Wednesday, September 30, 2020

The Babri Masjid judgement

 At last, the CBI court has given its verdict. It has acquitted the accused who were alleged to be responsible for demolition of the Masjid. The court has been unequivocal in declaring that there was neither any criminal conspiracy nor any planning by the accused for demolition.

It is easy to fault any judgement; it becomes easier if one has not read any part of the judgement. It seems that ignorance about any judgement gives one the inalienable right to denounce it outright. It has now become the habit of  political parties to condemn any inconvenient judgement as repugnant to law. These parties assume they are always on the right side of law and therefore any judicial decision not acceptable to them is prima facie defective.

Sitaram Yechury wonders how the Masjid could self-implode. The verdict clearly says that the demolition was the handiwork of some miscreants who were not the persons who are accused. His trick is to put words in the mouth of the judge and then criticise the judgement for what it does not say. This is not expected of a seasoned leader.

Randeep Singh Surjewala is more understandable. Any judgement that does not criticise his party's antagonists is ipso facto incorrect. He argues that this judgement is contrary to a pronouncement of the Supreme Court. What did the SC say? It said that the demolition was an egregious violation of the rule of law. The present judgement accepts this and goes on to conclude that the culprits are different; they are not the accused in this case.

The judge of the CBI court has delivered a reasoned verdict. Unfortunately, in our present scheme of things , he will get pilloried because he has been reasonable. It is now open season for unfair criticism of any fair judgement.

Sunday, September 27, 2020

Protests against Farm Bills

 The Farm Bills have now received presidential assent and therefore have become Acts. However, the protests against the Bills are continuing. Remarkably there is similarity between these protests and those against Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). Both protests are anticipatory in nature.

The CAA does not adversely affect the interests of Muslims who are citizens of India. Yet, a canard was spread that the CAA was anti-Muslim. A fear was created that this was a prelude to an attack on Indian Muslims. Similarly, the Farm Bills are not against the interests of farmers. Despite this, the farmers are egged on to protest. An impression is sought to be created that the government will, in future, abandon APMC and MSP. The charade is complete in Bihar where the RJD is protesting 'to safeguard farmers' interests' though Bihar is one of the three states which do not follow the APMC system at all (the others are Kerala and Manipur.)

The Bills widen the scope of marketing for agricultural products. This can be pernicious only in the wild paranoid imagination of politicians. Only 6% of farmers sell their crops at MSP rates. The main benefit of sales in APMC mandi yards is reaped by the arhatiyas or commission agents who play multiple roles as brokers, money lenders, guides etc.

The incomes of arhatiyas will be reduced in case APMC becomes more unpopular. The farmers are in the stranglehold of arhatiyas and therefore easily misguided by them. The stranglehold of these middlemen can be loosened only if the commercial / rural banks come forward to lend more and on time to small and marginal farmers.

Sales in APMC mandis are subject to payment of taxes and commission. Therefore, sales outside the mandis are advantageous to the farmers. One of these Acts facilitates contract farming. A bogey is created that the farmers will become slaves of corporates. On the contrary, the farmers will benefit from R & D of corporates and enhanced certainty of offtake.

It is easy to torpedo any attempts at reform. The politicians will render good service to the nation if they realise that their role is not to oppose any sensible move by the government.

Thursday, September 24, 2020

Religious tolerance

 In the Sudarshan TV case, the Supreme Court has observed, "A message should go out to the media that it cannot make a religious minority the target of its attacks. The dignity of a community is as important as journalistic freedom." This is indeed a sober advice that cannot be faulted except that it seems to excuse targeted attacks on the majority community.

In an intervention application, Sashi Kumar of Asianet has claimed that hate speech in media should not be allowed to be disguised as free speech or religious freedom by majoritarian forces. Do only majoritarian forces indulge in hate speech? 

It is necessary for institutions and individuals to observe neutrality and to abstain from demonising either the majority or a minority. Targeting either is equally nefarious.

Sunday, September 06, 2020

The Hindu's Success

I have been a reader of The Hindu ever since boyhood. The newspaper helped me to cultivate interest in reading. Its editorials and articles have always fascinated me. 

I also have a nostalgic thankfulness to The Hindu. While I was in school, I was awarded the first prize in an elocution competition conducted by the Mylapore Academy. In a way this was unfair because another competitor spoke much better and the audience rightly expected him to get the first prize. That was my expectation too. During my talk, I referred to a leader piece in The Hindu and this obviously tilted the scales in my favour. A sub-editor of The Hindu was a judge in the panel! I felt guilty and pacified myself thinking that that is how life is. (The speaker who must have won the prize is Dr.G.S.Kailash who is presently a chest physician and a popular public speaker on health-related issues.)

So my delight knew no bounds when The Hindu claimed on May 12, 2020 that it is the fastest growing English daily in India. It added 4,61,000 readers nationally in Q4 of the calendar year 2019. This count was 1,03,000 more than what Times of India could achieve. 

However, my delight was deflated when I read what the Social Affairs Editor, G.Sampath has written today. He writes that five qualities are necessary for success in the world. What are they?

1) Hate: The Hindu's hatred for our prime minister is phenomenal.

2) Lie: The daily's false stories about the Rafale purchase cannot be forgotten.

3) Cheating: The newspaper's propensity to ignore anything positive about its bete-noire is well known.

4) Ability to bully the weak: The newspaper bullies and gets bullied too. This is not surprising because the country it admires most is the world's most powerful bully. 

5) Toadying up to the powerful: This is second nature to the newspaper. Till 2014, the daily excelled in this attribute. It bent over backwards during the emergency days when The Indian Express displayed its spine.

Thank you Mr. Sampath for your unintended explanation.