We were communicated at the last minute that the PMO has not cleared the award to us. We were not given any reason for this. It is still not know who took the call to deny the award to us. But it came as a rude shock to office-bearers of the organization and the scientific community at large,” Vijnana Bharati’s secretary general A. Jayakumar told Hindustan Times in January 2016.

Last November, Bhatkar came out in support of the government’s withdrawal of high value notes. In a recorded video message posted on Maharashtra chief minister Devendra Fadnavis’s twitter account, Bhatkar said Modi had taken a “colossal decision which we had been waiting for decades”.

He said that there would be “some inconveniences”, but there had been “enough preparation” done in the last ten months to implement the initiative. “I congratulate that even the implementation has been handled well,” he said.

Search for vice-chancellor begins

With the appointment of the new chancellor, the path is now open for the governing board to meet and form a new search committee for vice-chancellor. The governing board could not meet thus far due to the absence of the chancellor.

Niti Aayog vice-chairman Arvind Panagariya, ICCR president Lokesh Chandra and Arvind Sharma of McGill University are the new members of the board.

As per sources, China and Thailand have re-nominated their members, while Laos and Australia are yet to confirm the names of their representatives. N.K. Singh, former revenue secretary and Rajya Sabha member, was the only Indian nominee left out from the previous mentors’ group.

As per the statutes, the governing body has to recommend at least three names for appointment as vice-chancellor to the president.

Nalanda University in Rajgir, Bihar, was conceived as a cluster of multi-disciplinary schools. Currently, the School of Historical Studies, School of Ecology and Environment Studies, and the School of Buddhist studies, Philosophy and Comparative Religion have admitted students. Five more schools in linguistics, international relations, information science and technology, economics and management, and public health are also planned.

India had proposed the revival of Nalanda University at the East Asia Summit in 2007, showcasing the project to evoke India’s cultural linkages with the South East Asia and beyond.

Exclusive: Nalanda Mentors Group Dissolved, VC’s Second Extension Denied

Just days after Nalanda University said Gopa Sabharwal would remain as vice-chancellor, extending her term till the appointment of new head, the president overruled the decision.

Days after Nalanda University said Gopa Sabharwal would remain as vice-chancellor, extending her term till the appointment of a new head, the president has overruled the decision.

Nalanda University. Credit: Nalanda University Blog

Nalanda University. Credit: Nalanda University Blog

New Delhi: President Pranab Mukherjee on Monday dissolved the Nalanda Mentors Group (NMG) – Nalanda University’s de-facto governing board. He also overruled the NMG’s decision to extend vice-chancellor Gopa Sabharwal’s term, stating that she has to demit office on November 24.

“The president, in his capacity as the visitor of Nalanda University, has approved the constitution of the governing board of the university in accordance with section 7 of the Nalanda University Act, 2010,” sources told the The Wire.

As per the 2010 Act, the new 14-member governing board will be chaired by the chancellor and will include the (acting) vice-chancellor, along with five members nominated by India, China, Australia, Laos PDR and Thailand. Former revenue secretary N. K. Singh, who was also member of the Nalanda Mentors Group, will represent India.

Besides, the government has nominated Arvind Sharma of McGill University, ICCR president Lokesh Chandra and Niti Aayog vice-chairman Arvind Panagariya to the governing board for the three seats reserved for ‘Renowned Academicians/Educationists’.

The other members will be secretary (east), Ministry of External Affairs, an additional secretary-rank official from the human resources development ministry, and two members representing the Bihar state government.

Further, the president on Tuesday ordered the senior-most dean of the university to temporarily discharge the duties of the vice-chancellor upon “completion of the extended term” of the current incumbent.

“This will be a stop-gap measure until the new vice-chancellor is appointed,” said sources.

The Wire had reported on November 19 that the ministry was not backing the decision by the governing board to give another extension to Gopa Sabharwal beyond November 25. Senior officials had told The Wire that the decision was “not legally tenable”as the 2012 statutes had only a provision for a one-time extension for the vice-chancellor “not exceeding a total period of one year”.

When asked for a clarification at the time, the Nalanda University spokesperson had defended the move, arguing that under the statutes, “the incumbent vice-chancellor is to stay on until the new vice-chancellor is in place”. “This is to ensure that there is no leadership vacuum in the university,” said a statement released to The Wire.

The statement also mentioned that the “governing board is grateful to Gopa Sabharwal for agreeing to stay on and act as the interim vice-chancellor until the new vice-chancellor which the visitor will select from a panel of names assumes office”.

On Saturday, the university had even made a public statement that there would be no hiatus in leadership.

Sources pointed out that the NMG had been “discharging” the duties of the governing board after being given repeated extensions since November 25, 2010.

Besides George Yeo and Sabharwal, the NMG-cum governing board’s members were Amartya Sen, N.K. Singh, Meghnad Desai (London School of Economics), Prapod Assavavirulhakarn (Thailand), Wang Gungwu (Singapore), Susumu Nakanishi (Japan), Wang Bangwei (China), Tansen Sen (City University of New York), Sugata Bose (Rajya Sabha member of parliament) and secretary (east), Preeti Saran.

The NMG was formed in 2007, with Amartya Sen as the head, with the aim of developing the concept of Nalanda University. The proposal was formally endorsed at the second East Asia summit in November 2007.

Thereafter, when the Nalanda University Act was passed in 2010, the NMG was supposed to exercise its power for one year from November 2010. “This was later extended to two more years due to the reason that financial contributions from some member states were not received,” said sources.

In August 2013, the Rajya Sabha referred the Nalanda University (Amendment) Bill to the standing committee on external affairs.

In line with the standing committee report, the cabinet approved the recommendation to move official amendments to the Bill in February 2014. But then parliament was prorogued for general elections in April-May.

“Due to these reasons, the term of the NMG which was discharging the functions of governing board, was extended in November 2013 until a governing board is constituted. This arrangement continued till November 21 (Monday),” said sources.

After Narendra Modi became prime minister, it was widely expected that the government would take some steps to clamp down on the university, whose chancellor, Amartya Sen had been highly critical about the prime minister.

In February 2015, Sen  refrained from seeking to serve as chancellor for Nalanda University for the second time. He had alleged that the government was deliberately not allowing the president to  assent to his continuing at the post. After Sen left the field, the government appointed former Singapore foreign minister George Yeo as university  chancellor.

The dissolution of the Nalanda Mentors Group-cum-governing board effectively  means that the selection of the new vice-chancellor will be further delayed.

In January, a five-member search panel had been set up, but there was a delay in starting the selection process due to a dispute over interpretation of statutes on whether Gopa Sabharwal’s name could be solely forwarded to the president for reappointment as vice- chancellor. Ultimately, as The Wire reported,  attorney general Mukul Rohtagi had to weigh in and the panel had to compulsorily compile a list of three names to the president to make his choice. The advertisement inviting applications for the post of vice-chancellor was issued on October 31, with the last date for application being November 30. With this latest move, the search panel, made up of members of the previous board, effectively does not exist anymore.

‘Political Pressure’ Bad for Academics: Pratap Bhanu Mehta’s Resignation Letter from NMML

“I do not believe that the candidate the committee has recommended as its number one choice commands … respect amongst the academic community.”

“I do not believe that the candidate the committee has recommended as its number one choice commands … respect amongst the academic community.”

A view of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New delhi. Credit: NMML

A view of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New delhi. Credit: NMML

On Friday, Pratap Bhanu Mehta, a member of the executive committee (EC) of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) resigned from his position to protest the manner in which the institution’s reputation and integrity were being compromised by attempts to foist a politically-connected bureaucrat as director.

The bureaucrat in question is Shakti Sinha, an Indian Administrative Service officer who had worked as private secretary to Atal Bihari Vajpayee when he was prime minister of the first BJP-led National Democratic Alliance government at the Centre.

The NMML is the country’s premier institution for research on modern Indian history and has so far been headed by directors who have had a reputation as scholars.

The previous director, Mahesh Rangarajan, resigned last year in the aftermath of statements by senior BJP leaders, including Union culture minister Mahesh Sharma, expressing unhappiness at the NMML’s orientation.

The Wire has learned that a decision to appoint Sinha to the job was taken as early as the third week of July 2016. Soon after, on July 22, an advertisement for the post of director was issued which tweaked the required qualifications to include “administrators” and not just eminent scholars. When the applications were scrutinised, the selection committee – headed by minister of state for external affairs M.J. Akbar – placed Sinha at the top of the list.

Rather than be party to Sinha’s appointment, Mehta, who is an eminent political scientist and heads the Centre for Policy Research in Delhi, has preferred to resign from his position on the EC.

Appended below is  the full text of the letter of resignation he sent on Friday, August 11, 2016, to Lokesh Chandra, chair of the NMML executive committee.

Dear Prof. Chandra,

I write to submit my resignation as member of the Executive Committee of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. I was appointed to the Committee by the present government. But developments of the last few weeks lead me to conclude that NMML is heading in a direction that makes me uncomfortable.

Under such circumstances, I feel I will not be able to contribute to the institution in any meaningful way. It is therefore right that I step down.

As you are aware, I have recorded my note of dissent against the recommendations of the selection committee.

I believe the committee, in making its recommendations, has acted in deep haste, in a way that will harm the long term reputation of a distinguished institution like NMML. NMML has a wide remit, much beyond its function as a memorial and library. It is central to the world of historical scholarship, and can potentially be a great contributor to the world of ideas more generally. It is important therefore that the head of the institution be someone who commands intellectual respect.

Pratap Bhanu Mehta. Credit: cprindia.org

Pratap Bhanu Mehta. Credit: cprindia.org

I do not believe that the candidate the committee has recommended as its number one choice commands such respect amongst the academic community. I am not in a position to comment on his abilities as an administrator. But nothing in the track record of this candidate leads me to believe that he can provide the kind of exemplary intellectual leadership NMML needs at this point in its history.

Appointing an administrator who does not have the requisite track record in the field of scholarship, or the world of letters more generally, sends a very bad signal about the stature of NMML as an institution. I believe that the appointment of such a person also violates the spirit in which the executive committee had revised the qualifications for the post of director.

As I had pointed out in the meeting of the selection committee, the advertisement we put out was at variance with the formulations of the executive committee. This advertisement paved the way, in a way in which we had not intended, for a pure administrator to be considered for the position. This advertisement was not approved by the executive committee.

It is the committee’s (and the government’s) prerogative to marginalise academic considerations if it so wishes. But I hope you will understand that I cannot be complicit in this marginalisation.

The committee should take into account administrative experience or demonstrated leadership skills. But sending a signal that completely marginalises issues of academic credibility, scholarly credentials, or larger contributions to the world of ideas or thinking does not befit an institution of the stature of NMML. It is the committee’s (and the government’s) prerogative to marginalise academic considerations if it so wishes. But I hope you will understand that I cannot be complicit in this marginalisation.

nmml ad copy

The advertisement that Mehta says the executive committee never approved.

As I had pointed out in the selection committee, the overall pool of applications was not worthy of an institution of such importance. That may have partly been the result of the process: a very tight deadline was given to applicants; the committee was given no time to do any outreach to potential candidates after the advertisement appeared. But I also suspect the reason the application pool was disappointing was this. There is an impression that good academics will find it very difficult to function in the institutional set up we have created, with its multiple political and administrative pressures. We can debate how this impression has been created. But we have to come to terms with the fact that we are doing everything to exacerbate the impression that leading institutions are hostile to academics of genuine accomplishment and promise. We are not even seeking them out, or persuading them to provide intellectual leadership to major institutions. This appointment will, I am afraid, exacerbate that impression.

Since I have put in a note of dissent, I do not wish to encumber my colleagues and the incoming director with my presence on the committee. It will only create more awkwardness all around. I respect the right of the committee to take the institution in whichever direction they think fit. But I hope equally that the committee will understand my reasons for resigning.

My colleagues have been wonderful, and a great source of learning. But when it is clear that the chasm between our visions of the kind of director NMML needs is so deep, it is time to bow out. I respectfully submit my resignation, and request that you forward it to the appropriate authorities. I shall, always, remain a friend of the institution and the highest ideals it should stand for.

Warmest best wishes,

Pratap Bhanu Mehta

The Modi Government, and RSS, Are Keen to Claim the Roma as Indians, and Hindus

The government recently organised a conference that officially validated – for the first time – the Indian origin of the Romas, raising their hopes of being a part of the Indian diaspora. But the decision is not free of Hindutva politics

The government recently organised a conference that officially validated – for the first time – the Indian origin of the Romas, raising their hopes of being a part of the Indian diaspora. But the decision is not free of Hindutva politics

External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj at the inauguration of International Roma Conference and Culture Festival 2016, organized by ICCR and ARSP, in New Delhi on Friday. Credit: PTI Photo by Manvender Vashist

External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj at the inauguration of International Roma Conference and Culture Festival 2016, organized by ICCR and ARSP, in New Delhi on Friday. Credit: PTI Photo by Manvender Vashist

New Delhi: The Roma community spread across as many as 30 countries in 5 continents has just got a huge boost in its fight for an identity. Few would have thought – even among the Romas – that a day would come when the Indian government would make a tectonic shift to own them for their “Hindi and Hindu origin’’ and pave the way to welcome them “home”.

The Narendra Modi government did just that by hosting a number of prominent Romas from 15 countries in New Delhi to deliberate on issues surrounding the community – including its Indian origin – thus validating a historical claim besides raising the hope of being recognised as a part of the Indian diaspora.

The Romas, about 20 milllion of them scattered across West Asia, Europe, the Americas and Australia, are believed to have migrated from northern India from the 5th Century onwards, beginning with the invasion of Alexander who carried with him a large number of iron smiths from nomadic groups like the Chauhans, Doms, Banjaras, Gujjars, Sanchis, Dhangars and Sikligars. However, their “motherland” never acknowledged the Roma claim officially nor did it mention their migration in its history books. Obviously then, the Modi government’s move has come as a historic change of stance for the community, particularly when it continues to face persecution and discrimiantion in many European countries.

But there is a catch here. Though the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) hosted the International Roma Conference and Cultural Festival through its cultural wing, the Indian Council for Cultural relations (ICCR), the ground work for it was done by the Antar Rashtriya Sahyog Parishad – Bharat (ARSP), one of the major organisations that nurture the overseas footprint of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s fountainhead, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Eight of the 18 Indian scholars who spoke at the conference were office bearers of the ARSP. All of them underlined the Hindu origin of the community and therefore the need to “reintegrate them to Bharat.” An exhibition to highlight the Hindu cultural identity of the Romas was also curated by the organisation at the event.

So is the Modi Government responding to the Romas’ long-held plea for recognition of their Indian origin only because of their Hindu roots? ARSP Secretary General Keshav Govind Parande and ICCR President Lokesh Chandra agree there’s the possibility of adding 20 million Romas to the Hindu fold through measures like granting People of Indian Origin (PIO) status to them but say it is wrong to see the issue only from the Hindutva angle.

Says Chandra, “There has been enough historical evidence to prove the Indian origin of the Romas. Municipal records in many European countries as old as the 10th century mention their country of origin. For centuries, the Romas had carried the art of steelware of ancient India through classical Europe. They have been the steel smiths of Europe besides singers, dancers and fortune tellers. So there is nothing Hindutva there. The government shouldn’t be questioned about it.”

roma festival 4

Artists performing at the Roma Cultural Festival. Credit: ICCR

The Roma dialect has about 1500 Hindi words, he adds. “They have lovingly preserved an early phase of the Hindi language.” Since many Romas are in important positions in various countries now, he feels, this will also help India.

In his speech at the conference, Chandra said, “When Greek scholar Paspati heard the Romas call the cross ‘Trishul’ under the clear sky of Constantinople, he realised that it refers to Trishul, the Trident of Shiva, the God of Cosmic Dance. Long ago, here was their origin… Roma scholar Dr. Vania of Paris termed his people ‘Ramno chave’ or the ‘sons of Rama’.”

Parande tells The Wire that the ARSP was waiting for “the right moment” to raise the issue of reintegrating the Romas to their motherland even though it has been in touch with community members living in different countries for the past 15-16 years.

“We have raised it now because of the friendly government at the centre,” he says, but doesn’t want it to be seen as an issue of right-wing interest alone.

“Indira Gandhi was also very keen on the Roma issue. That is why, we have put in the concept note not only what Atal Bihari Vajpayee said during his meeting with some Roma leaders in 2001 but also what Indira said while inaugurating the first Roma conference held by an organisation in Chandigarh in 1983. She said that she feels kinship with the Romas,” he says. Chandra recalls inviting Indira Gandhi to a performance by a Roma dance troupe at the Turkish embassy in New Delhi in the 1970s (Turkey has the largest Roma population in the world). “She came there to everyone’s surprise and watched the dance. Thereafter, she went to the first Roma conference in Chandigarh,” he recalls.

ARSP’s interest in the Romas goes back a long time. Lokesh Chandra’s father, Dharma Vira, who was associated with the ARSP, wrote a book on the Romas’ Hindu origin many years ago.

Inaugurating the conference at Azad Bhawan on February 12, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj too called the Romas “children of India” who migrated and lived in “challenging circumstances in foreign lands for centuries.’’

Most Indians are unaware of the Indian origin of the Romas. So this time, Parande took a Roma delegation to meet HRD Minister Smriti Irani too. “We have put across a few requests to her, such as inclusion of a page, if not a chapter, on the Indian origin of the Romas and their forced migration in our school and college history books; to institute scholarships to Roma students to come to India to study and set aside grants to pursue research on the origin of the Romas.”

Among the conference resolutions to be submitted to Swaraj is the need to set up a cell in the MEA to study and research the origin of the Romas and examine what status can be accorded to them by India. Chandra says, “Measures like these may take a while but what can come sooner than that is their cultural and social engagement with the people of India.”

Among the visiting leaders of Romas, it was not difficult to find a willingness to engage. And more.

“I appeal to the Indian government to build a political consensus on the recognition of the Romas as a linguistic, historical and cultural minority and to demand from the United Nations that their authoritative organs raise at the General Assembly the question of the legal and political position of the Romas,” said Bajram Haliti, Secretary General, the World Roma Organisation. Belgrade-based Haliti, also a poet who has published a collection on Bollywood actor Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, said, “If it is a prerequisite to change our name from Roma to Hindu, I suggest we do so. Because one of the conditions to solve the Roma issue is, as per international laws, that a minority should have a distinctive home country.”

On a lighter note, if Romas become a part of the Indian diaspora someday, Indian film and music lovers would also get to own the likes of Charlie Chaplin, Michael Caine and Elvis Presley, because the conference organisers and participants also highlighted their ‘Indian origin’ via their purportedly Roma heritage.

Government Continues to Blow Hot, Blow Cold on Nehru Library

New Delhi: Days after the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) issued a statement saying the institution had no plans to dilute the centrality of Jawaharlal Nehru from the library or museum housed in his official residence, Union Culture Minister Mahesh Sharma appears to have lowered the boom on its director.

According to PTI,  Sharma, who spoke to reporters here on Tuesday, termed the appointment of Mahesh Rangarajan as Director of NMML “illegal and unethical”. The appointment was made despite the EC writing to the Culture ministry on May 12, 2014 asking it to defer a proposal on permanent absorption of Rangarajan for the post till the election process was over, the minister claimed.

In fact, Rangarajan’s appointment was approved by the UPA cabinet on May 14, two days after the last day of polling – when the EC’s Model Code of Conduct ceases to be operational  – and he took charge as director on May 19, 2014.

Sharma also faulted the fact that Rangarajan was made director till retirement rather than for a three-year tenure, as had been the case with the previous incumbent, Mridula Mukherjee.

Asked by reporters why he and the NDA government had not spoken about the director’s appointment before, Sharma said, “We never wanted to raise this issue. But, once Congress leaders including the Congress president has reacted on this issue, now it has become our duty to bring the facts before the public.” Sharma said the appointment had been “illegally” made and that the government would be taking an appropriate action in the matter.

In the normally partisan world of Indian history, Rangarajan’s stewardship of the NMML has drawn praise from both Left and Right, with the institution hosting a large number of seminars, talks and events focused both on historical as well as contemporary subjects. The library’s collection has also grown and its status as India’s premier centre for research involving 20th century documentation remains unmatched.

While no politically-induced change in the NMML’s functioning is as yet evident – or on the cards as per the official modernisation plan approved in June – recent statements by the Culture Minister have stoked fears about the government’s intentions.

“The museum will be revamped to showcase contemporary India, including PM Narendra Modi’s campaign for smart cities and the Indian Space Research Organisation’s unmanned flight to Mars. The recast museum will focus on the evolution of Indian democracy”, Mahesh Sharma had told the Economic Times on September 2.

The next day, the NMML director issued a statement seeking to allay concerns that any change of direction at the iconic institution was on the cards:

The Government of India has taken a number of initiatives as part of the 125th Birth Anniversary of Jawaharlal Nehru (2014-2015).

Keeping in mind the basic objective of the NMML to spread the ideas of Jawaharlal Nehru and awareness about freedom struggle and history of modern India the National Implementation Committee constituted by the Government of India has recommended plans for modernization of the NMML.

There will be a special focus on the governance of India under Jawaharlal Nehru as the first Prime Minister of India which has been largely left out in the present exhibition. Teen Murti Bhavan is the house of Nehru the Prime Minister, and the Museum will focus on his years as Prime Minister as he, along with great colleagues, laid the foundations of post-colonial India.

Rangarajan’s statement noted that these plans had been approved by a high level committee chaired by NMML chairman Lokesh Chandra on June 27, 2015.

In his remarks on Tuesday, Mahesh Sharma attacked the Congress party for acting  proprietorial over the NMMLand  said India’s first Prime Minister was a national leader and not a “family property”. “The Modi government has been respecting all the great people and will continue to do so. Nehru’s birth centenary was celebrated. Celebrations are taking place for Gandhi ji, Ambedkar. BJP believes that any great man who has contributed to nation building, they are not fiefdom of any one family. They are nation’s legacy.”

We Will Have More Nehru, Not Less, Says Iconic Museum and Library

Jawaharlal Nehru signing the Indian Constitution in 1950. Source: Wikimedia Commons

Jawaharlal Nehru signing the Indian Constitution in 1950. Source: Wikimedia Commons

New Delhi: Within a day of Union Culture Minister Mahesh Sharma and Nehru Memorial Museum & Library chairman Lokesh Chandra declaring their intention of diluting the salience of India’s first prime minister in the institution which bears his name, saner counsel seems to have prevailed.

A September 3, 2015 release posted on the NMML website now states that the museum will actually increase the emphasis on Nehru and his times in the museum.

As part of the government’s plans to celebrate the 125th birth anniversary of Jawaharlal Nehru, the statement says “there would be a special focus on the governance of India under Jawaharlal Nehru as the first Prime Minister of India, which has been largely left out in the present exhibition.”

The government-constituted National Implementation Committee has recommended plans to modernise the museum and library “keeping in mind the basic objective of the NMML to spread the ideas of Jawaharlal Nehru and awareness about freedom struggle and history of modern India,” the release states. “Teen Murti Bhavan is the house of Nehru the Prime Minister, and the Museum will focus on his years as Prime Minister as he, along with great colleagues, laid the foundations of post-colonial India. It will draw on the rich NMML archives built up over the last fifty years.”

This apparent U-turn may put to rest the controversy triggered by statements Sharma and Chandra made  to the Economic Times on September 2, 2015.

“The museum will be recast as a museum of governance, showcasing contemporary India, including PM Narendra Modi’s campaign for smart cities and the Indian Space Research Organisation’s unmanned flight to Mars,” the paper quoted “people involved in the project” as saying. “Major plans are being drawn up to “revamp” NMML, Culture & Tourism Minister Mahesh Sharma told ET.”

 

On his part, NMML chairman Chandra had said the institution was stuck in the past. “Right now, it is only about the times of Nehru… We have to make the museum relevant to today’s times so that questions on governance in present day are addressed.”

He also said that the NMML should organise more discussions on “present day issues. “Why West Asian scholars have not come here to discuss the perils of ISIS or discuss Modi’s recent visit to the UAE”, he asked.

The NMML statement says the library “will also enhance the intellectual component of governance through national seminars and international conferences, an input that Nehru always considered of high value”.

The statement says the institution’s modernisation plans were approved on June 27, 2015 by the NMML executive council comprising Lokesh Chandra as Chairman, M.J. Akbar as Vice-Chairman and Nitin Desai, Pratap Bhanu Mehta and Surya Prakash as members besides the Director, NMML, Financial Adviser and Joint Secretary, Ministry of Culture.

Sharma and Chandra’s comments had caused a furore with senior leaders of the Congress vociferously criticising their alleged plan. One former Congress minister said the move was “crazy” and “typical of the BJP government”. He further went on to state that having never participated in the freedom struggle, the RSS wanted to rewrite history and change the character of the museum