06-10-2016 (Important News Clippings)
Date: 06-10-16
Make Good Teachers
Instead of obsessing over board exams, invest obsessively in teacher training
A big UPA education innovation was making Class X CBSE board exams optional, plus instituting a Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation alongside a no-fail policy up to Class VIII. De-stressing students and minimising drop-out rates were some of the main goals. While welcome success has been seen on both these fronts, in recent years clamour has grown against an unfortunate side-effect. Various states have been complaining of a significant decline in learning outcomes. So they have been asking the Centre to revoke the no-fail policy and also make the Class X CBSE exams compulsory again. But such exam-obsessed approaches won’t improve learning outcomes.
If systems of assessment have declined, this means a widespread failure to implement Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation as mandated by RTE. But this is not a failure of the students so why should they be punished? It doesn’t serve India well if governments just keep playing ping pong with education, one party reversing the policy of the other party after taking power. The real solution lies in improving assessment and accountability systems, which largely translates into improving teacher recruitment and training.
From more than 90% of aspirants failing the central Teacher’s Eligibility Test year after year to teacher absenteeism touching as high as 40% in the poorest states to the prevalence of English teachers who just can’t speak English, all around there are signs that teacher recruitment and training are in terrible shape in India. Rather than obsessing over exams for students let’s focus on setting standards for teachers, having a system that rewards the good ones, and equipping teachers with modern pedagogical tools to teach critical thinking rather than rote lessons. Only two things will truly de-stress students: good teachers and better opportunities after they graduate.
Date: 06-10-16
For A Banking Renaissance
How to set up bad bank to manage stressed assets
Though obvious, policymakers must clearly state the objective in setting up a bad bank. In my opinion, instead of muddling the bad bank with multiple objectives, the government must state clearly that the bad bank is being set up “to bring back the vitality of the Indian banking sector at the least cost to the taxpayer.”
Why is a banking sector without a bad bank incapable of fulfilling this objective? First, managing stressed assets requires specialised expertise which is sporadically dispersed across several different banks. Second, senior managers in the public sector banks are forced to devote the lion’s share of their attention to managing the stressed assets in their portfolio. As a result, public sector bank managements are unable to pay adequate attention to their normal business, which is to screen borrowers, originate new loans and monitor these loans. No wonder the Indian banking sector is in deep slumber when it comes to new lending activity.
Third, public sector banks face several legal and institutional restrictions in managing stressed assets. Take for instance the possibility of action by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) or Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). With any stressed asset, a bank faces the problem that the current value of the asset is significantly lower than the payment that the promoter of the firm owes the bank. If the bank does not write down the value of its claim, the promoter has no incentive to exert effort in improving the value of the stressed asset. However, in the current setup, bank management cannot take the judgment calls to write down such claims.Enhancing the value of the stressed assets involves significant uncertainty. Inevitably, some judgment calls will go wrong. If bank management anticipates that CVC/CBI will not distinguish between bad judgment and malafide intent, then a fear psychosis paralyses it.
Finally, given the stressed assets in their portfolios and the need to provide capital for them, banks are short of capital required for initiating new loans.To remove all these constraints, the bad bank should be set up as a private equity fund where the government holds less than 50% equity stake. First, the bad bank can draw experts in managing and restructuring bad assets from several banks to create a crack team. Second, this structure will free the bad bank from external vigilance emanating from CVC/CBI. Instead, the bad bank should have its own internal vigilance department.
Internal vigilance enforcement is more likely to use information gathered within the organisation to assess employee integrity and reputation. As a result, when compared to investigations by external agencies, internal vigilance is less likely to either err by not identifying a dishonest employee or by unfairly targeting an honest employee. Resolution of cases – both enforcement actions against the dishonest and dropping actions against the honest – is also quicker with internal vigilance.
Third, if government holds less than 50% equity stake, the bad bank will not be constrained on employee compensation. This feature is extremely important if the bad bank initiative is to succeed. Expertise in managing and restructuring bad assets is uncommon and therefore needs to be rewarded adequately. It is therefore critical to structure the bad bank as a private equity fund where employees can be compensated adequately for their specialised expertise. Use of equity-based compensation is a common practice in private equity. To provide strong incentives to employees, this needs to be implemented in the bad bank as well.
Fourth, the proposed structure will provide room for private investors to participate in the equity of the bad bank. Apart from reducing the amount of taxpayer money that the government has to cough up as capital for the bad bank, this structure can reduce the risks incurred by the government as well.More importantly, the governance benefits from such private investor participation would be enormous. Private investors will be able to provide independent pricing and market information for purchases of distressed assets from the banks. Neither bureaucrats nor politicians have the expertise to price the distressed assets.
Moreover, by providing private investors board seats that are commensurate with their equity stake, the governance of the bad bank can be significantly enhanced. Experts appointed on the board of the bad bank by private investors would be able to monitor the management carefully. The government and RBI should, however, ensure that no promoter for business house that is involved in any of the stressed assets gets to be an investor in the bad bank. This can easily be achieved by RBI implementing the fit and proper criteria.
A well-structured bad bank would enable the existing banks to renew their focus on their long-term core operations without the ongoing distraction of troubled assets. Free of the troubled assets, the existing banks can expect restored investor and market confidence. This will in turn enable them to raise capital more easily and at more affordable rates. Bureaucrats and policymakers must grasp the benefits inherent in structuring the bad bank as a private equity fund with less than 50% government equity.
Krishnamurthy Subramanian The writer is Associate Professor of Finance at the Indian School of Business.
सुशासन की अनूठी पहल
साउथ ब्लॉक में प्रधानमंत्री कार्यालय के पास ही एक छोटा सा कमरा। लंबाई करीब 15 फुट और चौड़ाई लगभग 12 फुट। पहली नजर में आपको शायद इसका अहसास नहीं होगा कि यह वह कमरा है जहां से लाखों करोड़ की योजनाओं का भविष्य तय होता है। यह अनुभव करना है तो फिर हर महीने के आखिरी बुधवार का इंतजार करना होगा। ऐसे ही एक दिन प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र मोदी अपने कुछ वरिष्ठतम अधिकारियों के साथ कमरे में आते हैं। सामने की ओर कुछ स्क्रीन लगी हुई हैं। प्रधानमंत्री बहुत गौर से उन स्क्रीन्स की ओर देख रहे होते हैं। वर्षों से लंबित परियोजनाओं पर केंद्र से लेकर राज्य तक के बीच एक साथ चर्चा होती है और प्रधानमंत्री फैसला करते हैं कि आगे क्या करना है। इसी कमरे से अब तक लगभग आठ लाख करोड़ रुपये की 136 परियोजनाओं की समीक्षा हो चुकी है। दरअसल यह छोटा सा कमरा मोदी सरकार के कामकाज के तौर-तरीके का दर्पण है। एक छोटी सी घटना से शुरूआत करूं तो आपको इसका अहसास हो जाएगा कि राज्यों पर इसका क्या प्रभाव पड़ता है। एक बार जब ‘प्रगति’ की बैठक चल ही रही थी तो म्यांमार में एक मध्यम दर्जे का भूकंप आया। बैठक के अंत में उत्तर-पूर्वी राज्यों के मुख्य सचिव, जिनमें से कुछ ने स्वयं यह भूकंप महसूस किया था, उस समय हैरान रह गए जब प्रधानमंत्री ने उनसे पूछा कि क्या अब तक उन्हें इससे हुए नुकसान की कोई सूचना मिली? उक्त मुख्य सचिव हैरत में थे कि बैठक के बीच भी प्रधानमंत्री म्यांमार में आए भूकंप के उत्तर पूर्वी राज्यों पर पड़ने वाले प्रभाव को लेकर सतर्क थे। जाहिर है कि प्रगति की बैठक से पहले सभी राज्यों के मुख्य सचिव भी पूरी तरह सतर्क होते हैं।
खैर, साउथ ब्लॉक में बैठक हो उससे पहले कुछ किलोमीटर दूर नेशनल इनफार्मेटिक्स सेंटर यानी एनआइसी के मुख्यालय में अधिकारियों व तकनीशियनों का एक दस्ता काम में जुटा होता है। वे भारत सरकार के हर विभाग के सचिवों, सभी राज्यों के मुख्य सचिवों के कार्यालय को साउथ ब्लॉक के इस छोटे से कमरे को वीडियो-कांफ्रेंस से जोड़ने की तैयारी कर रहे होते हैं। इस अनूठी वीडियो कांफ्रेंस का मकसद है ‘प्रगति’ यानी प्रो-एक्टिव गवर्नेंस एंड टाइमली इम्प्लीमेंटेशन। यह प्रधानमंत्री की एक खास पहल है। ‘प्रगति’ संवादमूलक एक अनूठा प्लेटफॉर्म है। इसका उद्देश्य है आम जनता की शिकायतों का समाधान करना और साथ ही भारत सरकार के महत्वपूर्ण कार्यक्रमों और परियोजनाओं के अतिरिक्त राज्य सरकारों की परियोजनाओं की भी निगरानी और समीक्षा करना। यह तीन स्तरीय प्रणाली है, जिसके हिस्से पीएमओ, केंद्र सरकार के सचिव और राज्यों के मुख्य सचिव हैं। प्रगति एप्लीकेशन की डिजाइनिंग इस तरह की गई है कि प्रधानमंत्री द्वारा संबंधित विषय की समीक्षा करते समय स्क्रीन पर उससे संबंधित सूचनाएं, ताजा अपडेट और संबंधित विजुअल उपलब्ध होते हैं।
प्रधानमंत्री इस माध्यम से अब तक 15 बार बैठक कर चुके हैं। पिछली बैठक 28 सितंबर को हुई, जिसमें प्रधानमंत्री ने राजस्थान, असम, मेघालय, सिक्किम, पश्चिम बंगाल, महाराष्ट्र, ओडिशा, झारखंड, बिहार, उत्तर प्रदेश, उत्तराखंड, जम्मू-कश्मीर में सड़क, रेलवे और बिजली क्षेत्र में बुनियादी ढांचा परियोजनाओं की समीक्षा की थी। इस दौरान उन्होंने आयकर विभाग द्वारा शिकायतों के निपटान का भी जायजा लिया और संबंधित अधिकारियों से अधिक से अधिक प्रौद्योगिकी का उपयोग करने की सलाह देते हुए शिकायतों का त्वरित निपटान सुनिश्चित करने पर बल दिया। दूसरे शब्दों में कहें तो ‘प्रगति’ के रूप में की गई पहल का मकसद है परियोजनाओं के क्रियान्वयन में रुकावटें दूर करना, देरी को कम करना और किसी भी मामले में सरकार की विशेष पहल की समीक्षा करना।
यह मोदी सरकार के सहयोगात्मक संघवाद की दिशा में भी एक कदम है, क्योंकि यह केंद्र और राज्य सरकारों के उच्चतम अधिकारियों को एक मंच पर लाता है और महत्वपूर्ण निर्णयों में केंद्र और राज्यों की सहभागिता को सुनिश्चित करता है। मोदी सरकार का टीम इंडिया का संकल्प केंद्र और राज्यों के बीच सहयोग की इसी भावना पर आधारित है। इस माध्यम से प्रधानमंत्री विभिन्न मुद्दों पर केंद्र और राज्यों के संबंधित अधिकारियों के साथ चर्चा कर सकते हैं और साथ ही जमीनी हकीकत की ताजा जानकारी भी ले सकते हैं। भारत में शासन के लिहाज से यह एक अभूतपूर्व पहल है। यह ई-गवर्नेंस और गुड गवर्नेंस का भी एक अभिनव उदाहरण है, जिसके मूल में है विश्वसनीय शिकायत निवारण का तंत्र और समय पर परियोजनाओं को पूरा करने का प्रधानमंत्री का संकल्प। एक शुरुआती बैठक में प्रधानमंत्री ने ‘प्रगति’ के बारे में कहा था कि इस बैठक का उद्देश्य विभिन्न सरकारी विभागों के बीच बनी हुई उन दीवारों को तोड़ना है जो निर्णय लेने में बाधा बनती हैं। ‘प्रगति’ की बैठकों में बुनियादी ढांचे से संबद्ध परियोजनाओं से जुड़े कई जटिल मुद्दों का समाधान निकाला गया है। इन परियोजनाओं में ईस्टर्न व वेस्टर्न डेडिकेटेड फ्रेट कोरिडोर, दिल्ली-मुंबई इंडस्ट्रियल कोरिडोर, इलाहाबाद-हल्दिया जल मार्ग विकास परियोजना, मुंबई ट्रांस हार्बर लिंक और चेन्नई व हैदराबाद मेट्रो परियोजनाएं शामिल हैं। कई महत्वपूर्ण और लंबे समय से अटकीं रेलवे लाइनों का काम आगे बढ़ा है। इनमें कुछ उत्तर-पूर्व और माओवाद प्रभावित क्षेत्रों में भी हैं। हाल में ही 1981-82 से लंबित नांगल-डैम तलवारा रेल लाइन की समीक्षा की गई और प्रधानमंत्री ने इस बात पर बल दिया कि इस प्रकार की देरी से परियोजनाओं की लागत बढ़ने से देश का कितना नुकसान होता है। प्रधानमंत्री बार-बार यह कहते रहे हैं कि एक परियोजना के क्रियान्वयन में जो देरी होती है वह देश पर आर्थिक बोझ डालने के साथ ही अन्य भावी परियोजनाओं का रास्ता रोकने का भी काम करती है।
लगभग हर ‘प्रगति’ बैठक में सामाजिक क्षेत्र पर विशेष ध्यान दिया गया है। शिक्षा क्षेत्र से जुड़ी जन-समस्याएं, केंद्र सरकार की स्वास्थ्य सेवाएं, सेवानिवृत सैनिकों की समस्याएं, उपभोक्ताओं की शिकायतें, डाक सेवाओं में विलंब, पासपोर्ट मिलने में देरी इन सभी विषयों पर चर्चा हुई है। कभी-कभी प्रधानमंत्री जन-शिकायतों के निपटारे में देरी पर अफसरों की खिंचाई भी करते हैं। अक्षय ऊर्जा से जुड़े नए प्रोजेक्ट, उनकी रफ्तार, उनके असर पर भी ‘प्रगति’ की बैठक में कई बार बात की गई है। इतना ही नहीं, ‘प्रगति’ के माध्यम से अफगानिस्तान, म्यांमार, और भूटान सहित पड़ोसी देशों में चल रहे प्रोजेक्टों की भी समीक्षा हुई है।
‘प्रगति’ बैठकों का एक और पहलू है सर्वोत्तम कार्य-व्यवस्थाओं का आदान-प्रदान। पिछले वर्ष ओडिशा में नव कलेवर उत्सव की तैयारियों का जायजा लेते हुए प्रधानमंत्री ने कहा कि ऐसे ही बड़े उत्सव अगले कुछ महीनों में दूसरे राज्यों में भी होने वाले हैं जिनमें भारी संख्या में लोग एकत्रित होंगे। प्रधानमंत्री ने इन सभी राज्यों को कहा कि वे अपनी योजनाओं और तैयारियों की जानकारी एक दूसरे को दें, जिससे राज्य एक दूसरे की सर्वोत्तम पहलों को अपने राज्य में अपना सकें।
[ लेखक प्रशांत मिश्र, दैनिक जागरण के राजनीतिक संपादक हैं ]
Date: 06-10-16
बढ़ते शहर, बिगड़ते हालात
पिछले कई दिनों से हो रही भारी बारिश ने एक बार पुन: हैदराबाद को जलमग्न कर दिया है। लगभग यही हाल मुंबई का भी है। ज्यादा दिन नहीं बीते हैं जब हमने देश की राजधानी दिल्ली और उभरते भारत के प्रतीक कहे जाने वाले गुड़गांव को सिर्फ कुछ ही घंटों की बारिश में डूबते देखा था। जब देश की अर्थव्यवस्था के केंद्र महानगरों के यह हालात हैं तो बाकी शहरों की स्थिति का अंदाजा लगाना मुश्किल नहीं है। वहां तो वैसे भी बिन बारिश सड़कें और गलियां पानी से भरी रहती हैं। समस्या दरअसल आजादी के बाद शहर निर्माण के तौर-तरीकों की है। हकीकत यह है कि आजादी के बाद चंडीगढ़ को छोड़कर कोई भी शहर योजनाबद्ध तरीके से नहीं बसाया गया है और पुराने शहरों को भी अनियोजित तरीके से विस्तृत होने दिया गया। प्रक्रिया यह होती है कि शहर की परियोजना पहले बनती है और उसी के आधार पर आधारभूत ढांचे जैसे जल निकाय, सड़क, गैस पाइपलाइन, बिजली का निर्माण होता है और फिर जाकर व्यावसायिक और आवासीय इमारतों की बुनियाद रखी जाती है, परंतु भारत में ठीक इसका उलटा होता है। पहले एक हिस्से पर अनधिकृत कालोनी बन जाती है और उसके बाद चुनाव के समय उन्हें कानूनी जामा पहनाने की होड़ लगती है। उसके बाद बिजली के तार लगते हैं, सड़क और नालियां बनती रहती हैं। यह हाल महानगरों से लेकर छोटे शहरों और कस्बों तक दिखाई पड़ता है। प्रश्न यह उठता है कि आखिर यह स्थिति क्यों उत्पन्न हुई है? भारत के शहर शहर कम और झुग्गी-झोपड़ियों का जमघट ज्यादा क्यों दिखते हैं? क्या कारण है कि राजधानी दिल्ली तक में आज भी रहने योग्य स्थल वही हैं जो ब्रिटिश बना गए थे।
यह समस्या सिर्फ भ्रष्टाचार की ही नहीं हैं। अपितु इसके कई पहलू हैं। सर्वप्रथम देश की सरकारी संस्थाएं और नौकरशाही में शहरों के निर्माण और उनके प्रबंधन की क्षमता का अभाव है। शहरों के बढ़ते आकार, जटिल अर्थव्यवस्था और तीव्रगति से बदलते प्रौद्योगिकीय परिवेश के कारण शहरों के प्रशासन में विशेषज्ञता की आवश्यकता है, परंतु शहरी प्रशासन अभी भी पुराने ढांचे पर चल रहा है। न ही इसे चलाने वाली नौकरशाही इस कार्य के लिए प्रशिक्षित है। यह मानना ही हास्यास्पद है कि सिर्फ एक सामान्य परीक्षा पास कर सरकारी विभागों में चयनित होने से कोई शहर जैसे जटिल पारिस्थितिकी तंत्र को चलाने के काबिल हो जाता है, खास तौर पर वे जिनका शहर प्रबंधन से संबंधित विषयों की कोई पृष्ठभूमि ही न हो। दूसरा प्रमुख कारण है अपेक्षित संस्थागत तंत्र का अभाव। आर्थिक सुधारों के करीब 25 साल गुजर जाने के बाद भी अभी तक शहरी प्रशासन की रीति-नीति में कोई खास सुधार नहीं हुआ है। यह अभी भी लालफीताशाही और पिछली शताब्दी के अधिनियम में ही फंसा हुआ हैं। यह समस्या आज के समय और भी पेचीदा हो जाती है जब तेजी से बदलती प्रौद्योगिकी के सामने पुराने नियम-कानून बेमानी होते जा रहे हैं। उदाहरण के लिए दिल्ली सरकार और तकनीक आधारित ओला और उबर जैसी टैक्सी सर्विस के बीच चल रहा विवाद है। इंटरनेट और स्मार्टफोन ने टैक्सी सर्विस का पूरा बाजार ही कुछ सालों में बदल दिया है, परंतु इससे जुड़े अधिनियम बदलते परिवेश से कदमताल मिलाने में असमर्थ रहे हैं। इन्हीं नियमों को आधार बनाकर केजरीवाल सरकार नई तकनीक को गैरकानूनी बताते हुए उन्हें पुराने ढर्रे पर चलने को मजबूर करना चाहती है।
यही समस्या स्मार्ट सिटी की परियोजना में भी है। भवन निर्माण, इंजीनियरिंग इत्यादि की तकनीक हर कुछ साल में बदल रही है, परंतु शहरों के नियम और निर्माण संबंधित मानक जैसे सामग्री, सुरक्षा मानक क्या हों, निर्माण की तकनीक क्या हो, अभी भी आदिम काल के ही चल रहे हैं। इंडस्ट्री के मानक और सरकारी मानक अलग हैं, जिसके कारण निर्माण कार्यों में न तो नई सोच या डिजाइन और न ही नई उन्नत तकनीक आ पा रही है। शहरों के अधिनियम और मानक को सामयिक बनाने में हम आखिर क्यों असफल रहे हैं, इसका एक महत्वपूर्ण कारण विकेंद्रीकरण का अभाव है। हर शहर दूसरे से अलग होता है। सभी पर एक ही समान नीति या मानक लागू नहीं किए जा सकते। सॉफ्टवेयर इंडस्ट्री के केंद्र बेंगलुरू और कार इंडस्ट्री के केंद्र औरंगाबाद की शहरी विकास से संबंधित आवश्यकताएं अलग-अलग हैं। न सिर्फ उनके आर्थिक ढांचे अलग हैं, बल्कि वहां रहने वाली जनसंख्या के समीकरण और उनकी मांगें भी अलग हैं। ऐसे में दोनों जगह होने वाले शहरी विकास का स्वरूप एक जैसा नहीं हो सकता। उन्हें अपनी नीति, अधिनियम बनाने की स्वतंत्रता होनी चाहिए और इसके लिए स्थानीय निकायों के ज्यादा अधिकार होने चाहिए। परंतु इस स्तर पर संस्थागत क्षमता और नौकरशाही में विशेषज्ञता का और भी अधिक अभाव है।
आज आवश्यकता यह है कि शहरी प्रशासन में संरचनात्मक सुधार किए जाएं। प्रशासन चलाने वालों की चयन प्रक्रिया में परिवर्तन हो, जिसमें शहरी प्रबंधन और समस्याओं से संबंधित क्षेत्र के विशेषज्ञों को वरीयता दी जाए। स्थानीय निकायों का अधिकार क्षेत्र और वित्तीय स्वतंत्रता के साथ-साथ निर्णय लेने का दायरा भी बढ़ना चाहिए। आज के प्रसंग में संस्थागत सुधार एक निरंतर चलने वाली प्रक्रिया है। इसे पांच या दस साल में एक बार होने वाला अभ्यास नहीं बनाया जा सकता है। इसका मुख्य कारण प्रौद्योगिकीय परिवर्तन है, जिसकी गति बढ़ती ही जा रही है और जिसके कारण शहरों की अर्थव्यवस्था और उत्पादन प्रक्रिया भी हर कुछ साल में बदल रही है। आज विश्व की 50 प्रतिशत से ज्यादा आबादी शहरों में रह रही है। भारत में भी यह संख्या 33 प्रतिशत तक पहुंच चुकी है और आने वाले 25 सालों में करीब 30 करोड़ लोगों के गांव छोड़कर शहरों में बसने का अनुमान है। जाहिर है कि शहरों के प्रबंधन और विकास को अगर अभी भी गंभीरता से नहीं लिया गया तो आने वाला समय और कष्टकारी साबित होने वाला है, जिसकी झलक अभी से ही दिख रही है। चाहे वह बिखर चुका कानपुर हो, डूबता हैदराबाद हो या फिर प्रदूषण, गंदगी और अत्यधिक जनसंख्या घनत्व के कारण हर दो महीने पर एक नई महामारी से जूझती दिल्ली हो।
[ लेखक अभिनव प्रकाश सिंह, दिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय में असिस्टेंट प्रोफेसर हैं ]
मराठा आंदोलन के पीछे छिपी कड़वी हकीकत
पर्यावरणविद और कृषि विशेषज्ञ
Date: 06-10-16
Add clean air to Swachh Bharat goals
Clean air must become part of the Swachh Bharat campaign. High level of pollutants not only damage health but also contribute to global warming. Effective policy and regulatory interventions are called for. The absence of robust data has hampered efforts to improve air quality. The government must strengthen the capacity to monitor air quality through roll-out of standardised methods, and use of reliable and good quality instrumentation. Pollution control boards need to put in place a system of regular apportionment studies to identify and monitor sources of pollution. It would help assess the impact of existing interventions, and design interventions that yield positive results. There is a need to invest in research on the impact and health burden of different kinds of pollutants, to improve the efficacy of policy measures. Reliable data is key.
Effective interventions to improve air quality call for concerted and collaborative action by governments at all levels. A regional approach that involves experts across disciplines needs to be adopted. There is no silver bullet. Identify a basket of measures, ranging from denser urbanisation to minimise commutes and better public transport to energy efficiency and clean fuels. Monitor and assess the effects of interventions, relentlessly, to recalibrate those interventions.
Date: 06-10-16
जीवन को आसान बना देगी कृत्रिम बुद्घिमता!
हमें उन क्षेत्रों को चिह्निïत करना चाहिए जिनमें कृत्रिम बुद्घिमता का फायदा उठाकर व्यापक परिवर्तन लाए जा सकते हैं। विस्तार से जानकारी दे रहे हैं अजित बालकृष्णन
Date: 06-10-16
मद्य निषेध और सख्त
गत सप्ताह पटना उच्च न्यायालय ने बिहार सरकार के उन संशोधनों को असंवैधानिक ठहरा दिया जो उसने सन 1915 के आबकारी अधिनियम में किए थे। इनके अधीन शराब की बिक्री और उसे रखने पर प्रतिबंध लगाया गया था। फैसले में कहा गया कि जो कानून संविधान में राज्य के नीति निर्देशक तत्त्वों में औचित्य मांगते हैं उनको भी तार्किक होना चाहिए और मूल अधिकारों का सम्मान करना चाहिए। इसके अलावा अदालत ने कहा कि इस कानून के तहत उल्लिखित दंड पूरी तरह अतार्किक और क्रूर था जिसे सभ्य समाज में उचित नहीं ठहराया जा सकता। अदालत ने कहा कि इसे एक पुलिस शासित राज्य में ही उचित ठहराया जा सकता है और हम वह नहीं हैं। दुर्भाग्यवश इस संकेत को सकारात्मक ढंग से लेने के बजाय बिहार के मुख्यमंत्री नीतीश कुमार ने और जोर आजमाइश का निर्णय लिया। नीतीश अपने मौजूदा शासनकाल में शराबबंदी को लेकर सख्ती से अड़े हुए हैं। दो अक्टूबर को आहूत कैबिनेट की विशेष बैठक में राज्य सरकार ने बिहार शराबबंदी एवं आबकारी अधिनियम 2016 को अधिसूचित किया जो काफी हद तक उन संशोधन के समान ही है जिन्हें उच्च न्यायालय ने रद्द किया।
To be truly transparent
Only a full-time commission, which is independent of the government and the judiciary, can impart transparency and credibility to the system of appointments to the higher judiciary
For this reason, the independence of the judiciary from the executive and legislature has been regarded a cornerstone of the Constitution, and the Supreme Court has held it as an inviolable part of the basic structure of the Constitution. It is on this basis that the Supreme Court, in the Second Judges Case in 1993, took over the power of appointing judges from the executive to itself, holding that the government’s primacy in appointing judges would also compromise the independence of the judiciary. The independence of the judiciary was seen not just as functional independence but independence in manner of appointments.
Opacity in appointments
Since then, a collegium of three/five senior-most judges of the Supreme Court have had the decisive say in selecting judges to the Supreme Court/high courts. This creative reinterpretation by the Supreme Court of the Articles of the Constitution dealing with appointment of judges has improved independence of the judiciary, inasmuch as judges appointed subsequently are less liable to be politically partisan or be influenced by the executive. It has, however, not fully solved the problem of independence, since judicial independence is also compromised by the lure of post-retirement jobs in commissions and tribunals, in the hands of the executive, or the permission for foreign trips for judges, also in the hands of the government.
When the power to appoint was with the government, especially in the later years, the government often used it to appoint politically partisan or subservient judges. Also, since there was no transparency, appointments were often arbitrary and nepotistic. With appointments taken over by the judiciary, the government’s ability to influence the appointments and thus appoint politically partisan or pliable people got reduced, but the problem of nepotism and arbitrariness continued. The collegium also did not lay down any criteria for appointments or any method for evaluating candidates on those criteria. It also did not lay down any system for transparency in appointments. Thus, appointments continued to be made in an arbitrary and nepotistic manner with the people not being informed about who was going to be appointed and on what basis. Earlier it was said that in order to become a judge, one did not need to know the law but the law minister. It is now said that one need not know the law but the existing collegium of judges to become a judge.
In order to regain some control over appointments, the government introduced the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act. This Act provided for a selection committee of six people, which included three senior-most sitting judges of the Supreme Court, the Law Minister, and two persons to be selected by a committee of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Chief Justice of India. It also provided that the Secretariat of the Appointments Commission would be in the Law Ministry. It further provided that any two members of the NJAC could veto the recommendation of the other four.
Government vs judiciary
Experience has shown that the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition (who also hopes to become Prime Minister) are usually in agreement about appointing weak and pliable people to regulatory institutions and those who select members of such institutions, in order to weaken regulation of the political class. There was thus justified apprehension that the NJAC would dilute independence of the judiciary by giving the government a significant say in appointments. Therefore, the Supreme Court struck down the constitutional validity of the amendment introducing the NJAC as well as the NJAC Act on the ground that it diluted the independence of the judiciary which was part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
However, the Supreme Court did not take this opportunity to lay down any system of transparency in selection of judges. On the other hand, it left it to the government to devise a memorandum of procedure for selecting judges, which would have to be approved by the Chief Justice of India. This has resulted in the government trying to introduce clauses that could enable it to veto any recommendation on national security considerations. The memorandum of procedure is therefore stuck, with no agreement in sight between the government and the Chief Justice of India. The government is using this to delay appointments recommended by the collegium. Judicial appointments have thus become hostage to the fight between the government and the judiciary on who should control appointments.
Need for a full-time body
The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms has for long recommended that selection to the higher judiciary must be made by a full-time (not ex officio) body, which is independent of the government and the judiciary and which goes about the selection in a rational and transparent manner. The business of selecting hundreds of judges in a year to the higher judiciary, if done properly, would require at least a thousand candidates to be considered and comparatively evaluated over multidimensional criteria in a fair and rational manner. This would require a full-time body, which could devote itself to this process, with a large secretariat. The job cannot be done by an ex officio body of judges and the law minister, who are extremely busy persons.
There also needs to be some transparency in the selection to prevent arbitrariness or nepotism. Minimum transparency would require that the criteria for selection of judges be made known, the comparative evaluation of candidates also be made known, and names of shortlisted/selected candidates announced before appointment, so that those who have relevant information about the candidate can send it to the appointing authority. Basic criteria to judge the competence of a candidate should include integrity, competence, judicial temperament, common sense and sensitivity towards the problems of the common man, among others. A system modelled on the British Judicial Appointments Commission, which follows a method to evaluate candidates based on predetermined and set criteria, is well worth considering.
The members of the selection authority could be retired judges or even laypersons and should be selected by a broad-based selection committee in which the government and the judiciary play a role, but not a dominant one. It is only such an independent full-time body that can be expected to select judges in a fair and rational manner.
End the turf tussle
While the Right to Information Act made the judiciary a public authority, the judiciary has stymied the right to information vis-à-vis itself and consistently refused to disclose information on its administrative or judicial functioning. Information on judicial appointments and pending judgments has been refused by the Supreme Court, that has challenged every decision of the Central Information Commission asking it to disclose such information.
Appointments to the higher judiciary are too serious a business to be left to people who do not have any time and who function without any system or transparency. It is imperative that a system for selection of judges be put in place and a full-time independent body be constituted to ensure that only those persons who are in tune with the egalitarian constitutional philosophy, and who have some sensitivity and understanding about the common people of the country are appointed.
The road to securing judicial accountability is long and hard, but proper accountability for such a powerful and vital organ like the Indian judiciary is essential for the survival of the rule of law and democracy in this country. The time has come for the people of the country, who are the real stakeholders in an honestly functioning judiciary, to assert themselves and demand for such a body to be appointed and this scuffle over judicial appointments to be laid to rest.
Prashant Bhushan is a public interest advocate and convener, Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms.
Date: 05-10-16
Not simply a vision thing
“Bt cotton, Bt brinjal and many technologies of the future exist through the expectations they generate and mobilise about the future.” File photos of students in Chandigarh protesting against Bt brinjal. Photo: Reuters
Monsanto recently decided that it would stop the release of new genetically modified (GM) cotton technology because of “uncertainty in the business and regulatory environment”. At the same time, it was reported that GM mustard has moved closer to obtaining clearance for commercial cultivation in India following a key committee’s favourable assessment on issues of soil suitability and risks to health and ecology.
The issues involved are complex and contested, and the challenges and contradictions may be evident to even the most casual of observers. Bt brinjal itself may have faded away from public discourse but the debacle over its introduction is not something that will be forgotten in a hurry. The contestations over Bt cotton continue to be alive in scientific research, in experiences on the field, and in policy debates. The seed industry has, in fact, split down the middle over a reorientation of the regulatory and policy frameworks related to Bt cotton. And yet, for a certain prominent section of the science and technology (S&T) establishment of the country, the promise of GM mustard trumps all scepticism.
Contestations
The conundrum here is not so much about the technology itself as it is about the promise that imbues the technology and which holds the present and the future together. Building promises is very similar to building facts, notes Cynthia Selin who studies the intersection of science, technology and society. It is the promise and vision of the future that then becomes key in generating a constellation that provides social and political legitimacy on the one hand, and much-needed financial resources on the other. Bt cotton, Bt brinjal and many technologies of the future exist through the expectations they generate and mobilise about the future. The act of developing a technology, therefore, is as much work inside the laboratory as it should be of engaging with the state and society and with their various concerns and questions. This will not be possible if the public is seen as ignorant or ill-informed, and the activist reactionary or an agent of vested interests. The contestation is, in fact, over the vision of S&T, of society and, for that matter, of the future itself.
In the case of GM mustard, work was done at Delhi University using public money provided by the government. And yet it needed the Central Information Commissioner to say that biosafety data around GM organisms should be available in the public domain. There are some key questions here. What explains, for instance, this deficit of trust in the public and in democratic mechanisms set up by the very institutions that provide the resources and the legitimacy for these new technologies? Is it an anxiety about failure of the technologist or of the technology itself? Or is it about the stakes involved in the socio-technical-economic system that has been mobilised to create the legitimacy in the first place? Does it say something about the potential failure of an imaginary technology that is based exclusively on the promise of the future? Can the narrative be one of hope and promise alone with no space for doubt or the possibility of any failure at all?
Technology Vision 2035
This indeed is the premise one sees embedded in India’s Technology Vision 2035 (TV 2035), a vision produced by the Technology Information, Forecasting and Assessment Council (TIFAC), an autonomous organisation under the Department of Science and Technology. Released earlier this year by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, TV 2035 charts out trajectories for society through various technologies that will help make India a ‘developed’ country by 2035. The vision is both an account of a future and a route to that future where technology delivers, provides and secures. Risk and vulnerabilities that are inherent to technology and therefore to our increasingly ‘technological cultures’, as Professor Wiebe Bijker, sociologist of science and technology, calls them, are part of the narrative in only a very marginal manner. There is little, if any, doubt about the capacity of technology and the different technologies to deliver the goods. TV 2035 sees people opposed to certain technologies like nuclear and big dams as a barrier to their dreams. These then need to be addressed through better governance and not better technological design because “bottlenecks lie in policy and not technology”.The past and the present, we know, are full of various dilemmas, challenges, even failures of technological promises and yet, a substantive engagement with the ethical, legal and social (ESLA) issues of research, development and deployment of technology is conspicuous by its virtual absence.
When failure and risk are integral parts of the technological enterprise, why is it that technological visions like TV 2035 have such little space for including and discussing them? It may not be a conscious choice, but it is not an innocent one either. The particular question here is not whether GM mustard is acceptable, which is a rather different debate. The point is to note that the promise and the promissory visible frontstage in advocating a GM mustard is complemented by a vision backstage that is unwilling or perhaps unable to look at anything but that promise. The ideal of the democratic in scientific and technological choices, while desirable, is certainly not an easy one to realise because the messy issues of the ethical, legal and social have to be dealt with both frontstage and backstage.
Political and democratic promise
An illustration of this is visible in a situation where the technological only appears marginal at first glance. On a visit to Kashmir, a conciliatory Home Minister Rajnath Singh offered to engage with anyone who was interested in finding a solution to the crisis there. “I will be staying at the Nehru Guest House. Those who believe in Kashmiriyat, Insaniyat and Jamhooriyat are welcome,” he tweeted in an effort to reach out to all. It was as much an invocation of the political and the democratic promise as it was of the technological promise of modern communications. The irony only came forth when he was asked how this message of the Home Minister would reach the people when the government itself had blocked Internet services.What more can one say of the inextricable intertwining of the political and the technological with the social, legal and ethical? The technological has promise, no doubt, but it is not untethered to chart territories of its own making.
Pankaj Sekhsaria and Naveen Thayyil are researchers at the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IIT-Delhi. Vanya Bisht, also a researcher in the department, contributed to the piece. The views here are their own.
Why Pakistani artists should condemn terror attacks in India
An artist represents freedom — the universal, unalienable idea that humanity must be free to live without fear, violence and misery.
Art, declared political and artistic voices recently amidst the din over banning Pakistani artists from Indian films, should be above politics. But nothing could be more impossible for art is dipped deeply in politics. Every stroke of a brush, every word from a pen, how a girl says yes or no in a film, is tangibly touched by the politics of its time. Colonial politics fuelled Bankim Chandra and Rabindranath Tagore’s art, daring to imagine a land where Indians could hold their head high. The politics of independent India, its black market, its poverty, its passion for dignity, informed the ‘‘angry young man” embodied by Amitabh Bachchan in the 1970s. And since liberalisation, global to local politics shape Indian art, from Karan Johar’s shiny movies to gritty outpourings like Dalit rap. To imagine art is above politics isn’t imagining art — it’s imagining a plastic product, bereft of the passions, the ideas, the violence and dreams of our times.
Similarly, imagining artists need not have a political stand is belittling artists. An artist isn’t a pretty party performer. An artist should entertain, of course — and no one appreciates Pakistani artist Fawad Khan’s mind-blowing stubble more than I. But an artist is more than a mimic. An artist represents freedom — the universal, unalienable idea that humanity must be free to live without fear, violence and misery. In this context, the desire to see Pakistani artists, appreciated in India, condemn the Uri attack, isn’t unreasonable. It’s logical for Uri was a cowardly and brutish assault upon those who had no opportunity to defend themselves. Any artist would want to throw in their colours, their songs with those who fight such darkness — and against those who want to crush the joy, the energy, all that jazz of the free world.History shows the opprobrium earned by artists who differentiate between human lives. Richard Wagner was a great
composer. But his association with Germany’s Nazi ideology shrank his stature, making it
hard for many who love Wagner’s Ring to not think, when it plays, of the millions herded into Holocaust camps, far
from wine, cheese, sonatas and philosophies. Some artists have lived within inhuman states, challenging them courageously. Through South Africa’s Apartheid, Nadine Gordimer shed light on darkness with heart-breaking, heart-warming words, even as the civilised world refused to play ball with a system that believed skin colour should determine a human’s life.
Terrorism also affronts people everywhere and all artists saying so makes sense. Previously, Pakistani artists condemned terror attacks in Peshawar and Paris. Their silence on terror hurting India thereby looks stark — and draws attention to their being Pakistani, rather than artists, which is a loss. Once, Faiz challenged the authorities of Pakistan, his irony leading him to the iron doors of Karachi jail. But that was an artist’s work — creating courage against violence by composing beautiful words and living them. By condemning terror in India, Fawad Khan and company could emphasise they’re not just Pakistan’s beautiful people, sprinking shers and sherwanis on routes perfumed with attar — and dynamite.
Yet, arguing art is above politics presents theorists with the opportunity to support lifting The Satanic Verses ban. In 1988, on this day, Salman Rushdie’s book was banned from import in India, a Congress government flirting with Muslim and Hindu right-wings, pulling Ayodhya, pushing Shah Bano into a cynical conjurer’s hat. But its Rushdie ban stamped hard on further art, M.F. Husain then hounded for drawing Hindu goddesses, Rohinton Mistry for discussing the Shiv Sena. Today, if art’s suddenly above politics, those arguing this should demand The Satanic Verses be free in India, to provoke and outrage, awe or bore, do what art does — help us develop the ability to say, “I hate this”, but not with a bomb.
The point of art is to shake, even break your heart and patch it up again, through paintings, words and chords that celebrate your life — and your right to live it, no matter who you are. Any art that doesn’t stand for that is just a thumka in the annals of time.
srijana.das@expressindia.com
(This article first appeared in the print edition under the headline ‘For Their Art’s Sake’)
