Tuesday, October 30, 2007

India Shining III: Land Rights!

There is an apparent irony in today's paper. On the front page you have a half page story talking about India's investment and how Mukesh Ambani is the world's richest man (63 billion $ is a lot). On how the sensex has risen 1000 points in 14 days and the top 5 companies have contributed to it.


A few pages afterwards we have a story about 25,000 people marching to the capital to demand land rights and stressing that they have been betrayed by corporates, rich landlords and the likes of them. I was aware that this march was being organised during my stay in the Gandhi Peace Foundation. This march is no joke and I was witnessed the people at ekta parishad planning out everything to the detail.

More...The above above two instances tell us the story of the Indian Nation. Those who get rich do so at the cost of thousands of others. The Planning commission has released a document stating that the issue of naxalism is directly linked to land rights of the poor. Helloo!!!!! "did you take that long to realise it?". The Prime Minister says that he shall form a committee to look into this land issue. Now that he's made the statement the poor will be 'packed off'. That's how diplomacy works in this country. Give them an assurance, a ray of hope and there shall be no issue in the future. The same was with the Gujjars too. Ah well! nobody seems to realise the gravity of the situation. I can just imagine 25000 people coming from gwalior to Delhi on foot just to hear this statement without understanding that 7 Race Course Roadmight hardly do anything. They have bigger things to do; remember the Nuclear deal and saving the coalition!

That is the irony of India Shining. We see it, we know it, but most of us don't raise a voice about it.

Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, May 13, 2007

Why Human Rights?


I write this at a very crucial time. I, a student of law have to decide which line should I go into; the corporate side and firms where there is easy money, litigation or higher studies. This also comes at a time when the student community is debating about reservations and those who recently finished 12th would soon be on the look out for the appropriate college. Over the past few days I’ve been encountering human rights to a very great extent. Interning with various NGO’s and the Poverty course at the University have been heavily responsible for it. A question that I often ponder about during these time, “Why Human Rights?” is what I’d like to write about in the next few paragraphs.

I observe that no rich man will ever talk about a violation of his human rights, plainly because he has the means to fend for it. The very fact that one of you is reading this article is proof that you know about your rights and have the resources at hand to fight for them. But the problem is that apart from us, there are 250 million in this country and another billion or so in this world who cannot. Neither do they have a preacher nor a protector. Rights exist not for the rich but the poor who are faced with their violations every minute. They are placed at the mercy of state systems that can do as they please with them. While there are 100,000 dying in Darfur, millions displaced in New Delhi as a result of demolitions, and god knows how many languishing in Indian jails without due process; we seem to be divided into three main groups. The first, that has no clue about them and doesn’t want to associate with them. They just want to go on with their so called ‘personal lives’ without even looking at them. The second, reads about them, would like to do something, but then decide that their individual careers are more important and carry on. These two constitute the majority of the population that can fend for themselves incase they are subjected to any injustice. The third group, consists of those who make a difference in this world of inequalities. The members of this group go on the presumption that they exist in this world to fight for those who are affected by human rights violations. And why so? Because the man above did not give them the means to fight for it on their own. Because they cannot stand living in this world with so much injustice going around and lastly because they love their country.

The last line in more of a rhetorical argument. Albert Camu wrote, “There are means that cannot be excused. And I should be able to like my country and still love justice. I don’t want just any greatness for it, particularly a greatness born out of blood and falsehood. I want to keep it alive by keeping justice alive.” Camu’s quote above was written in response to the French injustices in Africa but bears lot of relevance here. The future of my country today is bleak. In the garb of globalization, millions are suffering. At one place the majority poor are being killed for the expense of a few million dollars in building a Special Economic Zone. On the other hand people languish in jails without no idea what the future has in store for them. I find it hard to believe that most of us are silent on issues like Nandigram where states get away by ordering the killing of poor farmers. To add to it, most of us seem to be more interested in the profits that an Indonesian company will make than taking the lives of people.
In my studies at law school and successive internships I understood that the most important word is ‘rights’. Once my rights are secure, only then can I look at others. In as much as some activists might argue that rights are founded on concentration camps, displaced people or the poverty stricken, I stick to the belief that it is not a gift given by the state or a decree passed by the Court, but a possession that has to be won everyday. But does one be have to be an egotist and draw the line at his rights only or does he have to look beyond? History has witnessed enough of egotists and knows too much of its consequences. I could go on passionately as most activists do as to how we need to protet human rights and all that stuff but I’d like to stop here to delve upon a greater issue, “rational legal thinking”.
Within the human rights circle I observe that there are just a few who fight not for the people but for the law. They believe in the black letter of the law and abhor the twisting of the laws for some and not for others. If I were to emulate anyone in the future it would be these kind of people. They are way above the HR activists and fight for the forsaken because they believe in the strength and application of the law. Not bundled with emotions or any passion, they rationally argue for the poverty stricken and the violated and gain ground through the legal system.
So while I intern with a person who believes in the black letter above I see a sense in their struggle with returns. But I then ask myself if this is the path I want to take as financial considerations seem to take the upper hand.
I have three more years to go at law school. Enough time to decide what to do. Umm... Let's see where I eventually land up...

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

SC on reservations

The Supreme Court recently stayed the Government law on reservations for OBC's in India.

The case judgment is available here.

Here's what people are saying about it;


Bong Buzz writes ; The Supreme Court has temporarily stayed the government order of reserving seats for OBCs in higher education. However, there is nothing much to rejoice. For this is only an interim order. The court stayed the order only on the ground that there is not enough data on OBC demographics, that no data on this has been collected in the last 76 years. Now if the govt. readies a hurried report on OBCs the court will no more be able to say government has no data. Moreover the court has clarified that the benefits enjoyed by the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes can’t be withheld. So much for the Supreme Court! So much for India! Living in India, how can we expect justice? This is the land where caste-based reservation will continue and Lalu Prasads and all will continue to rip political benefits out of that. There is only one way out - leave the country!

..............................................

2paisaworth writes; If the SC's objection is that the census data on which the percentage of OBCs in the population is based on is outdated, then the OBC quota in Government jobs in the 1990s in the wake of the Mandal report also ought to have been quashed with the same argument. Karat is right because the SC's stay is over an non-issue. By questioning merely the veracity of the data, rather than the basis for reservation itself, the SC has implicitly acquiesced to the Centre's twisted logic for the implementation of quotas.

There's a strange incongruity in the rationale for celebrations in the anti-quota camp today and the SC judgment. Somehow people don't seem to get it. I've heard "anti-quota spokesmen" (where did that epithet come from?) from across the social spectrum laud the SC for recognizing that "caste-based reservations only serve to divide the country". The SC has done nothing of the sort. How long will it take for a Government hell-bent on the idea of Quota to come up with more accurate figures?

The debate ought to be on the very raison d'être of reservations, not mere technicalities like this one.

...............................

2kbloggers also has an interesting post on it.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

The Massacre at Nandigram

One multinational Company, a communist government in the State, 4000 police personnel and 10,000 acres of land; All that is required for a massacre that results in the death of 20 villagers and wounds 70 more. This incident has now turned out to be one of the worst instances of the abuse of state power since Godhra, gujarat.
Nandigram is a small town in West Bengal, India where the Government proposed a Special Economic Zone for a Multinational Company named 'Salim group'.

State power must never be used to further private interests. Well, that is precisely what has happened in Nandigram. To what extent does the State recognise the 'right to property' in India? Off late it has been using the non-existence of this right to inflict pains and increase the troubles of the Rural poor. Not surprisingly, this has been to the extent of causing death in India. 'Accountability' doesnt remain to be seen in the usage of State power. (refer to my earlier post on accountability) . How can one have faith in the Government in a democracy when it cannot protect the interests of its people? A left government, meant to protect the poor, has now done something that the communist preacher of Kolkata are ashamed to acknowledge. The Sarkar family has even returned the rabindra awards and done a repeat of what tagore did after the Jallian walla Bagh Massacre.
While this is a topic on which I can write on great length, I shall stop here as I got an exam tomorrow. Readers are requested to see the video below. Also, other readings attached.

- Video on the Nandigram Issue

- Nandigram on Cuckoo's Call
- Are SEZ's a good idea? Nitin Desai

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

DRUGS FOR THE POOR

Thank you SANOFI- AVENTIS

For deciding not to patent your anti-malarial drug ; at a time when the existing malarial drugs are becoming ineffective and the mosquitos are becoming resistant to it.

For having concern for the millions of poor people on planet earth

For setting an example for the filthy rich pharmaceutical companies to follow

For helping the cause of countries like India and those in Africa.

For fighting against malaria and putting in billions of dollars in its research: The Impact Malaria programme was created in 2001 and is sanofi-aventis contribution to the fight against malaria. Its four major axes are:
1. to discover new antimalarial drugs,
2. to develop new combinations or formulations from existing drugs, particularly ACTs,
3. to inform, educate and communicate about malaria, especially remote healthcare facilities, communities and families,
4. to distribute antimalarial drugs which are vital to the poorest populations, with a differential pricing approach, including a "no profit-no loss" policy.
These actions are carried out with public and private healthcare organisations and the health authorities in the countries concerned, notably through national malaria control programmes in liaison with the WHO, Roll Back Malaria Partnership and leading international institutions.

............................

Labels: , ,

Link
Google
WWW YOUR DOMAIN NAME
http://rpc.technorati.com/rpc/ping