Home Blog Page 472

Pakistan needs to abolish its draconian Military Courts

Military Courts of Pakistan have unleashed a reign of judicial terror by awarding death sentence and prison terms to anyone who is perceived to be working against the interests of Pakistan Army.  

Pakistan is presently going through a judicial crisis of sorts. The Pakistan Army is refusing to let go of its Military Courts even though their instituted term including the one extension is over. It may be recollected that Military Courts were instituted in Pakistan in January 2015, with a constitutional amendment, as a response to the terror attack on a school in Peshawar. The objective was to speed up the trial of those suspected to be linked with terror related activities.

It was argued, at that stage, that the courts entailed a superimposition on the judicial framework of the nation while also breaching human rights guarantees. The move also amounted to an admission that the judicial system in the country was not performing satisfactorily.

It can be safely presumed that the Military Courts were set up due to pressure exerted by the Army which no political entity in Pakistan has ever been able to withstand. For the sake of political probity the courts were projected as a temporary measure. The Constitution amendment laid out a two year sunset period after which the amendment was to lapse.

Having got what it wanted, the Pakistan Army unleashed a rein of judicial terror. Hundreds were sentenced to death or to prison terms without releasing information about the trial, including names of these so-called convicts or the charges under which they were tried. Even the duration of the prison term awarded to these “convicts” were not made public and there was no system of appeal instituted. The appeals lodged in civil courts by the lawyers of these so-called accused spoke of coercion to extract confessions and the lack of legal access to them.

Many terrorists did meet their just end but the fact that many innocents were also taken into the dragnet cannot be denied, and it is here that the fallacy in justice prevailed as the right to a fair trial was undermined.

On expiry of the denominated two-year term in January 2017, a superficial exercise of handing over the pending cases to anti-terrorism courts was carried out, but soon enough the Nawaz Sharif government announced an extension for another two years.

Now that the extended term is also coming to an end the ball is in the court of the Imran Khan led government. The Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) has announced its opposition to any further extension of the term. “We have serious reservations about extending the tenure of the military courts.  Joint Investigation Teams have already been militarised, so we don’t want to (further) militarise our judicial system,” stated a spokesperson of the PPP.

The Pakistan Army has laid down its position with a tongue in cheek response. “Lawmakers can decide on the fate of Military Courts keeping in view the current situation, and their impact. We will do what Parliament tells us,” says the Pakistan Army spokesperson. The key to the statement lies in the assessment of the “current security situation”. Such an assessment is carried out solely by the Army with parliamentarians expected only to nod in unison. Hence, the Military Courts will be set aside only if the Army Chief so desires and there is no indication that he would desire any such thing.

Two relevant questions can be posed here. First, what have successive governments in Pakistan done over the last four years to boost up the judicial and administrative process in a manner that would make it capable of taking on its responsibilities? The answer is – Nothing. Second, is it not proven without doubt that neither Military Courts nor the political leadership of the country has been successful in eliminating the cult of terror in the country, so why carry on with such overreaching powers to the Pakistan Army? At least the judiciary should be allowed to function in a manner that is in line with international norms.

On one hand, the Pakistan Army looks for overreaching powers to deal with so-called terrorists and on the other it prevails upon the government to protect such terrorist organisations that it nurtures as Pak Army’s strategic assets. It is well known that Imran Khan has not extended the presidential ban on the well known terrorist organisation the Jamaat-ud-Dawa and its sham subsidiary the Falah-i-Insaniyat Foundation (FIF). No prizes to guess as to where the instructions to legitimise these organisations came from. Other terrorist leaders like Noor-ul-Haq Qadri and Syed Sallahuddin are given unhindered leeway to continue with their activities. So where are the military judges when all of this is going on?

It is quite amusing to note the manner in which the Pakistan Army is looked upon in the country as a guardian angel. Nawaz Sharif was prime minister under the blessings of the army as is Imran Khan now. The Army changes governments, runs the judiciary and lays down policy, all in the name of ensuring the security and the wellbeing of the people.

The reality is that the Pakistan Army likes to function with unhindered power. The Army Chief, General Qamar Bajwa, talks of giving priority to development over security but does nothing concrete in this direction. The lack of forward movement is attributed to the inefficiency of the government that is being changed with consistent regularity. With PPP and PML (N) having served their terms under the goodwill of the Army it is now the turn of Imran Khan led Tehreek-e-Insaaf to play the puppet.

The world is quite aware of the sham that is being played out in Pakistan. It is no wonder then that nobody is coming forward to bail out the bankrupt country. It is fast losing whatever little self respect it ever had. If Pakistan has o survive then its government and its Army will need to show some respect for democratic institutions and processes. Subverting the same for vested interests is not going to help. A good way to start would be to abolish the military courts and give the judiciary the place that it deserves in all civilised countries.

‘Pati, Patni Aur Woh’ suspense ends; Ananya Pandey, Karthik Aryan and Bhumi Pednekar in the lead roles

Even before the start of actual shoot, film “Pati, Patni Aur Woh” has been making headlines. Taapsee Pannu, who was last seen in Manmarziyaan, recently alleged that the producers dropped her without any proper intimation. According to her, “I was at the narration in November. I liked the script and gave it the go-ahead. I was asked to clear my schedule and I complied. Only the clauses remained to be negotiated. But they suddenly vanished. When I tried to confront the producers, I wasn’t given a proper reason.”

Responding to Taapsee’s allegations, producers Bhushan Kumar and Juno Chopra have clarified that, “When a script is locked, every director or producer approaches several actors for the casting of the film. We reached out to many actors, who we thought could be our potential protagonists in the film. Taapsee Pannu was one of the many actresses we had approached for one of the leading ladies in the film. However, we as Producers have never made any commitment to her.”

The film has finally got a fresh star cast on board, which includes Ananya Pandey, Karthik Aryan and Bhumi Pednekar.

I wasn’t educated at drama school with the aim of being a movie star: Nicole Kidman

Hollywood star Nicole Kidman believes she is happy to find her footing as a character actor. “I wasn’t educated at drama school with the aim of being a movie star,” she said. Kidman is also of the view that she ‘played it safe’ with her career in the past but now always looks for roles that will challenge her. ‘I think maybe I played it a little safe in the past, and went for the work I thought I was meant to do, which spoke to the idea of what and who an actress is supposed to be. But, for the most part, I’ve followed my spirit, which motivates me to go against the grain.

‘I’m completely spontaneous and random in my decisions. Never let it be said that I don’t have diverse taste. I love jumping into the deep end. Why not? That’s my favourite saying, I think it has such potential and choice, why not?’ Kidman told Psychologies magazine. The actor said life experiences have made her a better performer and she is happy to be a character actor.

Delhi HC approves release of Film on 1962 Sino-Indian war hero Rifleman Rawat

’72 Hours – Martyr who never died’  – a film based on the life of Rifleman Jaswant Singh Rawat, who was posthumously awarded the Maha Vir Chakra for gallantry during the 1962 Sino-Indian war,  was released on Friday after the Delhi High Court gave its approval.  

Rawat’s family members had moved the court against the release of the film, claiming that it had invaded their and Rawat’s privacy. Besides, they had also sought royalty from Sandhya Entertainment, the producer of the film, and demanded that the actor playing Rawat’s role be changed. The production house told the court that the family’s consent was taken in 2015 and the film was made on the basis of the information given by them. The Court observed that the man’s family members could not claim breach of their privacy as they had consented to the making of the film in 2015.

Rawat was a rifleman in the 4 Garhwal Rifles unit of the Army and had single-handedly prevented the Chinese army for three days from over-running his post during the 1962 Sino-Indian war, before he was killed on November 17, 1962. For his gallantry, he was still being honoured with promotions, the most recent one being of a Major General, it had said. It had also said the post which Rawat had defended against the Chinese Army was now named as Jaswant Garh and there was a room nearby where his personal belongings were still kept safe.

The trend of Judges opting for Recusal is incomprehensible

Justice Lalit Suri and Justice AK Sikri have put too much faith in their notion of “righteousness” and have opted to turn their back on call of duty. While a section of media may continue its slanderous reporting but that should not set the trend of abdication of one’s duty.

Munshi Premchand, the greatest Hindi writer of all times has a message for Justice Lalit Suri and Justice Sikri in his story – ‘Panch Parmeshwar’. The message is that once you sit in judgement, you become God and, in that role, you must put aside your prejudice and preferences, sift facts objectively and judge acts of omission fairly and fearlessly, irrespective of who has committed them and how others would take it if your verdict goes against them. It is obvious neither of the judges fit into Premchand’s idea of a Panch. Both of them recused themselves recently — one from hearing the Ram Janam Bhoomi case and the other from accepting the prestigious nomination for the Commonwealth Arbitral Tribunal – fearing that they will be accused of lacking in intellectual integrity and delivering coloured judgements.

Justice Lalit opted out of the five-member Constitution Bench that was to hear the Ram Janam Bhoomi land dispute, literally in panic. It happened minutes before the hearing began when it was pointed out that as a lawyer, he had pleaded on behalf of Kalyan Singh, then UP Chief Minister, in a case of contempt of court relating to the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992.  Justice Lalit insisted that it would be inappropriate for him to continue on the bench for he would be seen as favouring the BJP. By his logic, lawyers should not become judges in India, for they would have to frequently recuse themselves from hearing cases of clients whose cases they handled in courts from time to time. The question is, where do you draw the line and what should constitute as irrefutable reason for recusal. Can it be your religion, your caste, the state you come from, your friends, family or your ideological persuasions?

Justice Lalit may be thinking that he has taken a high moral ground but it is not so. He would have gone higher in national esteem had he risen above his professional association with his client, Kalyan Singh and wrote out a reasoned, balanced judgement based on incontrovertible facts in a case that has kept the nation on communal boil for decades. Unfortunately, he chose the easier route. He was afraid that he would be criticised for sympathising with crusaders of constructing Ram Mandir on the disputed site in Ayodhya. Apparently, he was more concerned about what denigrators would say and had no belief in his intellectual integrity and sense of objectivity. 

Justice A K Sikri’s case is even more inexplicable. As a member of the selection committee he had concurred with Prime Minister Narendra Modi to remove Alok Verma as Director of the CBI. The third member was Mallikarjun Kharge of the Congress who disagreed with the majority view. Typical of the slanderous standards of our media reporting, Justice Sikri was accused of siding with the PM Modi to return a favour that PM had bestowed on him by nominating him as a member of the London-based Arbitral Tribunal in the Commonwealth Secretariat. Instead of ignoring this rubbish, Justice Sikri rushed to the press. He explained that the Tribunal membership was not a plum job and that his consent had been taken much before he even knew that that he would be part of a committee that would terminate Alok Verma’s unsavoury dalliance with the CBI.

Justice Sikri did not stop at that. He withdrew his consent to be India’s nominee at the Arbitral Tribunal in the Commonwealth Secretariat. In doing so, he not only let down the country but also encouraged the congenital baiters to hunt for another prey on another day. He forgot that in May 2018, he had set aside governor’s decision and reduced time from 15 days to 48 hours for the BJP leader to prove his majority in Karnataka Assembly, paving way for the Congress-JDS combine to form the government. Still, he was offered the membership of the tribunal by the incumbent NDA (National Democratic Alliance) because government decisions are never taken on the basis of what others feel but what is required to serve the interests of the nation.   

Both Justices must be aware that all individuals have conflict of interest in their lives. But those who refuse to allow these conflicts to cloud their judgement make good leaders and they are remembered. I recall an ICS (Indian Civil Services) officer who had instructed the traffic police inspector to fine his wife for jumping the traffic signal and if she refused, put her in the lock up. During my college days I was an aggressive student leader fighting for the cause of students but that did not deter me from using force as an SP (Superintendent of Police) against the protesting students who were burning buses and looting shops.

All of us have preferences and prejudices which we acquire from the education we receive and the background we come from. But we do not abdicate our responsibilities, worrying that our decisions may be questioned and ridiculed. Justice Sikri and Justice Lalit seem to have put too much faith in their notion of righteousness and opted to turn their back on call of duty. We wanted them to be like Premchand’s Panch and dispense justice like Parmeshwar (God), unruffled by the noise in their surroundings. But Alas!            

Actor Anil Kapoor meets Prime Minister

Bollywood seems to have developed a special interest in meeting Prime Minister Modi. Just a week back a delegation from Bollywood, comprising of stars such as Ranveer Singh, Ranbir Kapoor, Alia Bhatt and Varun Dhawan had met the Prime Minster. Now, actor Anil Kapoor met the Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi yesterday.

The 62-year-old actor took to Twitter to share the news. “I had the opportunity to meet our h’ble Prime Minister @narendramodi ji today and I stand humbled and inspired in the wake of our conversation. His vision and his charisma are infectious and I’m grateful for the chance to have witnessed it in person,” Kapoor tweeted alongside a photograph with the prime minister.

Not much of a difference between Asiya Andrabi and Mehbooba Mufti : BJP MLC Surinder Ambardar

While speaking on the occasion of Kashmiri Pandit exdous today in Jammu, BJP MLC Surinder Ambardar said that Mehbooba Mufti has separatist tendencies and she is no different from Separatist leaders like Asiya Andrabi and Kashmiri Pandit’s murderer Bitta Kartay and that is the reason BJP broke the alliance with PDP after getting to know the regressive mindset of Mehbooba Mufti.

“It was a bad experience to run the government with Mehbooba Mufti. She had no capacity to run the government which she herself had said after the demise of her father Mufti Mohamed sayed,” Ambardar added. 

While speaking on the topic “Jammu and Kashmir –  The way ahead” , a dialogue in unresolved issues of Jammu and Kashmir with regards to Kashmiri Pandits and 30th year of exile organised by Ten Network and Earth News, MLC added that Kashmiri Pandit exodus was a civilisational onslaught and continues to be so even after three decades. He also added that there is a set pattern and design of Pakistan under which his community was forced was to leave it’s ancient and centuries old habitat for which Kashmiri mainstream and separatists are equally responsible.

Role of Indian diaspora in Nation’s socio-economic development

Diaspora India Media and Communication (DIMC) organised a high powered panel discussion on the “Role of Indian Diaspora in Nation’s Socio Economic Development,” at Ambedkar International centre, New Delhi. The event also witnessed the unveiling of the website of the organization www.diasporaindia.com.

The keynote address for the discussion was given by Shri Dnyaneshwar M. Mulay, Secretary (CPV & OIA), Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Government of India. The panel discussion that followed was chaired by Ashok Sajjanhar, Former Indian Ambassador to Sweden, Latvia and Kazakhstan. The panelists included Professor (Dr.) Kamla Dutt, an Indian American and an accomplished author, Mohammad Haleem Khan, former Secretary, Disinvestment, Government of India,  Ambassador Anup Mudgal, Former Indian High Commissioner to Mauritius and Colonel (Retired) Jaibans Singh, a reputed national affairs’ specialist and an accomplished author.

While terming the Indian Diaspora as a vibrant strength of the nation Shri Dnyaneshwar M. Mulay stressed the need to open communication channels with the community and the creation of a expert base on the subject. “Currently, many Indians who have done very well abroad still do not feel comfortable. Slowly things are picking up, but still more can be done to be much more effective,” he said. “Today evening is very significant that we are moving in the right direction. I’m really delighted to be part of this journey,” added Mulay.

Professor Kamla Dutt said that India is respected for its non-aggressive and holistic approach to life by any country hosting Indians. It is this quality which puts Indians in high credentials against any other country specially Chinese, Russians or British. Our spiritual face is key to the world to live in peace and together. We should stress on these as Indian Diaspora is more connected to roots on the social value systems and sprituality of India.

Md. Haleem Khan, Former Secretary to the Government of India stressed on the need to brings few practical supports and benefits to the Indian Diaspora community so that they feel more connected to the country. One time engagement in year is not sufficient. Highlighting the economic potential of the Diaspora Khan said that India continues to be the world’s top recipient of remittances from its Diaspora, gathering close 72 billion dollars in 2017-18, as opposed to USD 3 billion in 1991. He said that it is a matter of pride and significance that FDI inflows into India can be expected to cross the USD 80 billion mark in fiscal 2018-19.

Ambassador Ashok Sajjanhar presented a global view of the Diaspora community and appreciated the contributions of Indian Diaspora especially from the Gulf region and African region. Mr Sajjanhar observed that significant pie of remittance is contributed by those who are working in the blue collar jobs and not by white collar jobs. India has to build higher credibility, trust and continued engagement for serious partnership with the developed regions’ Indian Diaspora, he said.  “The role and participation of the Indian Diaspora has become more significant now than ever before. Prime Minister Modi has, on his many visits abroad, to countries like the United States, Canada, and the Gulf region etc., been able to enthuse the Indian Diaspora abroad like never before. This has created space for India at the high table at all global for a,” he added. He also said engagement with the Diaspora should not be limited to economics alone, but should be broadened further to include other areas such as culture, sports, literature and the like.

Shri Anup Mudgal said, “India has, over time, realised the importance of the Diaspora and set in motion in the last three to four years, several initiatives for closer engagement between them and India’s own developmental process.” He particularly laid stress on engagement with Indian origin youth living abroad, and particularly the student community, which he opined constitutes a significant component of global Diaspora.

Colonel (retired) Jaibans Singh said his interest in the Indian Diaspora is derived from the fact that 60 percent of his large family is settled in countries across the globe.

He stressed upon the need to look into the social and emotional aspects concerning NRI/PIO’s. “We need to realise that within our country there are a large number of aged mothers of immigrants, who are in various stages of depression. They have the money, build huge homes, spend as if there is no tomorrow, but feel socially isolated. This situation has a severe effect on their children living abroad.” Colonel Singh further opined that one reason behind the Diaspora reluctance to invest in India is their perception that Indians are not hard working or honest enough to put their money on. So, they prefer to make large houses, but won’t spend on business ventures.

Elaborating about the DIMC’s role in the nation’s socio economic development Pooran Chandra Pandey, Founding Chairman, DIMC said that DIMC will lay priority on hardcore research, evidence digging; reaching out to Indian Diaspora families in India and acting as a credible bridge between the Diaspora and the Government of India.

Shri Onkareshwar Pandey, Founder trustee of DIMC and a senior journalist gave an over view of DIMC, an organization that came into existence in 2013 with the sole aim to become the voice and supporting hand of Indian Diaspora and to provide them all possible required support and recognition in India. “In the last five years, DIMC has worked on the ground, started creating its ground network and has established a presence in 20 states of the country. We plan to cover the entire country, including at the district levels by the end of this year,” Pandey added.

A book titled “Achhi Auratein Aur Anya Kahaniyan” authored by Dr. Kamla Dutt was also released on the occasion and a film on the life and history of the Indian Diaspora in Mauritius, made by IGNOU, was screened. Dr. Daljeet Sachdeva, Deputy Director, IGNOU, and director of this film, gave a brief introduction about the film. 

For Shah Faesal it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee in Kashmir

Shah Faesal is the new flavor in the political landscape of Kashmir. A top rated IAS officer who suddenly had a twinge of conscience that has compelled him to find a new uncharted path. One wishes him well but there is a valid reason to remain skeptical about both his capability as well as his intentions.

Faesal has given interviews and spoken to several journalists after having left the service and it is from his statements that his intent can be deciphered. Faesal says that his decision is in response to the “Unabated killings in Kashmir and absence of credible political initiative from the Centre.” He wishes to “Re-imagine” the concept of electoral politics which, in their current form, he feels, are “an obstacle to the resolution (of Kashmir issue).”

Faesal is emphatic about his decision to not join any political party, but his statements indicate a separatist mindset. “The sentiment is that here people don’t relate to the idea of India,” he has said while also terming the Hurriyat as “the custodian of the sentiment of the Kashmir people.” This can be construed to mean that, in his view, the people of Kashmir are looking for “Azaadi” (freedom from India).

To put it simply, Faesal wants India to come forward, hat in hand, and hand over Kashmir to the separatist Hurriyat and to him to do whatever they will. To achieve his objective he is ready to exert pressure by talking incessantly about the wrongs being committed by security forces (that are fighting to contain terrorism) and play politics with the democratic electoral process in a manner that suits him.

It would be unbecoming to go so far as to say that he is on the payroll of some anti-India forces as is being alluded from some quarters but, at the same time, it would be simplistic to consider his decision to be entirely the product of a emotional upheaval. The fact that he has openly admitted to his admiration for Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan and feels “inspired” by him gives a clear idea as to where he will be looking for support.

It is time for Faesal to wake up and smell the coffee! The “unabated killings in Kashmir” that he talks about is something that worries every person in India and the world. In fact, Indian Army is most distressed by the violence, as is apparent from fervent appeals being constantly made to Kashmiri youth from the Army Chief to the junior-most company commander to shun the path of violence and express their problems in a political forum.  If Faesal wishes to make a difference he should also reach out to the youth and wean them away from the self destructive path of terrorism.

If he wants a “credible political initiative” then he should convince the Hurriyat to come on to the table with an open mind and clean hands. One would like to remind him that New Delhi, over the years, and with successive governments of both erstwhile UPA and the incumbent NDA, has given offer for such talks that have been shunned in a most arbitrary, highhanded and literally abusive manner by the Hurriyat. He should read more deeply into the Hurriyat meeting with Deputy Prime Minister Lal Krishna Advani in 2004, the offer for Round Table discussions by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh over two years from 2005 to 2006 and the latest statement by Home Minister Rajnath Singh expressing readiness to talk to those who may not necessarily be like-minded. Apart from waxing eloquent on the subject, Faesal should also specifically state what he wants the government to do beyond what it has done already. He should further give a guarantee that in the eventuality of the government agreeing to his suggestions, he will be able to get the Hurriyat and other political entities on board for meaningful talks. 

So far as the “Re-imagined electoral politics” are concerned, one will have to wait and see how he develops this model before commenting upon the same.  There are inherent contradictions in the posture that he has adopted.  Presently, it is unclear whether his concept involves standing for elections or not.

An initial reaction to his statements is one of dealing with a person who is either confused or intelligent beyond comprehension. He has nothing new to offer but, on the other hand, he seems to be ready to push a few more pliable youth to their deaths as ignominious terrorists. He is willing to join the bandwagon that believes in creating disruption and divisiveness of a type that the common man is fed up with.

One wonders if Faesal has bitten more than what he can chew. Being devoid of any new ideas he will only encroach into the space of the separatist leaders who are known to guard their position with exemplary determination. They are masters in not sharing the goodies even as they keep jumping ships in accordance with the situational demands. Nobody has been able to encroach in their territory for decades on end.

Nevertheless, in case Faesal is genuine in his concern for the people and aware that their future is secure only so long as they are a part of the democratic Indian Union, one would not hesitate from wishing him success. He has expressed a desire to “bridge the gap to represent the people truthfully,” it remains to be seen as to what he construes to be the truth. If what he has to sell is only “old wine in a new bottle” then he will face ignominy and frustration sooner than he expects, since he will also be seen as yet another self serving politician and a “daily wager” as he so disdainfully refers to the existing leaders of his region.