A decade of Presidency

By Amulya Ganguli

For one person to head a party for 10 years can be a matter of pride for him or her, but not for the organisation since it is an unmistakable sign of the dearth of suitable alternatives. Evidently, therefore, Sonia Gandhi's completion of a decade as the Congress chief is not so much a cause of jubilation as an indictment of the century-old party itself.

By highlighting yet again the indispensability of the Nehru-Gandhi family, her long tenure has confirmed the essential fragility of the organisation. The fear is that if the guiding hand of the dynasty is removed, the Congress will fall apart, as it did under Narasimha Rao when two of its stalwarts - Arjun Singh and N.D. Tiwari - walked out. Similarly, under Sitaram Kesri, the demoralization in the party ranks was so high that Sonia Gandhi had virtually to carry out an internal coup to take charge of the organisation.

True, Sonia Gandhi has also seen desertions, notably of Sharad Pawar and Co. and has failed to woo Mamata Banerjee back into the fold. But her main achievement lies in ensuring that the loyalty quotient acts as an organisational adhesive even if it is inspired by the family rather than the party.

The minus points, however, of such an arrangement is its suffocating impact on the growth of talent. Although Jawaharlal Nehru, too was described as the banyan tree under whose shade nothing grew, his tenure still saw the presence of highly influential Congressmen, whose presence - mainly in the so-called Syndicate - was deemed as an obstacle to her ambitions by Indira Gandhi.

The present-day Congress does not have the faintest resemblance to the party of those days, so much so that it is practically inconceivable to think of a situation where anyone other than Sonia Gandhi - or Rahul Gandhi - can be the chief when she is neither the Congress president nor Prime Minister.

Her stint at the top might have been commended if she was seen to be leading the party from strength to strength, as Indira did in the early Seventies and Rajiv Gandhi in the mid-Eighties. Under Sonia Gandhi, however, there is no sign that the party will ever regain that stature. All that it can hope to do is to be the first among equals among its coalition partners.

But it is a position which ensures that it will follow rather than lead, as has been evident from its inability to push through either the economic reforms or the nuclear deal because of Leftist objections. It also gives the impression that the party is willing to sacrifice its avowed goals for the sake of sticking to power - not an image which brings glory to a party with a glorious record during the freedom movement.

The two achievements for which Sonia Gandhi is usually praised are, first, her success in cobbling together an alliance and then bringing it to victory in 2004. And, secondly, for forsaking the prime ministership and choosing Manmohan Singh for the post.

But more than four years later, neither seems as creditable as it did at the time. For one, it was the BJP which lost in 2004 while all that the Congress did was to pick up the fallen crown of thorns. What is more, some of her new allies, like Ramvilas Paswan, for instance, had no option but to leave the BJP's company after the Gujarat riots and were, therefore, easy pickings.

Secondly, the "inner voice" which instructed her against becoming the Prime Minister might have been inspired more by practical considerations rather than moral ones since she was aware that the turmoil which the saffron brotherhood would create over a "foreign' Prime Minister would have been too difficult to handle.

Her real achievement is, of course, in choosing a widely respected man as prime minister and in standing by him through thick and thin. Had she been seen to be lukewarm about Manmohan Singh, the Congress's tradition of backbiting would have made life extremely difficult for the gentle Sikh. Her dignified behaviour and success in avoiding major controversies have also taken the sting out of the BJP's and the Sangh parivar's propaganda on her origin.

She is also apparently not devoid of diplomatic skills, judging from the manner in which she has been able to keep together a ramshackle coalition comprising such basically unreliable characters like M. Karunanidhi with his pro-LTTE sympathies, which have been kept under cover, and Sharad Pawar with his links with Bal Thackeray, which are no longer under a cover. No one can taunt her now about being a housewife, as Jyoti Basu once did.

Her only major mistake was perhaps the abrupt rejection of Mulayam Singh Yadav's friendly overtures in 2004, which seems odd in retrospect since the Congress and the Samajwadi Party are apparently coming close together again to check the over-ambitious Mayawati. Besides, they were once partners in U.P.

But her main failing is that she seems to be a prisoner of the past. Her economic ideas are more in keeping with Indira Gandhi's "socialism" than with modern-day market-oriented policies, which are favoured by Manmohan Singh. And on the nuclear deal, too, her position is apparently at variance with the Prime Minister's.

But, apart from the specifics, it is clear that she lacks a vision. She neither sees the dams and industries as the temples of a new India, as Nehru did. Nor does she talk about a journey into the 21st century, as her husband did. Her preoccupation is more with day-to-day affairs. Perhaps the practical nature of such politics can enable the Congress to remain at the head of a victorious coalition, but it is not inspirational enough to make the party relive its days of glory. (IPA Service)

Slowing down the climate change

By G V Joshi

The Kyoto Protocol (KP) is an agreement made under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

The treaty was negotiated in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, (hence the name) opened for signature on March 16, 1998, and closed on March 15,1999. The treaty came into force on February 16, 2005 following ratification by Russia on November 18, 2004.

As of November 2007, a total of 175 countries and other Governmental agencies have ratified the agreement. Its objective is to reduce Greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide) that cause climate change from the atmosphere.

The atmosphere around our earth at sea level contains nitrogen (78%) and Oxygen (21%), and Argon, an inert gas (0.9%). The remaining 0.1 per cent is made up of carbon dioxide (0.036%), sulphur dioxide, methane, hydrogen oxides of nitrogen in traces etc. collectively called Greenhouse gases (GHGs).

In addition, atmosphere also contains some water vapor depending upon the temperature of the atmosphere, over which we have no control. GHGs are mostly man-made, created by burning of fossil fuels like coal in power houses and crude oil products in automobiles and burning of forests.

Everyone today, knows about GHE, GW and resulting climate change. Countries that ratify this protocol commit to reduce their emissions of GHGs. One hundred and thirty-seven developing countries have ratified the protocol, including Brazil, China and India, but have no obligation beyond monitoring and reporting emissions, because their contribution to GHGs is small compared to developed countries of the West like the US.

As of December 2007, the US and Kazakhastan are the only signatory nations not to have ratified the act. As of January 2008, and running through 2012, signatory countries have to reduce their greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions by five per cent below their 1990 levels.

GHE was first discovered by Joseph Fourier in 1824, but was first investigated in depth by the Swedish scientist, Dr Svante Arrhenius in 1896 only.

The concentration of carbon dioxide is approximately 30 per cent greater than it was in the 18th century, before the industrial revolution. It has increased from around 280 parts per million (ppm) to approximately 360 ppm today and is increasing day by day. Although carbon dioxide comprises only 0.036 per cent of the air, its warming effect is most significant.

Most scientists now accept the increasing the amount of CO2 will result in GW. Even politicians are now alert to the problem.

Although water vapour traps more heat than CO2, we have no control over it, and so, to fight GW nations must focus on cotrolling CO2.

All scientists have stated unequivocally that GW is man-made. But they are not sure about how much and how fast GW still continue as a result of heat-trapping by GHGs.

All of them feel that all nations should identify cost-effective steps that they can take now, to contribute to substantial and long-term reduction in GHG emissions.

The reasons behind Kazakhstan's refusal to ratify KP are not known.

The US, although a signatory to the KP, has neither ratified not withdrawn from he Protocol.

According to a report the United States have five per cent of the world's population and 30 per cent of the world's autombiles, but the country contribute 45 per cent of the world's automobile emissions of the GHGs.

American authorities have announced that they would not implement the KP on GW because, the causes of, and solutions to, global climate change are not completely and clearly understood. The economically viable technologies for removing and storin carbon dioxide are not available today.

Cutting GHGs from US Automobiles will be critical to any strategy for slowing global warming for the whole world.

President, George W. Bush, has indicated that he does not intend to submit the treaty for ratification, not because he does not support the Kyoto principles, but because of the exemption granted to China, the world's second largest emitter of carbon dioxide.

Climate change will affect and is affecting everyone-changing agricultural patterns, increasing the frequency and severity of cyclones, adding to the prevalence of disease around the globe, raising ocean levels to submerge island and coastlines and causing extreme economic disruption. Some of these effects are already there.

There is a general feeling that humanity can adapt to climate change, but factually entire societies as in the case of Harappa and Mohenodaro have collapsed from climatic shifts.

GW is causing melting of glaciers like Gangotri glacier in the Himalayas. The glacier-fed rivers of north India would first swell in summer due to melting of ice in the glacier and then shrink to dangerously low levels in winter for want of water.

India has already lost 31 sq km of the Sagar Islands in the Sunderbans and more are on way, displacing thousands of people, with no where to go. Even some islands in Andaman and Nicobar would not be spared.

Global warming has nothing to go with expanding Ozone Hole. A shrinking Ozone hole would not bring down GW. They are two different problems. The ozone hole is a thinning of the stratosphere's ozone layer, which is roughly 16 to 50-km above the earth's surface. The depletion of the ozone is due to manmade chemicals like chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

The freezing temperatures in Delhi, record snowfall in Kashmir and the biting cold in Mumbai over the last few days was not a result of GW. According to Dr Rajeevan, director of the National Climate Centre (NCC) in Pune, it was part of the year to year variation in whether. The unusually heavy snowfall and cold wave in China was responsible for it. He had already predicted the extreme weather this year. India got some protection from the Himalayas.

Today, the Indian contribution to GHGs is small compared to the US and China, but with Tata Nano, Fiat 500 and other new small cars zigzagging on the roads of India guzzling petrol, diesel or even bio-diesel in massive quantities in years to come, we would not be far behind.

It is highly doubtful whether KP or any others to follow would succeed in curbing GW and resulting hazards.

Even developed countries of the West would not be able to do it, because economically viable technology is not available today.

But it is a good idea and should be pursued by all nations by developing hydrogen technology for automobiles and new methods to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere as soon as possible. (PTI)

Lok Adalat - Justice expedited

By M K Sharma

Lok Adalat as the very name suggests, means people's court. 'Lok' stands for people and 'Adalat' means court. The concept of Lok Adalat was prevalent in ancient India, though with different nomenclature called 'Nyaya Panch'. However, this concept was published back to oblivion in last few centuries, particularly during the British regime. This abstract has again gained popularity and is gaining momentum. The ancient concept of Lok Adalat has now got statutory recognition. The Govt. of J&K, with an idea to provide free and competent legal service to the weaker sections of the society and to ensure that the opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities and to reduce the mounting arrears of cases in courts, have brought a legislation called "The J&K Legal Services Authorities Act 1997". This Act besides providing provision for assistance of legal aid to the weaker sections of the society provides the scheme of Lok Adalat in Chapter V of the Act for expedited justice. The Lok Adalat has jurisdiction to settle, by way of effecting compromise between the parties, any matter which may be pending before any court, as well as matters at prelitigation stage i.e. the disputes which have not yet been formally instituted in any court of law. Such matters may be civil or criminal in nature. But any criminal matter, which is not compoundable, cannot be decided by the Lok Adalat.

There are number of benefits that the litigants derive through the Lok Adalat. First, there is no court fee and if the case has been referred to the Lok Adalat by the regular court, the fee paid shall be refunded if the dispute is settled at the Lok Adalat. Secondly, the decision of the Lok Adalat is binding on the parties to the dispute and no appeal lies against the order of the Lok Adalat. The award of the Lok Adalat is capable of execution. Thirdly, the disputes can be brought directly before the Lok Adalat instead of going to a regular court first. Fourthly, there is not strict application of the procedural laws while disposing off the matters in the Lok Adalat. The parties to the dispute can interact with the members of the Lok Adalat directly and explain their position in the dispute, which is not possible in regular court of law.

Recently the J&K High Court Legal Services Committee under the able guidance of Mr Justice K S Radhakrishnan. The Chief Justice of J&K who is Patron in Chief of the High Court Legal Services Committee and Mr Justice Nisar Ahmed Kakru, Executive Chairman of the High Court Legal Services Committee, organized a Lok Adalat week in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The results were animating. In the Lok Adalat week several Lok Adalats were held in the State of J&K and approximately 6000 cases were settled in the Lok Adalats held during the week. Ever since the concept of Lok Adalat started taking of in J&K, only the cases which were pending in different courts were being referred to Lok Adalat. The special feature of this Lok Adalat week was implementation of Section 18(4) (ii) of the Act, which provides for jurisdiction of Lok Adalat in respect of matters, which are at pre-litigation stage. In this Lok Adalat week smart number of pre-litigation cases were taken up and disposed off. In the pre-litigation stage cases awards for more than Rs. 2 crores were passed in favour of the financial institutions. It has been learnt that after the Lok Adalat week several parties have approached the concerned authorities with respect to the reference of pre-litigation stage cases to the Lok Adalat. The disposal of cases at pre-litigation stage will save the money and time of the poor litigants, besides reducing the institution of cases in the courts, which in turn will give time to the regular courts to attend to the matter of complicated and heinous nature.

The aforesaid statutory dimensions are going to open new vistas in the field of adjudication of disputes through conciliation especially the matters, which are at pre-litigation stage. The system of Lok Adalat has received laurels from the legal functionaries as well as public at large. Through this process disputes can be settled in a speedy and simpler way.