04-04-2017 (Important News Clippings)
To Download Click Here
Costly verdict
Supreme Court’s highway liquor ban is proving counterproductive
Take cities such as Gurgaon and Chandigarh. The former has grown around highways. Most hotels, bars and restaurants are concentrated along these highways and pull in young professionals and foreign tourists. Following the Supreme Court order, at least 200 liquor licences in Gurgaon – including 150 bars and 15 high-end hotels – have been rendered ineffective. Similarly, in a small city like Chandigarh the apex court directive has forced at least 91 bars, pubs and restaurants to go dry.
Needless to say such closures will lead to enormous losses to business and tourism, which will translate into jobs lost as well as huge revenue losses for state governments which could have been spent on people’s welfare. The uncertainty of India’s business climate will deter investment from coming to India. And given the number of livelihoods at stake it’s more than likely that illegal liquor vends will proliferate along highways, leading to bigger risks to public safety. Even the man whose PIL led to the highway liquor ban – Chandigarh-based activist Harman Sidhu – has said he never wanted popular watering holes within city limits to shut down.
As always, measures to ramp up governance will work far better than radical decrees. Policing should improve on highways to tackle drunken driving. State governments should be directed to allocate more resources for this purpose. Only constant checking of drivers and punishment for offenders can deter those who drink and drive. Blanket bans and prohibition-like decrees, whether from judiciary or legislature, only make the problem worse. In this case they will injure the economy and cripple the tourism industry – which happens to be the sector that produces the most jobs per rupee invested. The apex court must reconsider its decision.
Date:04-04-17
Reasons not to believe
Finance Bill 2017 could end tribunal autonomy and institute tax harassment as the norm
The passage of the Finance Bill 2017 creates history on various counts. Firstly, an ominous broad spectrum legislation encompassing diverse subjects way beyond the limited scope of Article 110 of the Constitution was masqueraded as a Money Bill. Secondly, hiding under cover of the special procedure reserved for passage of Money Bills, the government pushed the Bill by brute majority in the Lok Sabha ignoring the collective wisdom of the Rajya Sabha reflected in its several substantive amendments.
Thirdly, the Bill introduces draconian provisions giving unfettered power to taxmen to search and seize without any real accountability. Fourthly, the Bill allows taxmen to clutch at much more than is required in name of tax compliance.
Fifthly, in a dystopian manner, the Bill converges unconnected Appellate Tribunals on an imagined synergy between unconnected universes (eg airport regulatory appellate with telecom appellate). Sixthly, it introduces an overarching Section 179 which empowers the government to make rules for all terms of service, including appointment, salary and removal of members and chairpersons of Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals. This all powerful Section is made applicable to 20 odd tribunals, thereby subjecting substantive powers and privileges of tribunals to delegated rule making control of the executive.
Benjamin Franklin had famously said that nothing can be certain, except death and taxes. With multiple onslaughts on the taxpayer, including demonetisation and now the Finance Bill, it seems that death by taxes and taxmen is the likelier scenario in this country.
Parliamentary subterfuge started by stringing non-Article 110 subjects on to a Money Bill, then adding tax terror provisions in direct contravention of law laid down by the Supreme Court, introducing the Bill in LS and following it up with a minor cosmetic debate while ignoring RS opinion completely.
Section 132 of the Income Tax Act provides search and seizure powers to the tax department only in case there is “reason to believe” that a person has undisclosed income or property. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Section does not confer any arbitrary authority upon the revenue officers. Since a serious invasion of rights, freedoms and privacy of the tax payer is involved, the power must be exercised strictly in accordance with law and only for the purposes for which it is authorised (ITO vs Seth Brothers, 1969 SC). If the action is maliciously taken or power is exercised for collateral purposes or without application of mind or without honest and bona fide formation of opinion, it is liable to be struck down (M/s Spacewood Furnishers, 2015 SC).
How does any of this review get done if these “reasons to believe” cannot be disclosed officially before ITO, CIT (Appeals) or ITAT? Most bemusing and unsatisfactory is FM’s justification, viz that it exposes the informant to the assessee. How was this provision then operated satisfactorily for the last several decades?Hardly a fraction of cases reach HC and above and hence non-disclosure becomes the norm. It does not protect informer identity; it immunises reasons themselves from review since one cannot review that which is not disclosed!
If, on the other hand, courts, including departmental appellate bodies (but not the assessee) can see the reasons – something which the law and FM leave totally unclear – then the stated purpose of the government is largely defeated but the assessee is still unable to mount an effective challenge on what he cannot see. It will also increase HC and SC litigation considerably, merely to get to see and challenge these reasons, thereby defeating the very purpose of departmental inbuilt multilayered appeals which is the heart of the IT Act.
Last, certainly not the least, this change regarding disclosure applies with extraordinary retrospectivity, from 1962. A lawyer FM would certainly know that he is enacting a certain-to-be-struck-down provision!
The new Section 132 also allows tax officers to attach provisionally any property belonging to the assessee, in addition to humongous existing confiscatory powers. Immediate attachment of bank accounts with protracted multilayered proceedings serpentinely going on will sound the death knell for most assessees. Mark Twain’s famous quip as to the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector being “the taxidermist takes only the skin” seems now to be legislatively enforced.
The provisions regulating Tribunal appointment and removal and pretence to reduce burden on courts is in the teeth of the apex court’s dictum in 2014 where (now) Chief Justice Khehar stated, in a Constitution Bench, that “one cannot lose sight of the fact that the Central Government will be a stakeholder in each and every appeal/case which would be filed … It cannot therefore be appropriate to allow the Central Government to play any role with reference to the places where the Benches would be set up, the composition and constitution of the Benches as also the transfer of members”. This is nothing short of abuse of the democratic process.
Under cover of saving expenses, FM has sought to club Tribunals with no connecting rationale or logical nexus. Which mental acrobat sees synergy between the National Highways Tribunal and the Airport Appellate Tribunal or between the Cyber Appellate Tribunal & the Telecom Disputes Appellate Tribunal? This clubbing of such strange bedfellows is most mystifying.Maybe it’s just simple hubris. Or power intoxicated Dutch courage to keep pecking at the constitutional fabric which stitches all of us citizens (but apparently not this government) to the rule of law.
Date:04-04-17
Stand firm on good governance norms
This is all to the good. When the time comes for the automobile industry to switch over to BS-VI, on April 1, 2020, industry will know that the goalpost would not shift and will be ready with compliant vehicles probably ahead of schedule. A similar stand has been taken for tighter emission norms for power plants as well.
For too long, the Indian approach has been to frame laws and observe them more in the breach than otherwise. For long, governments have succumbed to threatened shocks to the system, such as a spurt in unemployment and opted to let implementation slide. That governments, central and state, are moving away from that model is welcome news.
To set norms to ensure health, address environmental concerns, protect workers, etc, is good for all stakeholders — those who work in these sectors, the general public, and for the sector as well. Often, tighter norms pave the way for innovation to improve processes. The government is supposed to be the one place where the interests of all groups are addressed. Laws and regulations are an instrument that ensures the well-being of diverse stakeholders.
Fear of a backlash from one section should not lead the government to compromise the interest of others.
However, it is important for the norms that are to be enforced to be evolved after consultation and negotiation with all stakeholders, that there should be reasonable time for transition. Besides, the governance structure needed to enable the transition must be put in place. If qualified food inspectors must certify all food sold, for example, a large enough army of food inspectors must be ensured before that norm is enforced.
Date:04-04-17
गेहूं की बंपर फसल का रास्ता साफ, रस्ट की समस्या होगी दूर!
Date:03-04-17
The wheel of social justice
New national commission for backward classes must address the gaps and lags in the Mandal project
The only function of the NCBC under the NCBC Act is to examine requests for inclusion of any class of citizens as a backward class in SEdBC lists and hear complaints of over-inclusion or under-inclusion of any class in such lists and to tender advice to the Central government, which shall ordinarily be binding upon the government. It is presumed that civil court powers given to the NCBC, provided to all commissions, will continue.
Another role of the NCBC is that it should be consulted by the Central government while undertaking the periodic revision of SEdBC lists “with a view to excluding from such lists those classes who have ceased to be backward classes or for including new backward classes”. The NCBC’s main function and its periodic role are laid out in the the Supreme Court’s directions in the judgment of November 16, 1992, which upheld the constitutional validity of the V.P. Singh government’s decision to implement the Mandal Commission recommendations, taken on the basis of my note as Secretary, Ministry of Welfare, in 1990.
If the NCSEdBC’s function and role are the same as that of NCBC, its usefulness for SEdBCs will be neither more nor less than the NCBC’s. Reportedly, the NCSEdBC will be entrusted with the additional function of grievance redress of SEdBCs. This is an improvement. Further, according to Union minister Venkaiah Naidu, a new Article 342(A) will make it mandatory to take the concurrence of Parliament for adding or deleting any community in the SEdBC list. This will introduce greater transparency. It is more difficult to get a wrong decision through Parliament, which is under constant public gaze and scrutiny, than through executive orders issued from within the four walls of executive office.
SEdBCs require not only list-inclusion and reservation, but also comprehensive and holistic development and advancement of each community towards equality with Socially Advanced Castes (SACs) in all parameters of development and welfare. The blueprint for this is contained in the Report of the Working Group on Empowerment of SEdBCs in the XII Plan prepared under my chairmanship, which stands even though the terminology of “plan” has been replaced by “vision”, “agenda”.
In view of this, the Commission should be entrusted with the work of advising and guiding the Centre and the states regarding measures undertaken and required to be undertaken; monitoring their effectiveness and the progress of SEdBCs and each Backward Class, and all other related tasks. This was recommended by the NCBC in its annual report of February 2000.
The existing statutory composition of a judge as chairperson, a central secretary-level officer as member-secretary, a social scientist and two persons possessing special knowledge of matters relating to SEdBCs should continue. All five members should be selected on the basis of objectivity, repute earned through long and sincere service for backward classes and knowledge and experience of society, social backwardness and developmental processes relevant to advancement of SEdBCs. They should not be attached to any political party.
To infuse confidence in the SEdBC public, the practice of ensuring majority of membership from SEdBCs should continue. Due representation should be ensured for most and extremely backward classes, who form a good majority of SEdBCs, among them castes of artisans, service-providers, fisher-folk, indigent castes etc. The past two chairpersons belonged to most backward classes — this is a precedent worth continuing. One of the five members may be from a religious minority — the bulk of India’s Muslims and Christians belong to most and extremely backward SEdBCs.
Anxiety has been expressed that the proposed move is intended to delete certain communities from SEdBC lists. Exclusion of castes which ceased to be backward was recommended by certain past commissions and specifically directed by the Supreme Court. Castes can be excluded only on the basis of objective data, not on anybody’s whims and fancies. Parliamentary scrutiny can further reduce the scope for arbitrary decisions.
The real danger that leaders have to protect SEdBCs from is inclusion of any socially advanced castes (SAC) in SEdBC lists. Certain SACs are making muscular efforts for this, knowing that they cannot succeed under the Constitution which provides for reservation and other social justice measures only for social classes who are victims of “untouchability” (SCs), victims of remoteness under vulnerable conditions (STs), victims of social inferiority or lowliness under the caste system (SEdBCs) and not for the poor or the unemployed. The poor and the unemployed who do not belong to these three social classes, should be helped through means such as scholarships and educational loans, but not through reservation. Parties should resist the temptation of using muscular agitations of powerful SACs for transient electoral advantage. There should be a common moral code based on constitutional norms and morality emphasised by B.R. Ambedkar, which should be binding on all parties. Issues relating to SEdBCs, SCs and STs are too serious and important for the vast majority of India’s population and for national progress to be made a football in electoral competition.
Another important task calling for the attention of leaders, the Commission and the government is the categorisation of SEdBCs into “backward”, “more backward”, “most backward” and “extremely backward” castes with sub-quotas, so as to spread the benefits of reservation and other social justice measures equitably. The Opposition should desist from knee-jerk and contradictory reactions. The government should improve its credibility by instituting, in article or rules, the process of members’ selection through a bipartisan collegium.
The name of “National Commission for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes” is correctly chosen in line with constitutional terminology. In 1951, Jawaharlal Nehru insisted on this name in a new clause (4) of Article 15. The acronym should be “NCSEdBC” and not “NCSEBC” because “E” can be misunderstood and misinterpreted as “economically” and misused for SAC caste entry into SEdBC list.
Date:03-04-17
Court is open
Apex court’s decision to hear constitutional cases in the summer vacation is a welcome signal of resolve
The decision to work during its holidays on cases involving constitutional questions comes on the heels of an “action plan” framed by the Supreme Court last month for cases more ordinary. In April 2016, there were 2.18 crore cases pending across India’s courts. The apex court asked high courts to issue directions to lower courts that bail applications should be disposed of within a week and sessions trials where the accused are in custody be concluded within two years. These efforts are meant to clear the backlog of cases more than five years old, which numbered over 43 lakh at the end of 2015, by the end of this year. The Supreme Court’s own contribution to pendency was at about 60,000 cases. By following up its order to subordinate courts with a visible display of urgency, the SC has set an example that must be followed by the rest of the judiciary.
The three constitutional matters coming up before the court — the validity of triple talaq and polygamy under Muslim Personal Law and the right to privacy with respect to social media — are of deep importance, with large political and social implications. The highest court in the land is the only one with the legal and moral authority to deal with them. In showing urgency and leading by example, the court has taken an important step in the right direction.
Digital push must be disability -inclusive
As India catapults towards a digital economy, making ICT accessible to the disabled is a must
Around 8-10% of India’s population lives with disabilities, with an equal number constituting the aged. Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) have the potential to significantly impact the lives of these groups, facilitating access of services available to them and allowing them to handle a wide range of activities independently, enhancing their social, cultural, political and economic participation. Making ICT accessible no longer remains an option but has become a necessity.
Poor accessibility due to lack of focussed information and political will has led to social exclusion of people with disabilities, exacerbating the negative impact of the existing digital divide. The new call for action of disability rights activists now is “Cause No Harm”, thus ensuring future generations are not excluded from mainstream activities due to a hostile infrastructure.
This assumes a greater thrust given the unprecedented developmental activity in the country under the various missions launched by the present government, such as the Smart Cities Mission and Digital India. Accessibility for disabled people is a cross-cutting theme across all of these and care must be taken to ensure disability-inclusive development.
Accessibility as a link
Incorporation of accessibility principles across all new developments will also complement the Accessible India Campaign, the flagship campaign launched by the Prime Minister on World Disability Day which aims at achieving universal accessibility for all citizens and creating an enabling and barrier-free environment. India was one of the first countries to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The recently passed Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 mandates adherence to standards of accessibility for physical environment, transportation, information and communications, including appropriate technologies and systems, and other facilities and services provided to the public in urban and rural areas. These include government and private developments. The Act also mandates incorporation of Universal Design principles while designing new infrastructure, electronic and digital media, consumer goods and services. Most importantly, the Act sets timelines to ensure implementation of the above and punitive action in the event of non-compliance.
Accessibility therefore forms the common thread weaving together the Accessible India Campaign, the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, the Smart Cities Mission and the Digital India campaign to achieve the combined goal of creating an inclusive society that will allow for a better quality of life for all citizens, including persons with disabilities.
Beyond the social implications, accessibility makes for business and economic sense too. If principles of Universal Design are incorporated at the design stage, cost implications are negligible. Retrofitting, on the other hand, has huge cost implications.Exclusion of persons with disabilities from education, employment and participation on account of a hostile infrastructure and inaccessible technology has huge economic implications. UN agencies put this cost at around 7% of national GDP. On the other hand, accessible services and business premises can broaden the customer base, increasing turnover and positively impacting the financial health and social brand of the company. Recent research pegged the market size of different product categories needed by persons with disabilities in India at a whopping Rs. 4,500 crore.
Disability is not an isolated issue. It is cross-cutting and can impact everyone irrespective of caste, gender, age and nationality. Thus ensuring a disability-sensitive development agenda across all ministries, sectors and causes becomes critical if growth has to be truly inclusive. ‘Nothing about us without us’ assumes even greater significance in the current context.
The importance of synergy
As India catapults towards a cashless and digital economy and as human interface between service providers and end users gives way to digital, it becomes imperative to ensure accessibility for inclusion. The need is for representation of persons with disabilities in all ministries and key missions, commissions and committees to advise and ensure inclusion in all policies, programmes and developments. The government’s procurement policy too must mandate accessibility as a key criterion. Adherence to the latest Web Content Accessibility Guidelines should be made mandatory while developing websites and mobile applications.
Also important is the synergy between various arms of the government. The Smart Cities Mission focusses on comprehensive development leading to the convergence of other ongoing government programmes such as Make In India, Digital India, Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT), Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana, National Heritage City Development and Augmentation Yojana (HRIDAY), etc. but the Accessible India Campaign does not even find a mention! This is so when as many as 39 cities out of the 50 cities of the Accessible India Campaign are also among the shortlisted Smart Cities.
Much after Independence, there has been minimal change in the fortunes of India’s disabled population. It becomes our collective responsibility to ensure inclusive development, one that engages all stakeholders through a pragmatic and judicious combination of interventions while effectively leveraging technology to ensure truly inclusive and sustainable development.
Javed Abidi was instrumental in the setting up of the National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP). He is also the Global Chair of Disabled People’s International
बिना वीटो की सदस्यता किस काम की
संयुक्त राष्ट्र सुरक्षा परिषद में सुधार-प्रक्रिया को गति देने के लिए भारत सहित जी-4 के अन्य देशों ब्राजील, जर्मनी और जापान को शुरुआती तौर पर वीटो पावर छोड़ने की पेशकश की गई है। संयुक्त राष्ट्र में भारत के स्थायी प्रतिनिधि सैयद अकबरुद्दीन का इस पर कहना है कि वीटो का मसला अहम जरूर है, मगर सुधार-प्रक्रिया पर यह वीटो नहीं बनना चाहिए। उनका मानना है कि सैद्धांतिक रूप से वीटो पावर नए सदस्यों के पास भी उसी तरह होगा, जैसा कि मौजूदा पांच सदस्य देशों के पास है, मगर ‘वे तब तक इसका इस्तेमाल नहीं कर सकेंगे, जब तक कि समीक्षा के दौरान इस पर कोई फैसला नहीं हो जाता।’
जाहिर है, सुधार प्रक्रिया के संदर्भ में सीधे तौर पर तो यह नेकनीयती में उठाया गया कदम लगता है, मगर तेजी से बदल रही भू-राजनीतिक सच्चाई तस्वीर का दूसरा पहलू दिखा रही है। यह सही है कि मोदी सरकार ने सत्ता में आते ही विदेश नीति में कई तब्दीलियां कीं, मगर सुरक्षा परिषद में सुधार के मसले पर उसने कमोबेश पूर्ववर्ती सरकारों जैसा रवैया ही अपनाया। चाहे यूपीए हो या एनडीए, भारतीय राजनीति का आभिजात्य वर्ग संयुक्त राष्ट्र के प्रति विशेष आग्रही बना रहा है। संयुक्त राष्ट्र के प्रति इस लगाव की अहमियत निश्चय ही उन दिनों ज्यादा होती, जब भारत वैश्विक राजनीति की परिधि से बाहर था। मगर अब तेजी से उभरते नए भारत के लिए पुरानी लकीर पर चलने का कोई मतलब नहीं है।
साफ-साफ कहें, तो संयुक्त राष्ट्र को लेकर भारत का अनुभव ऐतिहासिक तौर पर उतना सुखद नहीं रहा है। जब भी हमने समर्थन के लिए उसकी ओर देखा, हमारे राष्ट्रीय हित प्रभावित हुए। लिहाजा जिस तरह व्यापक राष्ट्रीय हित में नेहरूवादी आदर्शवाद को धीरे-धीरे बदला गया है, ठीक उसी तरह वक्त का तकाजा यही है कि भारत पूरी मजबूती के साथ उन तमाम मसलों से खुद को अलग करे, जिसे लेकर संयुक्त राष्ट्र का रवैया ढुलमुल है।
संयुक्त राष्ट्र के प्रति विशेष आग्रही होना किसी भी मुल्क की सेहत के लिए अच्छी बात नहीं है; खासतौर से भारत जैसी उभरती हुई ताकत के लिए तो बिल्कुल नहीं। आज भारतीय हित न सिर्फ वैश्विक हुए हैं, बल्कि उनका काफी विस्तार भी हुआ है। लिहाजा हमारी हुकूमत के अंदर यह एलान करने का आत्मविश्वास होना चाहिए कि तमाम बाहरी कारकों को महत्व देने के बाद भी वह इन हितों को संरक्षित और विकसित करेगी। देखा जाए, तो भारत सरकार ही वह एकमात्र सांविधानिक प्रतिष्ठान है, जिसके पास यह अधिकार है कि भारत कब और कैसे अपने पत्तों का इस्तेमाल करेगा।
दरअसल, संयुक्त राष्ट्र की नींव दूसरे विश्व युद्ध के बाद पड़ी, और इसीलिए यह उस दौर में हुए ताकत के बंटवारे को दर्शाता है। इसकी मूल शक्ति सुरक्षा परिषद में निहित है, जिसके पांच देश स्थायी सदस्य हैं। इन देशों के पास वीटो का हथियार है, जिसके बहाने ये संयुक्त राष्ट्र का इस्तेमाल अपने-अपने हित में करते रहते हैं। इसकी महासभा तमाम कल्पित अधिकारों के साथ आज भी बतकही का मंच बनी हुई है। कुछ तकनीकी इकाइयों को छोड़ दें, तो इसके तमाम अंग किसी न किसी रूप में महज दिखावा बनकर रह गए हैं। मसलन, इसकी मानवाधिकार परिषद में सूडान, जिंबॉब्वे, चीन और सऊदी अरब जैसे देश शामिल हैं, जबकि मानवाधिकार उल्लंघन में इनकी कुख्याति शायद ही किसी से छिपी हो। आश्चर्य नहीं होना चाहिए कि चेक लेखक वाक्लव हॉवेल इसे ‘तानाशाहों की बैठक’ कहा करते थे।
आखिर संयुक्त राष्ट्र को हमें संजीदगी से क्यों लेना चाहिए? सवाल यह भी है कि अपने महत्वपूर्ण राष्ट्रीय हितों को हम यूएन वीटो की बेदी पर क्यों चढ़ाने दें? इसी से जुड़ा एक महत्वपूर्ण मसला, कहां और कब अपनी सेना को तैनात करने का है। हमारे नीति-नियंता अब तक संयुक्त राष्ट्र अभियान के तहत भारतीय सेना की विदेश में तैनाती को तवज्जो देते आए हैं। यह संभवत: तभी तक न्यायसंगत था, जब तक भारतीय हितों का दायरा छोटा था। मगर आज यह नीति व्यावहारिक नहीं लगती। और भारतीय हितों की रक्षा करने की अपनी प्रमुख जिम्मेदारी से मुंह फेरने जैसे आरोपों से बचने के लिए यह सरकार की एक ढाल की तरह इस्तेमाल होती है।
साल 2008 में जब भारत ने अदन की खाड़ी में अपने युद्धपोत को भेजने का फैसला लिया, तो उम्मीद बंधी थी कि देश के राजनीतिक और सैन्य नेतृत्व को यह कहकर मजबूर किया जाएगा कि वे अपने आर्थिक व सामरिक हितों की रक्षा के लिए अपनी सेना के इस्तेमाल को लेकर एक सुसंगत नीति तैयार करेंगे। मगर यह अब तक स्पष्ट नहीं हो सका है कि भारत आखिर किस स्थिति में अपने हितों की रक्षा के लिए सेना का इस्तेमाल करेगा? अपनी सेना के इस्तेमाल को लेकर एक स्पष्ट नजरिये की कमी ने देश को काफी नुकसान पहुंचाया है।
भारतीय नेतृत्व आज भी यही बताता है कि वैश्विक सुरक्षा में वे भारत की जो भूमिका देखते हैं, वह अपने हितों व मूल्यों के आत्म-मूल्यांकन से नहीं, बल्कि संयुक्त राष्ट्र जैसे वैश्विक संगठनों के निर्धारण से ही साकार हो सकती है। आज कोई भी ताकतवर मुल्क संयुक्त राष्ट्र के शांति अभियानों को संजीदगी से नहीं लेता, मगर हम इसमें सबसे बड़े साझीदार बने हुए हैं। बीते तमाम वर्षों में हमने संयुक्त राष्ट्र के 44 अभियानों में करीब 1,80,000 शांतिरक्षक भेजे और दूसरे देशों की तुलना में सबसे ज्यादा सैनिक गंवाए। भारतीय नीति-नियंताओं का तर्क है कि ऐसा किसी सामरिक लाभ के लिए नहीं, बल्कि वैश्विक शांति-सुरक्षा में अपना योगदान देने के लिए किया जा रहा है। आखिर हमें वैश्विक शांति और सुरक्षा को इतनी अहमियत क्यों देनी चाहिए, जबकि आंतरिक सुरक्षा और कानून-व्यवस्था के मोर्चे पर हम फिसड्डी साबित हुए हैं?
तर्क यह भी दिया जाता है कि ऐसे अभियानों में शामिल होते रहने से सुरक्षा परिषद में हमारा दावा ज्यादा मजबूत होगा। मगर सच यही है कि दशकों तक अफ्रीका में शांति अभियानों में शामिल रहने के बाद भी अफ्रीकी राज्यों ने हमारी उम्मीदवारी को समर्थन देने से इनकार कर दिया है। ऐसे में, मेरा यही मानना है कि जब तक हम एक प्रभावी आर्थिक व सैन्य ताकत नहीं बनेंगे, तब तक सुरक्षा परिषद में हमारी दावेदारी को गंभीरता से नहीं लिया जाएगा। बिना वीटो के सुरक्षा परिषद में दोयम दरजे की स्थायी सदस्यता का औचित्य समझ से परे है।
Date:03-04-17
दिमाग और कंप्यूटर
कहावत है कि अगर युद्धभूमि में आप किसी दुश्मन को हरा नहीं पा रहे, तो बेहतर यही होगा कि आप उसके साथ गठबंधन कर लें। कंप्यूटर को लेकर इन दिनों यही रणनीति अपनाई जा रही है। वैसे तो कंप्यूटर मानव मस्तिष्क की ही उपज है, लेकिन जब से यह अस्तित्व में आया है, मानव मस्तिष्क से स्पद्र्धा करता रहा है। हर कुछ साल बाद जब कंप्यूटर प्रोसेसर की नई पीढ़ी बाजार में आती है, लगता है कि बस कुछ दिन और फिर कंप्यूटर इंसान के दिमाग को भी मात दे देगा। इन दिनों जिस कंप्यूटर जनित कृत्रिम बुद्धि यानी आर्टिफिशियल इंटेलीजेंस की बात चल रही है, उसकी कहानी भी कुछ ऐसी ही है। तकनीक के हर मोड़ पर लगता है कि इस बार यह कृत्रिम बुद्धि इंसानी अकल को मात दे देगी। फिर ऐसा कुछ हो जाता है या ऐसा कुछ बचा रह जाता है कि इंसानी अकल आगे खड़ी दिखाई देती है। और अब कुछ वैज्ञानिक सोचने लग गए हैं कि यह बेकार की लड़ाई है, जो जरूरी भी नहीं है और जिससे किसी को कुछ मिलना भी नहीं है।
इसकी बजाय कंप्यूटर की प्रोसेसिंग पावर और इंसान की अकल अगर एक-दूसरे का सहयोग करें, तो ज्यादा बेहतर नतीजे हासिल किए जा सकते हैं। वैसे कंप्यूटर बना भी तो इसीलिए था। प्रयोगशालाओं में वैज्ञानिक तो इस पर प्रयोग कर ही रहे हैं, पश्चिम की कुछ निजी कंपनियों ने इसे अंजाम देने का बीड़ा भी उठाया है। कैलिफोर्निया की न्यूरालिंक नाम की एक कंपनी ने इस काम को पूरी गंभीरता से शुरू किया है। सबसे बड़ी बात है कि न्यूरालिंक कोई छोटा-मोटा स्टार्टअप नहीं है, बल्कि टेस्ला नाम की उस कंपनी के संस्थापक एलॉन मस्क हैं, जिन्हें पर्यावरण के हिसाब से कई बहुत उपयोगी उत्पाद बाजार में उतारने का श्रेय जाता है। खासकर बिजली से चलने वाली पहली सफल कमर्शियल स्पोर्ट्स कार और सस्ते सोलर पैनल बाजार में लाने का श्रेय।
न्यूरालिंक ठीक-ठीक क्या करने जा रही है, यह अभी पूरी तरह स्पष्ट नहीं है, लेकिन उसके व्यापारिक सहयोगियों की बातचीत से जो चीज सामने आई है, वह बहुत दिलचस्प है। इससे अनुमान लगाया गया है कि वह बड़ी गुणवत्ता और प्रोसेसिंग पावर के कंप्यूटर चिप को मस्तिष्क में लगाने की तैयारी कर रही है। यानी कोशिश आपके दिमाग में ऐसा कंप्यूटर लगाने की है, जो दिमाग की जगह तो नहीं लेगा, लेकिन उसकी मदद करेगा। बेशक, अभी यह दूर की कौड़ी लग सकता है, लेकिन दिमाग, तंत्रिका विज्ञान और कंप्यूटर की दुनिया से जुडे़ हजारों वैज्ञानिक इस संभावना को साकार करने की कोशिशों में जुट गए हैं। साथ ही इसके संभावित परिणामों पर भी बहस शुरू हो गई है और इसकी नैतिकता पर भी।
जाहिर है, इसके बहुत सारे फायदे भी होंगे। खासकर उन लोगों को, जिनकी याददाश्त उम्र बढ़ने के साथ-साथ कम होने लगती है, या फिर दिमाग की क्षमता जवाब देने लगती है। कंप्यूटर चिप ऐसे लोगों की कई तरह से मदद कर सकता है, जिसमें किसी को शायद ही कोई आपत्ति हो। माना जा रहा है कि इस तरह के चिप में आगे चलकर विचार भी अपलोड किए जा सकते हैं और कई तरह के ज्ञान भी। ऐसे आगे बढ़ते हुए हम कुछ डरावनी आशंकाओं तक भी पहंुच सकते हैं। इन्हें अगर कुछ देर के लिए छोड़ भी दें, तो अभी हमारे समाज में नई पीढ़ी और पुरानी पीढ़ी के कई तरह के वर्गीकरण हैं, क्या वे बेमतलब हो जाएंगे? क्योंकि तब किसी की मानसिक क्षमता और उसका रुझान इस बात पर निर्भर करेगा कि उसके दिमाग में कौन सा चिप लगा है। एक सवाल यह भी है कि क्या तब हमारा दिमाग भी हैक हो सकेगा? हमें पता नहीं कि यह कब तक हो सकेगा, लेकिन तब तक हमें ऐसे सवालों से तो जूझना ही होगा।
