Daily Excelsior... Editorial

EDITORIAL

By Pinaki Bhattacharya

Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh has chosen the last year of his government to visit Beijing. If this reflects the estimation of his officialdom..more

Perceiving oratory: Cock-eyed or clear

By G S Bhargava

In an opinion piece in the Dec.31 2007 issue of The Telegraph, Kolkata’s premier English daily, the celebrated columnist, Dr Ashok V. Desai has ...more.

Right to Information : Making it effective

By Saumitra Mohan

It has been more than two years since the Right to Information Act (RTI) came into force in October 2005. Immediately after its enforcement, ..more

Mush in mesh

By Sushil Vakil

EDITORIAL

Think again

Whoever says that cricket is a gentleman's game will have to think again. The Sydney cricket Test between India and Australia will strengthen the impression that it is just like any other sport. It is competitive. It is played for money. Gone are the days when the rules will be followed scrupulously. Cricketers no more walk out when they know they are out. They wait for umpires to signal their exit. If umpires err they are happy. In fact, the umpires and Aussie players have had a good match in the Australian city. Together the Kangaroos have proved that they can also level a rather serious charge of racism and get it established at least prima facie in front of an adjudicator who apparently can't distinguish between logic and mob mentality. Now one understands why the United States and the erstwhile Soviet Union have never played cricket. They knew that it was a camouflage for warm feelings. If the nations showed intense rivalry on a pitch and exhibited friendly relations off the field they simply deceived themselves. Two superpowers at one time were, therefore, convinced that human ties could not be disguised in any manner. They spurned the advice to go in for a game of cricket before settling for negotiations. The Soviet Union may be dead and gone. Nothing, however, has happened to suggest that its former constituents have given up their aversion to cricket. Rather they have become more realistic. Over the decades several incidents have taken place that indicate that cricket can't be elevated to a super status. Umpires have been biased at one point or the other in the history of the game. Not very long ago one of them was exposed to the charge of openly basing his decisions on racism. The moment he stood exposed he had offered to walk out provided he was compensated by the International Cricket Conference (ICC) and given a golden handshake in lieu of his possible earnings in future! It is also a matter of record that before the Second World War there were two categories of cricketers even in England. One consisted of gentlemen who were rich and studied in the best schools. The other included the men whom Marx would describe as proletariat. Although playing for the same team they would walk into the ground through separate gates. This is how cricket was played in a country that is credited with having popularised it wherever it ruled. Who can ever forget the deadly "bodyline" cricket of the late 1930s that converted playgrounds into battlefields? Should we feel happy in retrospect that Australia was at the receiving end at that time? That will not solve our problems, however. We should feel delighted instead that our "boys" have been at their best behaviour. They have been made to suffer defeats but they have won hearts with their gentlemanly conduct. Their behaviour reminds us of a thinker's observation: "It is true that nice guys finish last. Nice guys are winners before the game even starts." Alternatively they can also say: "We are living proof that nice guys always finish last."

Despite their triumphs so far the Australian cricketers have started wondering why they are being compared with "wild dogs" by their own country's commentators. They are good players but they are desperate as they seem to believe that "win any way as long as you can get away with it." Means are not as important for them as ends. The moral of the story is thus clear: consider again before you conclude that cricket is all about gentlemen.

Chinese checkers

By Pinaki Bhattacharya

Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh has chosen the last year of his government to visit Beijing. If this reflects the estimation of his officialdom about the status China enjoys in the current global pecking order, clearly then they are out of step with reality. China is always big news, whether interested sections of the South Block acknowledge this reality or not. China is not only muscular in economic terms; but increasingly in political terms also.

And Beijing's influence is not being felt just in Asia, but Africa - a region of traditional Indian influence - is becoming a hub of Chinese activity. Countries like the Sudan, Somalia and Nigeria are becoming beehives of economic activity, owing to the preponderance of Chinese capital. A lot of that is a result of out-of-the-box thinking in China.

But New Delhi, on the other hand, appears to have remained a prisoner of hide-bound traditionalism in its relation with its big power neighbour. Though this time the rhetoric level on both sides about the unresolved border issues have been kept in check, some sections of Indian establishment would like the terms of reference of this current round of engagement to be defined by ideas like anti-terrorism and China's alliance with Pakistan.

If that is the only brief Dr Singh actually carries to Beijing, this trip would surely be written off as a disaster even before he sets foot on China's soil. China is increasingly taking positions that are not in keeping with the Washingtonian mindset of fighting a deathly battle with Islamist terrorism. They have reflected their increasing autonomy on the issue of terrorism in case of the Sudan and Iran.

On Pakistan, Beijing is worried with the recent developments. But it also holds on to the relationship it has built with the country on India's borders over many decades. It believes that Pakistan's establishment is best suited to get control of the forces at play in their own country. And no country is in a position to provide prescriptive solutions to Islamabad's problems. Historically, the Chinese have desisted from lecturing leaderships of other countries, how to run their country.

Now they are charting an international culture of diplomatic engagement, which is marked by civilised intercourse, devoid of threats of force. As was pointed out in end-October to this writer during a visit of China, India has emerged on the radar screen of the Chinese as more than just a blip. It is a country of "secondary priority," as an eminent Chinese scholar on South Asia attached with Beijing University, Prof Han Hua, had said.

But she had also tried to do an India on India by saying that the Chinese governments policies on the country are now subject to the perceptions of the vocal Chinese public opinion, expressing itself on the internet. For a long time, the Indian officialdom used to give this logic of the weight of public opinion to their Chinese counterparts to justify not being able to make significant concessions.

The keen sense of realpolitik was even more evident when she had linked the claim on Tawang valley in Arunachal Pradesh to a Buddhist shrine that was apparently greatly revered by the Tibetans! Obviously, the Chinese side is acutely aware that the Tibet issue still looms large on the relationship.

But it is important for India to deepen its relations with China in the perspective of the changing global order. This is almost as important for the Chinese to reciprocate and indeed, initiate ways and means, by which the two Asian giants compete only in terms of their own national interest, and not at the behest of extra-territorial influences.

In that light, Dr Singh appears to be the right man to restart a dialogue that is based on intent for intensive economic engagement. That process should go beyond such examples of tactical partnerships like the Chinese oil companies joining hands with the ONGC to keep bidding wars on check for oil concessions.

It can very well be established by arrangements of mutual exchange of students who would like to learn something from each other - at the minimum it could be English in the case of Chinese; and Chinese, in case of the Indian youth. Though English is the predominant language of commerce; it would not harm the Indians to learn Chinese as the language of those who are set to dominate the economic landscape in the next decade or so.

One recalls reading that Sir Thomas Roe's passage into the Mughal durbar was much smoothened because he knew the Central Asian dialect the Mughals in Emperor Jahangir's time spoke amongst their kin. Otherwise, much that Roe would have wanted to convey could have been lost in translation.

So it is up to Dr Singh that whether the dialogue between the two most important countries of the coming decades gets lost in translation! Interestingly, there is a minuscule Indian diaspora in China that could also be inspired to smoothen the process of turning the Atalanticist mode of Indian policies towards the Indian Ocean, and concurrently, more inland.-CNF

Perceiving oratory: Cock-eyed or clear

By G S Bhargava

In an opinion piece in the Dec.31 2007 issue of The Telegraph, Kolkata’s premier English daily, the celebrated columnist, Dr Ashok V. Desai has voiced appreciation of the oratorical skills of Nehru, Winston Churchill and Hitler to run down Narendra Modi’s gift of the gab. Indians of my generation had been hearing Nehru long before his ringing ‘Tryst with Destiny’ peroration in the Constituent Assembly at the dawn of Independence at midnight on 14 August 1947. Our earliest recollection was of vignettes of his campaigning for the 1937 elections under 1935 Government of India Act. . He was on a whirlwind tour of Madras Presidency.

A Kerala friend recalls years later of what stuck in his mind of ‘a fair handsome person with a powerful wrist flaunting a large Rollex watch striding like a colossus from end to end of South Kanara district On the lighter side, in Madras, today’s Chennai, he greets the Premier, as chief ministers were then called, saying ‘ready? ’ And the other responds ‘Reddier, sir ‘

A different picture emerges of his canvassing for V.V.Giri in Bobbili. Giri was pitted against the Raja of Bobbili, the incumbent head of the Justice Party Government in the Presidency.. No road shows and photo opportunities with measly throwing of flower garlands at rented crowds for him. It was a majestic stride through the area. And in the Bobbili town, the minions of the Raja unleashed elephants to disturb Nehru’s public meeting.

As for Winston Churchill, we would be gripped by his exhortation to Britons during the dark phase of the Battle of Britain. All India Radio would repeatedly broadcast it. Hitler, honestly, I have never heard except more recently in the TV History Channel. But after the defeat of the Conservatives in the 1945 general election, I had heard Nye (Aneurin) Bevan berating the Tories as ‘worse than vermin.’

I had also the privilege of calling on Nye Bevan at his Ebbe Vale constituency in Wales during a British Council sponsored visit to the UK in 1951. Later on behalf of a shoelace organisation called the Socialist Study Centre, I was lucky to have had Nye address an overflow meeting at 18, Windsor Place, New Delhi, which was the central office of the Socialist Party. His wife, Jennie Lee, who was a junior minister in the Attlee Government, had endeared herself to the Nehru Government with her declaration that a change in the status of Jammu and Kashmir as a constituent State of the Indian Union - no doubt safeguarded by Art.370 of the Constitution - would expose the vast Muslim minority in India to mortal danger!

Within the country, Atal Behari Vajpayee, at the height of his oratorical gift, would hold his hearers spellbound His darts at the then Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, softened by sweet humour, went home without hurting. For instance, once parodying the family planning slogan, hum do hamari do, he poked fun at the then Prime Minister and her two sons, Rajiv and Sanjay, It was also a hit at the burgeoning dynasty. Prakash Vir Shastri, who was with the Congress, was no less silver tongued.

Later, in the Lok Sabha the CPI leader, Indrajit Gupta, was a matchless debater. The incumbent Lok Sabha Speaker, Somnath Chatterjee, scion of the celebrated Hindu Maha Sabha leader and a High Court judge, N.C.Chatterjee, also belongs to the same league. So is Jaipal Reddy, now with the Congress. Jaipal Reddy has since been shunted out of the high profile Information and Broadcasting Ministry to the backroom Works and Housing chore. Dr. Desai could not have missed any of them, if he did not want to.

In the United States, there was John F. Kennedy, too bright to be missed, and his elder brother, Robert Bobby Kennedy, besides Dr. Martin Luther King, their fellow martyr. For instance, JFK’s imperishable ‘ask not what American can do for you, ask what you can do for America’, - is said to be scripted by John Kenneth Galbraith. After the border conflict with China in 1962, when Nehru sought US help in beefing up our air force, while letting the US force undertake ‘operation siksha’

Kennedy dispatched a high-powered delegation headed by Averrell Harriman to persuade Nehru to ‘solve the Kashmir problem’ with Pakistan. Harriman was no common place emissary but he sent Nehru to doze. When American journalists who descended on Delhi like flies on pot of honey — said Nehru was afflicted by a serious mental illness , which could cause cerebral thrombososis, the Prime Minister laughed it away saying ‘when people talk nonsense I fall asleep!’

Then followed several rounds of ‘negotiations’ in Delhi and Rawalpindi between Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Pakistan external affairs minister, and his Indian counterpart, Sardar Swaran Singh. Swaran Singh had perfected the art of repeating endlessly what he said. The joke about his negotiating style of ‘South Vietnam is south of North Vietnam and North Vietnam is north of South Vietnam originated then Finally, Nobel Peace prize winner, Mikhail; Gorbachev, was among the most eloquent Soviet heads of state, although his epochal political reforms of glasnost and perestroika tolled the knell of the Soviet empire and his own political career. (Syndicate Features)

Right to Information : Making it effective

By Saumitra Mohan

It has been more than two years since the Right to Information Act (RTI) came into force in October 2005. Immediately after its enforcement, a concern was expressed in certain quarters about adequate efforts not being made by all those concerned to implement the Act in its true spirit. It was felt that vested interests were making an all our effort to sabotage the Act.

Lot of hue and cry was heard when there was an attempt from within the Government to water down certain portions of the Act by excluding the details of information contained in an official note sheet on the pretext of administrative necessity and for securing the officials against victimisation.

But in this all, people failed to realise that the Act was in its infancy and would take its time before it starts working to its potential. And it was not very late before people actually started realising the import and power of the right emanating from this particular act. Now they seem intent on using the right enshrined in the Act for anything and everything pertaining to their civil right in democratic India.

The many path-breaking decisions and judgements consequent to sundry appeals for information under RTI by the Central Information Commission and various State Information Commissions, the veil of secrecy hanging over the official records has slowly been lifting, resulting in substantive dilution of the draconian Official Secrets Act, 1923 which has been the last resort of a reluctant bureaucrat for denying even innocuous information to the members of common public on one or the other pretext including the one pertaining to state's security and integrity and the larger public interest.

Now, several landmark decisions and judgements of the Central and State Information Commissions later, it is reinterpretation of the same ‘larger public interest’, which is being proffered as a ground on which various wings of central and State Governments should be sharing the information with the common public of this country. Even though today the right to seek information under RTI has come into its own and has become a powerful tool for exercising one's democratic rights, one feels that still a lot needs to be done to further strengthen and reinforce this right before it can really become a genuine weapon of popular control exercising benign influence over the different Government bodies.

Even though the number of petitions requesting information under RTI has gone up by leaps and bounds, this number could be much more substantial than it is presently. Still, there is a lot which needs to be done to generate awareness among the people about their powers under RTI, though various adverse judgements of information commissions resulting in imposition of pecuniary and disciplinary action against many Government servants are also creating enough awareness by way of demonstration effect.

Many Government departments and bodies including judiciary have made it costlier for the hoi polloi to seek and access information. The price to seek and obtain information has been made prohibitive by many agencies defeating the very intents and purposes wherefor RTI was conceived. Since it has been left to various State Governments and autonomous Governments bodies to frame such rules relating to the various charges for information sharing, they have found an excuse in the same by way of making the same ridiculously high.

While these prohibitive costs to seek information do discourage non-serious information seekers, they also repel the many genuine ones who are not well-off enough to be able to foot the bill for the purpose. However, there are specific provisions in the Act about the inadvisability of charging anything from people below the poverty line. But one has to understand that there are many millions others in the country who, even though above the poverty line, are no better. These people are, at least, definitely not so better as to be able to spend a princely sum for seeking and obtaining information under RTI.

Then, there is a practical problem which has come to the fore after the requests seeking information started to flow in thick and fast. The problem relates to the shortage of staff and officers for attending such requests. It is because of this that there has been an overlaod of pending requests with different information commissions and Government bodies.

Since there has been many landmark judgements by now wherein specific pecuniary penalties have been imposed upon many Government servants for deemed deliberate failure to provide information in time and since such penalties have to be footed from one's own pockets, Government staff and officers are found to be on toes now to attend to such requests and provide the requested information within the statutory 30 days’ period as per the Act.

Today, when many Government departments and bodies are already reeling under the shortage of staff and officers in these times of downsizing and rationalizing of the size of the Government employees, the normal functioning of these departments and bodies are severely getting hampered. As non-compliance under the Act results in personal financial loss including the fear of departmental proceedings, a Government staff or officer is more than keen to attend to RTI requests before anything else.

Some of these problems have arisen also because of the fact that many Government departments and bodies have still not put the requisite in-house information into the public domain as they are supposed to do under RTI. This also results in delay or outright refusal in furnishing of the desired information to the petitioners. When a request to furnish information on National Policy and Action Plan on computerization of judiciary under RTI was sent to the PIO (Public Information Officer) in the Ministry of Law and Justice, the response was ‘‘the details of implementation of the plan are still being worked out. That being so, it is not possible to give any information in the matter at this stage.’’

The Right to Information Act is merely an instrument that lays down the statutory procedure in the exercise of this right. It is, therefore, necessary that all exceptions and denials of the right to information must necessarily conform to the restrictions that bear a nexus to those mentioned in Article 19 (2) and to none others.

So, there is an urgent need to do some further soul-searching as far as implementation of the Act is concerned. All the Government departments and bodies should not only put all the permissible information pertaining to their establishments in readily sharable form, they should also immediately notify and properly publicise the APIO, PIO and AA for accessing information relating their offices. Also, it is advisable that such notified authorities should remain in the same office for ensuring better efficiency and accountability.

In fact, it is proposed that as far as possible, a self-contained office should have APIO, PIO and AA in the same premises. It makes the system more efficient and also makes it easier for the common public. For example, if the District Magistrate starts entertaining all RTI petitions pertaining to every office under his/her control and supervision, then he/she would be left with no time to attends to his/her normal work.

So, it is advisable that various authorities to be notified remain within the same premises. Moreover, the Central and State Governments should make further clarifications to ensure that the cost of seeking and obtaining information under RTI does in no case become prohibitive. Also, the entire process of moving an RTI application has to be further simplified.

The phone-in system, as instituted in Bihar, should now be extended to rest of the country. This avoids a common citizens several trips to the Government office. E-governance should be utilised to the maximum for the purposes of RTI.

Moreover, there shall also be a need for dedicated staff and officers to attend to RTI requests and also to pre-empt the hampering of the normal functioning of the office by engaging regular staff and officers. There is also a need for grant of specific financial grant to a Government office for meeting various expenses required to be incurred for provisioning of information (e.g xeroxing et al) and for further strengthening and reinforcing the service delivery system under RTI for being able to serve the people better.

If we are able to modify and further refine the RTI Act, one is sure that the powers granted to a common citizen in India shall go a long way in strengthening and reinforcing our democratic foundations. (PTI)

Mush in mesh

By Sushil Vakil

There is no denying the fact that Benazir's barbarous assassination is boomeranging on President Musharraf. And to tide over the crisis is now trying every trick in the book to absolve himself and his government of the blame. From a passionate human being to a true son of the soil Musharraf is changing postures to cover up the unholly nexus between those at the helm of the affairs and Islamic terrorists. The Government's altogether different versions make it more suspectable.

For true to type, Musharraf's theories raise more questions than it answers. Musharraf may not have a direct role in the killing but his lust for power and subverting Constitution to suit his ends one of the reasons for the prevailing chaos in Pakistan. Besides that, who would benefit from her death? Naturally the military regime that wants to prolong its rule. It is widely agreed that Inter Services Intellegence work for Musharraf as well as Taliban. In fact, it works for USA as well. Yes, the same infamous intelligence outfit that has been aiding and abetting cross-border terrorism and exporting terrorists to Afghanistan with US aid, due to which Pakistan has remained a safe haven for Islamic terrorists even today. The US is indirectly responsible for the traumatic conditions in Pakistan as it is using Musharraf to serve its own geopolitical interests in South Asia. Apart from that it is using Pakistan as a pawn in its so-called war against terror.

There is no doubt that Pakistan has seen much mayhem due to Islamic terrorism and it is Musharraf who is responsible for the heightened terrorism. He therefore, can't absolve himself of the blame. All these facts put a question mark on his "sincerity" and credibility."

Incidently, Musharraf is much more than an army general, an exceptional one at that. His concerns are artistic, intellectual and political. More people remember him as a General who usurped power by forever silencing one of his opponents. This is clear from Musharraf's call on the countrymen exhorting them to unite against what he said was the threat it faces from terrorists. Mr Musharraf said that he was personally saddened by Ms Bhutto's death. But the facts and security provided to her speak otherwise.

It is fair to assume that Benazir has been killed by the establishment in collusion with the terrorists as it suits the interests of Pakistan army under Musharraf. It is borne out by the fact that Pakistan government is coming out with different versions that suit them, related to her brutal killing. Soon after the killing, Pakistan Interior Ministry Spokesperson claimed that Bhutto was not killed by bullet injury but by hitting sunroof handle of the car in which she was travelling. However, the claim was rubished next day when Pakistan TV channels aired footages showing two people pointing a pistol at Bhutto from a close range. The new development raised a storm in political circles inside and outside the country. Later on the Interior Minister sought the apology for his Spokes- person's account attributing the mistake to incorrect phraseology.

Under fire, the Government also claimed that it has intercepts indicating Bhutto was killed by Al Qaeda as it felt she was close to the US. As the tide began to turn against Musharraf he has sought the help of Scotland Yard team to "assist" in investigations to clear the "confusion theories" surroun- ding the assassination. But knowing the complicity of Paksitan police in destroying evidence PPP has demanded that investigations be carried under the auspices of United Nations. But Musharraf is unlikely to concede to such a demand as he is aware that once the investigation is honestly carried it could potentially rip off the mask of certain important faces.

Taking advantage of the choatic situation Musharraf justified the postponement of elections to February 18 as elections cannot be held in free, fair and transparent manner this time around. But an interesting question arises that when Pakistan's major cities like Lahore, Karachi and Islamabad were returning to normalcy then why the government delayed the elections. Certainly, Musharraf wouldn't wish PPP to win on sympathy wave. This also raises eyebrows on govern- ment's sincerity.

Undoubtedly, US too is keen in Musharraf continuance in office as he is serving their interests in South Asia. In fact, US President George Bush commented soon after Bhutto's assassination that Islamic fundamentalists were behind the murder. It was the Taliban madmen again, the Al Qaeda spider who struck at this lone and brave woman who had dared to call for democracy in her country," Mr Bush said. In this way Mr Bush has given a clean chit to Musharraf and his men.

Though Benazir's murder is still a mystery yet the versions are changing each day. There are reports that Bhutto was killed as she was scheduled to meet some top senior US law makers to handover a dossier accusing the ISI and Election Commission officials of rigging the upcoming elections. The controversy has taken ano- ther turn with some PPP leaders claiming that assail- ants had targeted Bhutto with sophisticated "laser techno- logy". Adding further confu- sion, Russian intelligence agencies have concluded that murder couldn't be possible without the active connivance of the officials inside the government.

In the face of changing versions and evidences one can fairly conclude that Islamabad's changing claims are ridiculous and pointless. The fact cannot be overlooked that armed assailants were able to have such close access to Bhutto. Certainly, it exposes security lapse. Moreover, it shows that Musharraf had not provided Bhutto adequate security despite her requests. As such, Pakistan government's statements are in no way going to help Musharraf and his men to escape responsibility.