*116 hawala transactions detected
Sanjeev Pargal
JAMMU, Apr 12: The Special Investigating Team (SIT), constituted by the State Government to probe the links of Kashmiri separatist Sayyid Ghulam Nabi alias Fai in Jammu and Kashmir and outside the State and hawala funding made by him to terror outfits, separatists, NGOs, journalists, intellectuals and other organisations, has been asked to complete its findings and recommendations within one month period.
The SIT has been directed to expedite its probe in the aftermath of a directive from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) that all facts and figures pertaining to Fai and his agents should be made available to it at the earliest.
The directive had been issued at a high level security review meeting chaired by Union Home Minister P Chidambaram here on April 10 and attended by top brass of civil and police administration, Central Police Forces and Intelligence agencies among others.
Official sources told the Excelsior that SIT headed by SSP Badgam Uttam Chand has been asked to expedite its findings and complete them in a month’s time.
The Government would submit findings pertaining to the Central Government to the MHA and act on the issues, which have to be tackled by the State, sources said, adding the Home Minister had also sought facts and figures on all activities of Fai since seventies onwards and the persons, who had benefited of his hawala transactions including separatists, terror outfits, journalists, NGOs etc.
Fai was recently sentenced to two months imprisonment by a Virginia court in the United States.
Sources said the findings and recommendations of the SIT, which pertained to the Central Government, would be submitted to the MHA as soon as they were received while the points on which the State Government and Police Department had to act on its own would be pursued to logical conclusion.
To expedite investigations in the activities of Fai, both within the State and outside, the Government had appointed two more officers to Uttam Chand headed SIT. They included Junaid Mehmood, SP CID (Counter Intelligence), Kashmir and Chief Prosecuting Officer (CPO), Srinagar.
Sources said even as investigations by the SIT were in progress, Police Department had established that 116 major hawala transactions have taken place in Jammu and Kashmir, some of which had direct or indirect hand of Fai.
The hawala transactions would run into several crores. While some of hawala transactions had been made through businessmen, few others were conducted through banking and other available channels.
“A number of persons had benefited of hawala transactions in Jammu and Kashmir including Kashmiri separatists, commanders of militant outfits like Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) and Hizbul Mujahideen, journalists, NGOs and other organisations. The SIT would work out details of hawala money that had flown through into the State over a period of time and names of its beneficiaries, both militants and their over ground supporters”, sources said.
It may be mentioned that based on the report of the SIT pertaining to activities of Fai, there was a possibility that the Central Government could issue a red corner notice against the Kashmiri separatist to ensure his repatriation to India once he completed two years sentence awarded to him by the Virginia court.
As reported, in connection with participants from India to the 11th annual conference of KAC, a national newspaper quoting from the footnotes of Attorney’s report had said, “Mirwaiz Umer Farooq was supported and controlled by the ISI. Fai invited Attiya Inayatullah to KAC conferences at the ISI’s direction. Gautam Navlakha was introduced to an ISI General for recruitment by Fai at the ISI’s behest”.
Prominent among those who wrote a letter in support of Fai to the US District Judge seeking leniency were Rajmohan Gandhi, Ved Bhasin, Karen Parker, Zaffer A Shah, Zahid G Muhammad and Hamida Bano.
According to an overview of the KAC conference sent to the media after the 2009 event by Fai, Ved Bhasin was quoted as advocating for Kashmir as an independent state in South Asia.
“The only solution is an independent state in South Asia. The status quo is not a solution, the division of the State is not a solution,” reported Kashmir Images of 22 July, 2011 quoting Ved Bhasin. Prof. Hamida Bano was among Fai’s beneficiaries but inclusion of Jatinder Bakhshi, rather a non-descript Kashmir Pandit migrant entity remained a mystery.
The Telegraph of 21 July reported that several Indian journalists and activists had also accepted the invitation from the group to take part in seminars in the US, which involved business class travel and “some luxury”. Sources said journalists such as Kuldip Nayar, Dileep Padgaonkar, Harinder Baweja, Ved Bhasin, Rajmohan Gandhi and activists Rita Manchanda and Gautam Navlakha and politician Subramanian Swamy had attended some of these seminars. Bharat Bhushan, who writes on India-Pakistan relations and is a former journalist with The Telegraph, declined to deny or confirm if he participated in any event organized by the group.
Siddharth Varadarajan, National Bureau Chief of The Hindu, said Fai invited him to attend a seminar in 2009. “But I declined,” Varadarajan said. What aroused Varadarajan’s suspicion was Fai having listed India’s envoy to Washington Meera Shankar as one of the speakers at the event. “I checked with my sources on how come she was attending? They told me she wasn’t,” Varadarajan said.

Validity of RTE Act upheld

NEW DELHI, Apr 12:
The Supreme Court today upheld the constitutional validity of UPA government’s landmark Right To Education Act (RTE), providing for reservation of 25 percent seats for poor children in all Government, private aided and unaided schools but not in minority institutions.
The ruling by a majority 2:1 judgement of a three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia is a shot in the arm for the Centre as the 2009 legislation was its flagship programme aimed at providing free and compulsory education to all children in the age group of 6 to 14 years despite stiff resistance from unaided private institutions.
While Justice Kapadia and Justice Swatanter Kumar gave the majority verdict, Justice K S Radhakrishnan, who gave a dissenting judgement on some aspects of the law, asserted that the provision for 25 percent compulsory free seats would not apply either to unaided private institutions or to unaided minority schools.
Significantly, the majority view also asked the Government to weed out “under performing and non-performing ” aided schools to ensure that only those schools who meet the standards required under the 2009 Act are allowed to continue.
The apex court rejected the arguments of the private schools that imposition of such conditions violated their Fundamental Right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) (carry out any profession) as being “unreasonable”.
“A child who is denied right to access education is not only deprived of his right to live with dignity, he is also deprived of his right to freedom of speech and expression enshrined in Article 19(1)(a).
“The 2009 Act seeks to remove all those barriers including financial and psychological barriers which a child belonging to the weaker section and disadvantaged group has to face while seeking admission.
“The 2009 Act has been enacted to give effect to Article 21A,” said Justice Kapadia, writing the majority judgement.
The apex court said Article 15(5) is an enabling provision and it is for the respective states either to enact a law or issue an executive instruction providing for the reservation except in the case of minority educational institutions referred to in Article 30(1) (minority institutions).
“The intention of the Parliament is that the minority educational institution referred to in Article 30(1) is a separate category of institutions, which needs protection of Article 30(1) and viewed in that light we are of the view that unaided minority school(s) needs special protection under Article 30(1).
“Article 30(1) is not conditional as Article 19(1)(g). In a sense, it is absolute. Reservation of 25 percent in such unaided minority schools (would) result in changing the character of the schools. Thus, the 2009 Act including Section 12(1)© violates the right conferred on such unaided minority schools under Article 30(1),” the apex court said.
The apex court said the Act has been enacted keeping in mind the crucial role of universal elementary education for strengthening the social fabric of democracy through provision of equal opportunities to all.
“Since the Article 19(1)(g) right is not an absolute right as Article 30(1), the 2009 Act cannot be termed as unreasonable. To put an obligation on the unaided non-minority school to admit 25 percent children in class I under Section 12(1)© cannot be termed as an unreasonable restriction.
“Such a law cannot be said to transgress any constitutional limitation. The object of the 2009 Act is to remove the barriers faced by a child who seeks admission to class I and not to restrict the freedom under Article 19(1)(g),” the court said.
According to the Government, there are 1. 8 lakh private unaided schools in the country and 1.2 lakh private aided ones, besides the 8 lakh Government schools.
Writing the dissenting judgement Justice Radhakrishnan said Government cannot abdicate its responsibility and compel “non-state actors” to discharge its duties.
“Non-state actors exercising the state functions like establishing and running private educational institutions are also expected to respect and protect the rights of the child, but they are, not expected to surrender their constitutionally guaranteed rights.
“The state, however, cannot free itself from obligations under Article 21A by offloading or outsourcing its obligation to private state actors like unaided private educational institutions or to coerce them to act on the state’s dictate,” the judge said.
Justice Radhakrishnan said Article 21A has used the expression “such manner” which means the manner in which the state has to discharge its constitutional obligation and not “offloading those obligations on unaided educational institutions.”
The judge said the Act cannot go to contrary to the Constitution bench ruling in the TMA Pai and Inamadar case which prohibited unreasonable restrictions on private unaided institutions.
“To compel the unaided non minority and minority private educational institutions, to admit 25 percent of the students on the fee structure determined by the state, is nothing but an invasion as well as appropriation of the rights guaranteed to them under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 30(1) of the Constitution.
“Legislature cannot under the guise of interest of general public arbitrarily cast burden or responsibility on private citizens running a private school, totally unaided”, he said. (PTI)

‘Case-by-case review’ of Central laws proposed

Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, Apr 12: The much-awaited report of Dileep Padgaonkar-headed panel of interlocutors on Jammu and Kashmir contains nothing to soothe the Valley-based political majors—National Conference, PDP, Hurriyat Conference—as it has outrightly rejected the options of autonomy, self-rule and Azadi. Three-member committee, comprising journalist Dileep Padgaonkar, academician Prof Radha Kumar and former Central Information Commissioner M M Ansari, that deliberated on contentious political issues with regard to J&K for full year between October 2010 and October 2011, does not seem to have accommodated key aspirations of either the ruling National Conference or the opposition PDP. Separatist Hurriyat Conference, which did not interact with the committee set up by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, has been equally disappointed.
Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s National Conference is unlikely to rejoice over the committee’s final report as its key slogan of greater autonomy has been completely rejected. Almost consistent with the Indira-Abdullah Accord of 1975, the committee has instead proposed “case-by-case review” of the central laws applied in J&K in the last 60 years.
Asserting that a pure and simple return to the pre-1953 situation would create a dangerous constitutional vacuum in the relationship between the Centre and Jammu and Kashmir, the report has recommended “case-by-case review of all Central laws and Articles of the Constitution of India extended to the State” since 1952.
It has proposed setting up of a Constitutional Committee that would review the applicability of Central statutes extended to Jammu and Kashmir after the July 1952 Delhi Agreement. The review process — once ratified by Parliament and the State legislature — would eventually end the extension by Presidential order of further Central laws to the State.
One of the key recommendations of the report is that Parliament will make no new laws applicable to Jammu and Kashmir unless these relate to the country’s internal and external security and its vital economic interest. In the report, the Interlocutors have suggested that eminent jurist should head the Constitutional Committee and it should have members from the State and the rest of the country, who inspire confidence in all stakeholders.
The Committee will bear in mind the dual character of Jammu and Kashmir — as a constituent of the Indian Union and as a State enjoying special status in the Union under Article 370 of the Constitution while determining whether and to what extent the Central Acts and Articles have abridged the State Government’s powers to cater to the welfare of its people.
“The Constitutional Committee should be future-oriented and it should conduct its review solely on the basis of the powers the State needs to address the political, economic, social and cultural interests, concerns, grievances and aspirations of the people in all the three regions—Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh, and all the sub-regions”, the report said, adding “the Committee will also need to reflect on the quantum of legislative, financial and administrative powers that the State Government should delegate to the three regions at all levels of governance”.
The report said that the recommendations of Constitutional Committee must be reached through consensus so that they are acceptable to all stakeholders represented in the State Assembly and Parliament. The next step would be for the President, in exercise of the powers conferred by Clauses (1) and (3) of Article 370, to issue an order incorporating the recommendations. This will have to be ratified by a Bill in both Houses of Parliament and by each House in the State Legislature by a margin of not less than two-thirds majority. It will then be presented to the President for assent.
“Once this process is over, Clauses (1) and (3) of Article 370 will cease to be operative and no orders will be made by the President under these clauses from the date of the final order,” the report further said.
However, the group members believed that many of the Central laws made applicable to the State over the past six decades “should not give rise to any strong objections” as these were “fairly innocuous laws that have been beneficial to the State and its people.”
Mentioning that search for a solution in J&K should not be made contingent on India-Pakistan talks, the report said, “if the stakeholders in Jammu and Kashmir are willing to enter into a settlement, the door can always be kept open for Pakistan to join”. The key objective, it added, was to make the Line of Control irrelevant. “It should become a symbol of concord and cooperation”, the report further said.
A hassle-free movement of people, goods and services across the LoC and the International Border must be swiftly ensured leading to institutionalised cooperation between the two parts of the former princely State. Another recommendation pertains to taking all appropriate measures to consider J&K as a bridge between South and Central Asia.
About harmonization of relations across the LoC, the report noted that no permanent solution can be achieved unless it applies to those parts of the former princely State that are now under Pakistani administration. “Any attempt at harmonization of Centre-State relations and devolution of powers at the regional, district and panchayat/municipality levels across the LoC, therefore, will necessitate wide-ranging constitutional change in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. If agreed, such harmonization will permit the development of joint institutions across the LoC for development, resource generation and other common matters,” the report said while recommending that these issues should be discussed with the representatives on the other side of the LoC.
The group has suggested promotion of Track II interactions for a resolution on both sides of the LoC. It has suggested resumption of Government of India-Hurriyat dialogue at the earliest opportunity and stressed that Pakistan and Pakistani-administered areas should be encouraged to enter into dialogue on the recommendations to be fine-tuned by the Constitutional Committee and the points that emerge from the GoI-Hurriyat dialogue.
The other recommendations relate to replacement of word “Temporary” from the heading of Article 370 with the word “Special” as has been used for other States under Article 371, appointment of the Governor from a list of names prepared by the State Government in consultation with opposition parties, holding of fresh election within three months if Article 356 is used.
Three Regional Councils, one each for Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh, should be created with Ladakh no longer a division of Kashmir. The proportion of officers from the All India Services should be gradually reduced in favour of officers from the State civil service.
The report noted that the roadmap leading to political, economic and cultural freedoms depend on the credibility of the dialogue process, implementation of key Confidence Building Measures and building a consensus among stakeholders. The CBMs suggested included speeding up of reforms related to human rights and rule of law, amendment of the Public Safety Act, and review of the Disturbed Areas Act and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. It also called for a Judicial Commission to look into the unmarked graves, with emphasis on identification of missing/ disappeared persons.
In order to ensure better implementation of the CBMs, the group has recommended the establishment of an empowered group to monitor them.