DELHI DESERVES A REFERENDUM

[  In an article titled THE DELHI IMBROGLIO- A REFERENDUM IS THE ONLY WAY OUT published on the HILLPOST site on 25-5-2015 I had argued why Mr. Kejriwal should demand a referendum on the Delhi statehood issue instead of just agitating the question on the streets. On the 5th of July AAP has now formally raised this demand and has asked its Urban Development Dept. to work out a proposal for this.]

There used to be a time when it was believed that politics was the last refuge of scoundrels: that has changed-today its their first refuge. On a similar note, it is becoming evident with each passing day that the first refuge of politicians is the law, or the legal process. ( One cannot, of course, miss the delicious irony in the fact that a force which was meant to punish them has ended up being their strongest shield!). Of course, this applies equally to scoundrels too, and in any case its becoming increasingly difficult to tell the difference between the two.

Indian politicians are perfecting the art of hiding between the terminology or the processes of law. A legalism a day keeps the prosecutor away. And so a Shivraj Singh Chauhan avoids his own implication in the Vyapam scam by saying he cannot order a CBI investigation because it is for the High Court to do so. Smriti Irani deflects all criticism of her thrice- born affidavits by saying that she has not yet been summoned by a court ( which has taken cognizance of the complaint against her); Sushma Swaraj suo-moto reversed the government's policy on a wanted fugitive but can legitimately claim that she has not broken any law; Akhilesh Yadav refuses to register an FIR against a Minister accused of burning to death a journalist( in his dying confession, no less) and then wards off journalists by saying that he cannot be arrested because no FIR has been filed against him! A serious FIR against a Governor is quashed because the law gives him immunity. Lalit Modi continues to evade the law by claiming that he has not yet been declared an absconder by a court.

It therefore doesn't surprise me at all that Kejriwal's proposal for a referendum on the Delhi question has been met by a synchronised howl from both the BJP and the Congress condemning it as " illegal ", " unconstitutional " and " anti-national". It is none of these, but these two parties realise that they cannot let Kejriwal run away with this bone in his mouth, and for a number of reasons: one, a referendum in Delhi will set a precedent for similar demands elsewhere; second, it will be a second nail in the BJP's national coffin and a personal defeat for Mr. Modi; third, it will relegate the Congress to the Wazirabad garbage dump for the next twenty years; four, it will upset the loaded applecart of Loot-yen's Delhi where everybody has his or her nose in the feeding trough ( the mixed metaphor may be excused in the interest of conveying the precise meaning!).

The referendum is a useful and legitimate tool of democracy, and the sooner these politicians realise this the better it will be for the country. It is a direct vote in which an entire electorate is asked to vote on a particular proposal, the vote usually being a precursor to a new law or policy. Unlike voting in Parliaments and legislatures by elected representatives, a referendum is an expression of DIRECT DEMOCRACY: it complements the system of  REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY. There are certain seminal and foundational issues in any country which are either extremely divisive, or such that they cannot be left to the decision of a government which is loath to give up its own powers ( as in Delhi), or to elected representatives who are constrained by their party lines or own self-interest. Some questions can only be decided by popular sovereignty and not by politicians.

The term " referendum" is believed to have originated in the Gaubunden canton of Switzerland in the 16th century. It is a process which has been used liberally by democracies: more than 500 referendums have been held world wide since the end of the 18 th century in countries such as the USA, Australia, Switzerland, Bolivia, Kenya, Norway, Hong Kong, Serbia, South Africa, Canada, Venezuela, UK, Ireland, Poland to name a few. The subjects they addressed have been equally diverse: congestion tax, devolution of powers, electoral reforms, prohibition,, accession to EU, redrawing of boundaries of political units, constitutional changes and so on. The most recent ones were the referendums on the independence of Scotland and the financial crisis in Greece. Referendums, by correctly gauging the popular will, always strengthen democracy and governance and not weaken it as Mr. Maken and Upadhyay mistakenly believe. It also acts a safety valve in volatile situations. So the path Kejriwal wants to tread on is a well travelled one though we in India may be stepping on it for the first time.

Delhi itself is sharply divided on the issue of statehood, and this fault line runs across class lines, unfortunately. Some people have benefitted from the present unique hybrid status of Delhi which is under the Center's thumb- the politicians, bureaucrats, all residents of South and Central Delhi who have historically been consuming a disproportionate proportion of all assets : power, water, funding, police presence, infrastructure and superstructure; traders and businessmen with contacts in the central govt. agencies and organisations such as DDA, Municipal Corporations, CPWD and so on. On the other side of the divide are the residents of a lesser Delhi- the low income groups, residents of unauthorised colonies, migrant labour, petty shop-keepers who rarely feature in the planning processes and priorities of the powers that be. This latter group outnumbers the former and constitutes the bulk of Kejriwal's support base. If a fair referendum were to be held, the result would be a foregone conclusion in favour of statehood. This is why the mainstream parties are resisting it and will deploy all tactics to ensure that it never happens. What they wilfully ignore for pelf and power is the fact that Delhi's present administrative structure is antiquated and cannot meet the challenges of its cancerous growth or the rising expectations of its citizens. The arbitrary division of powers between an elected Chief Minister and a domesticated Lieutenant Governor, between officers who report to the Center and those who report to the state govt ensures that there is no accountability or sense of responsibility. The Center deliberately choking Delhi of its fair share of funds in favour of discretionary grants is an insult to the citizens. The police have run riot because they can play both sides against the middle and have consequently become a law unto themselves. It is no wonder then that Delhi is the worst metropolis in the world.

Things have to change and a referendum would decide it one way or the other: this stasis in governance cannot be allowed to continue. Kejriwal's bold initiative is a step in the right direction and deserves to be supported by all who have the genuine interest of Delhi at heart. But I foresee a bitter struggle for him where even the courts will be ranged against him. This is a battle he cannot win in Parliament or in a judicial chamber- but he will win it on the streets of Delhi. It will be a Pyrrhic victory, and India will be the better for it.

ARE WE AN OLIGARCHY MASQUERADING AS A DEMOCRACY ?

 Lets first define the terms I am talking about.
OLIGARCHY-- a small group of people having control of a country or organisation.
PLUTOCRACY-- a form of oligarchy. Defines a society or system ruled and dominated by the small minority of the wealthiest citizens.
NETOCRACY-- a perceived upper class that bases its power on net-working skills.

Any observer of the events that have been unfolding over the last few weeks in this country could not have failed to notice how deep the rot has spread in our polity and society. Its no longer a question of Congress or BJP, government or business, judiciary or media- the cancer has metastatised through all the organs of the state. As Lalit Modi regurgitates dirty secrets on the twitterverse on an hourly basis and our rulers and erstwhile conscience keepers retreat deeper into their carapaces, a distinct pattern appears to be emerging of how a few individuals and families have taken over this country by manipulating the processes of democracy, and are now sucking it drier than the East India Company ever did. And the inevitable question that arises in my mind is: are we a democracy at all, or have we been hijacked ?
It is becoming clearer each day that the BJP refuses to take action against its errant Ministers that our democracy is just a facade. All the four pillars of a democratic dispensation- the legislature, the executive, the judiciary, the press- have developed deep fractures and have been taken over by termites and weevils who have hollowed out the innards of the edifice. They have been fattening themselves at our cost all these years; once in a while one of these insects tumbled out but we took little notice, and suspected no real danger. But now the Queen Bee itself is talking( or tweeting) and as the secrets tumble out the extent of the infestation is becoming clearer.
It is my contention that a few families and individuals in our four vital organs- executive, judiciary, legislature, press- have taken them over and have moulded and disfigured then to suit their own purpose, and the country be damned.
Consider first the political executive. State after state has been commandeered by the likes of the Badals, the Dhumals and Virbhadra Singhs, the Yadavs and Mayawatis, the Patnaiks, the Karunanidhis and Jayalalithas, the Pawars, the Hoodas and Lalls of various denominations, the Abdullahs, Raos and Naidus. The states have become privately owned businesses. It is impossible for anyone not owing allegiance to one or the other of these sicilian-style families to enter the power structure. Parliament itself is the personal fiefdom of a few dozen families, a franchise of the dominant families; and the franchisees are doing very well, thank you: according to the website of the Association for Democratic Reforms the average wealth of an MP in the current Lok Sabha is now Rs. 15 crore, up from Rs. 9 crore in the last one. And this is only the declared assets! The state legislatures are no different, packed with sons, daughters, their spouses etc. of the Dons. And so we have the scandalous situation of the Badal family having twelve Ministers in Punjab, and Mulayam Singh has so many of his family in the government that even he probably can't remember the number.
The judiciary too is not exempt from a few question marks, the biggest of them being: why is it so keen to retain its choke-hold on appointment of Judges ? In no other genuine democracy do judges appoint judges, but here we have a circus playing out on a daily basis in the Supreme Court where a perfectly reasonable NJAC Act is being scrutinised for its constitutionality, and in the interim all appointments have been put on hold- and that too when as many as  251 posts of judges are lying vacant and more than 40 million cases are pending in the courts. Why? Maybe the answer lies in the following statistics which a Mumbai lawyer M.J. Nedumpara recently submitted to the Supreme Court, based on information gleaned from the websites of the SC and 13 High Courts: 33% SC judges and 50% of High Court judges are " related to higher echelons of the judiciary", which translates to 6 in the former and 88 in the latter. This has been the result of the existing Collegium system of appointments ( which the NJAC seeks to replace) in which vacancies are neither notified/ advertised nor is there any transparency in the appointments. Further, a succession of judgements in the past has ensured that retired judges have almost complete monopoly over appointments to various Commissions and Tribunals, guaranteeing them post retirement sinecures. If this does not smell of an oligarchy or netocracy I am not sure what does.
Take our so called " free" press or media. Most of our leading newspapers and News Channels are owned/ managed by business interests ( Bennet Coleman, Mukesh Ambani, Bhartiyas) or politicians( Jayalalitha, the Marans, Rajeev Shukla, Chandan Mitra, the Badals, Karthikeya Sharma). Their agenda is naturally set by these behind-the scenes puppeeteers whose sole objective is to preserve the oligarchic status quo. They will not tolerate any change or any " outsider" trying to crash the party. That explains their almost vitriolic hatred of Narender Modi when he first made his bid for Delhi, or of Arvind Kejriwal even today. Mr. Modi is now acceptable to them partly because they have no choice now that he is the Prime Minister, and partly also because he is gradually getting co-opted into the cosy club himself. But Kejriwal is still fair game for a disgustingly biased reporting because he will not abide by their rules.
Consider next India Inc. as our world of business is grandly termed. They are the real plutocrats who pay the piper and call the tune. Protectively nurtured in the licence- raj nursery they have now attained adulthood and have claimed their legacy. There are 180,000 of them- dollar millionaires. But the real barons of the business world, the dollar multi-millionaires number 14800 ( India Today, 10th November 2014) and they are the real oligarchs. According to the Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report of October 2014 the top 1% of Indians own 49% of the country's wealth, and this continues to grow: in 2000 the figure was 36.8%. The top 5% own 65.5%. In contrast the bottom 50% Indians own just 5%! And this in a country where a quarter of the world's destitutes reside, more than 400 million people still live below the poverty line- now we know why they are there. Even in a far wealthier country like the UK the top 1% own only 23.3% of the wealth.
These then are the four sub-oligarchies which coalesce into a grand whole which is the democratic republic of India. The four guard their turf zealously,both individually and collectively, and also network with each other to ensure that no harm befalls any of them. They do not allow any meaningful action to be taken against any of them and ensure that wrong-doing is never punished. The Radia tapes exposed the most venal complicity between politics, media and big business but were quickly erased . 2G and coal allocations were not a one-off mistake or malfeasance: they were part of a mutually beneficial public policy, and many more names than those charge-sheeted are involved, but the lid has been hastily lowered on the investigations. It is common knowledge where the SAHARA moneys came from and where they went, but our oligarchs are certainly not interested in the truth becoming public, so Subroto Roy remains in jail: he will pay the bail amount some day and walk free and everyone will breathe easier. Jayalalitha's bail application is heard in record time while the victims of UPHAAR still wait for their application to be heard even after one year. Convicted members of our privileged netocracy can get bail within hours while unconvicted undertrials rot in dungeons for years. A High Court judge passes a patently illegal order and threatens to register an FIR against his own Chief Justice; another defies the law by refusing to sentence a convicted rapist and instead ordering a " mediation" between the rapist and the victim (!!)- and both continue to serve in the courts, no doubt to pass similar illegal orders in the days to come. Five thousand poor farmers have committed suicide in the last one year under pressure to repay their loans, but one of our high flying( literally) multi-millionaires who owes more than Rupees seven billion to the banks continues to party in his private jets and Mediterranean villas and produce movies for his son. The country's banking system is collapsing under the weight of Rs. 300,000 crores ( US$ 50 billion) " non-performing assets" which is just a euphemism for loans taken by big business which they just refuse to return, with no consequences for them: of course, you and I have to pay for it by more expensive loans and lower returns on deposits. Official secrets are stolen from central ministries and the companies doing so identified ( yes, they belong to our 1% club) but only class four employees and middle level managers arrested: the long arm of the law in India shrinks in direct proportion to the moneys and oligarchs involved. ( I can guarantee that we will hear no more of this case). No less than four retired Supreme Court judges give ( paid) legal opinions to help an absconding Lalit Modi, knowing fully well that his case is sub-judice and is likely to come up before the same court they were a part of till the other day. Can money speak any louder?
One can go on ad-nauseam but I think I have made the point intended-viz. that our oligarchs look after their own. In the first place laws and policies are made to suit them. If they still fall foul of them, then the laws are bent to breaking point. If even that doesn't help then perverse legal interpretations are floated ( such as drawing a distinction between an " affidavit" and a " disposition" and " absconder" and " evader" and so on.) And if, by some miracle, even that is of no avail then the final frontier stares us in the face: an impenetrable thicket of laws and lawyers, judges and judgements, adjournments and appeals that somehow ensures that the innocent is incarcerated and the guilty is freed.
Is it any wonder then how the present Lalit Modi burlesque is playing out? The Congress may be shouting " thief!" now but it took no action against Lalit Modi when it was in power itself- how could it, when it has been feeding at the same trough in our own Animal Farm?  In fact, Mr.Lalit Modi has rendered a great service to this country- he has exposed the putrefied core of our democracy and revealed how every institution meant to strengthen it has actually been undermining it from within. It would appear our tryst with destiny has been postponed indefinitely, for surely it cannot be our destiny to be an oligarchy? To take another metaphor from " Animal Farm":
    " The creatures outside looked from pig to man and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which."
   The bestial transformation is complete. 

CAN WE TRUST MR. JAVADEKAR WITH OUR ENVIRONMENT ?

The short answer is: no, we can't.

Mr. Javadekar has donned the mantle of India's Minister of Environment and Forests at a critical moment, when time is running out for the preservation of our once abundant natural assets, and environmental disaster is staring us in the face. His NDA  (National Democratic Alliance) government took over from the UPA (United Progressive Alliance), which, notwithstanding its many failings (and there were many of them) at least was sensitive towards the need for conserving the environment, and had taken many steps in that direction. We had expected that Mr. Javadekar would be equally responsive and would build on these initiatives to repair and reverse the degradation that mindless policies of the past had caused. A few facts about the current state of our environment and forests, as reported from time to time by the UN, WHO, IPCC (Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change) and our own agencies, deserve mentioning as a context for assessing Mr. Javadekar's performance in the last one year:

*  13 of the world's 20 most polluted cities are in India: Delhi heads the list.

*  76 of our 150 major rivers are polluted; the waters of 3/4th of them are not fit for drinking.

*  Our groundwater reserves are in a critical state, thanks to the 21 million borewells dug in the last 50 years: 30% of them in western India alone have dried up. 50% of underground water sources in the Indo-Gangetic plain are polluted.

*  Himalayan glaciers will disappear by 2050, effecting 400 million people.

*  Climate change has arrived: it will eventually lead to a 36% decline in food production in South Asia, and a 5.8% loss in wheat production post 2030 in India.

*  The IPCC report of April 2014 predicts a 4* C rise in temperature for India by 2100. A trailer of this was witnessed in peninsular India this summer, where average temperatures rose by 1.4* C whereas the normative increase was only 0.8*C: more than 2000 people died in this " heat wave"

*  Environmental degradation costs 5.7% of our GDP, or US$ 120 billion every year.

* 620000 people die every year just from outdoor air pollution.

* 60 million people have been displaced by projects till 2000. These " GDP refugees" are primarily from the most marginalised sections, including tribals and landless labour.

* The World Bank Environment Quality Index rates India at a terrible 155 out of 176 countries.

* We have now become the third largest emitter of carbon in the world.

* As per estimates of our own Zoological Survey of India the list of endangered species of animals has DOUBLED in the last two years- from 190 in 2010 to 443 in 2012: in other words, 253 more species of mammals, amphibians and reptiles are destined for extinction very soon. (I don't for a minute believe the govt's figures of a 30% increase in tiger population: this appears to have been contrived by a change in the earlier method of conducting the count. This doubt is lent credence by the govt's own recently released figure of 23 tigers having been poached in just the last year.)

*  830, 244 hectares of forest land , or an area which is seven times the size of Delhi, has been diverted for projects in the thirty years from 1981 to 2011. The tempo of diversion has been increasing instead of slowing down: 210,000 ha. has been diverted in just the four years from 2007 to 2011. 12000 ha. of forest land has been sacrificed by the present NDA govt. in just THE LAST SIX MONTHS.

* 50% of the country's wetlands have been lost to urbanisation.

* 67.3% of urban sewage flows directly into our rivers.

*  Our cities generate 60 million tonnes of waste every year: only 30% of it is treated or re-cycled- the rest of it continues to contaminate our rivers and forests. This quantum of waste is predicted to go up by 243% by 2025, according to a World Bank study.

This is not the picture of a " developing" country, as our govt. would like to believe: this is an image of an Elliotsian wasteland. This is what Mr. Javadekar inherited, and with the kind of mandate which his govt. has, one expected him to get down to some hard policy making and ruthless implementation to reverse this slide to ecological perdition. We have seen little so far of this: yes, there is the Clean Ganga campaign, but it has not yet gone beyond the chest thumping stage and it is in any case doomed to failure if Mr. Jadavekar goes ahead with his plan to construct another 150 dams on the upstream Ganga and its tributaries. Yes, there is also the Swacch Bharat programme: its success can be gauged by the 20000 tonnes of garbage that had piled up on Delhi's roads last week because Mr. Modi wished to tell Mr. Kejriwal who is Bossman in Delhi- evidently, garbage conveys a stronger message than votes.

Mr. Javadekar's Ministry has become a hand-maiden of Modi's industrialisation vision. Its mandate is not to conserve the environment but to dismantle the checks and balances that had been put in place to maintain the equilibrium between GDP and the environment. I cannot think of one single policy or decision by him in the last one year which has promoted the cause of sustaining the environment. To the contrary, however, there have been dozens which will cause long lasting and irreparable devastation to our natural resources and ravage the environment for ever. Here is an illustrative list:

*  Under Mr. Javadekar's prodding a truncated National Wildlife Board. at just one sitting in August 2014, cleared 130 projects related to mining, power, defence, all within 10 kms of protected wildlife areas (which had hitherto been a no-go zone). These PAs include Mukandra Hill Tiger Reserve( Rajasthan), Kanha Tiger Reserve (MP), Dudhwa Tiger Reserve (UP), Kapilash Wildlife Sanctuary( Odisha), and an Olive Ridley turtle nesting site in AP's Krishna district. Diversion of forestland of the Periyar Tiger Reserve in Kerala has been allowed to enable an increase in the height of the Kunnar Dam. And, most shocking of all, a four-lane National Highway has been approved over a 23 km. stretch of the Sariska Tiger Reserve (all of it in the core area) over the protests of the state forest department. It is clearly of no consequence to our Minister that more than 600 rivers and streams originate from tiger habitats, supplying water to the teeming millions in the cities. A case in point is the Ramganga river which flows from the Corbett National Park and provides Delhi with 190 million cubic feet of water. By chipping away at these habitats, therefore, we endanger not only the ecology but also the future of these cities.

* There is a strong move to replace the Expert panel on Ganga constituted in pursuance of Supreme Court orders to take a view on the number of dams that should be permitted in the upper reaches of the Alaknanda and the Mandakni, the major tributaries of the Ganga. The present panel, headed by Prof. Vinod Tare of IIT Kanpur, had recommended that only six of the two dozen odd hydel projects proposed on these rivers should be allowed, and that too after reducing their capacity by about 30%-40% to ensure minimum water flows to sustain aquatic life. A sensible recommendation, you would think. Not so Mr. Javadekar whose loyalty is to the power sector and not to his own Ministry. Unhappy with the paring down of projects, he has now proposed a new Committee headed by one BP Das, who is a known proponent of power projects, with the Joint Secretary of his Ministry as the convenor, and all the scientists being replaced by technocrats. Mr. Javadekar will get the report he wants, and the Ganga will not flow for much longer.

*  There is also a proposal in the pipeline to trim the powers of the National Green Tribunal, the only body in the govt. today which is showing some interest in protecting the environment: precisely for this reason it has become a thorn in Mr. Javadekar's " make in India" flesh. The proposal is to emasculate the NGT (National Green Tribunal) by making it a recommendatory, rather than a judicial, body; and to take away its autonomous status by bringing it under the Ministry. This will make Mr. Javadekar lord of all he surveys, even if all he surveys is a barren waste.

*  Mr. Javadekar is very thorough, if anything. He has also set in motion a review of the three pillars of our environmental regulatory edifice viz. The Indian Forest Act, The Wildlife Protection Act and the Forest Conservation Act. His objective is to extirpate from them all provisions which make it difficult to quickly implement Mr. Modi's " make in India" vision- in other words, environmental considerations, no matter how legitimate, will not be allowed to stand in the way of the GDP God. By the time Mr. Javadekar is through with his mission Veerappan will start looking like a saint, in comparison.

*  In order to leave nothing to chance Mr. Javadekar has also proposed to dilute the Forests Right Act to take away the powers of gram sabhas to reject projects in their area. He has obviously been rattled by the Niyamgiri fiasco, where (pursuant to a Supreme Court order directing that the gram sabhas be allowed to have their say) 12 gram sabhas voted to disallow the mining of minerals in their forests by the Rupees 50,000 crore Lanjigarh aluminia plant of Vedanta. Once again, this erstwhile spokesman of the BJP cannot appreciate the fact that there are more than 200 million deprived Indians living in and around forests and dependent on their eco-systems for their livelihood, and that they MUST have a say on the use of these eco-systems for other purposes. With such blinkered vision, is there any wonder that the Naxalite problem just won't go away ?

*  Mr. Javadekar is also re-defining the word " forest" (currently the definition given by the Supreme Court in 1997-98 prevails): he finds that the present definition is not " user friendly" ( guess who the " user" is that he has in his mind ?). He is proposing that areas which do not have trees on the ground, even though they may be classified as forests; plantation areas; and areas which were not notified as forests before a particular date, even though they may have tree cover now- all these areas shall cease to be considered as forests and will not enjoy the protection of the FCA (Forest Conservation Act). Tens of thousands of sq. kms of forest land shall thus be made available to builders, industrialists and assorted cronies, and the people who are actually dependent on these forests shall join the millions of ecological refugees.

* Coastal Regulation Zone Rules, meant to protect vulnerable coastal areas, mangrove swamps, deltas and aquatic life in these zones, are also slated for large scale amendments to enable construction of real estate, ports and highways.

* Wherever possible, and under the garb of stimulating production, environmental and social impact assessments and public hearings are being done away with. For example, coal mines which extract less than 16 million tonnes per annum and want to increase production by 50%, are no longer required to hold public hearings. Dhanbad and Jharia are the historical results of such short-sighted policies earlier, and the reasons why such hearings were introduced in the first place. But history appears to have stopped for Mr. Javadekar with the Mahabharat and the Rig Vedas.

*  The NDA govt. suffers from a Mohammad bin Tughlaq like megalomania: nothing else can explain its insistence on going ahead with the river-linking project despite warnings from scientists and enviromentalists. It is going full steam on the project without conducting any environmental or socio-economic impact assessment studies. It boggles the mind that any country can link 58 rivers through 12550 kms of canals, build 3000 dams and divert 173 billion cu.mtrs. of waters without carrying out these basic studies! The first phase of the project-linking of the Betwa and Ken rivers- has been formally announced yesterday.

*  Having worked in both state and central governments for many years, one can say with confidence that the former are far more venal and subject to pressure; it is therefore necessary that the central govt. act a check on the states, and have the final say in environmental and forest clearances. But Mr. Javadekar, in his hurry to open the flood-gates, is empowering the states to give approvals at their level. This  will create complete mayhem in a few years.

There is much that Mr. Javadekar could have done, and even more that is just crying out for policy initiatives and interventions. The Kasturirangan Committee report on the Western Ghats, that seeks to protect just 37% of its 164,280 sq.kms by declaring them as Ecologically Sensitive Areas, is awaiting approval since 2012. The Western Ghats are a priceless hot-spot that gives birth to 58 rivers and sequesters 10 million tonnes of carbon every year; it has already shrunk by 25% in the last two decades and is screaming for some protection. But our articulate Minister just won't approve the report because the politician-builder nexus in six states is opposed to it. True to his style, he will probably keep appointing more Committees till he gets the report that he wants.

Nothing concrete is being done about reducing our carbon emissions. We are fond of quoting China as a model for industrial development but are learning nothing from its efforts in this field: China has reduced its its carbon intensity (emissions per unit of GDP) by 20% in the last five years and has set a target of 45% reduction by 2020. Mr. Javadekar continues nonchalantly in his oxygen deprived fog. 

Urban waste, which is probably the biggest polluter of our rivers, is another area of concern that is just begging for some attention, but the MOEF is a silent spectator, leaving it to the cities to sort out the mess. China has already installed 180 high volume incinerators and is setting up 200 more with a target of incinerating 60% of the waste by 2020: this shall not only reduce the land required for land fills but also prevent leaching of chemicals into the soil and produce power. We have no comprehensive plan for this.

The NGT has taken the bold step of banning diesel vehicles older than ten years in Delhi, which has 14 lakh of them. This is commendable since 27% of carbon emissions are generated by the transport sector. One would have expected that the MOEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests) would, in conjunction with the Transport Ministry, have by now formulated a plan for the disposal of such vehicles, instead of merely allowing them to be sold in other towns, adding to their pollution. Many countries, including Mauritius, have evolved schemes whereby such car-owners are paid a sum of money for handing over these vehicles to the govt, which then breaks them down and recycles their various components. This is a programme that could be considered under the PPP mode if only Mr. Javadekar had the inclination to attend to this. But he is more involved in addressing press conferences where he can bad mouth the opposition.

The list is endless but the scenario is clear. Mr. Javadekar not only lacks the long term vision which an Environment Minister in today's challenging context should possess but he also has no interest in preserving the environment. His only agenda is to undo the good work done in the last two decades. The country shall pay a heavy price in the years to come for his stewardship of this Ministry. 

ENCOUNTER SPECIALISTS

   It is the general assumption that bureaucrats lead dull and boring lives, flitting from one file to another like a bottlefly, jumping from one posting to another like a grass-hopper, chanting hosannas to the presiding political deity, and finally retiring with a fat pension and an enlarged prostate. This is not true, barring of course the pension and the prostate. We lead pretty exciting lives, what with scams, statements like "nobody dies of cold", honey traps, back-stabbing colleagues and devising ingenious ways to secure post-retirement sinecures. What is regarded as a shortcoming in govt. functioning- frequent transfers- is actually the source of the greatest excitement, as with every move we come into contact with a whole host of new characters and encounter new situations. I have little doubt that the redoubtable Mr. Khemka of the Haryana cadre, who has had more transfers than Yuvraj Singh has made runs in the last Indian Premier League (IPL), has led a life as exciting as that of Billy the Kid (who, of course, was summarily shot by Pat Garrett without the benefit of the Disciplinary Rules which Mr. Khemka is entitled to). In short, we too are encounter specialists, and I'd like to share some of my own exciting encounters with the sceptical reader.

In the year of our Lord VP Singh ,1990, I was posted as Special Assistant to Mr. IK Gujral who was the External Affairs Minister. He instructed me, meticulous as he was, to obtain an exhaustive briefing from every Divisional Joint Secretary so that when their files started arriving in the Minister's office they would make more sense than the Dead Sea Scrolls. Working my way through Western Europe, Eastern Europe and the Americas (in the Ministry of External Affairs officers are referred to by their jurisdictions, not their names-it sounds more important), I finally arrived in the room of South Asia, a well nourished, portly Bengali gentleman. "What," I asked him astutely, "is our future strategy in our neighbourhood ?"

" Our long term plan," South Asia announced, " is to make the Indian Ocean a zone of piss."

Now, since this was a couple of decades before Messers  Ajit Pawar and Gadkari  made piss the fulcrum of all rural development programmes, I was non-plussed. " You can't be serious," I protested, "surely Sri Lanka and the Maldives wouldn't allow this !"

" They approve of our plan- after all they too are pissful nations."

" What about China?" I countered, drawing on my limited knowledge of geography.

He was ready. "Ah! With China we have a different problem- its about a shit. They won't give us a shit!"

I wanted to remind him that China had indeed given us a lot of shit in 1962, but I let that pass. "Why would we want China to give us a shit ?" I ventured.

South Asia finally closed the loop. Triumphantly, he proclaimed: " There can be no piss in Asia until China gives us a permanent shit in the United Nations Security Council."

It was time to pull the flush and quietly leave. This was one conversation I did not share with Mr. Gujral.

                          *          *         *          *           *            *             *            *           *

   The Armed Forces and the IAS share an enigmatic and equivocal relationship. The former grudge the IAS its hold on power, public visibility and higher pay scales. The IAS, on the other hand, is envious of the Army's cheap liquor and the fact that they can play golf in the afternoons and call it outdoor training. But lets admit it- we in the IAS do lack the old world courtesies that are ingrained into most army officers, their spit and polish, and their gallant approach towards ladies. Army officers, for example, don't have "affairs" with colleagues' wives, they "steal their affections", even if the said affection is given to them on a platter. Such Kipling-esque notions of gallantry make them look down (quite rightly, in my view) upon the IAS in terms of social accomplishments.

   Now, Shimla is one town where the Army and the IAS cannot help rubbing shoulders with each other, whether it be on the Mall, or in the Amateur Dramatic Club (ADC), which is a misnomer since its pivot is not the theatre but the bar, or in Bishop Cotton School (BCS), where both IAS and Army wives teach. And so it was that my wife Neerja, who taught in BCS for many years, became very friendly with Gauri, the wife of Colonel Abhay Rastogi who also taught there. By extension, soon the Colonel and I also became good friends-we played golf together, went out for picnics and even forgot about the contentious one-rank-one-pension divide. We became like one extended family, or so I thought.

   Abhay and Gauri had a beautiful tan Labrador bitch named Saira and they were looking to mate her. I was the equally proud owner of a magnificent Golden Retriever named Brutus who had also come of age to sow his wild oats, The conclusion was obvious and Neerja and I decided to broach the subject to the Rastogis, though it's usually the girl's side that is supposed to initiate the negotiations. But, I reasoned, we were family, so why stand on ceremony ?

  " Gauri," I remarked one evening when we were sitting around having a drink at the Headmaster's lodge," why don't we mate Saira with Brutus ? They'd have beautiful puppies."

   There was a tinkling sound as Gauri dropped her glass of Bacardi, followed by a thick silence which you could have cut with a knife. Abhay quietly left the room for a purported toilet break. Gauri got up, looked at me as a Major- General would at a Havildar, and declared in a parade-ground tone: " But that's impossible ! Saira is an army dog, how could we possibly mate her with a civilian dog ?"

Having been firmly put in my place I slunk off to join my civilian canine. We're still great, perhaps even better, friends. But as a matter of prudent policy we've decided to let sleeping dogs lie.

                 *                      *                         *                             *                               *

  After more than thirty five years in government I am convinced that politicians can outsmart bureaucrats any time. There's more than one way to skin a cat, and politicians know all these ways. I discovered this first the hard way. In the late 80's I was posted as the Managing Director of  the Himachal Road Transport Corporation (HRTC). My Minister ( he is not with us any more, unfortunately) was a polished legislator with more than forty years' experience of the bull ring, the undisputed number two in the Cabinet. He really was a gem of a man and tolerated none of the hypocrisies which are second nature to Indian politicians. He could (and did) drink bus drivers under the table (or dashboard, if you will), loved music and poetry, was a mesmerising raconteur, and had more than a roving eye (and hands) for pretty women. We got along famously till about one year into my term, when I dismissed ten drivers for drunken driving. Most of them were from the Minister's constituency and therefore I was verbally ordered to reinstate them. Having some Mangal Pandey blood in my veins (so I'm told) I refused. The Minister then asked the drivers to file appeals against my dismissal orders with him (he was the Chairman of the HRTC Board), and  in that capacity accepted the appeals and ordered their reinstatement. I told him that his orders were invalid since appeals lay to the full Board and not to the Chairman. He invited me to his office, offered me tea and biscuits, and politely asked me to bring the matter to the Board. I advised him against this, stating that in the Board note I would have to explain in detail the reasons for each dismissal (all the dismissed drivers were serial offenders), and would give  my firm recommendation that retaining the drivers in service would be endangering the lives of passengers in future. All Board decisions are in writing, and what possible reason could he give for over-ruling me, especially if the press got hold of the matter, as they would within hours?

He looked at me, and asked me in a quiet tone: " Avay, why don't you just accept my original order on their appeals and reinstate them?"

" Can't do that sir," I replied," the Rules don't permit you to admit an appeal against my orders."

" Which Rules?"

" The bye-laws of the Corporation, sir."

" Ok, in that case I'll just change the bye-laws."

" Only the Finance Department and the Cabinet can do that."

The Minister took a long and thoughtful sip of tea and offered me another biscuit. "So I can't change the bye-laws?" he asked softly.

" No, sir," I replied, thinking I finally had him check-mated.

" But I can change the Managing Director, can't I ?" he asked, almost absent mindedly, and walked over to his desk and picked up the phone.

I was shifted to the Animal Husbandry Department the next day, just hours before the drivers were reinstated by my successor, a police officer who was looking for wider experience in his CV. The Minister and I continued to remain good friends till he passed away some years later. But he had taught me an important lesson-never under estimate a politician or try to outsmart him.

                 

  

                          *                 *                     *                            *                           *
  

THE DELHI IMBROGLIO: A REFERENDUM IS THE ONLY WAY OUT.

The spate of notifications, clarifications and press statements issued by the BJP govt. at the centre over the last week to emasculate the elected govt. in Delhi  only validates what one had instinctively felt when that party had been routed in the February elections: that, having lost the war, Mr. Modi would go to any lengths to win the peace. And he has been doing precisely this through the MHA( Ministry of Home Affairs) and a supine Lieutenant Governor ever since, unconcerned about the fact that with each memorandum he is driving Delhi closer to a state of anarchy and chaos. His ultimate goal is now becoming clearer every day: declare a constitutional breakdown in Delhi, dismiss the Kejriwal govt. and rule through the same LG who kept Kejriwal at bay for ten months in 2014 by refusing to hold elections in Delhi.

First, the Central govt. refused to give Kejriwal the officers he wanted and the Delhi police refused to fill up the vacancies in the ACB( Anti Corruption Branch), which is the spearhead of the AAP govt's campaign against corruption. It then issued a notification limiting the ACB's jurisdiction to only employees of the Delhi govt.- effectively giving a licence for wrong doing to all other public servants: central ministers, all-India services. central govt. employees, PSU employees. Municipal employees etc. The notification defies all logic-will the MHA now issue similar instructions to all state police forces too, viz. that crimes committed by the above categories of public servants cannot be taken cognizance of by local state police, and that only the CBI has powers to do so? Is this some perverted version of diplomatic immunity?

The Delhi police has been deliberately let loose on the AAP govt. and party. It has registered dubious cases against seven AAP MLAs, refused to cooperate in an inquiry conducted by the District Magistrate of New Delhi under the CRPC into the suicide of a farmer, even filed an FIR in the same incident against AAP volunteers when its own personnel were even more negligent in failing to prevent the suicide.

Delhi's pending application with UNESCO for World Heritage City status has been suddenly and mysteriously withdrawn by the Urban Development Ministry at the eleventh hour, even though all the documentation has been completed and the case was to come up for inscription in September this year.

The intent is clear: do not allow the AAP govt. to function, deprive it of any possible credit for good work done, put legal and constitutional hurdles in its attempt to fulfill its election promises, discredit and harass it at every turn by ruthless employment of the police.

The fig leaf of the Constitution behind which the BJP is trying to conceal its naked lust for power is tattered and shrivelled. Granted that Article 239AA of the Constitution that gave Delhi a legislative assembly kept out of the purview of the Chief Minister the three subjects of land, public order and police and assigned them to the LG. But it did not mention anything about " Services"-that is, the transfer and postings of govt. employees. That has been added to the excluded list by a mischievous " interpretation" of the Constitution by the MHA on 21.5.2015, obviously in furtherance of the grand design to reduce Kejriwal to a Wajid Ali Shah in an Oudh administered by the Resident, Colonel Outram, who now goes by the name of Najeeb Jung. ( Kejriwal was not too far off the metaphorical mark when he recently likened the Centre to London and the LG to the Viceroy !)

Even more important, however, is the spirit of the Constitution. The text of a law, or the Constitution, only gives the INTENT of a particular provision. How that intent is to be implemented depends on the larger understanding of the political and administrative ecology, and, in a democracy, on an appreciation of the people's desires and wishes. It is in this respect that Mr.Modi's govt. comes across as unscrupulous. power hungry and vindictive in its approach to the present Delhi govt. Let me explain.

One of Mr. Modi's hubris-induced drawbacks is that he does not accept that there was any history before him- India's history begins only with I AD ( After Damodardas): this is evident in his approach to foreign relations, economic policies, reforms, social programmes etc. With regard to Delhi as a state too he has this blind spot. He overlooked, or deliberately disregarded, the fact that in 1998 the then Home Minister Mr. LK Advani had issued a notification making it mandatory for the Lieutenant Governor to consult the Chief Minister of Delhi on even the three excluded subjects mentioned above, and to record in writing the reasons if he felt that he should not do so. This order had the mark of a statesman and a democrat. And it is this order that Mr. Modi has caused to be withdrawn and revoked by the notification of 21.5. 2015. No greater contempt  could be shown for the people of Delhi and for the values of democracy and federalism.

Full statehood for Delhi is not a new demand- it has been raised by all Chief Ministers and parties in Delhi, and resolutions to that effect have been passed by Assemblies in the past also. It was one of the main planks on which AAP fought the last elections. It was, therefore, a legitimate democratic right of Kejriwal to have pursued this goal, even while insisting on full consultations by the LG with him on the excluded subjects in the interim.

There is merit in the demand for statehood. The population of Delhi is more than the combined population of all the other Union territories put together; put another way, it is more than twice the population of Himachal Pradesh. It has more Parliamentary seats than HP, Jammu and Kashmir, and Uttarakhand, to mention just its neighbours. Its annual budget is three times the size of HP's budget if we include the three Municipal Corporations also. It has among the highest crime rates in the country and yet the police are not accountable to the elected govt. or the Chief Minister. The argument is often trotted out by apologists of all govts, past and present, who are loath to give up control over this rich and vibrant city, that Washington DC too is under the federal govt and is not a separate state, so how is Delhi any different? This would be a good time to correct this wrong impression.

Firstly, Washington DC and Delhi are just not comparable. The former has an area of only 68.30 sq. miles and a population of 658000 whereas Delhi ( not NCR) has an area of 1400 sq. kms and a population in excess of 15 million ! Such large areas and numbers of people simply cannot go unrepresented. Secondly, Washington DC is not administered by the federal govt. but by an elected 13 member Council headed by a Mayor-in other words, elected representatives of the District govern the District, not nominated Lieutenant Governors or Ministers of the central govt. or bureaucrats who have no accountability. It is Congress which retains exclusive law making jurisdiction over the District and approves its budget, but that is all. The administrative and political model of Delhi is as far removed from that of Washington DC as fish is from fowl, not that Mr. Rajnath Singh would recognise it, being a strict vegetarian.                                                                                                                                                   But, most important of all, the people of Delhi want statehood and an accountable bureaucracy. By winning 54% of the popular vote and 67 of the 70 seats Kejriwal has an overwhelming endorsement and support for this demand. Not only has the Modi govt. refused to acknowledge this, but by issuing the notification of 21.4.2015 it has signalled that it is not even prepared to take on board the views of the Chief Minister on the four excluded subjects, that it will treat him as a political mannequin, that it will not even discuss this issue.

This is a big mistake and a grave political miscalculation . It ignores the wishes of 15 million citizens of Delhi. It ignores the first principle of any democracy-accountability of the bureaucracy and police to the elected representatives. It ignores the changing expectations of peoples, which in other countries have resulted in Arab springs, "insurgent" political parties like UKIP in the UK, the Tea Parties in the USA, the Front National of Marine la Penn in France-outfits which are side-lining mainstream political parties ( a phenomenon already proved in Delhi with the complete decimation of both the Congress and the BJP in February).

The biggest mistake which Modi is making, however, is in underestimating Kejriwal and in denying him any space for negotiations on the issue of statehood. Kejriwal has mastered the art of " protest" and " agitational" politics and has proved this time and again as an RTI activist and in the IAC movement. He is at his most effective when he is fighting the " status quo" and he will not fight by the rules Mr. Modi is comfortable with- the lifeless text of the Constitution amended to suit the status quoists from time to time, retrograde notifications issued by a faceless bureaucrat, imposition of Section 144 to curb protests, filing of FIRs by a compliant police force which has its own scores to settle with Kejriwal. Mr. Modi may have stepped into a ring to take on this master activist with his hand chosen referees and a copy of the Queensbury rules, but Kejriwal will make his own rules as he goes along. His core strength comes from the fact that he is a street fighter who derives his power from his connect with the people- not the people in the salons and drawing rooms of south Delhi but the voters in the polling booths. ( A recent poll by a media group indicates that 61% of Delhi's voters back him in his fight against the Centre on the issue of statehood.). He was prepared to fight in the ring but Modi has denied him even this right and so now Kejriwal will fight in the streets, where he makes the rules, after all.

Mr. Modi and the BJP have painted themselves into a corner, as Mr. Shinde had once done to his government. Out of Kejriwal's last struggles had emerged the Lokpal and a more comprehensive legal understanding of police accountability. Out of the impending one will emerge, if not full statehood, a substantially more effective and powerful state government in Delhi in keeping with the wishes of its citizens. The only way out for Modi now, if he wishes to save face and prevent Delhi from slipping into chaos and disorder, is to hold a referendum on the subject and let the people decide. This is the civilized and democratic way of settling contentious issues.

The question, however, is: how much of a democrat is Mr. Modi?   

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Voices are now being raised( in the media and the intelligentsia ) that Kejriwal should go to court and obtain a judicial imprimatur on this subject. He may, but on the limited subject of powers to post officers in his govt.( He has already won the first round yeasterday when the Delhi High Court ruled that the ACB( Anti corruption Bureau) should be under the control of the CM and NOT the LG). But my gut feeling is that he is unlikely to take the statehood issue to the Supreme Court, and for a number of reasons. First. the judiciary is likely to go by the strict wording of the laws( the Constitution and the Delhi ACT) which does not favour him. ( One must not forget that Kejriwal's fight is to change these ossified laws which suit mainstream, status-quoist parties, who refuse to see that societal changes and expectations have made these laws irrelevant. The IAC campaign resulted in a new law on the Lokpal, the Nirbhaya agitation resulted in a complete overhauling of the laws on sexual violence.). Kejriwal has grasped instinctively the truth about our moribund republic- that change will never come about thru a reasonable process but only thru mass agitations-even our courts are generally loath to disturb the status quo because it suits them too. Which brings me to my second reason: statehood is a political issue, not a legal issue, just as creation of new states was. And political issues have to be fought out on the streets since our government, Parliament and political parties( the institutions meant to arbitrate on political issues) are all non functional and rarely reflect or respond tothe will of the citizens, except during election time. So, like I said, Kejriwal will not fight by the Queensbury rules because they are loaded against him-he will go to the people( as he has in the past), Modi will go to the police and Delhi will go to the dogs.

Kejriwal should tweak his strategy a bit. Instead of unilaterally demanding statehood as an agenda of his party he should demand a referendum on the issue. This would take the wind out of the sails of the BJP and even parties like the Congress who are trying to ride two horses at the same time. Even the media will have to shut up. The demand for a referendum would show up Kejriwal in a much more reasonable. constitutionally compliant and non-dogmatic light: after all. what possible objection could there be to the demand that the wishes of the citizens of Delhi be ascertained thru a lawful and constitutional process? This would check-mate the increasingly arrogant Mr. Modi: if he accepts it he will have handed over Delhi to Kejriwal, for there is no way that the latter can lose the vote; if, on the other hand, Modi refuses to hold a referendum he will be exposed as an an autocrat and, worse, as backing away from a fight with Kejriwal. To show any weakness in any jungle- and Delhi is nothing but a primeval jungle, believe me!- is fatal. Modi must surely have learnt that from his Gir lions!

PLEASE RESPECT THE LAW, MR. CHIEF JUSTICE

Our superior court judges are very fond of quoting that old chestnut about nobody being above the law, but it now appears that they have exempted themselves from this adage. The refusal of the Chief Justice of India( CJI ) to attend the meetings of the newly constituted National Judicial Appointments commission ( NJAC ) admits of no other explanation.

The NJAC has come into existence with the passing of legislation by the Parliament, and is therefore now the law of the land, to be observed and respected by all citizens and institutions, including judges of the Supreme Court. It has been challenged in the Supreme Court but the relevant bench has not stayed its operation; in fact. it has specifically refrained from doing so in view of the substantial number of vacancies in the higher courts and the need to regularise the appointments of a large number of Additional Judges in these courts.

The CJI is the highest legal luminary in the country and he must surely be aware that legal propriety and sense of fair play demands that one's personal views should never be allowed to come in the way of judicial adjudication of an issue. He may not agree with what the vast majority of people in this country, and Parliament certainly, feel--that justice is too important a matter to be left to judges alone, just as war cannot be left to generals alone; that the earlier repugnant system of judges appointing themselves smacked too much of the manner in which the BCCI made its own appointments( which the Supreme Court itself rightly objected to!); that a wider consultation with other stake-holders was necessary to make choices; that the country had a right to know why a particular individual was deemed fit to don the robes while another was not. Chief Justice Dattu may not agree with this, just as I don't agree with homosexuality being a criminal act or with the court's decision granting bail to Jayalalitha and not to the Talwars, even though they are similarly placed. But I defer to the decisions because they are the law of the land, and I am a citizen of this country. What makes the CJI different from me in this respect?- does he enjoy a higher grade of citizenship or is he conferred with some special element of " lese majesty" that is denied to us lesser mortals?

Over the last couple of years the Supreme Court has stained its escutcheon somewhat, notwithstanding some outstanding judgements upholding the values of democracy. Even if we overlook regressive judgements refusing to decriminalise homosexuality or euthanasia, it has not exactly covered itself with glory in refusing to give information under RTI on a few occasions, in its apparent reluctance to take action against some of its own fraternity accused of sexual molestation, by a former Chief Justice of India accepting a cushy sinecurial post of Governor, by charges being levelled against another CJI who now heads a national Commission, and the most recent one of another Judge refusing to participate in a conference of Judges on religious grounds. Regardless of the merits of these cases, the reality is that the credibility of an institution does not depend on its bricks and mortar, but on the perception of the people, and this perception has taken a beating. The Court is seen as being unaccountable, opaque, elitist- a juridical Gymkhana Club, as it were- and marching to a tune different from what it expects the other organs of the state to march to. The latest show of pique by Chief Justice Dattu can only add to this perception.

Surely the CJI, of all persons, should realise the importance of observing constitutional discipline and the rule of law. Surely he must be aware of the 61300 cases pending in the Supreme Court itself and the 4.50 million cases gathering dust in the 24 High Courts ? Surely he is not unacquainted with the fact that a major reason for this horrendous pendency is the shocking number of vacancies in these courts- out of 906 sanctioned posts of judges in the High Courts, as many as 251- almost 30%- are lying vacant ! In UP 75 posts out of 160 are vacant, in Andhra Pradesh the figure is 20 out of 49, in Karnataka 17 out of 50. Surely, by refusing to operationalise the NJAC Mr. Dattu can only exacerbate this position as no further appointments can take place unless he cooperates- nay, complies with- the new law.

It has been suggested by some legal experts that the Constitution Bench, which is hearing the challenge to the NJAC, should resolve the impasse in one of three ways- extend the terms of the Additional judges by an interim order, stay the new law and thus provide a legal excuse to the CJI for not attending the NJAC meetings, and finally, revive the old collegium system temporarily till the case is decided.

I totally disagree with these alibis for what is an act of constitutional impropriety. It should not be the function of the Constitutional Bench to bail out the CJI from the wholly questionable corner he has painted himself into. The new law can certainly be stayed, but to revive the collegium system in the interim would be illegal and unconstitutional-it would amount to negating the will of Parliament without striking down the NJAC on merits. This is  a red line the Court should not cross, for it would create a constitutional crisis this country can ill afford. Is the personal opinion of one man so important that the country should be pushed into chaos?

There is only one solution to this imbroglio- the Supreme Court should ORDER the Chief Justice of India to attend the meetings of the NJAC, and if his conscience will not permit him to do so, then he should graciously step down. Be you ever so high, your lordships, the Constitution is above you. 

HAS THE LAST BASTION FALLEN ?

The canker has reached the Supreme Court.

The ill-advised letter and comments of Justice Kurien Joseph on the Judges Meeting on Good Friday has exposed the pernicious spread of the religious paranoia that appears to have gripped the country in the last few months. We had fondly hoped that at least our higher courts would be immune to the competitive religious frenzy that is increasingly holding all governance hostage to sectarian demands, but even this illusion has been shattered.

The tragedy is not the loss of objectivity or any rational thinking by Justice Kurien, of ignoring the fact that in the past also such meetings had been held on a Good Friday, Valmiki's birthday and Independence Day, or that utilising a long weekend for such a conference saved precious working days for disposal of the 30 million odd cases pending in the system, or that it was not even incumbent for Justice Kurien to have attended the meeting. No, the tragedy lies elsewhere and it has many facets.

As a devout Christian he had every right to feel that he would rather spend the day celebrating the festival with his family, rather than at a meeting which, by the admission of a retired Judge of the J+K High Court, has achieved nothing in the past. The correct course of action in such a situation would have been for him to have privately and discretely conveyed this to the Chief Justice, excuse himself from the conclave, and that would have been the end of the matter. By writing a letter to the Prime Minister he has instead made the affair public and raised a question mark over his real intentions. The Catholic Bishops' Conference had already started stirring the pot of controversy in TV studios and by his action Justice Kurien has simply added a few more newts' eggs and bats' wings to the pot, making this lethal potion even more potent.

Religious bigotry and counter-bigotry have been in the air like a pestilent cloud over the last one year. All institutions in the country- constitutional, political, administrative or theological- have failed to counter it and the Supreme Court was seen as the last bastion of sanity and non-partisanship, a place where religious identities would be subserved to the concept of a truly secular state. No longer. That belief has been dented: if even judges of this Court can indulge in contentious proclamations of their faith, and compete with the fringe elements of other religions, then where does our Constitution seek refuge?

Justice Kurien has done great dis-service to the Supreme Court. He has created fault lines in its edifice based, not on interpretation of the law( which is a good thing), but on religious one-upmanship. He has, by implication, cast doubts on the secular credentials of the Court itself and possibly given a handle to its critics in future to question its impartiality on judgements that have a bearing on contentious religious matters. By escalating the matter to the level of the Prime Minister he has shown a lack of confidence in his own peers and perhaps prised open the door for further intervention by the political executive when it suits them. 

He has also done a dis-service to his faith. Just when all right-thinking people were beginning to sympathise with the Christian community for random actions perpetrated against them, his protest has blurred the line that divides rational and bigoted believers, of any faith. Modern religions do not need Knight Templers or Crusaders, they need rational and moderate adherents; public proclamations of faith, especially of a competitive kind, are abhorrent to any civilised society. Till now we were critical of certain Hindu and Muslim organisations for their proselytsing stridency: with this controversy the Christian community will be perceived by many to have moved closer to the former. It shall be more difficult now to retain a balance between the rational and the irrational.

This is a critical phase for our country, a time when we need to strengthen the forces that are striving to place the public good above theological dogmas, the secular above the sectarian, the temporal above the religious. We cannot survive as one nation in any other way. At a time like this we do not need controversies of the kind created by Justice Kurien, regardless of how genuine his feelings were. We need wise men. We also need to remember that wisdom is divided into two parts:  (a) having a great deal to say,  and (b) not saying it.