A Requiem for the Karnataka Lokayukta, continued……

There appears to something terribly wrong with the governance of our unfortunate nation, that we cannot even ensure that our Lokayuktas are made of sterling stuff, without a single particle of any base metal. What I write today makes me ashamed of myself.

I wish to take my readers back to my piece, ‘A Requiem for the Karnataka Lokayukta’, that I placed in my blogspot on December 7. I am happy that soon after publication of the article, Shri Bhaskar Rao resigned from the post of Lokayukta on December 9, 2015 and further that the SIT constituted to investigate into this matter requested the Karnataka Government to issue a sanction order to prosecute him, something still pending with the Karnataka Government. Recent events in the Congress ruled State of Karnataka have completed the Lokayukta’s funeral rites.

After the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 came into force, the anti–corruption work in Karnataka was being done by the Police Wing which formed a part of the organization. The Lokayukta organization had under it an Administrative Wing, an Enquiry Wing, a Technical Wing and the Police Wing.

The Police Wing carried out enquiries entrusted to it by the Lokayukta, or Upalokayukta, and also implemented the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 through their units located throughout the State, which had been declared as Police Stations. In this arrangement, the officers working in the police wing were treated as staff of the Lokayukta and enjoyed certain protection for enabling them to act without fear in the discharge of their functions as per Section 15(2) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act. This protection deterred the Government of the day from interfering or pressurizing the police wing of the Lokayukta in the course of investigation. The only weapon that the Government possessed was to withhold sanction to prosecute the accused government servant, which was used abundantly.

Suddenly on 14-3-2006, Shri Siddaramiah’s Congress Government issued a Government Order, that brings the entire anti corruption work under the sole control of the Chief Minister. As per Para 4 of the GO, orders declaring the police wing of the Lokayukta in Karnataka as police stations will be withdrawn, and a separate Anti Corruption Bureau, (ACB) will be established, and officers of this new Bureau will be declared as Police Stations. As per Para 5 of this GO, the ACB cannot investigate any matter concerning a public servant without the approval of the appointing authority, who is clearly the Chief Minister. More importantly, as per Para 6 of the GO, all cases pending investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and pending prosecution under the present police wing of the Lokayukta will be transferred to the newly created Bureau. As on date, there are several important cases pending investigation and prosecution in the police wing against important politicians, bureaucrats and police officers. They must be heaving a sigh of relief.

A reading of the Preamble of the GO indicates that the Government of Karnataka has relied heavily on a report of the DG & IGP Karnataka dated 3-2-16, which the Finance Department has agreed to on 4-3-16, after which it has issued the GO on 14-3-2016. Such rare urgency and efficiency is not often seen on public issues of greater importance requiring immediate attention and solution.

The DG & IGP’s Report of 3-2-16 appears to state that it was inspired by a Supreme Court decision of 1998 (C Rangaswamiah vs Karnataka Lokayukta (1998) 6 SCC 66), 18 years ago. This seems to have engaged his urgent priority, notwithstanding incomplete investigations and prosecution of important cases, such as, the Cricket Stadium bomb blast case, or the Kalburgi murder case that even today remain unsolved. The Preamble suggests that the DG & IGP’s report has stated that there is no system of supervision of the investigations of the cases under the PC Act in the Lokayukta. Nothing could be more incorrect. Lokayukta investigations are done by an Inspector, Dy SP, sometimes by the SP, and all such investigations are supervised by the DIG, IGP, and Additional DGP, whose officers have been declared as Police Stations.

While pretending to strengthen anti-corruption work under the PC Act 1988 as claimed in the Preamble, a closer scrutiny of the GO reveals the exact opposite. As per Para 2 of the GO, the Anti Corruption Bureau headed by the ADGP and his subordinates will work under the control of a Secretary level officer of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (DPAR), and will report to the Chief Secretary, who in turn will report to the Chief Minister. By this, it is virtually the Chief Minister of Karnataka who will control all anti corruption operations in Karnataka.

Para 11 of the GO gives no clue of how complaints of corruption against the DG & IGP, or the Chief Secretary, Additional Chief Secretary, Principal Secretaries of the Finance Department and DPA will be dealt with. These are all members of the Vigilance Advisory Board. And most importantly, the GO does not stipulate how complaints of corruption against the Chief Minister and other Ministers of the Karnataka Government will be dealt with, since the powers to investigate complaints under the PC Act have all been removed from the police wing of the Lokayukta by this GO. 

There is no mention in the GO whether this new arrangement regarding the staff of the Lokayukta, which includes the police wing, was discussed with the Upalokayukta, (Karnataka still has no Lokayukta) as is mandatory under Section 15 (2) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1986. 

It is not difficult to see what lies beneath this GO. Creation of this ACB gives a direct handle to the CM, the ultimate authority of the ACB, which he can use to protect himself against corruption allegations, against dissidents within his own party, against difficult opposition members who can cause him problems, and against honest bureaucrats and police officers who choose to do their duty against political pressure. It is not difficult to get vexatious corruption complaints filed against them with the ACB, directly under his control, and get cases registered against them. That will take care of them for the immediate future.

The Chief Minister of Karnataka has indeed armed himself with a double-edged deadly weapon – to destroy opposition and to protect corruption in a gross misuse of executive power.

My thesis is in complete conformity with the views of prestigious and fearless sections of the press and other media. My thoughts are also echoed by my old friend Santosh Hegde whom I greatly respect.

Let us see how this pernicious, devious move by Siddaramiah is countered politically or by vigilant civil society organizations.

The Great Indian Budget Tamasha – Nothing much about nothing much

Let’s admit it – we love hype. Unless there is hype in the TV news, we find it boring. And our TV channels judge themselves by the amount of hype and hysteria they create. The presentation of the Union Budget every year is a mandatory and routine exercise of every democratic, elected government, sanctioning expenditures and revenues for various activities of the Centre and States for the financial year. In India, we have made it something akin to a carnival. Speculation and debates precede the budget presentation, about authentic GDP growth, deficit financing, inflation rates, FDI, foreign exchange reserves, etc. Big business houses and their lobbyists position themselves visibly or invisibly in Lutyen’s Delhi , either trying to lobby for taxation and exemption proposals in their interest, or using their more surreptitious resources with politicians and bureaucrats to get inside information regarding taxation proposals.

Well, coming back to the Budget, and particularly about the Finance Minister’s Budget speech, it really appears to be nothing much about nothing much. Nothing innovative, the usual tweaking of taxes, this way or that, and recycling of old schemes into new avataras with a few extra flourishes. 

First of all, I hope that the Government will fulfill its promises made to the Defence Forces regarding OROP. I have written extensively about the subject in my blog of March 3, 2016. To give the 75% of what was promised and hold back on 25% which directly and adversely affects the lowest but most critical segments of the defence forces shows complete insensitivity and national imprudence. I hope pensions for the retired soldiers or their widows will be in accordance with the promises made to them. I’m sure the Government realizes that India cannot afford to have disgruntled defence forces, particularly in the present geo-political scenario.

The Budget also suggests that it is relying more on extra-programmatic interventions to secure the welfare of the most distressed sections off our people. Take for example the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yogana, which seeks to provide relief to distressed farmers not through government initiatives, but through Insurance Companies. Or the Health Insurance Scheme, that is supposed to pay for hospitalization expenditure of the poor. The hidden message in these programmes is that the governmental machinery that was created to provide these services is incapable of doing so and has irretrievably broken down, beyond repair. I congratulate the government for having made this admission.

Regarding the Agenda to Transform India, I am happy that the Finance Minister has placed Agriculture and Famers’ Welfare at the top of the agenda. I look forward to seeing how he proposes to give them ‘income security’ and double their incomes by 2022! Irrigation and fertilizers is what we have been speaking about since the First Five Year Plan, and though at a very difficult time, we succeeded in a Green Revolution, we are now faced with its unintended consequences of poor soil health and depleted, contaminated water resources.

I wish the Finance Minister had also given us a White Paper about the real agricultural situation and projections in India. The issues I would consider important as India progresses are - What is the agricultural demand to provide food security in India for the next 20 years at least for its growing population? What special measures in agriculture does he propose for the chronic drought prone and arid zones of India, like Bundelkhand, that tragically remain the same year after year, even though scientific agricultural practices can redeem the lives of the farmers, as has been proven in Israel? What is the projected acreage available for food production, after factoring in the insatiable demand for land for housing, urbanization and industrialization, that is already happening as our society is demographically transforming from the agricultural to the industrial and service mode. I’m sure experts are aware that India is not following the sequential pattern as most industrial societies did, but is entrapped in several time warps, where the service sector has overtaken the industrial sector in the GDP, thanks to the IT revolution and liberalization. What is the projected irrigation cover, what will be the food deficit, and how do we plan to cope with it, as more and more agricultural land becomes non-agricultural land? Year after year, we see agricultural land and production declining, without much improvement in per acre productivity. What is the projected pattern and numbers of rural urban migration, and how will urban India cope with it? Why has the State agricultural cooperative credit structure broken down, that farmers have to turn to commercial banks for agricultural loans, the default of which is driving them to suicide? Does the Finance Minister know that one of the weakest and understaffed Departments at the Block and village level is the Agriculture Department? How does he propose to overcome these constraints? Until these vital issues are understood and addressed through a well thought out strategy and interventions, ad hoc Government’s schemes will only become another bunch of symptomatic measures, draining money out of government coffers, with little transformational or permanent impact. While Rural India will benefit from a Digital Literacy Mission, if it means digital capacity building and not computer marketing, what it urgently needs is a National Agriculture Mission. 

The most disappointing portion of the speech is about the Social Sector. The Budget speech provides no hint as to how it will improve the quality and productivity of our vast human resources, considered to be our greatest strength in this century – the demographic dividend. His statements regarding education and skills are standard, something being repeated from the 1970s. But there is not a word about malnutrition that still continues to afflict at least 50% of the population, despite his 2014 Budget announcement of a National Nutrition Mission. Per capita calorie, protein and micronutrient intake among our children, adolescents, and adults of the poorer sections continues to be far below recommended standards; undernutrition and stunting is rampant, reducing children’s capacity to study, adults’ capacity to work and earn and contribute to the GDP. This, in my view is more important than a Digital Literacy Mission. 

The Finance Minister’s insensitive proposal to tax EPF withdrawals above 40% has thankfully been withdrawn after the wide public protest. But what prompted him include it in the first place?

But his greatest duplicity has been regarding the repatriation of black money stashed away in off shore banks. This is what he says in Para 61 of his speech:

“Our Government is fully committed to remove black money from the economy. Having given one opportunity for evaded income to be declared once, we would then like to focus all our resources for bringing people with black money to books.” (Note the word ‘books’ and not ‘book’)

He consciously reiterates his Party President’s disgraceful charge against Prime Minister Modi of having deceived the people of India by his promise of sharing with every poor family fifteen lacs ( Rs. 15,00,000). It is primarily all about the three cheats in the BJP and a large number in the earlier regime with former Finance Minister Chidambaram heading them all. More about him and Jaitley in my next piece. 

Rahul's Fair and Lovely borrowing from my 2011 Article

My article, ‘Black money amnesty scheme is a scam to cover up another scam’, in Sunday Guardian, written way back in 2011, starts like this,

“So we are at it again, desperately trying to change the colour of money from black to white, with the same Fair and Lovely amnesty recipe. I learn from press reports that the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is "seriously considering" recommending to the government a scheme on the lines of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme (VDIS) announced in 1996 to bring back black money stashed in tax havens abroad for productive use in India. Black money amnesty scheme is a scam to cover up another scam”

Link to my article : http://www.sunday-guardian.com/analysis/black-money-amnesty-scheme-is-a-scam-to-cover-up-another-scam

Rahul is really exceptional. He quotes words written by me describing the corruption of some Congress Leaders and in particular Chidambaram regarding black money, and uses them against Chidambaram’s present counterpart, in the Present Modi Government who is his greatest benefactor. I am not averse to your attack on the present Finance Minister but he is only a friendly collaborator with your Chidambaram. 

My Congratulations to Rahul that he reads my writings. Be free to quote but do sometimes indicate the source. Avoid charges of plagiarism. 

OROP- The Great Betrayal

I think it’s time now that we term OROP – One Rank, One Pension, as APAB – A Promise and Betrayal.

Betrayal seems to have become a habit with the present regime. The Prime Minister betrayed the people of India in his promise for repatriating the nation's money illegally stashed away in off shore banks and now he has betrayed our great and loyal armed forces in his promise regarding judicious implementation of One Rank One Pension.

I am a much saddened man today, and I cannot understand why our great leader, who was beloved of the masses, beloved of the defence community of India, has decided to betray them so cruelly.

I recall that after Narendra Modi’s nomination as Prime Minister on September 11, 2013, at his first election rally in Riwari in Haryana on September 15, he assured the defence forces of his support to implement One Rank One Pension. This promise was continuously repeated at several other election rallies across the country. In fact it was the repetition of this promise, and the trust that the defence community placed in Modi, that compelled the then Finance Minister Chidambaram to include the OROP in his February 2014 budget, and make a token allocation of Rs 500 crores for it. Of course, they did nothing about it.

Resting on their hopes, the ex servicemen community contributed very significantly to the BJP victory especially in North India, where most of them reside – Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Rajasthan, Delhi, and of course UP, which has the largest number of ex-servicemen in the country.

Even over the last one month, the nation has witnessed the daily mortal risk faced by members of our defence forces, and the sacrifice demanded from them for defending our country. So that we can then sit back in our comfortable chairs and pass judgement about what went wrong or right. Just in the last one month, we have seen tragic loss of life of our brave soldiers in Pathankot, in Siachin, and at the J&K Line of Actual Control, something that has become a recurring event.

And we acknowledge and reward the sacrifice of our brave and patriotic soldiers by betraying the promises that were made to them by our political leaders.

Details of the OROP had been well defined in the Koshiyari Committee Report, 2012, which had been placed before Parliament and been unanimously approved. The NDA Government confirmed this definition in Parliament in 2014. Jaitley’s Budget of June 2014, continued with its assurance of implementing the OROP. Jaitley was then both Finance and Defence Minister, and the defence community was full of hope and expectation, thinking they would more speedily get their dues through a single window clearance.

But after the Budget announcement, a period of complete inertia set in, until Parrikar was appointed Defence Minister on November 9, 2014. The new Defence Minister held consultations with representatives of the defence organizations, and there was great satisfaction when in February 2015, he came out with a Draft Government Notification that satisfied the legitimate demands of the defence services. They eagerly awaited the implementation announcement in Jaitley’s next Budget of 2015. 

But a shock was in store for them. The Budget of 2015 contained not a word about OROP or its implementation. There was disbelief and consternation among the ex-servicemen, and a sense of betrayal. And that is when the sad spectacle of the agitation by our brave and patriotic ex-servicemen started, which continues even today. Experts on statecraft, starting from Kautilya, Machiavelli to the present day state unequivocally that if a country’s army is turning on to an agitation mode, then something is dangerously wrong with the country’s body politic. 

Parrikar sent his proposal to Jaitley’s Finance Ministry in February 2015, which hibernated, with the usual excuse that modalities are being worked out. Somewhere during this time, it is reported that the Prime Minister’s Office stepped in, and in September 2015, the hapless Parrikar read out an inconsequential statement (least expected from him, with all his experience and meticulousness) with a howler about VRS – the Voluntary Retirement Scheme – which is not even applicable to the armed forces! These were totally in variance with his own proposals of February 2015, and were made reportedly at the behest of the PMO.

Then started the ex-servicemen’s agitation and hunger strike in full force. And their ultimate humiliation and insult by the Delhi Police manhandling them and physically removing them from Jantar Mantar. I wonder if the Prime Minister is aware of the extremely negative impact this has had on the morale of serving soldiers, and that all news about the on-going agitation has been ordered to be blacked out in the Media, with not even paid advertisements being accepted by mainstream newspapers. This must have been the work of someone who manages these things. It is not difficult to find out who actually handled this shut out of news which must be known to the people. 

In November 2015, the Government issued a notification regarding OROP, that was totally at variance with the definition of OROP, as approved by Parliament, or the pledge made by Modi during his election rallies.

Many injustices are evident in the notification –

1. Fixing the base year as 2013 as against 2014, (which swallows up their salary increment for one year), in violation of what had been accepted in Parliament in 2013 and 2014;

2. Averaging the pension for the rank between the maximum and minimum salary drawn in that rank, a purely subjective exercise, as against the definition accepted in Parliament that it must be determined as the same pension for the same rank for the same length of service;

3. Equalizing of pension every 5 years instead of it being done every year. This results in one rank - 5 pensions! 

I’m sure the Defence Ministry, Finance Ministry and the PMO are aware that the fighting armed soldiers retire after 15-18 years of grueling service in the most inhospitable borders of our country, as against the non fighting soldiers who serve for longer tenures in more hospitable and more comfortable working conditions.

It is these fighting armed soldiers with shorter serving tenures and their widows who will be hit hardest, and most unjustly so, if the present formula of equalizing pension every 5 years instead of each year is implemented.

4. Finally, a one man Commission to sort out the anomalies of the package, without representatives from organizations of the armed forces, is not exactly a confidence inspiring measure. Would it not have been more convincing if the Commission was more like the Pay Commission and included the armed forces representatives as well?

I don’t know whether the Prime Minister is aware that our armed forces, patriotic and disciplined as they are, are getting bitter and disillusioned. The present Finance Minister lost to Amarinder Singh in the Amritsar Constituency by 94,000 votes. I am informed that the strength of ex-servicemen in that constituency is about 55,000, and with families, the figure would be the same that Jaitley lost by. Is that the reason for his grouse against the ex-servicemen, as is speculated?

Be that as it may, can anyone explain what the grouse of the Prime Minister against the ex-servicemen is?

I am not writing this piece without disclosing that by letters reproduced under I have communicated to the Hon’ble Prime minister my deep concern about this matter but obviously he is in no mood to respond at all.

Dear Prime Minister, 

I do not enter into any correspondence with you for reasons which you know or can easily be given. But I with this in public interest and of course it involves some advice to you which you may not relish but my duty to the nation leaves me no option. 

I was shocked day before that somebody whom you know was conveying to the nation his complaint against the three Army men who are in the forefront of the OROP agitation for compelling you to carry out your promise to the Army guys and their widows.

Your post election excuse for non performance of it is plainly not sufficient if not so ridiculous that it is already exposing you to public contempt.

I know that you think that you are infallible and all knowing. It is in my humble opinion an insane illusion.

During his television talks he shamelessly boasted that he would see three guys in jail. I wonder if you know that he had earlier moved the police with the same false complaint and the police rejected it. He has now been persuaded by some whom you know that the police will change their mind.

Dear Prime Minister please listens to what sensible citizens believe. They are convinced that the police is under corrupt pressure from your government. I am warning you that in every election you will encounter precisely public reaction of which you got a clear glimpse in Bihar. 

This is an appeal from a humble citizen who was once your friend.

With utmost pain.

Sincerely Yours

Ram Jethmalani 

Mr. Prime Minister, you cannot be that naive, that you are not able to see the designs of your trusted advisers plotting against you, who have brought you ignominy in Delhi and Bihar and now have succeeded in alienating you from the armed forces, who had placed implicit trust in you. 

Take charge, eliminate your hidden enemies to whom you are giving a free hand, perform your dharma, and redeem your promise to the armed forces and ex-servicemen of our country.

You can still do it. Otherwise, you are plotting your own downfall. 

The Economist: Terrorism in the Subcontinent, Who is responsible?

"I congratulate the Economist for stating the truth about terrorism in India and Pakistan with such clarity in its article , 'Terrorism in Pakistan, Shady war, shadow peace,' dated January 23, 2016. I want many more people in our country to read this, and therefore I am putting it in my blog. My apologies to the Economist, for not taking their prior permission."

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21688923-another-attack-brings-out-pakistans-conspiracy-theorists-shady-war-shadow-peace

Farewell Rohith, bright star

He was brilliant, brave and an achiever. A first generation degree holder from the humblest of households – from a section that has borne the cross of thousands of years of social oppression, injustice and prejudice.

He was sensitive and generous, as his heart rending last letter to the world indicates, a young man in a hurry to succeed in his mission, and fight the injustices in our society toward the Dalits.

He wanted to be a great writer like Carl Sagan, and surely would have been, if his life had not been snuffed out at 26 years.

His last letter contains his life’s snapshot – ‘My birth is my fatal accident’, he says, ‘I can never recover from my childhood loneliness. The unappreciated child from my past.’

One can only visualize what traumas would have haunted his past, of how the past would have been, for this exceptionally intelligent and sensitive child - barred from entry into various homes and places of worship, barred from touching food and water in certain households, his exceptional intelligence being ignored or put down by the upper castes. How dare you be so intelligent, they would have said. An intelligent, sensitive child could only turn lonely.

His alienated childhood and loneliness never left him. He remembers it even in his last thoughts, before departing from this world.

But he pursued his dreams, and then bit by bit, disillusionment seems to have set in – with the ways of the world, with people around him, with his ideas. And his resentment that ‘The value of a man was reduced to his immediate identity and nearest possibility. To a vote. To a number. To a thing. Never was a man treated as a mind. As a glorious thing made up of star dust. In every field, in studies, in streets, in politics, and in dying and living. ’

If only he had some support, someone by his side, when he was fighting his last lonely battle of disillusionment and depression – someone who could have restored his confidence in himself to fight the system of injustice that he encountered everywhere, in the campus or with the administration. Someone who could have told him that he was in for a long haul in his mission. No injustice anywhere in the world has been removed without a long and bitter fight, sometimes bloody. Take the case of the French or Russian Revolutions centuries ago.

Social oppression that has taken deep roots in Indian society for the last two thousand years at least, will not be wiped out from society through constitutionalism or by law in seventy years. I wish Rohith had geared himself for a long fight and had not given up.

Alas, as expected, the tragic incident became a political bonanza for some - VIP visits vulgarly and inhumanly cashing on political capital with an eye on future elections, the usual accusations and counter accusations, and Minister Smriti Irani and the Vice Chancellor Appa Rao allegedly making erroneous statements.

Even in death, he had been reduced to what he loathed - 'to his immediate identity, ....To a vote. To a number. To a thing.'

As a member of a privileged section of society, I cannot escape from being part of the historical and collective system that have perpetuated the social inequities that have socially and psychologically imprisoned large sections of our people over centuries, propagating their inferiority, and preventing them from achieving their complete potential. 

Farewell, bright star. You are now with the stars that you loved so much. 

I do not by this exonerate myself from the charge of being morally responsible for the tragic history of the Dalits in India over long centuries of condemning them to a humiliating existence on this sorry planet of ours. I humbly plead guilty to the charge and reluctantly ask for forgiveness of the Dalits who are rightly embittered and angry by the behavior of high caste citizens who harm , maybe unwillingly sometimes , contributed to the self immollition of the young scholar Rohith Chakrathirtha Vemula .

I am a product of Sindhi society which before the tragic partition of India had developed a synthesis of religion , scoffed at caste distinctions preached the genuine equality of all and developed contempt for the unworthy claimants of congenital superiority over their fellow citizens. I grew to be a great admirer of Dr. Ambedkar and fully sympathized with his preference for Budhisim over the caste ridden Hindus. 

I was a great supporter of the Mandal Commission and almost fought a lone battle against the most well known and flourishing lawyers of India before our Supreme Court. I succeeded against odds; thanks to the government of Bihar that briefed me to fight this great legal battle for the Dalits of India. No political party has the courage to challenge the Judgment though it was only a majority judgment. The compliments I won from the court and the appreciation of the backward class and their leaders was my remuneration.

The latest issue of the ‘ Outlook’ contains many tributes to the life and philosophy of the young scholar Rohith Vemula who ended his brilliant life in a manner which makes all decent Indians hang low their heads in shame and remorse. The best one is by a young female scholar Amrita Howlader . I hope everyone will read it. This will tell you that Rohith did not die in vain; his cause and life mission will get support from million more and compel the Indian nation to end this sordid and blackest spot on our face. 

Rohith let your comrades carry your memory and take your mission forward. 

It will take many more years to get the social justice that India owes you.

Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, IRS Officer finally gets justice from Delhi High Court

Hon'ble High court of Delhi in its judgment has quashed CBI cases against Ashok Aggarwal, IRS officer and held that investigation conducted by CBI in these cases smacks of intentional mischief to misdirect the investigation as well as withhold material evidence which would exonerate Aggarwal and it is a case of 'Suggestion falsi', 'Suppressio veri' and hence, malafide. Hon'ble Justice Siddhartha Mridul in his judgment further held that It does not seem to be merely a case of faulty investigation of CBI but it seemingly an investigation coloured with motivation or an attempt to ensure that certain persons can go Scot free. It is pertinent to state that Aggarwal, as Deputy Director of Enforcement was investigation cases for FERA violations and hawala transactions against highly influential persons. Hon'ble court further held that Aggarwal has endured suffering, humiliation and considerable trauma and a sense of dubiety has persisted qua him since long. Justice has finally prevailed upon the officer who fought for 18 long years for his false implication.

Must read and share https://www.facebook.com/feedteck/?fref=ts

Indian Journalism at it's Worst

The Ram Jethmalani interview: Jaitley ‘controls the media’ and Modi ‘made a fool of me’

http://scroll.in/article/778979/the-ram-jethmalani-interview-jaitley-controls-the-media-and-modi-made-a-fool-of-me

The Government cannot gag Kirti Azad because it is embarrassed by what he confided to the nation

Aristotle proclaimed proudly that man is a political animal. Were he witness today, as we in India, to the behaviour of one of the most powerful political animals of our country, he would undoubtedly have done further analysis regarding different categories of political animals, and the most bestial in the herd.

People of this country must realize that we are not merely a democracy, but a democratic republic. The difference between the two is profound and crucial, which many informed citizens, or even the intelligentsia may not be aware of.

In a democracy, a majority of the elected representatives are the custodians of human freedom and all political power. In a republic, it is the ‘people’ who are sovereign. They are free to speak up, and even if they are wrong, they can be corrected by wiser citizens, and the will of the majority will prevail. Even a Parliament, almost wholly controlled by one political party, cannot suppress free speech. Yes, free speech can be subjected to some restrictions, but they have to be extremely reasonable.

Unreasonable restrictions can be struck down as unconstitutional, and become unenforceable and void. It is a primary constitutional requirement that restriction on free speech should be for promotion of carefully formulated objectives, expressly sanctioned by the constitution. In addition, they must be reasonable, and are liable to be struck down, if the courts find them excessive in their reach.

No political party can suppress free speech of its members merely on the ground that it is ‘embarrassed’ by what is openly spoken and declared. Yes, it has a right to protest against a corrupt minister, or even a minister reasonably suspected of being corrupt, or a minister having corrupt antecedents. Democracy must not tolerate powerful ministers who are reasonably suspected to bear a questionable character. Only those persons about whose moral character and integrity the people are completely certain, must be put in responsible positions of power

Our Finance Minister proved long ago that he did not bear this impeccable moral stature. What Kirti Azad is stating vocally today is what he has been repeating during the last 10 years. No denial, much less a reasoned refutation, has been attempted by the gentleman, who now belatedly protests his innocence.

The recent statement of the Prime Minister is certainly not a certificate of good character for the Finance Minister; it is only a hope that he will survive as LK Advani once did. Many saw a sting in the tail in Modi’s ambiguous statement involving LK Advani. But, Modi was not prepared to assert that everything alleged by Azad is false, or even just wrong. The hint to the Minister is to resign as Advani did want to when I initially refused to appear for him.

I may not be in Modi’s ‘who is who’ list, but that does not mean I do not know what is what. I have seen Arun Jaitley’s whole career based on backbiting, secret scheming and dirty conspiratorial fabrications, against those whom he sees as obstacles to his political ambitions. Friends without mind, who do not mind following his diktat are available aplenty.

Well, all political animals play the same game of political cards, and of course, the most coveted card is the joker. And that is what the Finance Minister is looking more and more like, as each day passes. When the time comes for his future journey, he will have a terrific advantage. He will only have to go downhill. This wont take much time - fortunate for him in a way.

The earlier definition of an honest politician was one who when bought remained bought. Unfortunately, some today do not even have this basic qualification. They can be bought often. And the world is not round anymore. It has turned immensely crooked.

I have over the last decade closely watched and written extensively about India’s fraudulent ratification of the UN Convention against Corruption in 2011, a good 7 years after we signed it; our complete indifference and lack of political will to obtain the list of Indian black money holders from Germany, even after Germany offered to provide the information. That was the Sonia - Manmohan-Chidambaram Government.

Even after the Supreme Court ordered that the correspondence with Germany on this matter be released to me, all I got after a delay of 3 years, were unrelated 17 letters dealing with DTAT, with names and addresses of correspondents blacked out by indelible black ink. This was the Modi- Jaitley Government

Clearly, the present Finance Minister is in conspiracy with the previous one. He has made no effort to approach the German Government, as was confirmed to me when I visited Germany last year.

The blacked out letters, after some scrutiny, indicate that two officials are involved in this corrupt operation. Anita Kapoor, former Chairman CBDT, is said to have landed a cushy job in the same Finance Ministry after retirement; KV Chowdhery, also former Chairman, CBDT, after a criticial visit to Paris, was appointed CVC by a fraud on the Constitution and the Court. This will soon be reported to it. The continuity in the Finance Ministry after Chidambaram remains, thanks to Jaitley. I do not have to prove this obvious fraud.

The whole nation has heard Amit Shah, and his famous ‘election jumla’ statement regarding repatriation of black money. Modi has not repudiated it. I had to buy space in the Indian Express in April 2015 to inform the people of these criminal conspiracies.

How this crooked political mafia could swing the suspension of Kirti Azad, who is speaking the truth, is yet another shocker. They appear to have forgotten their humiliating defeat in Bihar all too soon.

But the question on everyone’s mind is – did Kirti Azad’s suspension have approval from the man above? I hope his words will be free from any ambiguity.

Pakistan and Us

The Modi Government has never shown any consistency in dealing with Pakistan about the Kashmir problem which Pakistan obstinately claims as the unfinished agenda of India’s partition. Our leaders, the old discarded ones and the ones installed in office last year are equally incompetent in handling it. They neither understand the strength of India’s case nor are they able to silence Pakistan’s persistent propaganda painting India as an unlawful occupant of the state which Pakistan owns. This piece is intended to put an end to Pakistan’s false and wholly unbelievable claim for all time and to educate those whose job it is to expose. Pakistan’s mendacity and the hollowness of its propaganda. 

We must go back to the late forties to understand the Muslim League behaviour when the nation was facing the prospect of Partition of the country. One of the subjects discussed was the fate of ‘Paramountcy’ enjoyed by the British Crown in all the princely states of India numbering hundreds. The Muslim League had its eyes on Hyderabad ruled by the Nizam who enjoyed full nominal sovereignty but controlled by the Paramountcy of the British Crown. Hyderabad was a Hindu majority state but ruled by a Muslim King or Prince and supported by his small army and of course the Razakars. The Indian National Congress committed to democracy of the British model wanted Paramountcy to vest in the people of the State. The Muslim League rejected this and won. Paramountcy was to devolve on the ruling prince or King. Pakistan’s plan was to secure Kashimr by force and Hyderabad by the Nizams Paramountcy. A fully armed section of the Pak army disguised as tribal’s invaded the state and almost – reached the outskirts of Srinagar the capital. In this emergency the ruling King acceded to the Union of India. Both under the Constitution as well as International Law the whole of Jammu and Kashmir became fully a legitimate part of sovereign India. The Indian forces succeeded in driving back the attacking tribals and they would have been thrown out of every inch of the state territory but the foolish Nehru accepted an armistice and a part of the state territory remained out of Indian control only de facto but not de jure. Make no mistake: by law domestic and international the title of India to the entire territory of the state of J&K (including what we call Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, POK) is unchallengeable in law.

​Yes the United Nations did call for a plebiscite in the state but on condition that every tribal who participated in the illegitimate invasion of the state or who had just entered the state from outside was to quit, a condition never complied with by Pakistan. 

Today it is Pakistan who under the Law of Nations is in unlawful occupant of a part of J&K and is under a legal duty to quit. Due to the long lapse of time the United Nations will not enforce a plebiscite the condition precedent to which was that the plebiscite will be a peaceful democratic operation under the de Jure and de facto rule of India with the Indian Flag being the only flag flying. India today is under no obligation to hold the plebiscite and Pakistan is legally bound to vacate the POK, every square inch of it. If Pakistan is agreeable India should be prepared to have the legal contention decided by the International Court of Justice once for all. India will doubtless win.

​Now we turn to some matter of even greater relevance and conclusive effect. In 1965 Pakistan again resorted to an illegalwar to conquer the Indian part of the state by armed force. Pakistan miserably failed in this war of pure aggression and it has justly earned the contempt of civilized nations of the world. It ended by the Tashkent Declaration under the influence of the friendly Russians and the benign Saintly Prime Minister of India the late Lal Bahadur Shastri. Pakistan must be eternally grateful to the great and forgiving Indian. Its essence is in two promises:

(i) Neither Party shall change the present status quo by force or violence or war;

(ii) Neither will carry on any propaganda for changing it.

​Pakistan should be grateful for Indian magnanimity. Virtually India has made a moral promise not to claim any part of POK. But this assumes that Pakistan will never make any claim even to one inch of Indian Kashmir. If Pakistan repudiates by word or deed any part of the Tashkent Declaration, Indian claim to POK will remain fully alive and enforceable before any International Tribunal. 

​The full text of this document dated January 10, 1966 is appended hereto.( http://mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/5993/Tashkent+Declaration )

​Now we got to another important event in the history of Jammu and Kashmir. The Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir was not framed by the Constituent Assembly which framed and promulgated the Constitution of India. The state of J&K acceded to the Union of India by an Instrument of Accession, Clause 8 of which provides: 

​“Nothing in this Instrument effects the continuance of my sovereignty in and over the State, or save as provided by or under this Instrument, the exercise of any power, authority and right now enjoyed by me as Ruler of this State or the validity of any law at present in force in this State.” 

Article 2 of the Constitution of India reads as under:

“Parliament may by law admit into the Union, or establish new States on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.” 

​Article 370 of the Constitution of India was a temporary provision but became a permanent feature by reason of the Constitution of J&K framed by its own Constituent Assembly and not by the Indian Parliament.

​The J&K Constituent Assembly worked from November 1951 to November 1956 and the Constitution came into force on 28.11.1957. It expressly adopted some provisions of the Constitution of India which by Article 147 are not amendable.

​In my opinion the Government of India has no power to change or amend the Constitution of the State. India cannot by any power lawfully vested in it can alter the boundaries or the Constitution of the State. India is in no position to accede to any Pakistan demands. India is not in unlawful occupation of any part of the state; even the POK is in law territory India can claim it for itself .

The Preamble of the free Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir states:

‘We, the people of the State of Jammu & Kashmir, having solemnly resolved, in pursuance of the accession of this State to India which took place on the twenty-sixth day of October, 1947, to further define the existing relationship of the State with the Union of India as an integral part thereof, and to secure ourselves:- 

Justice, social, economic and political;

Liberty, of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;

Equality of status and of opportunity, and to promote among us all; 

Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity of the nation;

In our Constituent Assembly this seventeenth day of November, 1956 we do hereby adopt, enact and give to ourselves this constitution.’

​The State of J&K is primarily governed by its own Constitution, unlike any other State in India, and Kashmir has voluntarily become part of a free, progressive, secular republic. That is azaadi, the highest political freedom a citizen can hope for. People who are blessed with genuine democracy, with constitutionally protected rights and duties of individuals, and an independent judiciary to enforce them, have attained true azaadi. Any violent action to secure more of it, or of a different kind or content, is a crime of terrorism and treason or both. 

​In 1971 Pakistan lost a very important part of what was collectively the whole of Pakistan. There could not be a stronger bond than simultaneous birth of both the western and eastern parts of Pakistan a unified state based on the bond of religious affinity. This entity broke up in hatred, violence and war. Bangladesh is now an independent friendly neighbour of India and our relations are Cordial in the real sense. Is it not such a different entity now with the eastern part wholly gone from Pakistan. The glue of the religious bond has not protected Pakistan’s territorial unity and constitutional oneness. By what rational argument is Pakistan now having some claim to J&K?

​The State of Kashmir is not only the valley but Jammu and Ladhak too. The religious equation is entirely different in their vast areas. What then is the moral and political strength of Pakistan’s demand for more Muslim Majority territory when Islamabad could not hold on to Dacca. The history beliefs and religious practices of Sunni Pakistan have no resemblance to the Islam of the Kashmir valley. Even Sindhi Muslims have a strong movement for secession from Pakistan; many of them according to the will and testament of their deceased leader the late G.M Syed are keen to join secular India. Pakistan cannot just ignore the annual meetings that take place in Europe and U.S.A wanting secession from Pakistan. 

​Lastly, the moderate element in J&K has taken a rational and practical decision. It is no use some Pakistan leaders constantly describing their Kashmir struggle as the unfinished business of partition. This just makes no sense. It must be recognised that even in 1947 the Muslim majority states were not as a whole allowed to secede from India and join Pakistan. The provinces of Punjab, Bengal and Assam had to be sub-divided. It is more than clear that the inhabitants of Ladhak, a region which is almost two-thirds the area of the whole state, the inhabitants of Jammu and the inhabitants of Baltistan want passionately to remain united with India. They are completely opposed to joining Pakistan and have no desire for independence. The real dispute ultimately boils down to the Kashmir Valley, an area approximately 84 miles in length and much less miles in width, as against Ladakh, which alone is about 33,500 square miles. Although it sounds like a petty dispute on the face of it, the overtones and emotions are so strong that the Kashmir valley has been the cause of three wars between Pakistan and India during the last 50 years; strains of violence that explode every now and then, recurring cross border terrorism, and incalculable human and economic loss. 

​My work in the Kashimr Committee of which I am a founder member entered into a dialogue with important Hurriyat leaders. After prolonged meetings and discussions we reached an agreement with five salient features which need to be repeated. These have been published in my writings and books many years ago. These features are five:

1) Terrorism and violence are taboo.

2) A lasting and honourable peaceful resolution must and can be found. 

3) The resolution must be acceptable to all political elements and regions of the state.

4) Extremist positions held by all for the previous five decades have to be and will be abandoned.

5) Kashmiri Pandits will be rehabilitated with honour and rights of equality.

​A careful understanding of the five points of the agreement show that abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India on the one hand and secession on the other were consciously and finally abandoned. The polestar of the peace process would thereafter be the legitimate interests and rational expectations of all elements and regions in the composite state.

​This agreement brought joy to every Indian and to most Kashmiris. The moderate section of the Hurriyat had repudiated the extremists and, at the same time, carried on talking to the Kashmir Committee with the full concurrence of the Pakistan authorities. It is tragic that the usual wooden-headedness of the Government of India blocked a formal solution. At the International Kashmir Peace Conference held in Washington, my friend Ashraf Jehangir Kazi, the distinguished ambassador of Pakistan to the United States argued that the Kashmir Committee had initiated a process of acceptable change. If anyone refuses to accept this, it would only show that he is an enemy of peace, regardless of his pretended postures and rhetorical assertions. Since then, the state of Jammu and Kashmir has held elections, which , unlike the earlier ones, were acclaimed by the entire International community as free and fair following which a democratically elected government has functioned in the state, doubtless causing frustration to the sympathisers of Pakistan, overt and covert. An all party parliamentary delegation toured the state and revived the dialogue in 2010. 

The problem has now been solved more than four times. Pakistan has no claim to any part of the state. It will even lose POK in a legal battle in an international forum. Let us all forget any serious changes in the state and whatever is good for the inhabitants of the state in both parts of it must be done in peaceful consultation and cooperation.

A Requiem for the Karnataka Lokayukta

A governance crisis has been unfolding in Congress-ruled Karnataka since July this year, which is steadily leading towards the murder of the institution of Lokayukta by the present incumbent, and his political masters. The original Karnataka Lokayukta Act of January 1986, gave suo motu powers to the Lokayukta to investigate any action taken by the Chief Minister, Minister, Member of Legislature, or any public servant. However, by June 1986, the Lokayukta Act was amended, and suo motu powers were withdrawn. The Lokayukta could only investigate cases referred to it by the State Government. This was the first state initiative to curtail the Lokayukta.

Deterioration in the Lokayukta continued over the years, partly due to the character of the persons who came to occupy the Ombudsman, and mainly due to political determination to emasculate the institution. As the institution evolved, it was becoming the norm for certain incumbents to repeatedly indulge in publicity stunts, storming public offices or institutions, accompanied by TV channel crews, rebuking and shaming public servants, and then returning to their offices, doing no follow up.

The political class did not resent the Lokayukta hogging prime time media limelight. They were happy that he was keeping himself busy with publicity at the cost of concentrating on anti-corruption work. Besides, the politicians by now had mastered the art of protecting the corrupt by ensuring that timely sanction for prosecution was never given, and by ‘punishing’ the corrupt public servant by something called a ‘transfer’, which in actual fact was redeployment of his talent and potential to a more lucrative assignment. The Lokayukta in Karnataka has now turned into a full blown scandal. News had been filtering into the media since July, 2015, that the son of the present Lokayukta, one Ashwin Rao, was running an extortion racket in the very residential and official premises of the Lokayukta, summoning government officials being investigated for corruption and demanding protection money from them.

After detailed information compromising his son started making sensational headlines, the Lokayukta, as an honourable gentleman, should have tendered his resignation. However, he stuck to his chair. The politicians were delighted. Now, they had a real partner to work with, and the pastures for corruption quid pro quos had turned much greener and wider. But the heat kept increasing as sordid details of Ashwin’s extortion started with names and places appearing daily in the local press. Ashwin was arrested on July 27 near Hyderabad. His father, the Lokayukta, fled from Bangalore to another destination without handing over charge, granting month after month of ‘leave’ to himself.

With the institution of the Lokayukta completely disgraced, the Government realised it was an ideal time to strike. They decided to give an Independence Day gift to the people of Karnataka, bringing into effect on August 14, 2015, the Karnataka Lokayukta (Amendment) Act, 2015 – that in view of recent developments, “It is considered necessary to make the following amendments to the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984,” inter alia, “to revise the procedure for removal of the Lokayukta or Upalokayukta;” and “to preclude the Lokayukta or Upalokayukta from discharging his duties during the pendency of the motion for his removal before the House or the Houses of the State Legislature;”

Section 6 of the original Lokayukta Act of 1985, had stipulated that the Lokayukta/Upalokayukta could only be removed by the Governor on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity, “after an address by each House of the State Legislature supported by a majority of the total membership of the House and by a majority of not less than two thirds of the members of that House present and voting”, after following the procedures prescribed in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.

This Section was replaced by a new Section 6 which states in sub-section (2) that a notice of motion for removal of Lokayukta or an Upalokayukta may be given in writing to the Speaker of the Karnataka State Legislative Assembly or the Chairman of the Karnataka State Legislative Council, duly signed by not less than one-third of the total membership of that House. Sub-section (14) of Section 6 contains the lethal killer dose — “The Lokayukta or Upalokayukta, as the case may be, against whom a motion is moved before the House or the Houses of the State Legislature for his removal, is precluded from discharge of his duties during the pendency of motion for his removal before the House or the Houses of the State Legislature.”

The implications are clear. Just one-third membership of either House was required for removal of Lokayukta/Upalokayukta, something any ruling government can muster. Thereafter, the Ombudsman is completely precluded from discharging its functions until the entire process of referral to the Chief Justice and enquiry is over. This is a perfect Damocles sword in the hands of the Chief Minister whenever he apprehends any action by the Lokayukta on any serious charge of corruption against his government. 

After details of the Lokayukta scandal stared surfacing in July this year, the opposition parties, (not the government) after much struggle, were able to give a notice to the Speaker for the Lokayukta’s removal on November 19. On November 27, the government struck back by giving a notice for removal of the Upalokayukta, an appointee of the previous government, making rather vague and unsubstantiated allegation against him, not yet released to the public or even given to the sitting MLAs. So, the Congress-ruled Karnataka today has a Lokayukta, who is a deserter on ‘leave’ since July 2015, and non-functional in view of the motion of removal having been admitted against him by the Speaker, and an Upalokayukta who has also been rendered non-functional by way of the notice for his removal given to the Speaker by Congress legislators on November 27.

The Lokayukta in Karnataka has been killed by the Government. Thousands of complaints against corrupt officials are lying unattended. But, there is great relief and good cheer among politicians and public servants in Karnataka, and the corrupt are celebrating. Strangely, there has been no outcry in mainstream media or from national activists, who had once thronged Jantar Mantar, crusading for a strong Lokpal. Indeed, one of them has done his usual U-turn and is tabling a Bill for a Government-controlled Lokpal in Delhi.

DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR; A SHORT TRIBUTE FROM A HUMBLE ADMIRER; RAJYA SABHA ON FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015

1. Hon’ble Deputy Chairman: Today is a great day in the history of our Parliament that we are meeting to recall the precious legacy of the illustrious Dr. Ambedkar - a priceless one ‘the Constitution of India’ for its eternal values and doctrines as also the great diction of its text which together qualify it for being called the sacred scripture of our constitutional text. I am not here to debate any part of it nor cross swords with anyone in this august House. I recognise the intellectual superiority if not at least the equality of every one present here. In the brief minutes allotted to me I wish to explain my own assessment and ideas about the great man and his great legacy to the Indian nation. I am proud of the man and his genius and the treasure he has left to us. These few minutes are terribly precious to me for this is a rare life opportunity to record my adoration of the great man in this august House of ours.

2. Sir, I believe that Dr. Ambedkar was one of the greatest constitutional experts that India has ever produced and a tribute to his linguistic facility and control is well-deserved by the fact that he was made the Chairman of the Drafting Committee of the Constitution. Sir, because he had that control over the language which the entire Constituent Assembly could not claim for itself in spite of the fact that there was a large number of highly erudite bureaucrats who were assisting the Constituent Assembly in drafting the Constitution. Sir, the Constitution that he drafted was the product of the great education that, unlike many leaders in this country, he had received at the University of Columbia for three years after which he came to India and launched into a teaching career. But the same University of Columbia after his work was over in our Constituent Assembly, invited him to come to Columbia all over again only to receive the honorary degree of Doctor of Laws from that very University. He gracefully accepted the degree conferred upon him. The greatest cause of that recognition and honour done to Dr. Ambedkar was the work which he had done on the drafting and promulgation of the Constitution of the Country; make no mistake. Years later Ambedkar wrote, “The best friends I have had in my life were some of my classmates at Columbia and my great professors, Jhon Dewey, James Shotwell, Edwin Seligman and James Harvey Robinson”.

3. Sir, within the little time that I have, I wish to talk about three main highly impressive features of our holy book of the Indian Constitution. The first and foremost in importance is, Secularism. Make no mistake it is not negation of religion. Secularism is ultimately the triumph of education over illiteracy, it is triumph of knowledge over ignorance; of reason over blind faith and the triumph of science over religion. It is so difficult to write all this in the text of the Constitution. That is why during the hated emergency also somebody thought that this word must be put in the Preamble of the Constitution. The Preamble of the Constitution containing a word does not change the internal contents of the text of the document at all; it is only an aid to construction. But secularism had already been declared in the Constitution of India. It was only made clear that secularism is a very, very important part of the Constitution of India, though not mentioned by name. Most of our personal laws are based on religion, but when he introduced article 44 which ordained that India would have a uniform civil code some day, he was telling the nation that our ultimate aim is to create uniformity of laws and override every religious text to the contrary. Religion was to be tolerated, but not to be encouraged or expanded in its sway over human action. I would request everybody to read a book if you can manage it. There is a wonderful book called ‘Religion Gone Astray’. There are three co-authors of the book. One is Pastor Don Mackenzie, the second is Rabbi Ted Falcon and the third is Imam Jamal Rahman. All these three great intellectuals have jointly composed it and which I suggest should be bought and distributed to every Member of Parliament whether in this House or in the other House, and must be made a compulsory textbook in every school and college in this country. This is the great tribute which I wish to pay to Dr. Ambedkar. Religion may have brought some hope and comfort to many suffering the slings and arrows of bad fortune and a cruel society but a more accurate comment on religion is that “all the ships of all the navies of the world can swim comfortably in the ocean of innocent blood that has been shed in the name of religion through the history of mankind.”

4. It is also true that Dr. Ambedkar himself opted for the religion of Gautam Buddha, a matter to which I will revert a little later.

5. From the draft of the Constitution he fashioned, it was clear that we had decided with a few significant changes to adopt the British model of democracy. To all superficial appearances it seemed that Judges in England were appointed by the Lord Chancellor who by a curious British paradox was not merely the Highest Judge but also the member of the British cabinet. No one grasped that judges in England were being appointed in fact by the highest Judge. Everybody assumed without proper study that the appointments were being made by a Minister of the Crown.

6. I believe that the system of appointment to the High Courts and Supreme Court of India by the executive was left intact without immediate change. But the change was ordered in the near future by Article 50 of the Constitution. Unfortunately under the brilliant light of Pandit Nehru and his ministers nobody thought of immediately changing the system. By 1990, however the Bar had seen a mandatory direction for change in the regime of executive supremacy in the matter of appointments. I and my illustrious colleagues discussed the unfulfilled mandate of Article 50 of the Constitution which reads:

“50. Separation of Judiciary from Executive.— The State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State.”

7. The nine-judge bench in its 1993 judgment namely, Supreme Court Advocates-on Record Association v. Union of India reported as (1993) 4 SCC 441, accepted the argument of me and my colleagues and the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Advocates-on Record Association and Anr. v. Union of India in 2015 has only confirmed the earlier decision.

8. Dr. Ambedkar was not ‘unelected’ like the present Finance Minister of India whose abuse of the judges as ‘tyranny of unelected’ is a mean puerile Contempt of Court.

9. Let me now deal with his patriotism and respect for India’s culture. He was born in a backward caste the victim of centuries of ill treatment, denial of access to education and ­paying professions, condemned to humiliation and social contempt from more lucky sections of society; in short victims of cruel discrimination and dishonour. Still he never questioned the cultural unity of India. For example he refused to compare the fate of his low caste with the blacks of America originally called the Negros. It is only recently that the use of the word ‘negro’ is now treated as a punishable wrong in the U.S.A. He believed in the efficacy of the Indian democracy and was convinced that the democratic process of India will terminate the inferiority of his caste and its cultural unity will be intact and strengthened. He worked for erasing this black spot on the face of India without generating hatred, angry recrimination or violent activity of any kind. It was human misunderstanding but easily curable by better democracy and education, he firmly believed. Democracy without education he believed is a sham and hypocrisy without limitation. His mind never wavered nor thought of other forms of government like Marxism or dictatorship or even democracy without constitutional rights like freedom of speech and thought, and other rights which made the glorious Part III of the Constitution of India.

10. He finally opted for Buddhism. He asked his followers to go in for the religion of Buddha. But, Sir, one thing must be conceded that Buddhism is the only religion whose prophet founded that religion only for the salvation of humanity form pain and suffering. I would request everybody to read one great poem, ‘The Light of Asia’ written by Sir Edwin Arnold the last stanza of which poem reads:

“We are the voices of the wandering wind,

Which moan for rest and rest can never find:

Lo! As the wind is, so is mortal life,

A moan, a sigh, a sob, storm and strife”.

11. And, Sir, with that, he told us that the purpose of all law and legislation in Parliament is ultimately to reduce human pain and suffering and it is Dr. Ambedkar alone who stands out as a great lighthouse of knowledge and learning for us to follow.

12. With this last tribute I must end though I do it under great compulsion.

13. Even so I am grateful to you Mr. Chairman.

The needless Tipu controversy generated by the Congress Party to create communal division. I had predicted this way back in April 2014

The tenor and content of the Congress Party's election campaign seems to be getting increasingly gory and savage as the election is winding its way across the country. Not merely in terms of imagery, but actual vocabulary. Blood seems to have become the word and weapon of last resort that the Congress, its communal allies, and its secured media allies have reserved for hurling against Narendra Modi. This dangerous weapon is being used abusively and irresponsibly, by shooting off inflammatory, divisive accusations against Modi and the BJP, completely without reason, logic or evidence, and with absolute impunity.

Is it just a coincidence that the linguistic pattern of the Congress, its political allies, and its "intellectual" cronies is getting more and more identical — irresponsible abuse, and yes, repeated language that suggests instigation of communal violence? Having tested the potential of communal violence instigated at Godhra as a weapon for destruction of a political rival, the Congress probably sees it as their last weapon of vengeance against Narendra Modi, like Hitler's V1s and V2s.

As the saying goes, "Once is chance; twice is coincidence, but three times is enemy action." Let us take a look at the election blood language as it has been developing. Start from Digvijay Singh, who says in July 2013 that BJP was planning to instigate communal riots in Congress-ruled states ahead of the 2014 Lok Sabha elections as part of its "sinister" design to win the elections, by "communalizing" the political atmosphere. This is typical Digvijay Singh, speaking out the mind and intent of his handlers through an imaginary proxy, in his routine sycophancy drill of which the nation has had a surfeit.

Soon after, Karnataka Congress Chief Minister Siddaramaiah takes the cue, and states quite outrageously in November 2013 that there would be bloodshed if Modi becomes PM. How and why he reached his prophetic conclusion, he does not explain. But he seemed certain that "there will be bloodshed if he (Mr Modi) becomes Prime Minister," and urged the people not to give room for that to happen. "It is everybody's responsibility to oust BJP, save India," he said. Perhaps he believed that by echoing the statements or intent of his benefactors, he would acquire greater security of office.

Rahul Gandhi decided to adopt the same blood fetish in his Dehra Dun speech in February 2014, as his campaign by then had turned fairly hopeless, and he had no other weapons he could turn to. He accused the BJP, without an iota of reason or evidence, of practising the "politics of blood" by pitting one religion against another and one caste against another to come to power at any cost, generally summarising the divisive caste and communal policies that the Congress has been practising for decades. This is what he said: "It (BJP) practises the politics of blood. They don't see anything but power ... power at any cost. They can pit communities and castes against each other, they won't hesitate in spilling blood if they find it necessary to usurp power." Childishly transferring his own ideology to the BJP, he knew full well that he as role model was confirming the right trend of slander and incendiary, unsubstantiated accusations. And he was not wrong.

Not far behind, Congress spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi, well known for his contribution to the Congress for activities other than of a spokesperson, added in April 2014, "I would like to say that when BJP talks of minority welfare, it sounds like Dracula taking over as the head of the blood bank." Really, Mr Singhvi, I had no idea that you had so much blood imagery in your mind. Is it merely a blind repetition of the hopeless propaganda that your peers and bosses have been shouting, or does the repetition also contain a threat of intent?

Amarinder Singh picked up the general discourse, and recently turned soothsayer predicting that there will be riots within six months if BJP prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi comes to power. Again, he gives no reason or justification for his prediction, or why he fixed a time period of six months.

I have already written about the Economist, which sold its intellectual respectability to unknown sources in adopting the astrologer's role and predicting blood: "Mr Modi might start well in Delhi but sooner or later he will have to cope with a sectarian slaughter or a crisis with Pakistan..." The Economist, with all its intellectual heritage, neither informs us of the basis of its astrology of "a sectarian slaughter", nor why there would be a crisis with Pakistan, from where we are already hearing conciliatory comments. As I have said earlier, there can only be two explanations for this — that the Economist has either lost its journalistic standards of excellence, or its intellectual integrity.

Judging from the consistent substance of what the Congress has been speaking, there appears to be high credibility in the whispers going around that their final weapon of mass destruction during or after the general election is to instigate communal riots in the country, especially in the Congress ruled states. They do, indeed, have a proven record of doing this. Many of my younger readers may not be aware of the communal riots that were instigated in Channapatna, Karnataka in 1990, when Rajiv Gandhi, Congress president, wanted to oust Karnataka Chief Minister Veerendra Patil, only because he did not conform to the Congress principles of subservience to the party high command. Well, communal riots were organised, just about a week after Veerendra Patil suffered a stroke, and were used as an excuse to dismiss him as Chief Minister at Bangalore airport, just before Rajiv Gandhi was about to board a plane for Madras. With such versatile hands on experience with communal riots, the Congress is adept at keeping its communal powder dry, and has no compunction at using it whenever it considers it necessary for its sectarian interest.

The warnings are sinister and the writing is clearly inscribed on the wall. Judging from the recurring vocabulary of the Congress, and whatever subliminal messages it conveys, and also information from the field, there is every possibility of the Congress engineering communal riots, and bloodshed, especially in Congress ruled states, where they control the machinery of government, mainly the police.

I would expect that the most vulnerable period would be the small interregnum that would exist just between the announcement of election results and the formation of the new government. In all probability, it will be a BJP-led government with Narendra Modi as Prime Minister. The interregnum normally witnesses the victors' euphoria, jostling for positions, with the new dispensation not quite in place. It is this small window that would be most exploited for mischief by the losers, particularly communal riots that all Congress honchos have been categorically and consistently forecasting; in other words, what they will attempt, just as they did in Godhra, after Modi's victory in his Rajkot byelection in Gujarat with Muslim support.

The BJP states need to remain acutely vigilant and take every precaution during this period, using their police and intelligence agencies, and their own grassroots networks at village levels to thwart any such malicious attempt at communal riots. In Congress ruled states and states ruled by other parties, the BJP, as the opposition party must use all its resources for precaution and must remain extremely vigilant regarding what is transpiring from grassroots up to the state level about possible communal mischief caused by the Congress or other parties opposed to Modi. They must be in constant contact with the constitutional and statutory authorities, should they apprehend or suspect any attempt to disturb communal harmony, which appears to be the design of the anti Modi communal parties to malign his name, and prove their point. Because their language clearly speaks that there is blood on their minds.

MODI ' S MAN KI BAAT - A RECIPE FOR DISASTER

Never has one man thrown away so much in such a short time. I speak of Shri Narendra Modi, the no longer respected Prime Minister of India. I have been his greatest supporter in the dark years of UPA II which used all their might of state power to assassinate him politically, and also his trusted aide Amit Shah.

The people of India showered him with their trust that he was the great Messiah, who would retrieve India’s lost pride after a decade of the Congress led plunder of India and communal divisive politics aimed at the majority community. They gave the BJP an unprecedented majority, and then expected him to start delivering his election promises to improve the lot of the common man. As Chief Minister of Gujarat for fifteen years, they expected a sage statesman, who had conquered all tendencies of megalomania, narcissism and arrogance, who would carry the country with him - Sab ka Saath, Sab ka Vikaas.

But what they saw were some hitherto unknown facets of his personality, which well informed citizens are aware of and comment about quite openly now. And I' m not just talking about his sartorial obsessions, which the world is seeing with some amusement, but about something more fundamental. And that is, his great capacity of amnesia towards all his well wishers who stood by him, who supported and helped him overcome his own dark days, when the entire might of the Government of India was baying for his blood, by every possible device.

Let me assure my readers that I am not speaking about myself. I speak of the thousands of BJP workers of Bihar who worked tirelessly during the 2014 elections, and enabled the BJP to win 22, and the NDA to win 31 of the 40 Parliamentary seats from Bihar. Many of them were side lined and felt terribly hurt about it. In the recent elections, BJP candidates were given tickets according to the wishes of the coterie controlled by Amit Shah and Arun Jaitley. Does it seems surprising then that the cadre based B.J.P with a committed vote bank was sent to such shameful oblivion. This is just a repeat of Delhi when the BJP workers at ground level decided to teach the BJP satraps a lesson. How else does one account for the reduction of Bihar’s BJP’s 29.4% vote share in the 2014 general elections to 24.8% in the recent assembly elections?

This article is a very polite and almost friendly criticism and advice, both of which you hardly deserve. I will wait for a while for how you respond not personally to me but the people of India and in particular your own colleagues in B.J.P. I have a long charge sheet against you and your favourite cabinet ministers and bureaucrats. You are entitled to dismiss this as an empty threat; but you have been warned. I have done my duty. I hope you have known of Tunku Varadrajan a distinguished writer and scholar from the United States who has been writing his weekly column for the Indian Express. In the last week’s issue he wrote "India needed a leader of the nation; instead, it got the leader of a party". Even he went wrong in the second half of this revelation. If the BJP leaders had courage of their convictions they would have long ago publicly shared this conclusion; " Increasingly it seems that we were swindled". I admire his unnecessary politeness.

I was invited to speak in Bihar. I spoke twice for a few minutes only. I made a public confession of my stupidity despite all my education and seventy five years standing at the Bar. The BJP President Amit Shah, a Modi nominee has publicly confessed that all the off repeated promises of Modi of getting back the stolen wealth of India and even putting fifteen lakhs into the poor man's kitty was an election gimmick (Jumla). "I have without meaning it, helped Modi to cheat you; do accept my apology and grant me your forgiveness that I seek". I hope Tunkuji has already forgiven me.

The first thing you Modiji should have done is to make essential commodities like cereals, dal, cooking oil, and vegetables affordable for the common people. Do you know their current prices in the markets? What was the point of raiding hoarders or importing dal just a week before the elections? Your government should have known long ago the distress it is causing to the common man. Do you need to be educated that rising prices of essential commodities are a result of hoarding by middle men and traders made so much easier by the digital revolution that you keep harping about. Why can't you set up a Cell in the PMO to monitor prices of cereals, pulses and vegetables across the country, and ensure that they are not manipulated through hoarding and profiteering. Indira Gandhi did it in her 20 Point programme and succeeded. If the BJP really wanted to woo the common man in the immediate term, all they had to do was reduce the prices of food items, and they would have earned their electoral gratitude.

The BJP Government and Modiji were seen at their clumsiest worst while mishandling the One Rank One Pension issue, which was an election promise. The dithering Prime Minister disgraced himself by breaking his word, and humiliated our loyal armed forces, by forcing them into a long dharna, that brought ignominy and disaffection to his government throughout the country.

I would next publish the two letters that I have written to you Modiji. One on the night immediately after my meeting the Jawans and a fragile old one who on hunger strike unto death was almost dead, and second after your most corrupt and illegal actions in appointing a new C.V.C. which may well end up in court action against you and your conspirators.

Mr Prime Minister, you must realize that you must carry the people of India with you, the people who placed so much love and trust in you in 2014. Silence and aloofness do not add to political, philosophic or bollywood stature. Remember, the country criticised Manmohan Singh on this same count. But he at least had an alibi, that he was being remote controlled. You have none. Your silence towards critical issues and controversies that are destructive of the nation is seen at best as lack of concern, and at worst as approval. Agriculture is a mess, farmers are committing suicide because of indebtedness and poor harvests. Have you met with any of the Chief Ministers regarding this or visited any rural areas to talk to farmers? No wonder, the perception is growing that you are only a friend of rich industrialists and not of the common man of India. When so called artists and intellectuals defamed our country by calling it 'intolerant' , (orchestrated by the Congress Party, as it may have been), did you take any steps to protect our country' s reputation by addressing them frontally? Rather you preferred to outsource it to respected civil society members. But even that came too late to counter the perceptional accusations against your government and our country. When certain irrational, anti-national and bigoted BJP parliamentarians made hate comments about the Muslim community in our country, or lynched a man to death, why did you not sternly condemn them and control them immediately? Instead, you have made the cow and beef your agenda for 21st century India, while we see India as a world power.

Ancient Rishis recommended beef as remedy for many ailments. You are too educated not to know this. Now dear Modiji, I hope Bihar has hit you hard, and you are introspecting seriously about your shortcomings. As an elder and not long ago a great supporter of yours, I can only advice that you must change your style of functioning. Get rid of coteries and yes men, and establish a direct contact with the people of India. Bihar should teach you that you are not infallible and are no Pied Piper or have solo magical powers that make people vote for you.

And lastly, Remember that the last year elections do not make you an infallible all knowing intellectual scholar. Do not convert all your well wishers into ill wishers. You have a few weeks to mend your ways, and if you want to regain the people's trust and confidence, you must make the right statements to them, make yourself more accessible to them, hear their problems and listen to their Man Ki Baat. Or else, you will become just another foot note in our history, who betrayed the trust of the people of India.