NCTC: Congress gives terror plan a quiet burial

With home minister Sushilkumar Shinde saying that the government will not bring a Bill on the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) in Parliament it is almost certain that it is curtains on P Chidambaram’s proposal for an integrated counter-terrorism centre. The main reason cited for not pursuing the NCTC idea is that there has been vehement opposition to the centre from various chief ministers. What seems to have turned the tide against the move was the opposition from Congress chief ministers. The June 5 chief minister’s meeting on internal security highlighted one crucial aspect that when it comes to matters regarding internal security there is no cohesion between the Centre and states. The Mumbai 26/11 attacks and the many other attacks that followed exposed, beyond doubt, the gaping holes in India’s security network. With the May 25 Maoist attack still fresh in the mind it was hoped that states, looking beyond federalist confines, would come together to address some of the pressing internal security problems India is facing today.
Law and order is a state subject and state governments fear that the proposed NCTC will compromise the existing structure and give the Centre superseding powers tampering the current autonomy they enjoy. The National Intelligence Grid (NatGRID), meant for gathering intelligence from various sources, was opposed for privacy violations and safety of information. Even the Multi-Agency Centre (MAC), which was praised by Shinde at the June 5 meeting, hasn’t been fully operational. The Crime and Criminal Tracking Network System (CCTNS) is yet to take off. More than a dozen chief ministers expressed their reservations and even after the government proposed a watered-down NCTC, after agreeing to keep it out of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and curtailing its power to make arrests, there seems to be not many takers. These also included Maharashtra chief minister Prithviraj Chavan and recently elected Karnataka chief minister Siddaramaiah.
In the territorial wrangles between different states and the Centre, the point politicians miss is that the extremist forces, both within and outside the country, do not factor state boundaries —they use it to their advantage, and make the most of a dithering government. For any tangible progress to be made, a co-ordinated approach is required in which all states are equal stakeholders. The Centre and states should come together and form a comprehensive plan to tackle terror. The communion between agencies will have to be in tandem with more intelligence gathering at the ground level. Even for a proposal like the NCTC to make a difference, there is a need for getting more forces that can gather information at the ground level and hawk-eyed surveillance wherever possible. Unless such progress is made, for which greater political will is required from all parties, the government will still fail to protect its citizens.

RTI: Politicians don't want you to see through them

Mention transparency in public life and one is reminded of Justice Louis Brandeis’ quote that “sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants…” Our political leaders, however, seem to disagree. Their opposition to the ruling of the full bench of the Central Information Commission, placing six political parties under the purview of the Right to Information Act, is proof. The move to bring parties under the RTI is a great step towards ensuring transparency and thereby reducing corruption involving politicians. Contrary to the view held by the parties, the country’s transparency watchdog opined that parties are public bodies as they are allotted prime property at concessional rates and get free air time on the public broadcast platforms of All India Radio and Doordarshan. The parties — the Congress, the BJP, the Nationalist Congress Party, the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the CPI and the Bahujan Samaj Party — have been given six weeks to appoint public information officers who will reply to RTI queries.
It is too early to call the judgement a watershed moment that will lead to a reduction of corruption because the six political parties can challenge the ruling in a high court. And the government on Tuesday said that it will approach the high court on the CIC judgement. The JD(U), which is not one of the six parties, has reacted sharply with its president Sharad Yadav saying that the move is not justified and that “political parties are not shops”. The CPI(M) has also rejected the CIC order. The BJP has said they prefer a larger debate on the issue and the ruling Congress has called it an “adventurist” approach and that it will “create a lot of harm and damage to democratic institutions”. Interestingly, the Trinamool Congress has welcomed the CIC order. The fear expressed by parties that they will be flooded with RTI applications on sundry issues is misplaced as the law does not give blanket powers and has sufficient safeguards to deny frivolous requests.
Parties that find this objectionable and suggest that such a move will hamper their free functioning fail to explain how such a moves have led to greater accountability, and thereby better performance, by political parties in many democracies in the West. In the United States, Britain and Canada, to name a few, disclosure laws make it mandatory for political parties to make public all financial details. In this context it should be mentioned that though a relatively newer political party, the Aam Aadmi Party has been more upfront about its means of funding. The question that begs to be asked is: If there is nothing to hide, why fear the RTI?

Lingerie Mannequins: BMC gets its knickers in a twist

Banning, it seems, is the easiest option for many in India. Reinforcing this view is the latest decision of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) which unanimously decided to ban mannequins that display lingerie items. Lingerie mannequins, according to the Ghatkopar corporator, Ritu Tawade, who proposed the ban, are “corrupting the minds of people and are against the morals of the society”. How Ms Tawade came to such a conclusion is not clear but she seems to have a lot of people agreeing with her, including the Mumbai mayor. There have been earlier instances of bans being resorted to when an unorthodox view was expressed: be it the banning of literature and art, banning of movies, etc. Rather than having an informed debate and seeking a public consensus on ways of improving a situation when there are conflicting views about a particular subject, the shortcut of banning everything does not fit the mould of propriety that societal norms set.
Circumventing or postponing tough decisions are not the sign of a good leader. Our authorities, it seems, do not believe in this. While banning does not address the problem, it certainly does exaggerate the pretence of action being undertaken by the authorities concerned. When it comes to bans, authorities, in government or ‘protectors of Indian culture’, are often at the forefront. If it is the safety and security of women that the authorities have in mind while taking these ludicrous decisions, they would do better by focusing more on improving the law and order situation in the country. If authorities hope to instil a respect for women with such a move, it should be remembered that bans do not ensure or enable gender justice.
If more people start to see reason in the flawed arguments put forward by the likes of Tawade, soon the sculptures and paintings in the Ajanta and Ellora caves and the Khajuraho temples will be portrayed in a more ‘descent’ way that will not lead to the ‘pollution of the minds’ of people who see it. And what a tragedy that would be.

AFSPA: It’s time J&K was shown some dignity

 Good news, even if a bit belated, can bring smiles and ignite hopes, especially if it comes from Jammu & Kashmir. State Congress chief Saifuddin Soz’s statement that it was time the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) was revoked from parts of the state is one such news. He was addressing an All India Mahila Congress workers meeting in Srinagar. Soz’s statement gains importance as it is the first time the Congress has openly stated willingness to consider revoking the AFSPA. The National Conference, with which the Congress has allied to form the government in the state, has been calling for a rollback of the Act since 2011. J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah has the option of calling the Unified Command Headquarters to take the Army and other intelligence groups into confidence for facilitating such a move. He has assured to take up the matter with the prime minister and home minister at the June 5 internal security meeting in New Delhi. Though security is still a concern in many parts of the state, especially with incursions and disturbances at the border yet to calm, the state government feels that there are many areas in which the draconian law — as it is often referred to because of the unbridled powers it gives the Indian armed forces — can be revoked. This is a sentiment that has found resonance with the people of the state and many human rights organisations.
The Act was invoked in Jammu & Kashmir in 1990 at a time when militancy was at its peak. But with successful elections and greater power given to local bodies, things have changed over the years. With general elections a year away the chorus for revoking the AFSPA from J&K has gained ground and is expected to be an issue that political parties will take up during their election campaign. Omar Abdullah has been a prominent leader who has openly expressed displeasure with the Act not being revoked by the Centre. However, irrespective of whether political parties try to gain mileage from the issue or not, there is a strong case for the Centre, and the Army, to look into the request.
However, New Delhi cannot, and should not, take a call on the revoking of the Act depending on the political situation in Pakistan. The government, both at the Centre and the state level, in consultation with the Army, should take measured steps that will both win the confidence of the people and also ensure that peace and stability is maintained and further strengthened. The partial revoking of the AFSPA from certain areas in J&K will be a step in the right direction. In addition to this, the government should bring development to the state and involve an otherwise disenfranchised youth of J&K to be part of India’s growth story.

Lone wolf terror: More potent than Al-Qaeda

A video grab of the Woolwich killer

 Just when world nations had thought that they had seen the worst of terrorism and were devising ways to check and tackle it, comes an offshoot of terrorism that is frighteningly hard to detect and contain given its nascent and localised nature. ‘Lone wolf’ terrorism, in which an individual or a small group of people, after being influenced by extremist views, decide to attack, has been on a steady rise over the years. The Woolwich attack, in which two radicalised Britons of Nigerian origin attacked and killed a British soldier, shook the world because of the gory nature of the crime. What came as more shocking was the motive behind the crime: the two ideologically motivated youth were protesting British military action in Muslim countries.

Anders Breivik

Faisal Shahzad

The Woolwich incident is not a one off case. Right from Norway where Anders Breivik gunned down more than 80 youngsters to Faisal Shahzad’s failed attempt to bomb Times Square in 2010 to Fort Hood where Nidal Malik Hassan gunned down 13 people in 2009 till the recent Boston marathon bombings where two radicalised youth to used a pressure cookers to kill three and injure more than 250 people, all these examples prove that these lone wolves can be as potent and dangerous as organised groups. Two main reasons for a sprout of such attacks is the increasing difficulty in organising a 9/11 type of organised, large-scale attacks and a growing access to radical views on different platforms: be it on the Internet, educational institutions, etc.
These developments, though not taking place in India, have a bearing on India and should catch the attention of New Delhi. India is not immune to terror attacks. India has been a victim of the various hues of terrorism and has at times been successful in tackling it. However, New Delhi is yet to come up with a comprehensive strategy to tackle terror. More often than not it has been a piecemeal approach of gathering scattered bits of information after there has been an attack. With Internet and information technology penetration increasing throughout India, the law enforcement agencies must be on top of the job when it comes to surveillance of online activity. More manpower and technology should be dedicated for this purpose. If we fail to heed this wakeup call it will be too late before we get our act together.

Jessica Lall case: Perjury and witness protection again

The Delhi high court on Wednesday ordered model-turned-actor Shayan Munshi and ballistics expert Prem Sagar Manocha, witnesses in the Jessica Lall murder case who turned hostile, be tried for perjury under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court observed that Munshi’s backtracking had prima facie amounted to ‘helping the accused’. If found guilty the duo could face up to seven years in prison. The court’s observation is important as it may act as a deterrent for witnesses in future cases. There are previous instances where witnesses have backtracked. In 1999, Sanjeev Nanda driving his luxury car hit and killed six people, including three policemen. Later in court the sole survivor turned hostile stating that it could have been a truck that hit them. In the Best Bakery case, Zahira Sheikh, who was a key witness to the attack that killed 14 Muslims, repeatedly changed her statements prompting the courts to jail her for 15 months in total for perjury.

Shayan Munshi

Another, and important, aspect is the Delhi high court asking the Delhi government to come with a ‘witness protection policy’ within 10 weeks. Such a policy is important because trials prolong over a long period and witnesses, either through threats or inducements, change their stance in court. But this is not the first time the government has been asked by the judiciary to bring in an effective witness protection policy. In 2003, in the wake of the Nitish Katara case, the Delhi high court had issued guidelines for witness protection and in 2012 the Bombay high court, while passing a judgment on the Best Bakery case, pushed for an effective witness protection programme. While the law ministry has expressed its willingness to incorporate a witness protection mechanism into the criminal justice system, tangible action is yet to be seen. And that seems to be the issue stopping an effective witness protection programme — it is a legislative failure which no amount of judicial intervention can address.
Witnesses turning hostile are a setback for any case, but more importantly if trials are to stretch over years and even decades, it can affect the recollection and statements given by the witnesses. A quicker justice system and an effective witness protection programme are essential to ensure that such instances are checked.

Four years of UPA2: Where's the party tonight?

Photo by AP

The Congress-led UPA, which completed four years into its second term, may not be popping open champagne bottles but it deserves a pat on the back. In an era of coalition politics, where national parties have lost ground and have been confined to regional pockets of power, and where regional parties have had a field day at the national level, it is no mean task to complete nine years in power. Riding on the success of schemes like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, the Right to Information Act and the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan implemented in its first term, in its second term the UPA continues to keep the momentum. The government has been able to maintain a respectable financial atmosphere at a time when economies around the world are struggling in the red, though a lot more needs to be done to ensure that the economy does not slip any further and improves, like giving a push for industry and opening the economy further. Under the UPA 2 poverty figures have fallen from 37.2% in 2004-05 to 29.8% in 2009-10. By the execution of Ajmal Kasab and Afzal Guru the government has sent a strong message that it is not a soft power and that there is no compromise on national security. On the foreign policy front it is a mixed bag. New Delhi’s handling of Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives could have been better. However, in its dealing with China and Afghanistan the government has shown great finesse. India has shown great resolve in maintaining political and economic interests with Myanmar, Vietnam and even Japan, while at the same time not straining its ties with China.

There are many things that the UPA could have done differently to avert the negative criticism it is receiving. A bolder and more aggressive prime minister — much like the Manmohan Singh during the Indo-US nuclear deal — would have helped evade much of this criticism. The government seems to have been plagued by allegations of corruption and just when it tides over one scam it is greeted by another. Also a part of the perceived failure of the UPA 2, and an issue the BJP is highlighting as the government’s failure, comes from the government’s inability to pass important Bills such as the food security Bill and the land acquisition Bill. However, if the UPA government has not been able to table the Bills in Parliament it was mainly because opposition parties, headed by the BJP, resorted to frequent disruption of proceedings. The mulish stubbornness of the opposition saw the last two sessions of parliament going virtually without any business done. The principal opposition is the government-in-waiting — a fact the BJP seems to have forgot. While the BJP has been vitriolic on its attack on the PM and has taken great pains to tar the government black, it has failed to suggest measures it would take in the event of the party comes to power in the next general elections.
While the opposition aided by an alert media have been quick to highlight the pitfalls of the government — and they have rightly done so, the government has failed to go to the people with its positive steps it has initiated over the years.