Thursday, October 23, 2008

my blogs

I request readers of my blogs to view ''. My blogs henceforth will appear there.

Thursday, October 02, 2008


I stopped posting for some time as I was otherwise busy being one of the reasons. However my disappointment was more to do with not getting coments on my blog, perhaps they are not worth comenting or there is not enough substance. However, I would like to continue my effort if only to let my thoughts come out of my mind. Hence the new postings.


Thai PM was forced to resign along with his Cabinet for hosting cookery shows while in office - perhaps not a significant crime as compared to our own Netas. Thai SC ruled so since the PM violated the constitution of the country. Thai Netas may be thinking how wonderful would it be if they were to be ruling India instead of Thailand!

The Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in India is now apparently taking a relook at the immunity the judges enjoy in our country. No fears, even if the Supreme Court Bench decides to do away with immunity to judges, our Netas would not allow the Indian Constitution amended as they themselves would probably be the targets the next time around.

Coming to think of the 'immunity' the intentions of the intellectuals who drafted the constitution of India perhaps never dreamt how progressive our Netas would be to do anything to retain their chairs and power for at least five years under the safety of 'immunity'. Does any one really subscribe that immunity is necessary to any one in our country as we expect our Netas to be above board and accountable to every action they take. To my mind it is only the jawans who guard our frontiers and just on orders are prepared to lay down their lives are the ones who should enjoy immunity and none else. Netas in our country win elections with money and mustle power and they continue to use the money and mustle to retain their seats even forgetting the principles with which a Party gets created or started by their elders. Opportunistic alliances, horse trading have become the necessary evils of our Party Chiefs. How I wish some thought will be given to the idea of doing away with immunity to any one in our country as we expect no body shoulod be above law.

Saturday, February 03, 2007

The President

This blog has the references to recent utterances attributed to Balasaheb Thakare, the Siva Sena Chief.

Political utterances of Balasaheb that Mr. President of India was blinded by his hair was condemned in due time and in due haste by the concerned. In Indian politics cricism of people in posititions however big they may be is not uncommon. The Chairperson of UPA called the NDA Prime Minister "gaddar", one of the senior leaders of BJP called Mrs. Sonia Gandhi by names. There were several other jokes which need no highlighting.

Coming to the actions of the Preident, poor President constitutionally is supposed to sign on the dotted lines as per the directives (either directly or indirectly) of the government of the day. At best he can refer back a bill for reconsideration of the Cabinet. If the bill comes back a second time, with or without changes, he has no option but to lump it. It was widely reported the kind of haste exhibited by the government and the President upholding the recommendation of the then Governor of Bihar. Neither the Government nor the President had any sense of shame when the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench declaed that the action of the Governor and that of the Government were unconstitutional.

It boils down to the fact that there is absolutely no need to cry foul to the utterances of the type attributed to Balasaheb. After winning the Bombay Municipal elections, he even said that he would stand by what he said.

Be that as it may, it is increasingly becoming clear that if the Constitution of India is to be protected from misuse, it can only be done by the Constitution Bench(es) of the Supreme Court and for this wisdom should prevail in posting honest and fearless judges to the Bench in question.

To be continued...

Monday, December 25, 2006

Cynical Indian

What prompted me to post this blog is an article by Mr. Swaminathan Ankaleswar Iyer in his column on Swaminomics in Times of India titled "TV viewers as 21st century juries".

I wonder whether cynicism is in Indians or in the article or somewhere else. I would like to think that Indians are generally a frustrated lot when they see political biggies get away with crime but perhaps not cynical. If one wants to really see cynical faces, one has to go back to the days when the present ministers were in he opposition. There were a bunch of them who could not hide their cynicism. Of course, I hold no brief for any politician. They are all the same - they are good at buying votes, selling principles/policies and above all try to protect their clan even when they know they are with criminical background.

I would also like to pose a question to the reader of the blog. Who really are governing the country? To me it looks like the Left, the RJD of Lalu Prasad Yadav, and the DMK. The biggest gainer is the Left as without UPA at the centre, they have no voice and merely they are left to take care of the trade unionism. They of course have their places in West Bengal and Kerala. But then again, are they sure about West Bengal with a moderate voice of Buddhadev as Chief Minister? Congress is satisfied as they have their Chairs which they have been missing for a number of years.

I would also like to ask another question to my reader. With the criminilisation of politics, the congress party as we see now has any principles/policies about which they can be proud of? My thinking is that the Congress Party of yester years is dead and the present party is a dead branch of a wonderful tree which may break any time.

With these things lingering in my mind, I would again think that judicial activism is a necessity. If anything the judiciary has to be expanded with more judges and more benches with impartial judges holding the positions. I am not saying there are no black sheep in the judicial system, they are there and they may continue to be there but perhaps they are a minority when compared to the politicians with not too clean record.

To be continued...

Monday, September 25, 2006

The Ubiquitous Chair - continued


Judicial Activism

Recently in the Times of India, Bangalore edition, there was a letter to the editor on the subject. I felt I should react to it since I too have been following the judicial activism in recent times. Of course in a democracy it should be the elected representatives of people that should pass laws needed for the good of the society. But look at our democracy? Who are the people that elect the representatives? How are the political parties winning the elections? Political parties are primarily concerned with how to come to power and RULE (RUIN) the country? They are busy with schemes that fetch returns to their coffers. They are busy in toppling Governments. They are only concerned about protecting their chairs. What right things are going on in the country? Or what right decisions are being taken by the government. Even the privatization of PSUs is put on hold. To save their chairs, the Office of Profit bill was introduced in the re-convened house which was earlier prorogued and got it passed with all parties supporting even after the President sent it back with suggestions. Look at the reservations issue. To garner votes and rule the country with populist measures, the bill was passed. Look at the States, the political parties are spending as if it is their Party fund, they give free power, free television sets, distribute agriculture land and so on. Whose money is it that the government is spending? Per se, judicial activism might seem rather undesirable. However, one should understand why judiciary interferes with the government decisions. On their own the interference is perhaps minimal. However, when there is a PIL or a similar approach to the courts, it is but natural that the courts adjudicate. Here again, they just don’t express their opinion without reason. They do hear the arguments from both sides and then only give their judgment. We all know what happened with the Bihar government in the recent past.

Now let us look at happenings in the country. When the CBI and the Ministry of Law joined together to reactivate the accounts of a suspect (?) the PM’s naïve statement was that the CBI is independent and he had no hand in that. Does one believe that any action by any Department is without the involvement of the Minister concerned or the PM? Look at the murder investigations in the Capital? Courts cannot be content with judging with what is presented before it by the government? Judiciary can’t be silent spectator to botches and cover-ups. Do we have a good government or a party to give good governance to its people? For a very long time it is known that the MPs take money to put questions in the Parliament. However only recently such MPs were suspended. But why such an action was not taken with reference to the OoP? Under the Office of Profit complaints, the Election Commission has taken action against only one MP and when there were several other complaints, which included even the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the EC seems to have slept over the issue until a revised bill is passed by the Parliament. We have been seeing increased terrorism in the country and no body talks of intelligence failure or failure to take action on the intelligence reports referred to the governments. What are we doing? We only see on the TV channels extensive debates without any conclusive remarks of what is lacking in the country and what the government has to do to protect its people. We certainly know one how kind the government is in giving money to the victims or their families whenever such man-made calamities take place. Money is in no short supply and therefore the State gives and the Center gives – of course whether this reaches the families or the victims is another question.

With such apprehensions, one should think seriously whether judicial interference is needed or not. If the governance is faulty, it surely needs interference from the judiciary and there is no doubt about it.

The country in the present circumstances needs judicial activism is perhaps one opinion that I would share. By this I do not hold that Judiciary is god sent and what it says is always sacrosanct.

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

The Ubiquitous Chair - OoP Chairs - continued

I did discuss in one of my previous publications the Office of Profit chairs which some of our Parliamentarians hold. As expected, there seem to be a deal between the Prime Minister and the President resulting in his signing on the dotted lines in the Bill to suit the Parliamentarians on the one hand and on the other constitution of a Joint Parliamentary Committee to discuss the suggestions made by the President. The purpose is served. The MPs can continue to enjoy the OoP as before and there will be more than enough time before the JPC submits its report. In any case what is JPC? It is again the same type of gentlemen – you scratch my back and I will scratch your back. The result of the JPC may be to include even more number of Offices so that every MP can have another OoP chair. Instead of all this fun, it is best if the Constitution of India is amended to indicate that every MP can occupy as many chairs as he pleases. Nothing wrong. In any case they do not seem to draw enough salary and perks as MPs which has resulted in the recent Cabinet approval to increase their salaries and perks. To stretch the argument further, it is perhaps better that every Political Party writes a Constitution of India afresh, put it before the public, and let the public choose. Better still we do not have a well written Constitution but have a one line constitution “government of the party, by the party and for the party” so that whichever party that comes to power can handle the affairs without arguments and counter arguments. It is perhaps increasingly becoming clear that the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India are the only two who can control the alarming decisions of our Parliament and its occupants.

More to follow....

Sunday, August 20, 2006

The Ubiquitous Chair - continued

A friend of mine to whom I referred the blog and with whom I discuss occasionally, has the following to offer:

Public opinion is supreme for democracy. Democracy is organization of opinion as against other forms of government, which are organizations of power. Public opinion should not be confused with popular opinion. Public opinion most often is not unique or single. Often these opinions reflect interests of the groups that express them. Media takes the responsibility of giving publicity to various opinions. Debates must be organized on various opinions, either by media or by government involving experts (impolitic) in the appropriate disciplines.

Will try to add....