The Parliamentary Election in India in close by. The election will decide who rules the Centre. It is very natural that every single political party will try to put its best foot forward. There will be an advertisement blitz, and the media will be full of stories counting virtues and performances of one party or the other. Appeals may probably be made – directly or indirectly - on linguistic, religious and ethnic lines. Under such a scenario, how will a voter judge the suitability or otherwise of a candidate? What are the criteria the voter would determine for accepting or rejecting a candidate? Whether the political affiliation is the only factor one has to keep in mind before casting the vote? What other factors do we need to consider before we vote? What, if a candidate is suitable enough, but has been contesting as an Independent?
These are some of the very pertinent questions, a voter may justifiably ask. An attempt has therefore been made by the Jantaraj to help the voter – especially the one voting for the first time – decide his MP for the next five years. The list is only illustrative, and is not exhaustive, and as such one is free to add his own factors before making up his mind.
The first element is the candidate’s political affiliation, i.e. to determine which party has nominated him, and to study the ideologies and past performances of the party concerned. The voter has to assess his own commitments to those ideologies, and determine if the performances in the past satisfy him. He may as well find out the activities and role of the party in the backdrop of the Constitution, its people and the society at large. He should ascertain if he finds himself comfortable with these factors. It may however be clarified that the need for a political affiliation is not a mandatory requirement – the person may be as well be contesting as an independent candidate. In such a situation, the voter has to assess the candidate on the basis of his inherent qualities and virtues.
The next step would be to see that the person is the right person, and suitable for being elected as a Member of Parliament. Under this head, it has to be seen if the candidate is adequately qualified, has the right attitude, approach and temperament to represent his constituency. His honesty, integrity and dedication should be beyond question.
The accessibility of the candidate is also an important factor to be considered before casting one’s vote. If he had been an MP in the past, his record and performances – especially the way he has nourished and taken care of his constituency - should also be considered before arriving at a conclusion in this regard.
The suitability of the candidate can also be judged by looking into his past records as an individual. No one with a criminal record or of a doubtful or shady character should be able to represent your constituency. The quality of your parliamentarians will determine the efficiency of governance. One has to be careful in electing the right persons for our Parliament.
Mind it, your vote is very valuable. Further, every single vote counts. One need not therefore be casual in casting his vote. The parliamentary democracy demands that the people should cast their votes judiciously and after due thoughts.
Thanks
Editor
www.Jantaraj.com
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009
What do we do for a better India?
Hi friends, we are back again. But, this time with a different agenda, and a different issue altogether. How do we make our India a better country to live in? What changes do we need to formulate so that our people get an enriched life?
Today, we will confine our discussions on changes in regard to socio-economic issues that would make our country a better one. While India is a country of plenty with adequate resources, both natural and human, we have difficulties in fulfilling the aspirations of our citizens. No one would probably deny that the country needs directional changes. Not that we lack the will or the inclination for reformation, there is an absence of consistent and constant endeavor to go for a change. Rebuilding a nation especially on socio-economic and administrative platforms needs sincere efforts both by the Government and the society at large. It is certainly not the task of the Government alone.
There are multiple areas that need special attention for bringing about social transformation and administrative reforms. While it may not be possible to enumerate or go for all of them in one go, we may nevertheless take up some of the major issues on a priority. The first and a very important step would be to bring in greater public accountability and higher level of transparency for a corruption-free society. The Right to Information Act is a step in right direction that could prove effective against many of our ills, more specifically the lethargic approach, corruption and nepotism in administration. It has unfortunately made marginal impact on account of factors like general ignorance, lack of awareness and poor publicity. This area needs to be geared up through periodical advertisements, personal contacts and other means for better effectiveness. A ‘zero tolerance’ attitude against corruption has to be cultivated in the country. Legislation alone has done little in eradicating the menace, and so a mass movement is the need of the hour for identifying corruption-prone areas, and exposing those – officials and politicians - indulging in corrupt practices. Those suspected to be involved in corruption should quietly be shifted to non-critical areas and watched over a period of time. A greater degree of transparency in work-culture will surely put a brake to this malady.
The Consumer Rights movements have not picked up fast enough. Despite several legislations against misleading and grossly inflated claims on consumer products, there is still a flourishing market of fake and substandard items of all hues. The number of Consumer Courts has to be increased, and the consumers should be educated to bring up cases of infringement of their rights on their own without having to go through the tedious process of hiring a lawyer.
The need of the hour is to have a responsive administration. The Police have to work with two faces – they need to be harsh to criminals while helpful and friendly to a law-abiding ordinary citizen. A people-friendly police officer may also be assigned the role of a public relations officer at each Police Station. Police public coordination committees may also be considered on a permanent footing. A high-handed Police force may not be well-equipped to deal with the present-day law and order situation, while a friendly, even-handed and intelligent officer may do miracles. The Police should be trained to have an accommodating attitude, especially in regard to the poor and the down-trodden, and remain unbiased and objective in its dealings with the public. The force should necessarily be free from interferences from politicians, high and mighty.
The criminal justice system needs to be more responsive and rationale. The maxim of ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ looks all the more meaningful in the backdrop of hardened criminals getting bails easily while those with minor offenses staying behind bars as under-trials for years. Justice should not only be done, but should also seem to be done.
Last but not the least, the country should have adequate legislation to put a total ban on divisive politics, hate speeches and moral policing. Those indulging in these activities need to be strictly dealt with. Nationalism and love for the country cannot be a monopoly for only one section of the populace. Whether it is terrorism or communal flare-up, the administration has to be swift in taking strict action notwithstanding the stature of the persons involved.
These are some of the thoughts in regard to enriching the lives of our people. What more do we need to do? Our readers are invited to offer their views and comments, so that the forum could be useful and rewarding.
Jai Hind.
Editor
www.Jantaraj.com
Today, we will confine our discussions on changes in regard to socio-economic issues that would make our country a better one. While India is a country of plenty with adequate resources, both natural and human, we have difficulties in fulfilling the aspirations of our citizens. No one would probably deny that the country needs directional changes. Not that we lack the will or the inclination for reformation, there is an absence of consistent and constant endeavor to go for a change. Rebuilding a nation especially on socio-economic and administrative platforms needs sincere efforts both by the Government and the society at large. It is certainly not the task of the Government alone.
There are multiple areas that need special attention for bringing about social transformation and administrative reforms. While it may not be possible to enumerate or go for all of them in one go, we may nevertheless take up some of the major issues on a priority. The first and a very important step would be to bring in greater public accountability and higher level of transparency for a corruption-free society. The Right to Information Act is a step in right direction that could prove effective against many of our ills, more specifically the lethargic approach, corruption and nepotism in administration. It has unfortunately made marginal impact on account of factors like general ignorance, lack of awareness and poor publicity. This area needs to be geared up through periodical advertisements, personal contacts and other means for better effectiveness. A ‘zero tolerance’ attitude against corruption has to be cultivated in the country. Legislation alone has done little in eradicating the menace, and so a mass movement is the need of the hour for identifying corruption-prone areas, and exposing those – officials and politicians - indulging in corrupt practices. Those suspected to be involved in corruption should quietly be shifted to non-critical areas and watched over a period of time. A greater degree of transparency in work-culture will surely put a brake to this malady.
The Consumer Rights movements have not picked up fast enough. Despite several legislations against misleading and grossly inflated claims on consumer products, there is still a flourishing market of fake and substandard items of all hues. The number of Consumer Courts has to be increased, and the consumers should be educated to bring up cases of infringement of their rights on their own without having to go through the tedious process of hiring a lawyer.
The need of the hour is to have a responsive administration. The Police have to work with two faces – they need to be harsh to criminals while helpful and friendly to a law-abiding ordinary citizen. A people-friendly police officer may also be assigned the role of a public relations officer at each Police Station. Police public coordination committees may also be considered on a permanent footing. A high-handed Police force may not be well-equipped to deal with the present-day law and order situation, while a friendly, even-handed and intelligent officer may do miracles. The Police should be trained to have an accommodating attitude, especially in regard to the poor and the down-trodden, and remain unbiased and objective in its dealings with the public. The force should necessarily be free from interferences from politicians, high and mighty.
The criminal justice system needs to be more responsive and rationale. The maxim of ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ looks all the more meaningful in the backdrop of hardened criminals getting bails easily while those with minor offenses staying behind bars as under-trials for years. Justice should not only be done, but should also seem to be done.
Last but not the least, the country should have adequate legislation to put a total ban on divisive politics, hate speeches and moral policing. Those indulging in these activities need to be strictly dealt with. Nationalism and love for the country cannot be a monopoly for only one section of the populace. Whether it is terrorism or communal flare-up, the administration has to be swift in taking strict action notwithstanding the stature of the persons involved.
These are some of the thoughts in regard to enriching the lives of our people. What more do we need to do? Our readers are invited to offer their views and comments, so that the forum could be useful and rewarding.
Jai Hind.
Editor
www.Jantaraj.com
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Awaiting the Next Move
Awaiting the Next Move
The Terror Track to Pakistan
It is now around two months. Pakistan at one stage seemed talking in two tongues – ‘the terrorists are non-state subjects’ and that ‘they may be Pakistani’. Under such a situation, the frustration and anger on the part of India is understandable. India’s stand however remains unchanged. It has relentlessly putting pressures on Pakistan to handover the terrorists and those responsible for planning and execution of acts of terror in India. With the international community openly advocating India’s stand, the options for Pakistan are certainly limited.
Some of the major developments during the last few days are summed up in the following lines –
- The Government of Pakistan has belatedly put a freeze to all activities of those promoting terrorism in India
- Pakistan has agreed to prosecute all those identified by India through its own judicial system
- It still fights shy of handing them over to India. India has however decided to wait and see how the judicial system in Pakistan addresses to allegations made by India
- The international community has again urged Pakistan to cooperate with India, and take the issue with utmost seriousness
There are little doubts that Pakistan is now under tremendous pressure. While India has decided to wait and watch, it has not allowed Pakistan to get out of the hook. It appears that Pakistan is inching towards accepting India’s points of view, and may ultimately accept some of the major demands to cool down the temperature. The ball is undoubtedly in Pakistan’s court. Let us see how prudently the leadership responds to the gravity of situation. It can only be hoped that Pakistan would now see reasons, and provide total cooperation in the task that would be in the interest of Pakistan as well.
The Terror Track to Pakistan
It is now around two months. Pakistan at one stage seemed talking in two tongues – ‘the terrorists are non-state subjects’ and that ‘they may be Pakistani’. Under such a situation, the frustration and anger on the part of India is understandable. India’s stand however remains unchanged. It has relentlessly putting pressures on Pakistan to handover the terrorists and those responsible for planning and execution of acts of terror in India. With the international community openly advocating India’s stand, the options for Pakistan are certainly limited.
Some of the major developments during the last few days are summed up in the following lines –
- The Government of Pakistan has belatedly put a freeze to all activities of those promoting terrorism in India
- Pakistan has agreed to prosecute all those identified by India through its own judicial system
- It still fights shy of handing them over to India. India has however decided to wait and see how the judicial system in Pakistan addresses to allegations made by India
- The international community has again urged Pakistan to cooperate with India, and take the issue with utmost seriousness
There are little doubts that Pakistan is now under tremendous pressure. While India has decided to wait and watch, it has not allowed Pakistan to get out of the hook. It appears that Pakistan is inching towards accepting India’s points of view, and may ultimately accept some of the major demands to cool down the temperature. The ball is undoubtedly in Pakistan’s court. Let us see how prudently the leadership responds to the gravity of situation. It can only be hoped that Pakistan would now see reasons, and provide total cooperation in the task that would be in the interest of Pakistan as well.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
The Mumbai Terror Attack and its Aftermath
It is the evening of the 26th November, when the first bullets are fired by the terrorists near the CST at Mumbai. That was the beginning of the most brazen and a prolonged terror strike in the financial capital of India, which shook the entire country and stirred the conscience of the civilised world. Let us now examine, what has happened during the last one month – in India, Pakistan and the world at large? What had been the impact, apart from the rabble rousing that we have witnessed of late in the sub-continent? What are the tangible steps the country has taken so far? Or is it going to be the words alone, we are so used to? Here is a brief account of all that took place within these 30 days.
The aftermath of terror – that lasted for almost 60 hours and cost the country heavily in terms of men and materials – saw a flurry of activities over the next 30 days. It had administrative, political and military ratifications in India and Pakistan, and resulted in hectic diplomacy and intense consultations amongst the world leaders with even the United Nations Security Council had to step in at the request of India.
The political fall-out in the wake of the recent terror attack has been distinct enough. It saw the resignation of both, the Chief Minister and the Home Minister of Maharashtra. The Home Minister at the Centre too had to resign. In the home front, the Government came out with a bill on formation of National Investigative Agency (NIA) on the line of FBI and another bill named ‘the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill’ for tougher law on terrorism.
The involvement of Pakistan-based terrorists was evident right from the beginning. The arrest of the lone terrorist – Mohammad Ajmal Kasab – proved an important piece of evidence of the role Pakistan played in the ghastly act. The Indian Prime Minister talked to his counterpart towards the end of the last month with a request to send the Chief of Inter State Intelligence (ISI) Lt General Ahmed Shuja Pasha for assisting in the investigation. Mr Gilani, the Pakistan Prime Minister, promptly gave his assent. The next day, however, Pakistan refused to send the ISI Chief, and offered to send a representative instead. This was a major u-turn by Pakistan. Pakistan’s non-cooperative approach has not been missed by the international community as well. There has however been a tremendous support for India’s position by world leaders.
India made a sort of diplomatic coup, and got world-wide support for the position it took. In the international arena, the US President endorsed India’s point of view. The President-elect, Barak Obama, declared in early December that India does ‘have a right to protect itself’. The US Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, asked Zardani, the Pakistan President, quite bluntly to act tough. Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff reportedly told Islamabad on the 4th December that Washington got enough evidence to show a Pakistani hand in the attack. The British Prime Minister, Mr Brown too advised Pakistan to act fast. The US reportedly asked Pakistan to crack down on the Lashkar-eTayyaba and arrest its chief Hafeez Mohammed Sayeed. Further, the European Parliament of 27-nation grouping found “confirmed evidence” of Pakistan hosting several terrorist groups like Lashkare-Tayyaba and “criminal mastermind” Dawood Ibrahim and using them as “an instrument of terrorism” against India.” The Washington Post carried a report on 6th December that Pakistan had agreed to a 48-hour timetable set by India and the US to formulate a plan to take action against the Laskhar-e-Tayyaba and to arrest at least three Pakistanis who India says are linked to the attacks in Mumbai, including former ISI chief Hamid Gul. All these go to show that Pakistan has been cornered for its commissions and omissions by the world community.
As a result of diplomatic pressures on Pakistan and after the UN Security Council declared it a terrorist outfit, the government of Pakistan on the 11th December reported to have banned Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), the front organisation for the outlawed Lashkar-eTayyaba (LeT) blamed for the Mumbai attacks,. The Pakistan Interior Ministry Chief, Mr Rehman Malik, told reporters that “the JuD has been banned with immediate effect”. It has put JuD chief Hafiz Mohammed Saeed under house arrest and sealed offices of the group. It incidentally emerged later on that JuD has still not been formally banned.
In regard to India’s position, it claimed to have adequate proof of ISI hand in the terror-attack. Apart from the confession of the sole surviving terrorist, the recovery of the satellite phone, telephone intersects and forensic evidences collected from the spots of attacks had tell-tale evidences to support the Indian claim.
Pakistan, meanwhile, made every effort to divert the attention from the main issue. It claimed on 13th December that the Indian Air Force (IAF) had intruded into the Pakistan territory. It lodged formal complaint with the Government of India. While the IAF denied the allegation, it did raise the temper quite a bit. Pakistan tried to bring in the war-fever by moving its forces to the front as also in flying its jets close to the border. The war cries seem to have now reached a deafening height. The situation appears tense, with both India and Pakistan flexing their muscles. The Government of India however has ruled out war with Pakistan.
While there have been distinct and unprecedented diplomatic victories for India, it has gained little in tangible terms. Those accused of complicity in the terror attacks have still not been handed over to India nor are the training camps in Pakistan and Pak-Occupied Kashmir dismantled so far. It is therefore difficult to envisage how long will India has to struggle for sorting out the mess created by Pakistan in the wake of the terror strike in Mumbai.
Click here to Lobby.
The aftermath of terror – that lasted for almost 60 hours and cost the country heavily in terms of men and materials – saw a flurry of activities over the next 30 days. It had administrative, political and military ratifications in India and Pakistan, and resulted in hectic diplomacy and intense consultations amongst the world leaders with even the United Nations Security Council had to step in at the request of India.
The political fall-out in the wake of the recent terror attack has been distinct enough. It saw the resignation of both, the Chief Minister and the Home Minister of Maharashtra. The Home Minister at the Centre too had to resign. In the home front, the Government came out with a bill on formation of National Investigative Agency (NIA) on the line of FBI and another bill named ‘the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill’ for tougher law on terrorism.
The involvement of Pakistan-based terrorists was evident right from the beginning. The arrest of the lone terrorist – Mohammad Ajmal Kasab – proved an important piece of evidence of the role Pakistan played in the ghastly act. The Indian Prime Minister talked to his counterpart towards the end of the last month with a request to send the Chief of Inter State Intelligence (ISI) Lt General Ahmed Shuja Pasha for assisting in the investigation. Mr Gilani, the Pakistan Prime Minister, promptly gave his assent. The next day, however, Pakistan refused to send the ISI Chief, and offered to send a representative instead. This was a major u-turn by Pakistan. Pakistan’s non-cooperative approach has not been missed by the international community as well. There has however been a tremendous support for India’s position by world leaders.
India made a sort of diplomatic coup, and got world-wide support for the position it took. In the international arena, the US President endorsed India’s point of view. The President-elect, Barak Obama, declared in early December that India does ‘have a right to protect itself’. The US Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, asked Zardani, the Pakistan President, quite bluntly to act tough. Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff reportedly told Islamabad on the 4th December that Washington got enough evidence to show a Pakistani hand in the attack. The British Prime Minister, Mr Brown too advised Pakistan to act fast. The US reportedly asked Pakistan to crack down on the Lashkar-eTayyaba and arrest its chief Hafeez Mohammed Sayeed. Further, the European Parliament of 27-nation grouping found “confirmed evidence” of Pakistan hosting several terrorist groups like Lashkare-Tayyaba and “criminal mastermind” Dawood Ibrahim and using them as “an instrument of terrorism” against India.” The Washington Post carried a report on 6th December that Pakistan had agreed to a 48-hour timetable set by India and the US to formulate a plan to take action against the Laskhar-e-Tayyaba and to arrest at least three Pakistanis who India says are linked to the attacks in Mumbai, including former ISI chief Hamid Gul. All these go to show that Pakistan has been cornered for its commissions and omissions by the world community.
As a result of diplomatic pressures on Pakistan and after the UN Security Council declared it a terrorist outfit, the government of Pakistan on the 11th December reported to have banned Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), the front organisation for the outlawed Lashkar-eTayyaba (LeT) blamed for the Mumbai attacks,. The Pakistan Interior Ministry Chief, Mr Rehman Malik, told reporters that “the JuD has been banned with immediate effect”. It has put JuD chief Hafiz Mohammed Saeed under house arrest and sealed offices of the group. It incidentally emerged later on that JuD has still not been formally banned.
In regard to India’s position, it claimed to have adequate proof of ISI hand in the terror-attack. Apart from the confession of the sole surviving terrorist, the recovery of the satellite phone, telephone intersects and forensic evidences collected from the spots of attacks had tell-tale evidences to support the Indian claim.
Pakistan, meanwhile, made every effort to divert the attention from the main issue. It claimed on 13th December that the Indian Air Force (IAF) had intruded into the Pakistan territory. It lodged formal complaint with the Government of India. While the IAF denied the allegation, it did raise the temper quite a bit. Pakistan tried to bring in the war-fever by moving its forces to the front as also in flying its jets close to the border. The war cries seem to have now reached a deafening height. The situation appears tense, with both India and Pakistan flexing their muscles. The Government of India however has ruled out war with Pakistan.
While there have been distinct and unprecedented diplomatic victories for India, it has gained little in tangible terms. Those accused of complicity in the terror attacks have still not been handed over to India nor are the training camps in Pakistan and Pak-Occupied Kashmir dismantled so far. It is therefore difficult to envisage how long will India has to struggle for sorting out the mess created by Pakistan in the wake of the terror strike in Mumbai.
Click here to Lobby.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)