Triple Talq Verdict by Supreme Court a Moral Booster for BJP

Posted by Dr. Gopal Unnikrishna Kurup


Triple Talq Verdict by Supreme Court a Moral  Booster for BJP

When on Tuesday, the SC verdict struck down triple talaq, the struggle by Muslim women to get their Constitutional right to gender equality and dignity started by Sha Bano over three decades back was brought to fruition, albeit partly, by another Bano, Shayara Bano, the courageous woman from Uttarakhand.
The SC verdict was welcomed widely by political parties across ideological prism, social activists, jurists and Muslim scholars—a sharp contrast to the vociferous protest that had greeted the apex court verdict in 1985, entitling Shah Bano, a 62 years old mother of five, to alimony. Unlike now, Muslim groups had then hit the streets in protest, prompting the ruling Congress leaders to join the chorus. Rajiv Gandhi developed cold feet, apprehensive of the vote bank repercussions of a Hindu PM allowing reforms in Muslim personal law, and hastily moved to bring in legislation to nullify the SC verdict much against considerable opposition from within, especially the women leaders.

Diametrically opposite is the situation now signifying how much India has progressed. Union law minister Ravishankar Prasad said that India of 2017 is not that of 1987 (when Sha Bano verdict was scuttled by Congress). Prime Minister Narendra Modi, BJP president Amit Shah and many senior BJP leaders were quick to welcome the court ruling, terming it as a victory for gender justice and dignity. BJP leaders were at pains to explain that the SC judgment should not be linked with religion.
The BJP’s stand on triple talaq is expected to appeal to the liberal intelligentsia within the Muslim community as also to the right-wing elements who have berated the Congress for allegedly indulging in “minority appeasement”. And the party now looks forward to considerable political gain, especially in the upcoming assembly elections in Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh.

The Conundrum of Article 35A

Posted by Dr. Gopal Unnikrishna Kurup

The Conundrum of Article 35A.

 

 

 

 It is rather depressing to dwell on the confounding problems the nation has to confront which have been created by the premier political family of the Congress in its pursuit of votebank politics and policy of appeasement.The latest conundrum is Article 35A of the Constitution conferring discriminating rights for Jammu&Kashmir.

 The Article 35A of the constitution sticks out almost as a fraud, injurious to the interests of the state and the country, connived at and committed by the then governing dispensation which was more concerned about vote bank politics and appeasement rather than  national interests.The article was created by the backdoor method of a Presidential order in 1954 as a sub provision of Article 35. But surprisingly you will not find this Article after Article 35 in the main body of the  Constitution, as is required when a Constitutional amendment is brought about, but in the appendix!  It is surprising and also worrisome that a provision like Article 35A has received little or no academic attention until recently.

Article 35 forms part of the "Fundamental Rights" chapter, and Article 35 A having been added after this provision  becomes part of the same chapter, but ironically, in essence and substance, it curtails the fundamental rights of a vast number of  citizens of our country. Article 35A is nothing but a restricted version of the 1927 & 1932 Orders empowering the state legislature to determine who are permanent residents of the state and confer on them various special rights and privileges while imposing restrictions on others

Unfortunately, by virtue of Article 5 of the Constitution of India, all residents of Jammu and Kashmir are citizens of India enjoined with various rights but not vice versa. Consequently, a situation has arisen when no one outside of Jammu and Kashmir can (i) purchase land there, (ii) get benefit of scholarship and admission to educational institutions of the state, (iii) apply for government employment in the state. It is not just limited to people outside of Jammu and Kashmir not satisfying the permanent resident criteria; even women marrying out of the state lose out on various rights and become "non-permanent" which makes them ineligible to buy land in their home state or benefit from various welfare legislation dealing with their right to property. Although in 2002, a full bench of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that even after marriage to outsiders, such women will not lose out on their permanent resident status, their children still do not have any rights as they are not included in the permanent resident category. In fact, one of the petitions pending before the Supreme Court highlights this aspect of discrimination and it is time that this issue is settled once and for all.

There are glaring instances where Article 35A has led to discrimination, violating the principles of human rights and various provisions of the constitution, forcing lakhs of people in  the state to lead the lives of second-class citizens. About 200 Valmiki families who were brought from Punjab to Jammu and Kashmir in 1957 to be employed as Safai Karamcharis were promised "permanent resident status", but 60 years on, their status is still in limbo. Even though many  members of these families have the educational qualifications required to apply for government employment, they are not entitled to do so except as Safai Karamcahris. Another glaring instance of discrimination pertains to the refugees from West Pakistan who migrated to Jammu and  Kashmir after partition but still treated as refugees. A population of around 3,00,000 is excluded from social welfare schemes, scholarships, admission to schools run by the  state government on account of this protective shield that the state of Jammu and Kashmir enjoys on account of Article 35A.

Ironically. the provision is a self-flagellation in a way. The economic potential of the state has not been realized as Article 35A acts as a deterrent to investment from outside It is the people of the state who have been deprived of the benefits that an open economy ushers in.. So, rather than aiding the people of Jammu and Kashmir, these provisions have, over the years, impeded the growth of the state.

Also, this situation has been exploited by separatists who find it easy to enlist unemployed youth in the name of protecting the Kashmiri identity  Every time these Articles are mentioned, all political parties except for the BJP raise the banner of revolt and predict doomsday for the country if these are repealed. Currently, we are witnessing the same scenario.   To end this, Article 35A should be approached dispassionately so that the Supreme Court can take a legal view of the entire issue.

THE GHASTLY TRAGEDY AT GORAKHPUR

Posted by Dr. Gopal Unnikrishna Kurup

 THE GHASTLY TRAGEDY AT GORAKHPUR

 Tragedies might appear as bolts from the blues, sometimes even as ordained due to wrath of heaven, but these days those of earthly reasons are  aplenty. News of one such ghastly tragedy struck us  last Friday. When reports of nearly 30 children dead in 48 hours in Gorakhpur's Baba Raghav Das (BRD) Medical College and Hospital trickled in on Friday night, it proved to be yet another ghastly example of the government's ailing public healthcare system in India. The death of these 30 children within a span of 48 hours and 63 children in the last five days for various reasons including lack of oxygen supply at the Uttar Pradesh hospital which was stopped when the hospital failed to clear its dues of over Rs 68 lakh. A letter by the vendor — Pushpa Sales Pvt Ltd — addressed to the hospital chief suggested an outstanding payment of Rs 68,65,702 was the reason behind the disruption of the oxygen supply. After 4.30 pm on Saturday, the BRD Medical College Principal, Rajiv Mishra was suspended. A judicial inquiry has been ordered. Both the Chief Minister Yogi Adithya Nath  and the Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya assured that "whoever is found guilty in the tragic and painful incident at BRD Medical College in Gorakhpur will certainly face stringent action,". After 3.30 pm on Saturday, the Prime Minister Office tweeted that Narendra Modi was closely monitoring the situation in Uttar Pradesh and said that Union minister of state for health Anupriya Patel and Union health secretary will take stock of situation.Union health minister JP Nadda has also sought a report from the Uttar Pradesh health department on the deaths of the children.

As always, the opposition saw it as an opportunity to derive political mileage. Insincere outbursts of outrage and laments flew at the state and central govts, as if it is the first ghastly incident taking place in that state. Rahul Gandhi with alacrity reserved only for such god-send opportunities took out his familiar template of Modi bashing, filled it up and threw at the people. Sonia ostentatiously commiserated with the hapless people, while retainers like Manish Tiwari stressed the "moral responsibility". Both he and co-retainer Ghulam Nabi Azad, demanded the head of Chief Minister and Health Minister ( who was a rival spokesman for BJP). Other parties, including the always-under-illusion Maya-vathi's donated their usual babel and bedlam.

No doubt, the state government authorities are at fault. A responsible opposition should identify the culprit level at which the failure occurred and pin down it in order to be positive and effective. Any negative and irresponsible blame game will only be counterproductive. The government has made it clear that no one from the hospital had informed them about the issue of lack of oxygen. Government at ministerial level is the solution to the problem and  is not the problem unless directly responsible for the mishap at that level.

The fact of the matter is that when it comes to public spending on healthcare, India lags behind abysmally. Research by medical journal Lancet showed that India ranked 154 out of 195 countries in terms of healthcare access, far behind countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, Ghana and Liberia. That is the legacy from the family Raj.

Hamid Ansari's Swansong

Posted by Dr. Gopal Unnikrishna Kurup

Hamid Ansari's Swan Song.

 

After 10 years in office , the swan-song sung by former Vice President Hamid Ansari on the last day of his office, wittingly it seems, has caused him to face a barrage of brickbats. The swan, suddenly, appeared to many as particolored and some what mosaic. It shows that politicians only just cover up their spots temporarily with a veneer of white correctness till the load of propriety and rectitude demanded by their office is going to be no more a burden on them. The very fact that he chose to make that contentious statement about Muslims in India being afraid and insecure, on the last day of his office indicates that he has been dying to blurt out that view for quite some time . He could be feeling relieved now after finally letting his steam out. But that also made him depart from the lofty position he had been in for so long by a fall and thud to the ground although he may not mind it believing that the fall has also shortened his distance to his community and crassness of politics.

Ansari might be resting with peace surrounded by his folks, having delivered his simmering resentment in the form of a parting kick and thus having not failed in thanks giving to the party which had hoisted him to the lofty position ten long years before. In that case, he must be reminded of a few facts.
That statement of his is similar to what Pakistan former President General Pervez Musharraf had stated as part of his attack on India and his anti India agenda internationally. Pakistan to date has been repeating that line.That India',s Vice President in his constitutional position is bearing out Musharraf and Pakistan could be to the great diplomatic discomfiture of India. Or, was that the intention of the statement?
Does he not know that this Hindu majority nation on its own has adopted the principle of secularism in its constitution? There have been three Muslim Presidents, five Supreme Court Chief Justices besides the creditable fact that the first female judge in the Supreme court was a Muslim,- Justice Fathima Beebi. Three front ranking super stars in Bollywood are Muslims besides a host of Muslim stars and super stars of the past. No cinema goer bothers about their religion. So open and welcoming are other fields and realms of political, cultural and social life in India. A political leader might ascribe his lofty position in office to people, his supporters, but surely for a man like Ansari who has seen only Rajya Sabha to become two-time Vice President can only be through the secular sentiments in the country.
It was a disappointing anticlimax acted by Ansari who among all his contemporary Muslim dramatis personae is the top beneficiary of the secular munificence in this country.