What is new
Resolve Kashmir Problem by Crediting Sher-I-Kashmir’s Nov 1951 Speech
- Published on 12 September 2016
From Bhutto’s to Wani’s execution, Violence has outshined Kashmiriyat
(A 1951 Serene View of Srinagar. Image Courtesy: J&K Assembly)
“We the people of Jammu, Kashmir & Ladakh, in order to unite ourselves in an atmosphere of Equality and Liberty and to lift ourselves and our children for ever from the abyss of oppression, poverty, degradation, ignorance and superstition to a life of freedom with a scientific temper and to fulfil the historic task of making the state of Jammu & Kashmir the shining crown on the forehead of the Republic of India, do hereby adopt and solemnly pledge this Socio Political and Economic manifesto,” says ‘Naya Kashmir’ a manifesto adopted by National Conference way back in 1944.
This vision is articulated by Constitution of the J&K, the only State to have its own Constitution. Adopted in November 1956, it says: “The State of Jammu and Kashmir is and shall be an integral part of the Union of India.”
How is that Kashmir swung from scientific temper and Indian Identity to naked love for Pakistan, which organized mass rape & man slaughter in J&K during October 1947?
How has graffiti –‘India go back’ in the Valley become trademark of separatism? Why masked youth take pride in waving flags of Pakistan and Islamic State? Such people perhaps harbour the notion that they can break away J&K from India in Talaq, Talaq, Talaq mode.
They believe that break-away on the lines of Bangladesh is possible. This idea has been fuelled by Pakistan and sustained by Valley’s popular politicians who resemble two-headed snakes. This is the Kashmir Problem. And this is what has saved Pakistan from self-destruction.
“This problem is a difficult, intricate problem, and no amount of eloquent speeches by me or by the hon. member opposite will solve the problem, It may influence us for a while,” stated Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru while responding to Kashmir problem raised by BJP member in Lok Sabha on 26th June 1952.
OECD/G20 duo Enhances BEPS Appeal by Flaunting Inclusiveness
- Published on 04 September 2016
(Edited Image Courtesy: OECD)
Inclusivity is the new mantra for entities pedalling tax reforms at the global level. G20, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) & other global entities are harping on the mantra to lure the developing countries into tax reforms net.
If these countries’ initial response is any indication, the strategy to make tax reforms acceptable to all might well become a runaway success. Many developing nations hitched to the G20/OECD Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) at its first two-day meeting ending 1 July 2016 held at Kyoto in Japan.
According to OECD Secretary-General (SG) report to G20 Finance Ministers (FMs) who met in China during July, “In addition to the 46 OECD members, OECD accession countries and G20 members, 39 additional countries and jurisdictions have now joined the G20/OECD Inclusive Framework on BEPS, committed to the BEPS package and participating on an equal footing.”
This brings the numbers of members in the BEPS Project to 85, with a further 19 countries and jurisdictions that attended the inaugural meeting in Kyoto, and are likely to join the Inclusive Framework by year end.
Who will humbly ask CJI whether he is exempted from code of conduct?
- Published on 26 August 2016
(PM with CJI- Edited Image Courtesy: PIB)
Did Chief Justice of India (CJI) T. S. Thakur breach the Judiciary’s own voluntary code of conduct (CoC) when he ridiculed Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Independence Day (ID) speech?
The answers to this and certain other prickly questions on judicial accountability lie in the court of CJI. And national enlightenment on these issues can come only if civil society files public interest litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court (SC). A Big If indeed.
To best of my knowledge, Vocal NGOs have not yet implored CJI to give verdict on applicability of CoC on him? Has PIL industry petitioned SC to admonish the Executive-Legislature combine to not delay further enactment of judicial accountability law?
Clarity on this count can also emerge if Modi Government advises the President to seek SC’s opinion on these issues. Another Big If!
A Layman’s reading of CoC named ‘Restatement of Values of Judicial Life’ (RVJL) shows that Justice Thakur prima facie violated two of its 16 principles when he derided PM’s speech. These are: 1) “A Judge shall not enter into public debate or express his views in public on political matters or on matters that are pending or are likely to arise for judicial determination.” 2) “Every Judge must, at all times, be conscious that he is under the public gaze and there should be no act or omission by him which is unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in which that office is held.”
Another occasion when CJI deviated from former principle was during the last winter season. Justice Thakur first endorsed #OddEven scheme of Delhi Government outside the Court. He later trashed PIL against the scheme, which rides roughshod over citizens’ right to earn one’s livelihood and physically challenged persons’ right to travel safely. After all, these rights can be interpreted as right to life just as right to fresh air is interpreted to rationalize the scheme.
Civil Society might well dismiss all this as nitpicking of no consequence in the absence of statutory CoC.
Save India from Justice of the Judges, by the Judges & for the Judges
- Published on 25 August 2016
(Quote from Administrative Reforms Commission's 4th Report)
Chief Justice of India (CJI) T. S. Thakur’s dig at Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Independence Day (ID) speech gives citizens an opportunity to turn mirror towards all the five hallowed pillars of democracy.
Each pillar – Legislature, Executive, Judiciary, Press and Civil Society/Advocacy NGOs – are decaying from within. Instead of introspecting over the decay, each plays the blame game. Each organ resists meaty reforms from within and outside.
Their common bond is aversion to transparency, with the exception of Legislature, which does not mind being viewed live on TV as mother of all cacophony. Executive has also embraced transparency partially.
The country can become a credible democracy only when the symbiotic triumvirate of Judiciary, Civil Society and Media embrace transparency & accountability without any ifs and buts.
To begin with, we should debate the role of judiciary in weakening democracy and in slowing national development ostensibly to safeguard the basic structure of the Constitution and the fundamental rights.