Editorial, "SAAHASA LAKSHMI PASSES AWAY," in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 31 July 2012 issue (Vol. 8, Part 2, No. 14)

SAHASA LAKSHMI PASSES AWAY

The springing tigress of the Azad Hind Fauz (INA) is no more amidst us. One of the loyal aides of Netaji’s stupendous effort to free the country by armed struggle and war from outside the borders, she was humane to the core and an able, kind-hearted physician. A faithful partner of Colonel Sahgal, of the same INA fame, and an affectionate mother to Subhashini Ali and Anisa, she always held the whole world a family and assiduously worked in her clinic for the cure and alleviation of health problems and social miseries of the poor people. She was quite vocal and steadfast in her politics and pedagogy of the oppressed and that was what brought her into the communist movement. Even so, she was never, to our knowledge, a doctrinaire, authoritarian party-boss but an affectionate and helpful guide to several young and active militants working for the cause of socialism and democracy. Her faith and confidence in the democratic destiny of the country and her devotion and commitment to the cause of the unity and integrity of the nation spurred her, at a definite juncture, to contest for the Presidency of the country locking horns with the esteemed Abdul Kalam-ji in the electoral battle and it was then that this editor wrote, “Springing tiger was the emblem of the Indian National Army led by that valiant tiger of a man, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, and his illustrious disciple, Dr. Lakshmi only inherited that ferocious grit. … Knowing full well that the odds are heavily against her, she has now sprung up like a tigress to counter the foxy maneuvers of the Indian bourgeois classes and to champion the causes and claims of the downtrodden people of India,” that “her contest itself will be more glorious than any victory” and that “One need not worry that the wall on writing is obvious and defeat is certain, for the very endeavour itself is noble to be undertaken in the spirit of Karmanyevaadhikarastae maa phaleshu kadachana {Worry not for the fruit of action, you have only right to do the action}!” She always lived, served, fought, sacrificed and ultimately breathed her last in the same spirit, leaving a huge void in the leftist political circles and profound sorrow in the hearts of all lovers of socialism and democracy. To try to emulate her example by deed would be the best possible tribute to her indeed. §§§

Editorial, "Police atrocities in political wilderness," in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 15 July 2012, Vol. 8, Part 2, No. 13 issue.

POLICE ATROCITIES IN POLITICAL WILDERNESS

 The indirect ‘spat’ between Kishore Chandra Dev, Union Tribal Minister,  and the Union Home Minister, P. Chidambaram, has laid bare the hollowness of the official claims that the 29 June 2012 raid on suspected Maoists in Bijapur district of Chattisgarh was a real encounter between armed Maoists and the CRPF and State Police. Of course, the Police insist that Maoists use people of the region as human shields while confronting the security forces and hence innocent people also do or may suffer in the process, but there are some salient norms to be followed in armed conflicts when innocent or ignorant people are used in such a manner. Reckless or ‘panicky’ firing responses are not called for in such eventualities even if the first shots may be from the rebel groups. If the police had information that Maoists are holding a meeting in a village, they should have been amply forewarned that many innocent villagers would participate in it, especially in an area claimed and unofficially recognized as a Maoist liberated area. Contrary to the claims of the Director General of CRPF that the police conducted themselves with extreme restraint and the backing by Mr. Raman, Chief Minister of Chattisgarh, that it was a real encounter in which people could have suffered due to the human shield tactics of the Maoists, we find the firing being wild and jumpy with even women and children killed in its course. Though Kishore Chandra Dev has tried to downplay their internal differences saying he acted according to ‘the inputs he got’ and the Home Minister as per ‘information he got’, the conduct of the Home Minister is hasty, cold and totally unjustified. The callousness of the bureaucracy in the entire affair is truly revolting. And we do agree with Swami Agnivesh that the Prime Minister should rise to the occasion and apologize – at least for the deaths of innocent women and children and duly compensate them. The Judicial enquiry ordered may bring out the real facts and reasons for this gory killing but there is urgent need to curb the ‘panic reflexes’ and ‘trigger happiness’ of the police forces also. Finally, this acute armed conflict should be viewed more as a socio-economic problem to be solved than a mere law and order or security concern to be overcome by the use of superior armed force §§§

Editorial, "Whither Sustainable Development?" in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 30 June 2012, Vol. 8, Part 1, No. 12 issue

WHITHER SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT?

 Is it the ‘Future we want’ – as the final document passed in the Rio+20 Earth Summit attended by about 100 Heads of State and Government and others in the largest ever organized environmental conference, emphasizing the goal of sustainable development asserts – that matters, or does it amount only to the ‘Future we bought’ as lampooned and torn to pieces by protesting social activists outside the main conference on 22 June 2012, and deserves to be condemned by all protagonists of equitable eco-friendly development. We too are not happy with the progress in inches projected by this document while people need to swiftly traverse miles and miles for effective remedy of ages-old injustices and injuries against the ‘commons’. Truly, the outcome of this much vaunted conference is “nothing but a political surrender to the forces of ecological destruction that now put human civilization as we know it at stake.” Talking about ‘Green economy’ involving capitalist corporations, absence of emphasis on non-capitalist development models and allusions to ‘unsustainable consumption and production patterns’ etc. only aggravate further the current globalized capitalist depredations. Perhaps the real clue lies, as one astute eco-critic (Rikard Warlenius) contends, in recognizing the ‘ecological debt’ owed by the affluent North to the deprived South. As he rightly says, “From colonial days until today, raw materials and energy from the South and the global commons, as well as their sink capacities, have been expropriated for the social metabolism of the North without properly compensating material losses, ecological degradation, labor and lost development opportunities. This has been crucial for the North's ability to secure world dominance as well as welfare and prosperity for most of its citizens, while the South's efforts to catch up constantly have been undermined. The ecological debt is hard to measure in full extent, but attempts at quantifying one important part of it, the climate debt, show that most African countries are creditors rather than a debtors, while all Northern countries have a huge debt not only to the South, but also to future generations everywhere... This debt should be acknowledged and compensated for… While repayment of the ecological debt could and should enable (sustainable) development for those who need it most, it is also clear that the capitalist economic growth in both North and South has a very high social cost and is environmentally disastrous. In the end, a new development model is needed.” Also, “Rio de Janeiro also hosted a parallel People's Summit… [where] "green economy" was rejected for a localized economy in harmony with nature and ideals of consumerism and growth abandoned for the adoption of liberated time and basic income as a prerequisite for "good life – buen vivir" for all” – and we do approve this course. §§§

Jinhe naaz hai hind per woh kahan hai- PYASA

Editorial, WE THE DISARMED PEOPLE, in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 15 June 2012 issue, Vol. 8, Part 1, No. 11

WE THE DISARMED PEOPLE

despite the ever-recurrent demand throughout the national movement to repeal the Arms Act which the British introduced to disarm and make impotent our nation, have in our ‘wisdom’ chosen neither to repeal that Act nor to make the right to bear arms peaceably a fundamental right, as it is in the US Constitution. But that does not in any way deter the ruling classes, elite groups and criminal coteries to strut around with the show of all force of arms, so much so that every MLA or MP has or can become a chota nawab with all his armed gunmen parading at public expense and the trigger happy police too eager to fire at unarmed people protesting for various reasons at the least provocation. Traffic is at the whim and fancy of the so-called law enforcers diverted/stopped to enable such puny princes ride in joy at the cost of time and money of millions of people – all this is democracy of course with limited accountability. A learned person seriously contends on a website that right to bear arms though not specifically inscribed must be, and even is, read into the fundamental right to life under Article 21, citing some superior courts’ decisions too in support, but this editor is quite skeptical. When even a licensed revolver bearing citizen could be arrested/charged for firing joy bullets into air and the law enables or mandates to do so, and obviously that even without any harm/injury caused to anybody, and despite the existing customs in many countries, and even in states (like Bihar/Punjab) of firing into air on festive/joyous occasions {Swaggering young men shooting into the sky at weddings is part of the popular culture in rural and small-town Punjab - Tehelka}, then of what avail can this ‘reading into’ Article 21 be? This is not to lend our unqualified support to joy shooting in air but only to caution that such things have to be tackled more by persuasion/propaganda about possible/probable harm and injury to people by falling bullets than to take to hasty and nasty prosecutions to harass the citizens – that too out of considerations to irk the opposition parties, etc. More important, paying homage to Sivasagar (Com. SM recently deceased) and admiring his exquisite line that ‘the revolutionary arming the people is the poet today’ (Prajalanu sayudham chese revolutionary nedu kavi), we take this occasion to suggest that the right to bear arms peaceably needs to be constitutionally guaranteed, if only to undo the historic injustice perpetrated against us by the British as also to vindicate the fundamental rights to life and liberty of the people §§§

Editorial, "Pre-trial detention", in 15-31 May 2012 combined issue of LAW ANIMATED WORLD.

PRE-TRIAL DETENTION

has always been, and still is, quite a delicate matter, with what the well-known Telugu axiom ‘karavamante kappaku kopam, vidavamante paamuku kopam’ [‘say bite, the frog is angry; say leave, the snake is sore’] typically applying in this case between the accused/ suspects and the police/prosecuting agencies. That corruption is rampant, that the present day rulers, politicians of almost all parties, bureaucrats, generally all the well-to-do sections of our society have been primarily responsible for its unchecked growth is a matter widely recognized and rued. The persons in or aspiring for power have with their enormous clout and cunning looted the country and amassed lakhs of crores of rupees in their private coffers, transferring large portions to tax havens abroad. If only a part of those sums were to be invested for the real human development of the country, there would be no poverty, ill-health or illiteracy by now. As such the persons indulging in economic offences need to be strictly dealt with by the harsh arm of law no doubt, but there should be some reasonable norms of law even to try and punish such persons, lest the deviation/deprivation in such cases may spill over to the generality and suppress the liberties and freedoms of citizens in various other spheres too. In this context, we note that Section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 is itself skewed with the original 14 days of pre-trial detention powers of a ‘receiving’ magistrate enlarged up to 60/90 days and the provision for bail not so liberal. ‘Bail is a rule and jail to be an exception’, though parroted as salutary in the background of the fundamental principle of presumption of innocence of an accused until proved guilty, is scarcely applied in practice. Right to fair trial is not explicitly embodied in but has to be read into Articles 21 & 22 of our Constitution and the preparation of proper defence for the accused is hampered in the wake of obscurely worded provisions. It will do well to appreciate and benefit from the Article 5(3) of the European Convention on Human Rights which ordains: “Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of … this Article shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial,” and the settled law by the European Court of Human Rights that release on bail could only be denied on four salient grounds: (1) danger of accused absconding; (2) his interfering with the administration of justice (by threatening witnesses, etc.) ; (3) risk of relapse into/repetition of crime and (4) prejudice to public order, each assessed from time to time as per the facts and circumstances of each case by an impartial and independent judicial officer – since without proper freedom and facility to prepare defence the accused would indeed be denied his right to fair trial and consequently society in general would suffer. §§§

Editorial, "Employment Rights." in LAW ANIMATED WORLD, 30 April 2012 issue (Vol. 8, Part 1, No. 8):

EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS

are getting more and more constricted it seems, rather than being 

broadened, although we profess the ideal of a democratic socialist republic 

assuring social, political and economic justice, together with several 

individual liberties, to the people, at least on the paper of our Constitution. 

Though the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, as amended from time to time, is 

stated to be a social welfare legislation, made mainly to aid the working 

classes, basically its aim and object are declared as achieving industrial 

peace and creating a congenial climate to both the employers and workers. 

Also its scope is circumscribed since it only applies to the workmen as 

defined therein but not to all employees. It gives the workers several 

employment rights no doubt, but it is not an employment rights law 

proper. The remedial mechanisms created thereby are not amply efficient 

or broad in scope; the labour courts are not even declared to be courts 

proper, though high level judicial officers are sought to be placed as 

presiding officers. The greatest drawback is that even the workmen cannot 

directly approach the industrial tribunals/labour courts for many 

grievances but at the same time their approach to civil courts is subtly 

barred citing these very tribunals/labor courts as effective alternative 

remedies! In contrast, we find the government employees, doubtless a 

‘creamy layer’ among the employees, accorded Administrative Tribunals 

to which they can directly take their grievances on sundry matters – even 

such ones as stoppage of increments. It is really a strange type of socialism 

and social welfare measures prevailing in India, like relatively fat-salaried 

govt. employees being accorded concession bus passes at Rs. 200-300 per 

month while general workers/self-employed poor with low wages of 2000-

5000 p.m. are constrained to buy bus passes at Rs. 400-500 p.m., to cite just 

one example. On the eve of May Day we desire and suggest that people 

demand and fight for a change in such a woeful state of affairs and achieve 

a sound employment rights law with broad-in-scope, powerful labor courts 

for effective and expeditious redress of their many grievances. §§§