Is Supreme Court trying to redeem itself?

Internal Emergency declared by Indira Gandhi was upheld as lawful by the Supreme Court and was welcomed by vast sections of non-political citizens as a welcome relief from anti-social elements keen on spreading chaos and disorder. Indians lost their freedom of expression. Yet they were happy that a sense of order was getting restored. As it was said both thankfully and sarcastically, "trains started running on time."

Emergency was misused by unconstitutional elements like Sanjay Gandhi to impose their writ on the nation. Millions who had earlier welcomed Emergency got disenchanted and threw Indira Gandhi out of power. Emergency was justified as a welcome tool to fight disorder. It was, however, used as an unwelcome  instrument to oppose dissent.

Now the Maharashtra government has arrested a few individuals who are allegedly supporters of Naxalism, a violent movement against the state. Government could not produce any detail which would warrant arrest when the matter was taken up in the Supreme Court by Romila Thapar and others. In the normal course, the petition would have been dismissed as the petitioners are not the alleged victims and the latter had already approached some High Courts. The Supreme Court which is hailed as a 'sentinel on the qui vive' (regrettably, wrongly) probably saw this as an opportunity to rid itself of the slur as the defender of Emergency and started hearing the petition. Governmental sloppiness in presenting relevant materials forced the court to adjourn the hearing to next week.

It is hoped that the Supreme Court will hear the petition and come to a conclusion based solely on merits of law without being under an obligation to disabuse itself of the notorious appellation earned during the Emergency. The Court has to defend the law and not necessarily its image. Image is fickle. Rule of Law has to be sustained. The alibi that the alleged criminals are intellectuals and therefore the charges are false is irrelevant.

This is not the first time that some of these alleged criminals like Vara Vara Rao are arrested. It is equally amusing that they have not been convicted in any case so far. Is the government paranoid or simply sloppy in its prosecution?

Risk Management and Leadership

Careers of Paresh Sukthankar and Nachiket Mor lend themselves to an interesting comparative study.

Both rose up the corporate ladder at a young age. Both are deemed experts in Risk Management. Both quit their positions in giant banks when they were about to be considered for elevation to the corner office.

Though we may never know why they made unexpected departure, we may engage ourselves in some guesses.  Were they given hints that they were not suitable for CEO position? Is relentless focus on risk mitigation a minus point for aspiring CEOs?

Perhaps more probably, their obsession with business risks made them develop cold feet when it was time to don the leadership mantle.

Karunanidhi: Self-made, strong-willed and self-centred

Call him Dakshinamurthy (his original name) or Karunanidhi. Both names fit him to a T. He was one of the most popular leaders in the south and among the South (North-South divide in terms of economic disparity.) He was compassionate towards the downtrodden and the marginalised.

He did not have parental support, unlike his children or grandchildren , to lend him a hand either in politics or in filmdom. He did not have a godfather to proffer preferential treatment to him in cinematic or literary or political world.

His determination to succeed was phenomenal. After Annadorai's untimely demise, he rode roughshod over Nedunchezhian and Anbazhagan to seize control of the party and ministry. Neither Navalar nor Perasiriar was any match to him in scheming or steely determination to capture power. Kalaignar was totally result-oriented. He proved to be a capable administrator and a convincing speaker. His letters to his 'udanpirappu' in Murasoli were a delight to anyone interested in Tamil. His interpretation of Thiruvalluvar's masterpiece written as 'Kuraloviyam' was creative though many would disagree with his views.

He was self-centred to the hilt. When the Congress leaders wanted to bury Kamaraj at the Marina, he denied permission as Chief Minister. He would have thought, "If I permit Kamaraj, where would I go and rest?" He would scarcely have thought that two other equally popular leaders - MGR and Kalaignar's bete-noire, Jayalalitha - would precede him in occupying the Marina.

The TamilNadu government was against his burial at the Marina. The Madras High Court in a hasty judgement that has less to do with law and more to do with the anxiety to ensure law and order vetoed the government decision.

There was no doubt about his popularity and his ability to nurture the DMK. However, his self-centredness arrested the continued growth of his party. He did not mind losing Vaiko when he was at his best from the party because Vaiko was a threat  to Stalin. He wanted his family members to lead the party.

Politics will be less colourful with his demise. Tamil enthusiasts have lost a mesmerising orator.

Director remuneration

Shareholders are becoming increasingly sensitive to payment of exorbitant commission and sitting fees to non-executive directors and unconscionably high salaries to executive directors. Shareholders' ire is reflected in the questions raised by them in AGMs.

In the case of IDFC Bank, many shareholders pointed out that enhancing the already high remuneration to directors especially when the company's performance is deteriorating does not make sense. Rajiv B Lall, the Managing Director, responded that he would take what the shareholders permitted. It was not clear whether this was a smart response to silence the vocal and helpless shareholders or a serious and well-meaning response. This was not tested by any shareholder.

Some shareholders suggested that directors on their own should cut down payment to themselves without any prompt from shareholders. Of course, it was all a drama. There was no impact. Accountability of directors, executive or non-executive, continues to be a myth in India.