October 12, 2010 11:39 IST
When 14-year-old Suhas Gopinath started Globals Inc ten years ago from a cyber cafe in Bengaluru, he didn't know that he had become the youngest CEO in the world.
Today, Globals is a multi-million dollar company with offices in the United States, India, Canada, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Spain, Australia, Singapore and the Middle East and has 100 employees in India and 56 abroad.
Among the several honours that have been bestowed upon this young man, the most prestigious is the invitation to be a member of the Board of the ICT Advisory Council of the World Bank..
In 2007, the European Parliament and International Association for Human Values conferred 'Young Achiever Award' on him. He was also invited to address the European Parliament and other business dignitaries assembled in the EU Parliament. He is also recognised as one of the 'Young Global Leaders' for 2008-2009 by the prestigious World Economic Forum.
Suhas is the youngest member ever in the World Economic Forum's history. The other members include the Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal, Hollywood star Leonardo DiCaprio, musician A R Rahman, Prince of Brunei, etc.
In this interview from his office in Bengaluru, Suhas Gopinath talks about his decade long journey and his dreams for the future.
Read on . .
http://business.rediff.com/slide-show/2010/oct/12/slide-show-1-meet-the-worlds-youngest-ceo.htm
Sunday, October 31, 2010
India among the world's most corrupt nations!
Rediff.com, October 26, 2010 20:16 IST
India continues to be among the world's most corrupt nations. In fact, it has fallen further in the transparency index to be ranked at 87 among 180 nations.
While in 2008, India was at the 85th position, it was ranked at 84 in 2009. Even countries like Rwanda (66), Ghana(62), Namibia (56) and Botswana (33) are ahead of India in terms of transparency.
Countries which are perceived to have the highest levels of public-sector corruption are also those plagued by long-standing conflicts, which have torn apart their governance infrastructure.
With governments committing huge sums to tackle the world's most pressing problems, from the instability of financial markets to climate change and poverty, corruption remains an obstacle to achieving much needed progress, according to Transparency International's 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), a measure of domestic, public sector corruption.
India continues to be among the world's most corrupt nations. In fact, it has fallen further in the transparency index to be ranked at 87 among 180 nations.
While in 2008, India was at the 85th position, it was ranked at 84 in 2009. Even countries like Rwanda (66), Ghana(62), Namibia (56) and Botswana (33) are ahead of India in terms of transparency.
Countries which are perceived to have the highest levels of public-sector corruption are also those plagued by long-standing conflicts, which have torn apart their governance infrastructure.
With governments committing huge sums to tackle the world's most pressing problems, from the instability of financial markets to climate change and poverty, corruption remains an obstacle to achieving much needed progress, according to Transparency International's 2010 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), a measure of domestic, public sector corruption.
The world's least corrupt nations
Rediff.com, October 28, 2010 08:28 IST
Denmark along with two other countries have been ranked as the world's least corrupt countries.
With a score of 9.3, Denmark has consistently topped the Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index. The country has a strong tradition of openness to global trade and investment, and transparent and efficient regulations are applied evenly in most cases.
Denmark also boasts an efficient, independent judiciary that protects property rights, and the level of corruption is extraordinarily low, according to the Index of Economic freedom.
Three countries share the first position in the Transparency Index. New Zealand shares the same score of Denmark at 9.3. New Zealand is known for its efforts to ensure transparent, competitive, and corruption-free government procurement. Stiff penalties against bribing government officials or accepting bribes are strictly enforced.
Singapore also tops the Transparency Index with a high score of 9.3. The government enforces strong anti-corruption laws. It is a crime for a citizen to bribe a foreign official or any other person, within or outside of Singapore.
Denmark along with two other countries have been ranked as the world's least corrupt countries.
With a score of 9.3, Denmark has consistently topped the Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index. The country has a strong tradition of openness to global trade and investment, and transparent and efficient regulations are applied evenly in most cases.
Denmark also boasts an efficient, independent judiciary that protects property rights, and the level of corruption is extraordinarily low, according to the Index of Economic freedom.
Three countries share the first position in the Transparency Index. New Zealand shares the same score of Denmark at 9.3. New Zealand is known for its efforts to ensure transparent, competitive, and corruption-free government procurement. Stiff penalties against bribing government officials or accepting bribes are strictly enforced.
Singapore also tops the Transparency Index with a high score of 9.3. The government enforces strong anti-corruption laws. It is a crime for a citizen to bribe a foreign official or any other person, within or outside of Singapore.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Lal Bahadur Shastri - Meeting in Tashkent 1966
A Russian documentary about the Taskent meeting of 1966.
Follow the title link to watch the video.
Follow the title link to watch the video.
Friday, October 22, 2010
This day (22 Oct) 67 years back Netaji's Provincial Govt declared war on the US and Britain
On 21st Oct 1943 the Provincial Govt of Azad Hind was proclaimed and in a mid-night declaration on 22-23 Oct, Netaji's Provincial Govt declared war on Great Britain and the US.
History followed this legendary man and his men in uniform thereafter .... but not too far could it follow...., for, after 17 Aug 1945 whatever happened to Netaji could hardly be recorded by any historian. While historical texts about Netaji stopped at the airfield of Taihoku declaring the mortal death of the immortal soul in a plane crash on 18 Aug, the mortal being ventured on a new chapter of history unknown.
And today, three generations of researchers, investigators and curious citizens of Free India attempting to rewrite the history by collecting, organizing, analyzing and joining together thousands of pieces of evidences gathered from around the world. Interestingly all the successive Governments of Free India since independence chose to distance themselves from the country's greatest freedom fighter and preferred to guard their classified files on the first person of the first Free India Government keeping them in a buried 'black box'.
History followed this legendary man and his men in uniform thereafter .... but not too far could it follow...., for, after 17 Aug 1945 whatever happened to Netaji could hardly be recorded by any historian. While historical texts about Netaji stopped at the airfield of Taihoku declaring the mortal death of the immortal soul in a plane crash on 18 Aug, the mortal being ventured on a new chapter of history unknown.
And today, three generations of researchers, investigators and curious citizens of Free India attempting to rewrite the history by collecting, organizing, analyzing and joining together thousands of pieces of evidences gathered from around the world. Interestingly all the successive Governments of Free India since independence chose to distance themselves from the country's greatest freedom fighter and preferred to guard their classified files on the first person of the first Free India Government keeping them in a buried 'black box'.
Gender laws in favour of women?
5 October 2010
nivedita choudhuri
The Union minister of law and justice has been saying on many occasions that laws will be made gender neutral in the next four years. Mr Veerappa Moily, recently replying to a debate in the Rajya Sabha, said male chauvinism and dominance should disappear and that men should never allow women to be degraded and looked down upon. However, the existence of a number of laws that are tilted heavily in favour of women makes the layman wonder if gender neutrality means looking after the interests of women (read wives) only and ignoring totally the welfare of men.
Take for instance the anti-dowry law – Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code – which has reportedly been misused by many women to lodge false or exaggerated complaints against their husbands and in-laws, accusing them of cruel behaviour. Implemented in 1983, Section 498A is a criminal law.
A case filed under this section is non-bailable (one has to appear in court to get bail), non-compoundable (the complaint cannot be withdrawn) and cognisable (the police has to register and investigate the complaint). The law says, “Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.”
This was meant to be a special law to get more convictions, but the opposite has happened because there are too many false complaints. Many women use the law to blackmail their husbands, allege activists of the Save Indian Family Foundation, a group that fights the misuse of laws targeted at men.
The false complaints can be filed due to many reasons. Sometimes, a wife wants her husband to sever ties with his family or stop giving money to his parents. If he does not comply with her demands, she slaps a false case against him alleging harassment for non-payment of dowry, allege the activists.
Men also find it unfair that their family members are arrested in the event of the wife naming them in the FIR. Anybody named in the FIR is arrested. It can even be the man’s parents, who live in a different town. The frivolity of the complaints was driven home by a recent newspaper article which reported that a wife was ready to slap a dowry harassment case against her father-in-law who had demanded fish curry for dinner. The wife, who was in no mood to cook fish curry, thought it would be easier to punish her ‘errant’ father-in-law by slapping a dowry harassment case on him.
Another law that is allegedly being misused is The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005. This law assumes that all victims of domestic violence are women and it does not give a man a chance to complain or seek justice if he is being harassed or abused by his wife. It also assumes that wives are always honest and truthful. Therefore, proof and evidence to support the allegations of abuse are not required.
Due to the lack of social support and legal protection, many male victims of domestic abuse are taking their lives every day, allege SIFF activists. False cases are severely hampering the personal and professional lives of the most productive section of the Indian population.
Moreover, the so-called “women protection’’ laws are causing more harm than good to women. In every false case, at least two women, a mother-in-law and a sister-in-law, are accused. Minor girls, married and unmarried sisters, ailing mothers and even aged grandmothers have been sent behind bars based on mere allegations and subjected to long-drawn trials before being declared innocent.
Unreasonable and easily misused laws like Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act are creating a situation of fear and mutual distrust and adversely affecting inter-personal relationships between men and women in society. There is fear psychosis among men, who are increasingly finding it difficult to repose faith in women or marriage.
Despite the public outcry over the misuse of Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act, the government is not ready to make the proposed Sexual Harassment at Workplace Bill gender neutral. It presupposes that women are always victims of harassment in offices and does not take into account the fact that a woman employee can be every bit as abusive and sadistic as a male. Such laws violate the essence of Article 15 of the Indian Constitution, which prohibits discrimination against any citizen on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
Of course, the prime motivation in filing false cases is money. There are scores of cases, allege SIFF activists, where the wives threaten to go to the police or courts if they are not given hefty sums of money as “settlement’’. Sometimes, the clinching factor is the property and assets of their in-laws which the wives covet. What better way to usurp it all than foist false cases on one’s in-laws and then demand a king’s ransom. The proposed Bill against sexual harassment, if not made gender neutral, is likely to encourage the extortion “culture’’.
Though the sufferings of men and their families are increasing, the Indian government still thinks that it’s women who need protection. It is continuing to turn a blind eye to these harassed men, who have to spend the best years of their lives running around in courts to proclaim their innocence. But, can anything better be expected in a country which ranks a lowly 84th in the Corruption Perceptions Index?
The writer is a freelance contributor
nivedita choudhuri
The Union minister of law and justice has been saying on many occasions that laws will be made gender neutral in the next four years. Mr Veerappa Moily, recently replying to a debate in the Rajya Sabha, said male chauvinism and dominance should disappear and that men should never allow women to be degraded and looked down upon. However, the existence of a number of laws that are tilted heavily in favour of women makes the layman wonder if gender neutrality means looking after the interests of women (read wives) only and ignoring totally the welfare of men.
Take for instance the anti-dowry law – Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code – which has reportedly been misused by many women to lodge false or exaggerated complaints against their husbands and in-laws, accusing them of cruel behaviour. Implemented in 1983, Section 498A is a criminal law.
A case filed under this section is non-bailable (one has to appear in court to get bail), non-compoundable (the complaint cannot be withdrawn) and cognisable (the police has to register and investigate the complaint). The law says, “Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.”
This was meant to be a special law to get more convictions, but the opposite has happened because there are too many false complaints. Many women use the law to blackmail their husbands, allege activists of the Save Indian Family Foundation, a group that fights the misuse of laws targeted at men.
The false complaints can be filed due to many reasons. Sometimes, a wife wants her husband to sever ties with his family or stop giving money to his parents. If he does not comply with her demands, she slaps a false case against him alleging harassment for non-payment of dowry, allege the activists.
Men also find it unfair that their family members are arrested in the event of the wife naming them in the FIR. Anybody named in the FIR is arrested. It can even be the man’s parents, who live in a different town. The frivolity of the complaints was driven home by a recent newspaper article which reported that a wife was ready to slap a dowry harassment case against her father-in-law who had demanded fish curry for dinner. The wife, who was in no mood to cook fish curry, thought it would be easier to punish her ‘errant’ father-in-law by slapping a dowry harassment case on him.
Another law that is allegedly being misused is The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005. This law assumes that all victims of domestic violence are women and it does not give a man a chance to complain or seek justice if he is being harassed or abused by his wife. It also assumes that wives are always honest and truthful. Therefore, proof and evidence to support the allegations of abuse are not required.
Due to the lack of social support and legal protection, many male victims of domestic abuse are taking their lives every day, allege SIFF activists. False cases are severely hampering the personal and professional lives of the most productive section of the Indian population.
Moreover, the so-called “women protection’’ laws are causing more harm than good to women. In every false case, at least two women, a mother-in-law and a sister-in-law, are accused. Minor girls, married and unmarried sisters, ailing mothers and even aged grandmothers have been sent behind bars based on mere allegations and subjected to long-drawn trials before being declared innocent.
Unreasonable and easily misused laws like Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act are creating a situation of fear and mutual distrust and adversely affecting inter-personal relationships between men and women in society. There is fear psychosis among men, who are increasingly finding it difficult to repose faith in women or marriage.
Despite the public outcry over the misuse of Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act, the government is not ready to make the proposed Sexual Harassment at Workplace Bill gender neutral. It presupposes that women are always victims of harassment in offices and does not take into account the fact that a woman employee can be every bit as abusive and sadistic as a male. Such laws violate the essence of Article 15 of the Indian Constitution, which prohibits discrimination against any citizen on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
Of course, the prime motivation in filing false cases is money. There are scores of cases, allege SIFF activists, where the wives threaten to go to the police or courts if they are not given hefty sums of money as “settlement’’. Sometimes, the clinching factor is the property and assets of their in-laws which the wives covet. What better way to usurp it all than foist false cases on one’s in-laws and then demand a king’s ransom. The proposed Bill against sexual harassment, if not made gender neutral, is likely to encourage the extortion “culture’’.
Though the sufferings of men and their families are increasing, the Indian government still thinks that it’s women who need protection. It is continuing to turn a blind eye to these harassed men, who have to spend the best years of their lives running around in courts to proclaim their innocence. But, can anything better be expected in a country which ranks a lowly 84th in the Corruption Perceptions Index?
The writer is a freelance contributor
Thursday, October 21, 2010
RTF Campaign’s Statement on PM’s Rebuke to SC For Overreach Into Policy Formulation
RTF Campaign’s Statement on PM’s Rebuke to SC For Overreach Into Policy Formulation
In Economics, Indian society/culture, Politics and Government, Poverty in India on September 8, 2010 at 9:28 PM
STATEMENT ON THE PM’s OBSERVATION ON THE SUPREME COURT, MADE IN EDITORS’ CONFERENCE ON 6th SEPTEMBER, 2010
The Right to Food Campaign is shocked at the Prime Minister’s statement made to the editors’ conference on 6th September, 2010, stating that the Supreme Court must not interfere with policy. We are glad that the PM has finally spoken up on the food issue, as it has ended up further confirming that this Government is so completely anti-poor. We believe that when within a democracy, people use their rights which have been enshrined in the Indian Constitution – the right to life, right to freedom of speech and expression as well as right to approach courts -, the Head of the Indian Executive, does not want the fundamental right of the people to be realised, and worse, he interferes with their right to get justice!. We condemn his comments that are likely to have a cascading effect down the bureaucratic chain and may lead to questioning of judicial intervention.
While we agree that ideally the role of the Courts in policy making should be limited but the citizens have a right to approach the Supreme Court in situations like the present scenario when the Executive has failed to ensure that the rights of people are protected. The Government has failed to ensure that
nobody ever goes to sleep hungry,
mothers don’t have to teach their children how to live with hunger,
hunger and starvation never happens,
not a single grain is wasted due to poor management of the food economy,
malnutrition in tribal and dalit children is prevented and deaths of infants due to malnutrition never happens,
no woman suffers from anemia,
the old and the vulnerable, the destitutes are not left to die lonely deaths,
children are provided with midday meals in school and under six children in anganwadi centres of the ICDS,
Dalit children get a meal with dignity and that there is no discrimination in the appointment of Dalit and Tribal cooks in the mid day meal scheme.
food is available in the market at affordable prices
It is indeed ironic that while the same Prime Minister treated the delay in preparations for the Commonwealth Games as an emergency, the response to the hunger situation in the country is yet to come.
The PUCL, Rajasthan filed a case (Civil Writ Petition 196/200) in the Supreme Court in 2001 demanding accountability from the state for persisting hunger and starvation in the country. The initial order in this case clearly lays out the perspective with which the Supreme Court has been intervening on this matter by stating that, “The anxiety of the Court is to see that the poor and the destitute and the weaker sections do not suffer from hunger and starvation. The prevention of the same is one of the prime responsibilities of the Government – whether Central or the State. How this is to be ensured would be a matter of policy which is best left to the government. All that the Court has to be satisfied and which it may have to ensure is that the foodgrains which are overflowing in the storage receptacles, especially of FCI godown, and which are in abundance, should not be wasted by dumping into the sea or eaten by rats. Mere schemes without any implementation are of no use. What is important is that the food must reach the Hungry.” (Order dated 20th August 2001).
The fact that this Case has been continuing for nine long years in spite of more than 50 operative orders by the Supreme Court and more than 10 reports filed by the Supreme Court Commissioners shows the failure of successive Governments in eradicating hunger and starvation from the country.
The Prime Minister must realise that people are forced to approach the Courts when there is such abdication of responsibility by the elected Government and it is the democratic function of the Supreme Court to respond to such appeals for protection of rights provided in the Constitution. Had the government made its own policy on universalisation of ICDS, there would be no need for the order of December 2006 directing governments to set up anganwadi centres in all habitations and to reach out to all young children. Similarly, had the government made its own policy to prevent deaths of homeless persons during the severe winter, the Supreme Court would not have had to ‘interfere’ and direct states to provide shelters to homeless people (January 2010). Had the government dealt with the leakages in PDS, then there would be no reason for the Supreme Court to set up a Central Vigilance Committee to look into the functioning of PDS and suggest reforms (July 2006). Had the Government ensured that there was no corruption in the supply of food for children, the Supreme Court would not have to say that private contractors must be banned from supply for nutrition supplements (October 2004). Had the Governments ensured that their own policy of providing 35kgs of foodgrains per month for BPL families was implemented, there would be no need for the Supreme Court to give the order that the entitlement of BPL families to 35kgs a month must be protected (January 2008).
These are just to name a few instances where the Court has had to intervene to protect peoples’ right to food since 2004 when the UPA I came into power.
The Prime Minister must realise that boasting about being the second fastest growing economy in a context where two thirds of our women are anemic, half the children are malnourished, almost one-third of adult men and women have a low body mass index, our malnutrition rates are higher than in some of the war-torn countries of Africa and India ranks 66 out of 88 countries by the Global Hunger Index, is like the Emperor Without Clothes.
In a situation where we are concerned about insufficient production of foodgrains, declining production of pulses and stagnant oilseed production, to suggest to the editors that the only way to ensure poverty alleviation is “for more people to be taken out of agriculture” is blasphemous. The Prime Minister’s concern seems to be more towards expanding the reach of the corporates rather than protecting the livelihoods of more than 60% of our population who depend on agriculture.
The Prime Minister ought to understand the spirit in which the Supreme Court’s remark on distributing foodgrains was made. Letting grains rot when there are so many people in the country who are hungry is immoral and cannot be justified.
The Right to Food campaign reiterates that the excess grains lying with the FCI must be immediately distributed by expanding the AAY to include all the vulnerable groups such as landless labourers, small and marginal farmers, slum dwellers, daily wagers in rural and urban areas, etc identified by the Government of India as per its own order on AAY issued in 2004 and by universalizing the PDS in at least the 150 poorest districts (that were identified for the National Food for Work Programme).
Further, we must move towards a Universal Public Distribution System along with putting in place mechanisms for incentivising agriculture, decentralised procurement, local storage, inclusive distribution and criminalizing neglect relating to hunger as it is no different from abetting homicide. In a context where the tax foregone (waived) by the Central Government on Corporate Income Tax, Personal Income Tax, Excise and Customs was Rs.5,02,299 crores in 2009-10 (79.54% of the aggregate tax collection); there can be no excuse to not spend on a universal PDS.
We are,
the Steering group of the Right to Food Campaign
Annie Raja (National Federation for Indian Women), Anuradha Talwar (New Trade Union Initiative), Arun Gupta (Breast Feeding Promotion Network of India), Arundhati Dhuru (National People’s Movement of India), Ashok Bharti (National Confederation Of Dalit Organisations), Anjali Bhardwaj and Nikhil Dey (National Campaign for People’s Right to Information), Asha Mishra and Vinod Raina (Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti), Colin Gonsalves (Human Rights Law Network), Kavita Srivastava (People’s Union for Civil Liberties), Mira Shiva and Vandana Prasad (Jan Swasthya Abhiyan), Paul Diwakar (National Campaign for Dalit Human Rights), Subhash Bhatnagar (National Campaign Committee for Unorganized Sector workers), and V.B. Rawat
In Economics, Indian society/culture, Politics and Government, Poverty in India on September 8, 2010 at 9:28 PM
STATEMENT ON THE PM’s OBSERVATION ON THE SUPREME COURT, MADE IN EDITORS’ CONFERENCE ON 6th SEPTEMBER, 2010
The Right to Food Campaign is shocked at the Prime Minister’s statement made to the editors’ conference on 6th September, 2010, stating that the Supreme Court must not interfere with policy. We are glad that the PM has finally spoken up on the food issue, as it has ended up further confirming that this Government is so completely anti-poor. We believe that when within a democracy, people use their rights which have been enshrined in the Indian Constitution – the right to life, right to freedom of speech and expression as well as right to approach courts -, the Head of the Indian Executive, does not want the fundamental right of the people to be realised, and worse, he interferes with their right to get justice!. We condemn his comments that are likely to have a cascading effect down the bureaucratic chain and may lead to questioning of judicial intervention.
While we agree that ideally the role of the Courts in policy making should be limited but the citizens have a right to approach the Supreme Court in situations like the present scenario when the Executive has failed to ensure that the rights of people are protected. The Government has failed to ensure that
nobody ever goes to sleep hungry,
mothers don’t have to teach their children how to live with hunger,
hunger and starvation never happens,
not a single grain is wasted due to poor management of the food economy,
malnutrition in tribal and dalit children is prevented and deaths of infants due to malnutrition never happens,
no woman suffers from anemia,
the old and the vulnerable, the destitutes are not left to die lonely deaths,
children are provided with midday meals in school and under six children in anganwadi centres of the ICDS,
Dalit children get a meal with dignity and that there is no discrimination in the appointment of Dalit and Tribal cooks in the mid day meal scheme.
food is available in the market at affordable prices
It is indeed ironic that while the same Prime Minister treated the delay in preparations for the Commonwealth Games as an emergency, the response to the hunger situation in the country is yet to come.
The PUCL, Rajasthan filed a case (Civil Writ Petition 196/200) in the Supreme Court in 2001 demanding accountability from the state for persisting hunger and starvation in the country. The initial order in this case clearly lays out the perspective with which the Supreme Court has been intervening on this matter by stating that, “The anxiety of the Court is to see that the poor and the destitute and the weaker sections do not suffer from hunger and starvation. The prevention of the same is one of the prime responsibilities of the Government – whether Central or the State. How this is to be ensured would be a matter of policy which is best left to the government. All that the Court has to be satisfied and which it may have to ensure is that the foodgrains which are overflowing in the storage receptacles, especially of FCI godown, and which are in abundance, should not be wasted by dumping into the sea or eaten by rats. Mere schemes without any implementation are of no use. What is important is that the food must reach the Hungry.” (Order dated 20th August 2001).
The fact that this Case has been continuing for nine long years in spite of more than 50 operative orders by the Supreme Court and more than 10 reports filed by the Supreme Court Commissioners shows the failure of successive Governments in eradicating hunger and starvation from the country.
The Prime Minister must realise that people are forced to approach the Courts when there is such abdication of responsibility by the elected Government and it is the democratic function of the Supreme Court to respond to such appeals for protection of rights provided in the Constitution. Had the government made its own policy on universalisation of ICDS, there would be no need for the order of December 2006 directing governments to set up anganwadi centres in all habitations and to reach out to all young children. Similarly, had the government made its own policy to prevent deaths of homeless persons during the severe winter, the Supreme Court would not have had to ‘interfere’ and direct states to provide shelters to homeless people (January 2010). Had the government dealt with the leakages in PDS, then there would be no reason for the Supreme Court to set up a Central Vigilance Committee to look into the functioning of PDS and suggest reforms (July 2006). Had the Government ensured that there was no corruption in the supply of food for children, the Supreme Court would not have to say that private contractors must be banned from supply for nutrition supplements (October 2004). Had the Governments ensured that their own policy of providing 35kgs of foodgrains per month for BPL families was implemented, there would be no need for the Supreme Court to give the order that the entitlement of BPL families to 35kgs a month must be protected (January 2008).
These are just to name a few instances where the Court has had to intervene to protect peoples’ right to food since 2004 when the UPA I came into power.
The Prime Minister must realise that boasting about being the second fastest growing economy in a context where two thirds of our women are anemic, half the children are malnourished, almost one-third of adult men and women have a low body mass index, our malnutrition rates are higher than in some of the war-torn countries of Africa and India ranks 66 out of 88 countries by the Global Hunger Index, is like the Emperor Without Clothes.
In a situation where we are concerned about insufficient production of foodgrains, declining production of pulses and stagnant oilseed production, to suggest to the editors that the only way to ensure poverty alleviation is “for more people to be taken out of agriculture” is blasphemous. The Prime Minister’s concern seems to be more towards expanding the reach of the corporates rather than protecting the livelihoods of more than 60% of our population who depend on agriculture.
The Prime Minister ought to understand the spirit in which the Supreme Court’s remark on distributing foodgrains was made. Letting grains rot when there are so many people in the country who are hungry is immoral and cannot be justified.
The Right to Food campaign reiterates that the excess grains lying with the FCI must be immediately distributed by expanding the AAY to include all the vulnerable groups such as landless labourers, small and marginal farmers, slum dwellers, daily wagers in rural and urban areas, etc identified by the Government of India as per its own order on AAY issued in 2004 and by universalizing the PDS in at least the 150 poorest districts (that were identified for the National Food for Work Programme).
Further, we must move towards a Universal Public Distribution System along with putting in place mechanisms for incentivising agriculture, decentralised procurement, local storage, inclusive distribution and criminalizing neglect relating to hunger as it is no different from abetting homicide. In a context where the tax foregone (waived) by the Central Government on Corporate Income Tax, Personal Income Tax, Excise and Customs was Rs.5,02,299 crores in 2009-10 (79.54% of the aggregate tax collection); there can be no excuse to not spend on a universal PDS.
We are,
the Steering group of the Right to Food Campaign
Annie Raja (National Federation for Indian Women), Anuradha Talwar (New Trade Union Initiative), Arun Gupta (Breast Feeding Promotion Network of India), Arundhati Dhuru (National People’s Movement of India), Ashok Bharti (National Confederation Of Dalit Organisations), Anjali Bhardwaj and Nikhil Dey (National Campaign for People’s Right to Information), Asha Mishra and Vinod Raina (Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti), Colin Gonsalves (Human Rights Law Network), Kavita Srivastava (People’s Union for Civil Liberties), Mira Shiva and Vandana Prasad (Jan Swasthya Abhiyan), Paul Diwakar (National Campaign for Dalit Human Rights), Subhash Bhatnagar (National Campaign Committee for Unorganized Sector workers), and V.B. Rawat
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)