life in general: one of the most corrupt state governments in india

Haryana's current state government is, in my understanding of state politics in India, one of the most corrupt ones. It is a Congress government and according to me operates in as opaque and un-democratic manner as BJP's (Bharatiya Janata Party) governments in the states of Karnataka and Gujarat and BSP's (Bahujan Samaj Party) government in Uttar Pradesh. 


Below is a recent insightful news feature in Open magazine that details Haryana's Congress government's fanatical attempts to cover the corrupt tracks leading to its chief minister, B S Hooda.


The Congress government in the Centre is playing a deliberate silent spectator as undoubtedly a portion of the kickbacks earned in Haryana would be filling the coffers of the party in the Centre.


http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/nation/why-is-hooda-afraid-of-the-cbi

Why Is Hooda Afraid of the CBI?

And why his state Congress government is trying every crooked trick in the book to stall a CBI inquiry into charges of largescale corruption brought to light by a whistleblower forest officer


By Jay Mazoomdaar


Sanjiv Chaturvedi did’t see it coming. In the beginning, the whistleblower IFS officer thought he was fighting petty private interests skimming off taxpayers’ money and flouting wildlife norms. Five years on, he is up against pretty much the entire Haryana state machinery.

Last December, the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) wrote to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) that the CBI was ready to probe plantation scams worth several crores, a number of violations of forest and wildlife laws, and the motive of the Haryana government in slapping fabricated charges on the whistleblower who had flagged off these irregularities. The CVC advised the MoEF ‘to take up the matter of registration of FIR with the state government and subsequent transfer of the case to the CBI’.

For two months, Minister for Environment and Forests Jayanthi Natarajan sat on the CVC memorandum. After all, the corruption cases in question involved Haryana CM BS Hooda’s office, his cabinet colleague Kiran Choudhry, and nearly a dozen IFS and IAS officers. Then, after Natarajan received a few calls from the media, her ministry wrote to the state government last week, not asking it to register FIRs, but seeking its opinion on the issue. 

Over the past five years, the Haryana government has made several attempts at defending itself against Chaturvedi’s charges. Each time, the central authorities have found its defence inadequate, even “misleading”. In fact, when the case was referred to the CVC in June last year, MoEF secretary T Chatterjee noted why “it may not be prudent to request the state government to further investigate as their stand is quite clear,” which was “rhetorical…without any documentary support”

+++

A Congress minister deferring to the clout of a party strongman is not surprising. What is shocking is the extent to which the Hooda government has gone to scuttle a probe into what seemed, in the beginning, to be departmental cases of embezzlement and violation of rules in private interest. But surely, Hooda knows better because his government has been recklessly bending rules to hound the whistleblower.

I met Sanjiv Chaturvedi in August 2007, just a week into his suspension. As a Divisional Forest Officer (DFO), he had annoyed the then forest minister Kiran Choudhry by broaching two instances of irregularity and corruption—construction of an irrigation canal through Saraswati wildlife sanctuary without statutory clearance, and investment of public money in a herbal park on land belonging to, among others, an MLA who is now Chief Parliamentary Secretary (Forest).

So blatant were the violations that PC Rawat, then Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) of Haryana, could not issue an outright denial. “Not a big violation” was all he said on camera. Chief Wildlife Warden RD Jakati and his fuming minister refused to even go on record.

Soon, NGO Wildlife Trust of India went to the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) of the Supreme Court in the sanctuary case. In July 2008, CEC member-secretary MK Jiwrajka agreed, in his report, that ‘the construction works were started a) without obtaining approval under the Forest Conservation Act; b) in violation of the provision of the Wildlife Protection Act and c) without obtaining… permission from the honourable Supreme Court.’

Yet, Jiwrajka absolved the accused and closed the case because “on a suggestion made by the CEC, the irrigation department has voluntarily deposited Rs 1 crore…for undertaking conservation and protection work”. This, after the Haryana government had spent Rs 2.2 crore to pay lawyers in the case to defend the violations.

The CEC’s mandate, however, does not allow it to give a clean chit, or offer compromise solutions, to anyone found guilty. The apex court’s notification on its terms of reference clearly states that the CEC will ‘place its recommendations before the [Supreme] Court for orders’.

In April 2008, NGO Ekta Parishad moved court in the herbal park case. In August, the Prime Minister’s Office sought a response from the state. The Hooda government did not oblige. Instead, it transferred the management of the private land to the forest department in February 2009. The CEC in its October 2009 report exonerated the state. But transfer of management under Section 38 of the Indian Forest Act, 1972, does not affect ownership of the land. The case is still with the Supreme Court.

+++

Chaturvedi’s suspension order, approved by the CM in August 2007 without seeking his explanation, did not cite any grounds. When the state failed to substantiate the order in a mandatory detailed report to the Centre, the MoEF concluded that the suspension was “not sustainable, as the grounds…were not found to be justified”. The President of India revoked the suspension in January 2008.

But Chaturvedi had also been served a chargesheet by the state government soon after he was suspended. Even after his suspension had been revoked, Haryana did not withdraw the chargesheet. In August 2008, then principal secretary (forest) recommended that the charges be dropped because Chaturvedi was only doing his duty. But forest minister Choudhry returned the file to PCCF Rawat’s office for further comments. It would stay there for 15 months—that is, till Choudhry was forest minister.

Suspension lifted, Chaturvedi waited for six months before the state put him in a non-cadre post, but the move was stayed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. He was finally posted as DFO, Jhajjar, in January 2009.

Within one month in Jhajjar, he unearthed a fake plantation scam worth several crores. A chargesheet was served on 40 forest staffers, and 10 were suspended. Suspecting involvement of senior officers, Chaturvedi insisted on a vigilance probe. Instead, the Chief Minister’s Office had him transferred to Hisar in August 2009.

Two weeks in Hisar, Chaturvedi unearthed yet another plantation scam, and confronted his seniors by repeatedly seeking permission to initiate criminal proceedings for the embezzlement of public funds. Things came to a head in January 2010 when Chaturvedi sealed a large plywood unit that had, in collusion with senior forest officers, deposited Rs 26,000 instead of Rs 22 lakh, as licence fee.

The Chief Minister’s Office responded by declaring his post vacant when he was away on official training for 18 days in March 2010. After a month without a posting, Chaturvedi was made DFO (production) in the same division.

+++

Captain Ajay Singh Yadav succeeded Choudhry as the state forest minister after the November 2009 Assembly polls. PCCF Rawat had retired. In the next five months, two successive PCCFs and then Financial Commissioner (forest department) recommended that the charges be dropped against Chaturvedi. The new Forest minister was unmoved.

In April 2010, Keshni Anand Arora, a trusted officer of Kiran Choudhry’s in the tourism department, became the new Financial Commissioner (forest department). On Arora’s recommendation, an inquiry officer was appointed in May 2010, nearly three years after the chargesheet was slapped on Chaturvedi.

The inquiry meant that Chaturvedi would not be promoted, sent on deputation or even be allowed to quit the service. His next promotion was due in months. After nine years in the IFS, he was keen to leave Haryana on a central deputation. He was already saddled with a range of false cases, from the ridiculous (stealing a Kachnar tree) to the alarming (abetment to suicide). Even his personal life was not spared and he was described as a ‘person of a (sic) dubious character’ in the chargesheet.

His back against the wall, Chaturvedi appealed to the MoEF in May 2010 but got no response. By August, Chaturvedi was desperate and wrote to the President. In September, the Cabinet Secretariat asked the MoEF to take ‘appropriate action’ and the ministry set up a two-member inquiry committee.

+++

The inquiry ran into several hurdles. The IFS division in the MoEF tried to undermine the probe by issuing a ‘note’ instead of an ‘order’ while instituting the committee. Then, asked to comment, para-wise, on Chaturvedi’s charges within ten days, the Haryana government took 51 days to reply. Since an inquiry was already going on, the voluminous reply argued, the Centre would have to ‘kindly wait’.

It did not. Additional Inspector General Shally Ranjan submitted her report on 8 December, recommending that the Central Government quash the ‘fabricated chargesheet’ against Chaturvedi and send a strong directive to the state asking it to order a CBI inquiry ‘to prosecute the real culprits’. However, Inspector General (forest department) AK Srivastava, Ranjan’s senior colleague in the panel, and MoEF Secretary Vijai Sharma subsequently dropped the word ‘CBI’ from their file notes.

Then Forest Minister Jairam Ramesh decided to give the Haryana government one more chance. On 18 January 2011, the state reiterated its stand, without furnishing any new details. The next day, the MoEF issued an order. The President quashed the chargesheet against Chaturvedi.

+++

Snubbed twice by Presidential orders, the Hooda government was still unfazed. In March 2011, a belligerent state forest minister Ajay Yadav wrote to Ramesh, requesting him to ‘institute an enquiry in the matter of quashing the chargesheet and especially the tone, tenor and contents of the enquiry report’.

Around the same time, Chaturvedi also wrote to the MoEF, seeking a CBI probe into the irregularities he had been pointing out all along. In April 2011, the ministry sent a confidential note to the CEC seeking its opinion.

The MoEF inquiry report had recommended that the 2007 CEC order in the Saraswati wildlife sanctuary case be immediately challenged in the Supreme Court as it ‘rendered the punitive clauses’ of forest and wildlife laws ‘infructuous’ and could set a bad precedent.

Citing these ‘adverse criticisms’, CEC member-secretary Jiwrajka refrained from offering any ‘advice in the matter’ and added that ‘the decision taken by the CEC’ in the Saraswati wildlife sanctuary case ‘does not preclude either the MoEF or the state from initiating penal action’ or approaching the SC.

In June 2011, MoEF secretary Chatterjee noted that ‘the documentary evidence submitted by Shri Chaturvedi is robust and in clinching support of his allegations’and that there was ‘need for an independent investigation’. Accordingly, Ramesh replied to his Haryana counterpart’s letter, dismissing his protestations on the quashed chargesheet and informing him that the MoEF was seeking the advice of the CVC on an investigation into the charges made by Chaturvedi.

+++

The Haryana government was not ready to give up yet.

A few days after receiving Chaturvedi’s dossier of allegations, Prabhat Kumar, director, CVC, wrote a note on 13 July to the MoEF, observing that Chaturvedi’s complaints were ‘serious in nature’ and that the ministry should take up the issue of his protection with the state. The same day, in another note for his boss Additional Secretary Hari Kumar, he concluded that a ‘CBI inquiry may not be required at all as the matter has already been considered by CEC and the elements of corruption angle (sic) is not prominently there’. The Additional Secretary agreed.

Vigilance commissioner R Sri Kumar was not convinced and decided to seek the opinion of the CBI. On 1 November, the CBI said it was willing to probe all charges, but the letter was acknowledged by Prabhat Kumar’s office after a month. On 16 December, the CVC finally wrote to the MoEF.

Chaturvedi is still waiting. After 10 transfers since 2007, he is still very much a pariah in the Hooda administration and does not feel safe in Haryana. He is waiting for a central deputation, for a CBI probe, for Union Minister Jayanthi Natarajan to do what is right.

It has been five years.

BRAZEN IN BENDING RULES Haryana Chief Minister BS Hooda (in black) with forest minister Kiran Choudhry

life in general: another example of tax-payers' money being spent on wrong things

Many newspapers and other media channels are flooded today with advertisements issued by various ministries in the central government and a few state governments themselves marking the 27th death anniversary of former Indian prime minister, Indira Gandhi. 

While reading the general newspaper, The Times of India, today morning I saw several half-page such ads. The ministers heading the ministries which have issued these ads are obviously not paying for the ads from theirs, or their party's (Congress'), pockets. It is coming from the government funds which is mainly tax money received from public, companies and other businesses.

Clearly, this is a obnoxious use of government funds. 

This particular blog focussed on Indian media has even gone into the details, provided some more examples from recent past, and made an estimate of the amount involved in the ads. Here is what that blog is saying:

https://wearethebest.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/indira-64-ads-32-pages-vs-patel-9-ads-3-pages/#comment-21484

Indira: 64 ads, 32 pages vs Patel: 9 ads, 3 pages

31 October 2011 

PRITAM SENGUPTA writes from New Delhi: After the advertising blitzkrieg to mark Rajiv Gandhi‘s birth and death anniversaries, and the death anniversary of his grandfather Jawaharlal Nehru earlier this year, Union ministries and Congress-led State governments and departments have once again splurged heavily to mark Indira Gandhi‘s death anniversary today.

In the 12 newspapers surveyed, there are 64 advertisements of various sizes, amounting to approximately 31½ published pages to mark the assassination of the former prime minister on this day, 27 years ago.

In contrast, Vallabhbhai Patel, the late Union home minister, whose birth anniverary too falls on October 31, gets 9 advertisements in the same 12 newspapers, amounting to 3 published pages. While there are multiple advertisements for Indira Gandhi, no paper has more than one ad for Patel.

The breakup of the Indira Gandhi ads are as under:

Hindustan Times: 22-page main issue; 9 Indira Gandhi ads amounting to 4¼ broadsheet pages
The Times of India: 30-page issue; 13 ads amounting to 6¼ broadsheet pages
Indian Express: 22-page issue; 9 ads amounting to 4 broadsheet pages
Mail Today (compact): 36-page issue; 3 ads amounting to 2¾ compact pages
The Hindu: 24-page issue; 8 ads amounting to 4 broadsheet pages
The Pioneer: 16-page issue; 7 ads amounting to 3¼ broadsheet pages
The Statesman: 16-page issue; 4 ads amounting to 2 broadsheet pages
The Telegraph: 22-page issue; 5 ads amounting to 2½ broadsheet pages
***
The Economic Times: 26-page issue; 3 ads amounting to 1½ pages
Business Standard: 14-page issue; 2 ads amouning to 1 page
Financial Express: 20-page issue; 1 ad amounting to half a page
Mint (Berliner): 24-page issue; 0 ads

This computation is only for 12 English newspapers; many other English papers have been left, as indeed has the entire language media which are more numerous than the English ones, several times over.

Among the 13 advertisers wishing the dear departed leader happy birthday this year are the ministries of information and broadcasting, commer and industry, steel, women and child development, health and family welfare, human resources development, development of north east region, and social justice and empowerment.

The state governments advertising their love are those of Rajasthan, Delhi and Andhra Pradesh. Besides, most newspapers carry an advertisement inserted by the Congress party.

All told, so far, this year, tax payers money have been spent in buying 265 advertisements amounting to 132 published pages in the 12 newspapers.

Last year, on the 19th death anniversary of Rajiv Gandhi, the historian Ramachandra Guha wrote in an edit-page article in The Telegraph, Calcutta:

“A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that on May 21, 2010, perhaps Rs 60 or 70 crore were spent by the taxpayer — without his and her consent — on praising Rajiv Gandhi. Since the practice has been in place since 2005, the aggregate expenditure to date on this account is probably in excess of Rs 300 crore.”

Also read: Rajiv Gandhi death anniversary: 69 ads over 41 pages in 12 newspapers

Jawaharlal Nehru death anniversary: 24 ads over 11 pages

Rajiv Gandhi birthday: 108 ads across 48 pages

life in general: undemocratic, dictatorial government of India

Criminal Procedure Code sections were applied by the Delhi Police, under instructions from the home ministry of the central government of India, in arresting civil activists Anna Hazare, Kiran Bedi, Arvind Kejriwal and a few other aides of Hazare, today morning.

These activists intended to hold a protest in Delhi against the weak anti-corruption legislation being put to vote by the government of India.

This is the latest incident of the government of India has been directly or indirectly acted against civil activists. There have been several similar instances all over the country, many of which go unreported in the mainstream media.

I am sure that the Congress party and other political parties which form part of the ruling alliance in the central government of India, will not be able to get away with their undemocratic, dictatorial acts for too long. 

Not that alternatives such as Hindu-extremist Bharatiya Janata Party, the Left parties and others are much better. The peformance of their governments in a few states where they won the state elections are not less dictatorial. But the Congress party cannot be allowed to get away with fast degeneration of democratic principles. 

Immediately below is a newsreport on Anna Hazare's arrest by the Delhi police, and following it is another commentary on the unfair restrictions which Anna Hazare and his followers were being asked to comply with.

1)

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/story/anna-hazare-arvind-kejriwal-kiran-bedi-arrested/1/148165.html

Unfazed Anna Hazare fasts in police custody as protests in his support spread far and wide 

ITGD Bureau  | New Delhi, August 16, 2011 | 07:37

Anna Hazare; Protests against Anna's arrest.

Hours before he was to launch his fast against corruption, Anna Hazare was on Tuesday arrested by the Delhi Police, preventing him from going ahead with his proposed protest. Other prominent activists in the Lokpal Bill campaign - Arvind Kejriwal, Kiran Bedi and Shanti Bhushan - were also arrested.

Delhi Police personnel and Anna Hazare supporters near his residence.

Hazare and his associates were arrested under CrPC sections 107 and 151. Hazare, a 73-year-old Gandhian, was taken into custody from a residential area in Mayur Vihar before he was to proceed to the venue of his fast at J.P. Park, where prohibitory orders are in place.

My arrest won't stop protest: AnnaIn a CD relased by his team members after his arrest, Hazare urged people to carry on the fight against corruption through non-violent means.

"How can my arrest stop this agitation against corruption? My team will carry on the anti-corruption stir further and this fight will continue," he said.

"I appeal to the people to be non-violent and not damage any individual's or national property. Nobody should be hurt," Hazare urged.

Hazare fasts in police custodyHazare, Bedi and Kejriwal were brought to the Delhi Police Officers' Mess at Civil Lines after their arrest, where the Gandhian launched a fast. Hazare's team said he was not even taking water.

Protests in support of Hazare
Team Anna is planning to move the Supreme Court against the arrests. Meanwhile, there were reports of massive support pouring in for Hazare, with IIT Kharagpur students planning to go on a hunger strike.

Residents of Hazare's village Ralegan Siddhi took to the streets in protest. Scores of people trooped out of their homes soon after news of the arrest of Hazare and his team members reached the village, about 230 km from Mumbai.

There was a spontaneous shutdown in the village. Many villagers, including women, marched to the local Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation bus depot and raised slogans against the government.

While thousands of activists staged a march in Pune, a large number of protestors started a gathering near Dadar in Mumbai. An agitation is planned at Azad Maidan in Mumbai later on Tuesday where prominent activists, including Medha Patkar, are expected to congregate.

Union Home Secretary R.K. Singh said efforts were made in the morning to persuade Hazare to give up his proposed fast, but he refused to relent.

Cops tried to persuade AnnaAccording to sources, senior police officials, including DCP (Crime) Ashok Chand, met with Hazare in the morning at an East Delhi apartment, where he was staying, in a bid to convince him to not go ahead with his planned protest defying prohibitory orders at J.P. Park.

Emergency is back, cries Bedi
Flaying the police move, Bedi said: "Emergency has revisited the country. This is undemocratic and unconstitutional," she said.

Around 500 supporters were with Anna at the time of his arrest. Chanting 'Bharat Mata ki jai' and 'Vande Matram', they created hurdles in the way of police personnel as they were trying to take him to a nearby police station.

Government has become dictatorial: Prashant BhushanPrashant Bhushan, a key civil society member of the joint Lokpal Bill draft committee, said: "The government has become dictatorial. Democratic rights are being infringed upon, which will lead to more anger among the people."

Anna detention undemocratic: Ramdev
Baba Ramdev said the arrest of Anna Hazare was undemocratic.

Ahead of the proposed fast by the Gandhian, a group of people had thronged the East Delhi apartment where Hazare was staying to pledge their support to his protest. Security personnel, including some in plainclothes and some from the special branch, were deployed around the apartment premises.

Chetan Bhagat, Anupam Kher slam arrest
Author Chetan Bhagat said Hazare's arrest was a disastrous move by the government while actor Anupam Kher called it the saddest day for Indian democracy. Anupam Kher said, "Government has angered the common man."

PM holds CCPA meetPrime Minister Manmohan  Singh held a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs to take stock of the situation.

After the Delhi Police denied him permission to hold his fast, Hazare had on Monday given a call to his supporters to fill up jails all over the country if he is arrested.

Addressing a press conference after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh slammed him for resorting to fast as a protest when Parliament was seized of the Lokpal bill, the Gandhian had said he will go to J.P. Park in Delhi on Tuesday, the venue of his fast, even though the Delhi Police imposed prohibitory orders.

"If I am arrested, I will continue my hunger strike in jail. If I am released, I will go back to the venue and this circle will continue," he said.

Hazare said once he is arrested, people should fill up the jails in every village across the country. "Going to jail for the country is no crime...It is a decoration," he said.

He accused the Prime Minister of "speaking" the language of his ministerial colleague Kapil Sibal saying that the Lokpal bill was before Parliament which will take the call.

Before his press conference, the 73-year old activist had made an unscheduled visit to Rajghat on Monday, where he sat in meditation. Hundreds of supporters gathered around him.

The Delhi Police refused permission to Gandhian and his supporters, saying that Hazare's team refused to give an undertaking on restricting the number of days of protest and protesters besides four other conditions.

In his speech at the Red Fort on Monday morning, the prime minister decried Hazare going on fast and said Parliament alone will decide on Lokpal and those having grievances should approach Parliamentary Committees for airing their views.
-With inputs from Headlines Today and PTI

2)
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/story/lokpal-bill-anna-hazare-fast-democracy/1/148168.html

Protest is central to a democracy

Gyanant Singh | August 16, 2011 | 08:03

Delhi Police has put arbitrary restrictions on Anna's fast.

It is ironic that the capital of the largest democracy in the world has no place for public protest. One might not agree with Anna Hazare or like his mode of protest but the manner in which he has virtually been denied a right to sit for an indefinite fast protest against corruption cannot be justified in a democratic country like India.
The government may be right in claiming that it was its prerogative to draft or give a final shape to the Lokpal Bill but it will find it difficult to explain the use of its power to regulate protests to virtually stifle dissent being expressed in the form of a peaceful protest.
Since the proposed protest was against inaction on part of the executive, the government dealing with the group should clearly seem to be fair and reasonable.
Despite Anna having compromised on the venue for his much publicised 'indefinite' fast protest beginning today, the Delhi Police restricted the duration of his protest to three days at the 'rear portion' of the Jai Prakash Narayan Park on Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg.
Incidentally, the Anna-led group had given up the Jantar Mantar site and had decided to settle for another venue after it was stressed that no 'indefinite' protest could be allowed at Jantar Mantar as many organisations would want to hold protest at the site as the monsoon session of Parliament was in progress.
The new venue was agreed to between the Anna camp and the police after the latter stated that such a long protest could not be allowed at Jantar Mantar in view of the need for equitable distribution of space for protests by various groups.
In a letter on August 16, the Delhi Police said it had 'now been advised' that the venue could not be allotted beyond 'one or two days' due to legal and administrative constraints. It would,
however, persuade the land owning agency to extend the period to three days. To add insult to injury, Anna, Shanti Bhushan, Prashant Bhushan, Arvind Kejriwal and Kiran Bedi have been asked to sign an undertaking that they would ensure that "the gathering does not exceed 4000/ 5000 persons". Apart from the fact that it would be beyond their control to predict the number of people unlike in political rallies where supporters are ferried to the venue, restricting the number of people to a maximum of 5,000 would amount to curtailing the rights of thousands of people who would like to voice their concern against corruption by going to the venue.
The right of people to visit the site to support the protest - which may be justified or unjustified - is independent of the right of Anna or his team.
With team Anna terming the restrictions as unconstitutional and gearing up to defy the Delhi Police diktats, Union minister Kapil Sibal quoted a Supreme Court judgment (1973 1 SCC 227) stating that "the right which flows from Art. 19(1)(b) is not a right to hold a meeting at any place and time". Though Sibal stopped at this, the next line of the judgment stresses that the state can only impose 'reasonable' restrictions in the interest of public order.
"Freedom of assembly is an essential element of a democratic system. The basic assumption in a democratic polity is that government shall be based on the consent of the governed," the Supreme Court has said in the judgment quoted by the minister.
It further stressed that free consent implied discussions and the right of citizens to "meet face to face with others for the discussion of their ideas and problems, and public streets are the 'natural' places for expression of opinion and dissemination of ideas." On limiting the crowd, Sibal said it could have been more if he had opted for far off Burari as the venue for protest. If this argument is taken to be valid, one cannot explain the symbolic march of our first freedom fighters from Meerut to Delhi in 1857 and repeated 'Delhi Chalo' refrain by protesters across the country.
Besides, the Delhi Police had initially agreed to venue. Sibal was further joined by his colleagues in the government to question the protest at a time when the Bill had already been introduced in Parliament.
The ministers reportedly stressed that Anna's demand was unconstitutional and his protest at this time was an affront to Parliament.
No doubt Parliament is an important institution but 'we the people' of the country also enjoy a special status in the Constitution.
Such a protest may not be justified in normal circumstances but to prevent it by imposing onerous conditions might be worse.

life in general & financial markets: its just another example of ugly face of congress/upa government

The midnight violent attack by the Delhi police, at the behest of India's Congress Party/UPA government in the centre, on the people who were at the Baba Ramdev-organised gathering at Ram Lila ground in New Delhi was only another example of the ugly & authoratarian face of the Congress Party/UPA government.

Such incidences have been happening in the hinterland of India since the last 8-9 years when Congress/UPA has been in power, and even prior to that under the previous regime of BJP/NDA. In states ruled by the communist and socialist parties too, police brutality on people has been a norm.

It is good that many affluent Indians, who are the supporters of Baba Ramdev, who are now getting aware of the violent face of the Congress/UPA government. I hope they also become sensitive to the problems of non-affluent Indians so that next time a government will find it difficult to turn into a monster.

Same applies to the hordes of financial market professionals including economists who look at a government's performance throw a very narrow prism.

life in general & financial markets: (part 2) the farce that is india's environment ministry

(click here for part 1 blogpost dated 31 Jan 2011)

There is an insightful story in the latest issue (dated 7 Feb '11) of weekly Outlook magazine on India's environment minister Jairam Ramesh's failure to deliver on the ground. I share it below.

Here goes (pics below are from Outlook's story itself):

Sandipan Chatterjee

It won’t rain forever Vedanta bauxite refinery plant in the Niyamgiri hills, Orissa

The Green Turns Grey

The environment minister promised much, but his flip-flops of late raise concern

Anuradha Raman

Mr Compromised

• Vedanta In ’09, Jairam said no to mining. Now says yes to refinery expansion though water is scarce.
• Polavaram dam Gives forest clearance, then seeks explanation
• Posco Under litigation as the ministry says yes to forest clearance for iron ore/steel plant
• Lavasa township Ministry report says ecologically sensitive Ghats will be affected. Later, Jairam lets off promoters with a fine.
• National Green Tribunal Set up after dismantling the National Environment Tribunal. It allows any party (including violators) to appeal against decisions.

Union environment minister Jairam Ramesh is fast discovering that striking a balance between the environment, wildlife, coastal zones, forests and corporate lobbies can be quite a minefield. On one side, whispers abound on how the minister missed out on being elevated to cabinet rank because of his green-is-my-favourite-colour theme song while, on the other, environmentalists express disappointment that he has not lived up to all the promises made. While no one disputes that the minister has raised awareness (or that he is a huge improvement on his predecessors), a perception is gaining ground that the minister has not quite delivered.

Indeed, the U-turns done by the ministry under his stewardship has baffled many. Vedanta, Polavaram, the Lavasa township and the coastal regulatory laws are some of the big issues on which Jairam not only appears to have backtracked but also compromised. And we are not even talking of the smaller projects that have not got much media attention. Somewhere down the line, the minister appears to have lost the goodwill of the very people whose causes he wants to champion. He says (see interview) he’s got his share of brickbats and bouquets. But such admissions alone will not help. Says Himanshu Thakkar of South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), “One expected transparent, participatory, environment-friendly policies and practices from someone who claims he believes in these values. When you do not see that, one is disappointed.”

Himanshu adds here that Jairam is more accessible and responsive than his predecessor, A. Raja, and initial action taken on projects like Posco, Vedanta, Adarsh apartments, the Navi Mumbai airport, the Lavasa project and  Maheshwar, among others, are welcome in parts. But there have also been many reversals, which some activists describe as the result of “a forked-tongue approach”. There are many who argue the minister should have initiated systemic actions. “Systems on compliance, transparency, better EIAS (environment impact assessments), greater participation by the affected people, nailing the fraudulent officers in charge of projects are some of the things he should have done. The minister hasn’t, raising doubts on whose side he is batting for.”

The environmentalists say inaction has led to a lot of confusion on the approval of big projects. For example, Jairam’s public utterings showing his willingness to allow the Vedanta refinery to expand after saying no to mining has muddied matters. “Where is the water for the refinery going to come from? Vedanta has already exhausted the streams nearby,” says Shankar Balakrishnan of Campaign for Survival and Dignity. Adds Himanshu, “While the minister earned praise for saying no to mining, he is sending confusing signals by agreeing to the expansion of the refinery.”

Similarly on Posco, Shankar argues that the ministry has not taken into account the views of the local people. “The Forest Rights Act needs to be complied with. But how come the environment ministry keeps giving approvals and then puts conditions? It’s confusing,” he says. Posco’s iron-ore mine, steel plant and private port (India’s largest foreign investment of Rs 52,000 crore) was granted forest clearance in 2009 and then a condition was added that it was subject to clearance of the Forest Rights Act (FRA)! Later, under pressure, a committee was appointed by the ministry to look at the FRA clearance under the stewardship of an official, in whose tenure an environment clearance was given to the project way back in ’05.
In Andhra Pradesh, there’s the controversial Polavaram dam which threatens to displace close to two lakh people, another example of how Jairam’s ministry approves and then disapproves. His ministry gave a forest clearance on July 28, 2010, without looking into the rights of the people. Prior to Jairam taking over, an environment clearance had already been sought for the project in ’05. While Jairam wrote in October 2010 to the Andhra CM enquiring whether the concerns of the local community had been factored in, little has come of it so far.

The Polavaram project threatens to displace mostly people from the marginalised adivasi communities. The project requires approximately 3,700 hectares of forest land as well as the sanction of the majority of these communities (who are entitled under the Forest Rights Act). The ministry granted the final forest clearance for the project in December ’09, stating that the approval is based on the assurance of the Andhra government that there are no rights to be settled under the Forest Rights Act in the project area. This, when the ministry’s own circular requires that the gram sabhas—not the state government—have to certify to the proper implementation of the law and have to grant their consent.

The ministry’s conditional clearance to the Lavasa township, said to have the backing of Congress ally, the NCP, is also intriguing. As per the environment ministry report, the Rs 3,000-crore hill town near Pune threatens to impact the Western Ghats. But now the builders have been let off with just a rap on the knuckles—in this case just a penalty.

Levelled off Aerial view of the Lavasa cityscape, in the core of the Western Ghats. (Photograph by Apoorva Salkade)

Adding to the list of damp squibs is Jairam’s inability to put transparent systems in place. Right from when he took over, environment groups had advised that conflict of interest rules be spelt out clearly, especially when it came to appointments on the Environment Assessment Committee on river valley and hydroelectric projects. The committee’s objective is to evaluate the environmental and social impacts of large dams and also look at no-dam options, and decide if the impact of the proposals are acceptable or not and if the project is viable.

The ministry has done little to appoint people with the right credentials. The current chairperson is a man who has served on the National Committee of the International Commission on Large Dams (INCOLD), a rabidly pro-large dam organisation which essentially works as a lobbying mechanism!

Meanwhile, what is really troubling environmentalists is the undue haste the ministry is showing in approving projects. Says Ritwick Datta, a lawyer who sought information under the RTI Act, “The minister’s own response was that as many as 535 projects of the total 769 projects have been approved and six were rejected! The period for which information was sought was from August 1, 2009, till July 31, 2010.”

On his part, Jairam says he is no enviro-caliph. But it’s time he becomes one, say environment experts.

life in general & financial markets: (part 1) the farce that is india's environment ministry

(click here for part 2 blogpost dated 2 Feb '11)

(pic shown below is courtesy http://article.wn.com/view/2010/07/16/Orissa_farmers_reject_new_Posco_package/#5)

The Congress Party-ruled government of India is notorious for cunning, but ugly and corrupt, use of the vast power it wields as the ruling government of the country.

In appointing a reasonably honest person, Jairam Ramesh, as the environment, the Congress government was being cunning as it tended to give an illusion of seriousness with regard to shoddy implementation of environment laws of India.

But even Jairam Ramesh has not been able to hold out against the extremely powerful, but dirty, forces within the Congress Party and its allies in the ruling government.  

Today, the environment ministry has given approval to a large steel project of Korean steel company, Posco, in the eastern Indian state of Orissa. The conditions that have been applied to the project would have anyway applied to any major project. But the violations that Posco committed have attracted no hard action by the government. The only thing that Jairam Ramesh could do was put on hold the project for a few weeks. That is all.

I am confident that the Congress Party-ruled government, or any other future government of India, will pay heavily for their horrendous track record with regard to environmental and people's basic rights including that of livelihood and property.

Here is what a press release, issued today, from a Orissa-based group, comprising of people affected by the Posco steel project had to say on the matter:

POSCO PRATIRODH SANGRAM SAMITI

Dhinkia, Nuagaon, Gadkujang; Jagatsinghpur District, Orissa

PRESS RELEASE: 31 January 2011

Scandalous Decision of Jairam Ramesh to OK POSCO project

Environment Minister disregards findings of his own Review and Statutory Clearances Committees

The decision of Indian Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh to give a comprehensive OK to the POSCO India Steel-Power Production-Captive Port project, based on some additional conditions, is nothing short of a total sell out to the politics of power and international capital. In a climate where each and every Minister of the Union Government is tumbling over with scandals, Ramesh had stood tall taking one brave legally and ethically correct decision after another. An acid test for him to continue this streak of decision making in the wider public interest, keeping in view intergenerational interests as well, was about the POSCO project. By his decision today to clear the project Ramesh has failed not only his own legacy, but has attacked the very rule of law based decision making that he has so often been harping on to be the basis of his functioning.

It is well known that the POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samithi, a peaceful movement of affected communities, has been systematically raising the deep, inter-generational and irreversible impacts of allowing this massive project to come up in the ecologically sensitive Jagatsinghpur district of Orissa. This struggle began with the inking of a most controversial MOU between Orissa State and Korea's Pohang Steel (POSCO) in 2005, proposing to establish the largest industrial project ever conceived in human history: a 12 MTPA steel plant backed by captive power plant; a captive port (described as “small” but designed to receive the largest commercial ships ever built - of CAPESIZE variety); a large township to accommodate over 100000 people; a large captive mine in Kandadhar (600 MT for local processing and 400 MT for export over 30 years); fresh water intake from over 100 kms. away (while denying many towns and cities drinking water) and extensive road and rail infrastructure to support the project.

The 4000 acres of land chosen for the plant site comprise of pristine coastal and deltaic ecosystems, with active nesting sites for the critically endangered Olive Ridley Turtles and the Horse Shoe Crabs. Over a third of this land comprises of coastal forests. Over 22000 people will be directly displaced by the steel plant alone, a number that has been repeatedly disputed by Orissa Government based on its spurious claims. Absolutely no impact assessment of any academic rigour worth its salt or regulatory review of value considering the mega scale of this project, has at all been conducted to support the project is environmentally and socially useful. In fact, the so-called Rapid Environment Impact Assessment reports prepared by M/s Dastur for POSCO India, was only for 4 MTPA steel production and not for the entire project as is required by law. Clearly against statutory standards and norms, the project was still accorded environmental, forest and coastal regulation zone clearances in 2007. In addition, the Orissa Government engaged the National Council for Applied Economic Research (NCAER) to cook up data claiming the benefits from the project as phenomenal, which when verified even cursorily proved to be junk statistics supporting desperate political games promoting the project.

Following what is widely regarded as a politically brave but legally correct decision of Jairam Ramesh to reject on grounds of fraud the clearance accorded to the infamous Vedanta Bauxite project in Orissa during 2010, the much larger POSCO issue came into focus. After all communities affected by POSCO had been engaged for over 5 years in the most outstanding example of peaceful resistance against such unprecedented unjust development. Bending to reason, Mr. Ramesh agreed to constitute a sub-Committee under the N. C. Saxena Committee reviewing Forest Rights Act implementation, to also enquire if the POSCO project's forest clearances were compliant with the Forests Rights Act enacted only in 2006. Producing their report the Committee put beyond any reasonable doubt that the forest clearances accorded were in comprehensive violation of the Forest Rights Act. A right step taken soon after by the Minister was to stay the forest clearance accorded - a decision taken that was taken at a time when brutal dislocation of forest dwelling communities was underway by the Orissa Government.

Subsequently, Ramesh ordered an independent enquiry into all aspects of the project's clearance coordinated by Ms. Meena Gupta, former MoEF Environment Secretary, with Mr. Devendra Pandey (IFS, Retd.), former Director of Forest Survey of India, Mr. V. Suresh, Advocate and PUCL activist and Dr. Urmila Pingle, expert on tribal affairs, as members. Following three months of deliberate and extensive consultations, and also detailed investigation into all aspects of the clearances accorded, and on the basis of detailed verification of compliance review files the Committee by a majority decision (3:1) comprehensively rejected all the clearances granted to the project. Ms. Meena Gupta who stood up for the POSCO project, dubiously recommended additional conditions to adjust against serious statutory violations and fraud in the decision making process – a line of thinking that Jairam Ramesh now scandalously subscribes to.

In the subsequent review by Statutory Appraisal Committees of the MoEF, the Committees reviewing the Forest and Coastal Clearances recommended withdrawal of clearances granted. The only Committee that proposed a go-ahead was the one reviewing the environmental impacts under the EIA Notification. It was for Ramesh to now decide on the right steps to be taken to correct this gross injustice and irregularities in environmental decision making. In the face of extensive burden of proof of fraud involved in securing clearances for the POSCO project, the matter should legally have been to withdraw clearances accorded – as in the Vedanta case. This was the time to test the honesty of a man to stand up and uphold Constitutional and Ethical values, regardless of any and all forms of pressures. Jairam Ramesh has miserably failed this test.

The report presented today by Jairam Ramesh is nothing but a capitulation to corrupt forces both within India and abroad. ........... 

For the single largest project FDI investment in India at 2005 prices (Rs. 51,000 crores or USD 12 billion capital cost), analysis reveal that this investment can be recovered in less than a decade given the pittance of a royalty that POSCO will pay for iron ore extracted. (Rs. 30/tonne at the official ore valuation of Rs. 300/tonne, compared with the commercial value of Rs. 7,000/tonne). It is to make such unprecedented profits from the plunder of India's natural resources that POSCO demanded a coastal location for its super large CAPESIZE ships to be berthed to cart away our precious iron ore. What India would be left with is the toxic residue of its dirty ore processing, while the refined ore (perhaps not even the finished steel) would be exported to Korea and elsewhere to add more value to POSCO's profits. This is not merely a flight of the nation's natural wealth but also a massive planned political exercise for erosion of financial resources with questionable legal sanction.....................

Abhay Sahoo

President

09556666552

Prashant Paikray

Spokesperson

09437571547

prashantpaikray@gmail.com

POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samithi