GD TOPICS Positives And Negatives Of Budget 2011POSITIVES• Citizens over 80 years to have exemption limit of Rs 5 lakh• Surcharge for companies cut to 5 per cent, from 7.5 per cent• Priority sector lending for housing raised from Rs.20 lakh to Rs.25 lakh• FII limit of investment in infrastructure raised to $25 bn and is expected to be raised to $40 bn soon.• Special incentives for hybrid vehicle makers if manufacturing done in India to be positive for auto companies• Cars become less costlier• Duty reduced on hybrid & electric cars along with batteries imported for such vehicles• Senior Citizen Age Limit reduced from 65 years to 60 years for Income Tax purposes• Basic customs duty on agricultural machinery reduced to 4.5 per cent from 5 per cent• MFs allowed to raise money from foreign investors.• No import duty on ship parts• Basic food and fuel and precious stones, gold and silver jewellery to be exempted from central excise duty• Nominal 1 per cent central excise duty on 130 items entering the tax net• Government has cut many import duties to check inflation• Disinvestments to be taken further• Crude palm used in sports exempted from customs duty to be positive for palm oil companies• Excise duty to be reduced from 10% to 5% on parts of specified machineryNEGATIVES• AC hospitals with over 25 beds to be taxed for services• Health Check-Ups in Private hospitals to become expensive• Both International Air Travel and Domestic Air Travel become expensive• Tax on life insurance service providers could be negative for insurance companies• Travel, Healthcare to become expensive due to increased service tax• Lack of FDI in retail, a disappointment• New service tax to hurt companies in hospitality• Hike in export duty on Iron Ore• AC restaurants serving liquor to come under service tax net• Branded clothes may cost more• Rise in MAT(MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE TAX) from 18% to 18.5%

2) Should all the tainted ministers be banned from holding high government offices?

Today, Dr. Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister of India announced that he takes full responsibility for the decision of CVC, which has been termed unlawful by the Supreme Court of India. Sound good. So... what now? Rarely in history, since Bhishma Pitamah's disastrous role in Mahabharat, has anyone combined a Look of Wisdom and Leadership Out of Pity into such a stellar combination. This Prime Minister commits mistakes that somehow do not suit his portrayed image and then comes up with a pitiful face and

demeanour to do the "whatever the law says as an Indian citizen". Let us take an example.In 1999 election, incidentally, the only election that Dr. Manmohan Singh has fought, he told people in Tilak Nagar that Anti-Sikh Massacres were the deed of the RSS, a Hindu Organization. He repeated this charge once more later in his career. That it was a lie is obvious, but the worse was it showed an amazing lack of integrity for a person who was to head a Government by a party, who was the perpetrator. Not just that, he even installed, one of the main accused, Jagdish Tytler as a Union Minister in his cabinet. Not until the Nanavati Commission had indicted Tytler, did Dr. Singh ask him to leave. As we were to know, he was being respectful of the feelings of the Sikhs. Yes, like every ordinary citizen. Really?Now, he wants to respect Supreme Court after it has given its verdict on CVC and the public is aghast - which this lunatic group called "public" does (for a few moments, perhaps) when they are reminded they have just been raped of their rights - that Dr. Singh is suddenly all pitiful and sorry. Just a month back he was advising the Supreme Court to "mind its own business", when he told them that ‘Power of review should not be used to erode authority’. Dr. Singh was obviously not happy that the law was not particularly excited about his pusillanimity.If, the Supreme Court, had backed down or if the Congress leaders had frightened the judges enough, and they had let CVC issue go away quietly, then one is left wondering if this Wise Guy-Pitious Leader called Dr. Singh would have felt he had violated the law or its spirit? If piety is a function of punishment, then it isn't what its billed to be on the label.Why is the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) important?One may wonder why is this appointment so important? So important that the Congress party and the UPA Government risked so much on it? It is the...governmental body created in 1964 to address governmental corruption. It has the status of an autonomous body, free of control from any executive authority, charged with monitoring all vigilance activity under the Central Government of India, and advising various authorities in central Government organizations in planning, executing, reviewing and reforming their vigilance work.With the scandals rampantly going on in the Rule of Plunder under the UPA Government, headed by Dr. Manmohan Singh, CVC happens to be an important cog. You take out the guy who would indict the Government for corruption, and you have made your life of loot rather easy!60-year-old PJ Thomas, is a 1973 batch Kerala cadre IAS officer, who began his career as the Fort Kochi sub-collector. Interestingly, he took over as the Telecom Secretary in October 2009. And in 2010, was appointed CVC on September 7 by a three-member panel consisting of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Home Minister P Chidamabaram and Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj. Sushma Swaraj dissented to the appointment.The FarceWhat a farce we have at our hand. The biggest and most important corruption scandal hitting the Government of the day is the Telecom 2G Scam. And during the time this scandal was being perpetrated, the Telecom Secretary was PJ Thomas. And he was

appointed - forcibly, despite dissent - as the Chief Vigilante to.. yes, probe into the same scam! And, it took the Supreme Court to point out the obviousThe Supreme Court on Tuesday embarrassed the government by questioning the tenability of Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) P J Thomas supervising the CBI's investigations into the 2G spectrum scandal as he himself was the telecom secretary at the time of 2G spectrum allocation.!And who was pushing through the appointment? Dr. Manmohan Singh and his smart friend Chidambaram. Now, the PM is sorry and will "accept" - like a good boy - the slap on his hand. If this guy had had his way, he wouldn't have let Supreme Court squeek much though!Palmolein CaseThis is of course not the first time, this epitome of integrity has been at the center of scams. He was involved in the Palmolein Import case when he was the Secretary of Food and Civil Supplies.Kerala government decided to import palm oil from the Malaysian company in Singapore named Power and Energy Ltd above the international price which was approved by the Kerala Cabinet . The price of import was fixed to $ 405.0 per ton which was higher than the international price of $ 392.25 per ton. The import order was signed by Thomas, who was then Kerala's Food Secretary. The investigation agency's charge sheet in the case says that this order caused a loss of more than 2.32 cores to the exchequer. The decision was to import 15,000 tonnes of palm oil.A case was filed against Karunakaran and others including PJ Thomas. Thomas however got a bail and later his case was stayed. Karunakaran died in December 2010 and in January, Supreme Court opened the case against PJ Thomas again.But the Court today took note of the fact that since Karunakaran died last month, his appeal has become invalid.This now means that Thomas, the country's top vigilance officer, will face trial for his role in the import of Palmolein oil by the Kerala government in 1991-92 that incurred a huge loss. Now, charges will be framed by the Vigilance Court at Trivandrum..... and Obfuscation as DefenseSushma Swaraj, the member of the committee to appoint the CVC said that she was told by Chidambaram that PJ Thomas had been acquitted of the Palmolein case. The Home Minister reacted pretty sharply. Here is the exchange:"It was me who brought this to the notice of the committee, who at that time said that Thomas was acquited in the Palmolein case. What the minister is saying now are all his afterthoughts and absolutely irrelevant,” she added. In a statement issued here, Chidambaram earlier today said: “I take exception to the statement by Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj, that I had ‘misled the Selection Committee’ and told the Committee that PJ Thomas had been ‘acquitted’. Actually, Swaraj is tying herself in knots by making thoughtless allegations.”“Firstly, if no sanction for prosecution had been granted since 1999 against P.J. Thomas (as admitted by her) how could the case have proceeded to trial or ended in an acquittal of Shri Thomas? Secondly, if the Supreme Court had stayed the trial of the case (as admitted by her), is it not self-evident that the case was pending and nobody could have been either acquitted or convicted?,” he said.

He further reiterated that the Committee was aware of the Palmolein case; that no sanction for prosecution of Thomas had been granted since 1999.This was in February of 2011, where the Home Minister is suggesting that in September 2010, the members of the committee - that is he, the PM and Sushma Swaraj, - weren't misled. But the highest Legal officer of the Government, Attorney General G E Vahanvati stated just a few days before him that Government was"unaware of cases against Thomas".The Government today told the Supreme Court that they were not aware of the cases pending against controversial Central Vigilance Commissioner PJ Thomas.This was stated by Attorney General G E Vahanvati before a bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia, which wanted to know if the issue of sanction and the charge sheet against Thomas was presented before the three-member committee headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh selected him for the assignment."It was not before the committee. The material pertaining to the sanction for prosecution under section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was not before the committee," Vahanvati said. The response of Attorney General came on a question from the bench whether the material relating to the charge sheet and sanction was presented before the committee.As the Attorney General said LOUD and CLEAR, that the Material was not placed before the committee, thus vindicating Sushma Swaraj.So, guys, can you get your act together?Now, in March, the Bench comprising Chief Justice S H Kapadia and Justices K S Radhakrishnan and Swatantar Kumar - said that the recommendation made by the Prime Minister's high-powered committee to appoint Thomas did not consider the relevant material (case against him) and as such its advice “does not exist in law”.What was the counter from the Government? Thomas was a man of 'impeccable integrity', but a victim of political vendetta. Yeah Right! If you have a knack of being in all the places simmering with scams, maybe you have some supernatural issue that you need to take care of, before you become the point man to investigate corruption. I think though that the reason has more to do with deceiving claims as opposed to any supernatural conspiracy. Looks, of Wisdom.. of Gentlemanliness.. of Integrity as we know by now are a bit over-rated. Look at Dr. Manmohan Singh for example.Yes, but what led to the 'error'?March 7, 2011

It took a nudge from Sushma Swaraj, the Leader of the Opposition, for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to admit in Parliament that he had made an “error of judgment” in appointing P.J. Thomas as Central Vigilance Commissioner. Although Dr. Singh can be given credit for allowing himself to be coaxed into reiterating his acceptance of full responsibility for the appointment, which was set aside by a censorious Supreme Court, his statement throws no further light on the shameful episode. How did it come about that a senior civil servant charge-sheeted in a corruption case was chosen as the country's top anti-corruption watchdog? Were the Prime Minister and the Home Minister, who were part of the three-member selection committee that appointed Mr. Thomas, really unaware of this? Why did they not apply their minds to the objections raised by Ms. Swaraj who, as the third member of the committee, specifically raised the

issue of the pending charges against Mr. Thomas in the palmolein import case? Was there pressure from any quarter to make Mr. Thomas CVC? Answering these questions is vital to institutional integrity.The little we know officially about the circumstances that led to Mr. Thomas' appointment is a piece of obfuscation. This is in the form of Attorney General G.E. Vahanvati's laboured submission in the Supreme Court that the Department of Personnel had failed to place the full facts about Mr. Thomas, or the relevant “papers and file,” before the selection committee. This sounded like a lame attempt to absolve the Prime Minister and Home Minister of accountability by making out that the appointment was a result of bureaucratic inefficiency or oversight. As we have made clear in earlier editorials, Mr. Thomas is entitled to a fair trial under the procedure established by law and no presumption of guilt should be attached to his part in the palmolein import case. What is scandalous is the government's decision to shield him and ipso facto protect itself against the fierce criticism about the highly coloured circumstances under which he was selected for the post. After the Supreme Court quashed his appointment and indicted the government for attempting to defend the indefensible, the least Dr. Singh should have furnished was a detailed account of how or why he was led into 'error'. An acceptance of responsibility is a step forward but insufficient. The proper course for a Prime Minister with a reputation for personal financial integrity would be to square with Parliament and the public on what it was that made him and his senior government colleague insist on, and rush through, the appointment of Mr. Thomas in defiance of morality, the law, and common sense.

3) Is it justified to spend crores of rupees on marriages?Big fat $22m wedding draws ire of Indian politicians

DELHI: The groom wore a garland made of banknotes and received a helicopter as a gift, there were 18,000 guests - or perhaps it was 30,000 - and 1000 workers took 40 days to prepare the venue.The exact details have been fiercely disputed, but the newspapers were all in agreement that this had been one very big, very fat Indian wedding.Lalit Tanwar married Yogita Jaunapuria at a family farmhouse near Delhi in a ceremony celebrated with 100 dishes, 12 giant TV screens to broadcast proceedings and even a gift of $US5500 for the groom's barber.

The Times of India calculated the cost of Tuesday night's extravaganza that united two influential political families at a billion rupees ($A21.68 million), while the Mail Today went for the less conservative figure of $US55 million.''I don't understand why there is so much hoopla about this marriage,'' the groom's father, Kanwar Singh Tanwar, told the Times. ''All estimates of this marriage in the media are speculation.''In the Indian Express, he was quoted as saying: ''True, a Bell 429 helicopter was given but it was a simple wedding.''Kanwar Tanwar is a wealthy city politician from the ruling Congress party. The bride's father is a former politician in the capital - making the arranged marriage a perfect

power deal. The lavish celebrations came despite pleas from Sonia Gandhi, the Congress party leader, to cut back during a corruption scandal.Mrs Gandhi has criticised colleagues for flaunting their wealth and has encouraged them to show solidarity with the common man by travelling economy class. Mani Shankar Aiyar, a Congress leader and former minister, said displays like the Tanwar wedding sent the wrong signal about the Congress party.''What's needed is a stern warning to all Congress men that they should not indulge in this kind of ostentation,'' he said.The media recorded each detail of the wedding with shock and delight. The Hindustan Times reported that at a pre-wedding ceremony, 2000 guests were given a silver biscuit, a safari suit and $US500 in cash. At a different ritual the bride's family welcomed the groom with gifts worth $US5 million.The newlyweds, both 26, were heralded by flowers and lights bedecking three kilometres of roads leading to the function, where no meat or alcohol were served in line with Hindu tradition

Are Big Fat Indian Weddings A Hypocrite Attempt To Show Off Wealth? Weddings in India have always been considered a big, grand, larger than life affair. In fact, one of the biggest dreams of parents is to get their daughter / son married in the most impressive manner. 

For some parents and family, it is an opportunity to show off their immense wealth and for some it is just a day of spending the wealth earned in a lifetime. In fact, there are cases in some of the Indian wedding,where one feels that there is no stoppage to spending of money. Such weddings become the talk of the town not just for a day or two but for months to come. From small occasions like a mehndi ki raat to bigger functions like wedding   reception , celebrations are nothing but a display of wealth. The so-called aim that ‘people should be awed!’ gets reflected in almost everything seen on the occasion. 

There is no doubt that people do get awed after seeing such a wedding. But the question is exaggeration of wealth to such an extent is justifiable or not? 

Until a decade or two ago, people used to ask for dowry shamelessly and now it is given shamelessly. Though such a tradition does not harm any one directly, one is expected to always give or do more during a wedding. To some extent it is peer pressure, where one parent tries to outperform the other parent. 

Spending money or the way to spend money is a personal choice but it does create some kind of pressure in the minds of parents who actually can not afford such grandeur. 

They spend almost all their earnings in just one or two days. At times, they take up personal loans or take some money from their relatives to make sure that everything in the wedding is perfect. No matter, if it takes a lifetime to pay that off. No wonder, every parents want their child to get married in the most beautiful way as possible but what is

more important is how beautiful there life is after the wedding. 

One cannot say that this approach is right or wrong as it is still a debatable issue. For those who can afford or are willing to spend, other things are not important for them. But for those who have to think twice before taking each step, such an approach to matrimony   becomes a problem. 

The happiness of the parents seems to be incomplete with the kind of pressure they have on their head. It is amazing to see that even today majority of the Indians are afraid to give birth to a daughter thinking that she will create unnecessary headache for the whole family. 

One of the biggest reasons why sex ratio is still so low in India is because parents are still afraid to give birth to daughters. The main reason for this apprehension is the kind of expenditure they might have to bear during their wedding occasion.

Justice delayed is justice denied.Bhopal gas case verdict: Justice delayed, deniedTNN Jun 8, 2010, 03.19am ISTBHOPAL: More than 25 years after a deadly gas leak from a Union Carbide plant caused the world's worst industrial disaster which has since killed 15,134 and affected 5.74 lakh people, a local court on Monday held former chairman of UC's India arm, Keshub Mahindra, and six others guilty under bailable sections of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to two years in prison.The accused were fined about Rs 1 lakh each and immediately granted bail.The seven held guilty were all officials of Union Carbide India Ltd and included its former vice-chairman Vijay Gokhale.In a verdict that political parties and victims' organizations called a travesty of justice, the accused were pronounced guilty under sections 304(A) (death by negligence), 336 (endangering life & safety), 337 (causing hurt) and 338 (grievous hurt).The court of CJM P Mohan Tiwari, where the verdict was pronounced, had been sealed with police officials blocking every door, allowing no mediaperson or representative of victims' organizations to witness the proceedings.The case dates back to December 1, 1987, when the CBI prosecution filed its chargesheet in the criminal case.The 12 accused in the Bhopal gas tragedy case include Union Carbide Corporation, Union Carbide (Eastern) Hong Kong, Union Carbide (India) Limited and top officials of the three companies.The chief accused was chairman of Union Carbide Corporation USA, Warren Anderson, who did not come to face trial in India. Neither did Union Carbide Corporation or Union Carbide (Eastern) Hong Kong. CBI termed these accused as absconding.This is the first time anyone has been criminally convicted for the disaster which took place on the intervening night of December 2-3, 1984.All accused were granted bail almost immediately after the verdict was read out, after their counsel had moved bail applications with personal bonds of Rs 25,000 each. Judge P Mohan Tiwari also found Union Carbide (India) Limited guilty under the same

sections and directed the erstwhile company to pay Rs 5 lakh as punishment under section 304(A), Rs 250 under section 336, Rs 500 under section 337 and Rs 1000 under section 338When justice delayedThe Supreme Court's decision to postpone its verdict on a plea for the Allahabad High Court to not deliver an immediate verdict on the Ayodhya title suits could well be one of those rare cases when justice delayed is not such a bad thing. This, of course, is only a play on words.The judicial verdict on a matter like the Ayodhya dispute would only settle a matter of legal propriety, but could still be considered unjust by large numbers of people. Some of the questions involved in the suits being heard relate to history: when did the idols appear at the site, had the site been a place of continuous worship by Muslims, etc. One party to the case is Lord Ram himself, duly represented by an advocate.The dispute interlaces and juxtaposes faith, unrecorded history and recorded history. Resolving a dispute of this nature is beyond the scope of law. Only democratic political action to strike an acceptable balance between conflicting expectations can offer a lasting solution. So, a judicial verdict on the dispute is justice only because that is what the courts are supposed to deliver.But the larger injustice that might be visited upon large numbers of innocent people by cynical politicians in the wake of the verdict would be very real, not nominal. Putting off such a verdict with the potential to spawn strife would hold the injustice of undeserved violence in abeyance. This works because the people are willing to wait for a verdict of the court. By delaying a verdict, such patience arising from respect for the judiciary is also being eroded, true.Yet, on balance, on the present occasion, a decision to postpone a verdict on a matter that the Supreme Court had, when referred to it by the Narasimha Rao government, declined to take up would give politics more time to transcend the irrationality that begets violence in the name of faith. But such a decision to postpone the verdict is yet to be taken, and has been slated for 28th.When the courts are being asked to decide on an essentially non-judiciable matter, and when political practice is yet to evolve to a level of maturity that abjures violence to settle a dispute, let the status quo on the dispute continue, even if by means judicial.Ayodhya verdict: Allahabad High Court says divide land in 3 waysLucknow:  Sixty years after it first went to court, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has pronounced judgment in the Ayodhya title suit, saying Hindus and Muslims are joint title holders.

The three-judge bench - comprising Justice S U Khan, Justice Sudhir Agarwal and Justice D V Sharma - ruled in a majority judgment 2:1, that there be a three-way division of the disputed land - one-third for the Sunni Waqf Board, one-third for the Nirmohi Akhara and one-third to the party for 'Ram Lalla'.

Each of the three judges gave a summary of his own. 

Justice Khan pointed to the unprecedented nature of Hindus and Muslims worshipping together for centuries. (Read: Muslims, Hindus worshipped together, says Justice Khan)

And Justice Aggarwal observed that the inner courtyard of the building belonged to both Hindus and Muslims. (Read: Inner courtyard area belongs to Hindus & Muslims, says Justice Agarwal)

The Ayodhya judgment

In an order that runs into over 8,000 pages, the High Court has said that the portion below the central dome under which the idols of Lord Ram and other Gods are placed in a makeshift temple, belongs to Hindus. All three judges agreed that the portion under the central dome should be allotted to Hindus.

The Nirmohi Akhara, the judgment says, would get the Ram Chabutra and Sita Rasoi. (Read the judgement) 

Ravi Shankar Prasad, BJP leader and senior advocate appearing for one of the litigants, emerged from court after the verdict to say, "this matter will be looked into in the next three months but the important part here is that court has taken a decision with the consent of the majority and that is that where Ram Lalla is (viraajman) is the birth place of Ram and that's what the Hindu's believe and even (Justice) SU Khan has also said that Ram Lalla will not be moved out from that place even when it will be divided into three."

Crucially, the court has said there shall be status quo at the site for three months.

There were two other majority findings, where one judge dissented and two agreed: that the disputed structure was a mosque and that a temple was demolished to build a mosque. Justice SU Khan held that no temple was demolished for constructing the mosque at the disputed structure. He said the mosque was constructed under orders of Babar over the ruins of temples lying in that state for a very long time. (Read: Ayodhya dispute timeline)

The judgment observed that the idols were placed beneath the central dome early on December 23, 1949.

The court dismissed two major claims to the land - one filed in 1989 on behalf Ram Lalla, or the infant Lord Ram, and the second by the Sunni Waqf Board filed in 1961. (Watch: Sunni Waqf Board's suit dismissed, says lawyer) | (Read: Sunni Waqf Board to appeal in Supreme Court)

The Sunni Waqf Board has said it does not agree with today's judgment and will appeal in the Supreme Court against it. 

The chairman of the Sri Ram Janmbhoomi Trust, Nritya Gopal Das, too said they would challenge the decision to provide one-third of the disputed land to the Sunni Waqf Board in the Supreme Court. (Watch: The background to the Ayodhya dispute)

The dispute before the court was whether the 2.7 acres of disputed land on which the Babri Masjid stood before it was demolished on December 6, 1992, belongs to the Sunni Central Waqf Board or to the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha.

It has been a protracted legal battle, and people across the country have spoken in one voice on the need to maintain peace and harmony. PM appeals for peace

After a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on security, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh issued an appeal to "all sections of the people to maintain peace and tranquility and to show respect for all religions and religious beliefs in the highest traditions of Indian culture... Let me also state that Government on its part remains fully committed to upholding the rule of law and maintaining peace, order and harmony... It is my hope that the response of the people of India to the judgement will be respectful, dignified and do our country proud. He said the "orders delivered by the three Honourable Judges need to be examined carefully." "The correct conclusion, at this stage, is that the status quo will be maintained until the cases are taken up by the Supreme Court," he said. (Read: PM appeals for peace after verdict)

Temple politics back?

Only a few hours after the Ayodhya verdict, top leaders of the BJP met at party patriarch LK Advani's residence in New Delhi. After the meeting, Advani said, "In so far as the judgement upholds the right of the Hindus to construct a temple, it is a significant step forward toward the construction of a grand temple of the birthplace of Lord Ram." (Watch: Advani, Modi, others react to verdict)

Advani said the BJP believed the verdict opened a new chapter for national integration and a new era of inter-community relations and added that the party "is gratified that the nation has received the verdict with maturity." (Read: A new chapter of national integration, says Advani)

No politics, please, said the Congress. Senior leader in charge of UP Digvijaya Singh said, "no politics at this point." (Watch: Ayodhya verdict- Temple politics back?)

Political parties appeal for calm

RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat said the "judgement has paved the way for the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya. The judgement is not a win or loss for anybody. We invite everybody, including Muslims, to help build the temple." (Watch: Nobody's victory or loss, says RSS)

Bhagwat also said "joy and happiness over the verdict" should find expression in a "controlled and peaceful manner" within the limits of law and constitution. "Uncalled for provocation must be avoided," he added, saying the movement for a Ram temple was "not a reactionary one, nor it is against any particular community."

Zafaryab Jilani, convenor of the All-India Babri Masjid Action Committee (AIBMAC), too said, "We hope peace and tranquillity will be maintained." Jilani said the "majority judgment is that mosque and temple must coexist."

The Congress welcomed the Ayodhya judgment saying everyone should accept it and no one should treat it as a victory or defeat. "Congress has held that the controversy should either be solved through talks or the verdict of the court should be accepted. The court has given the verdict. We should all welcome the judgement," party general secretary Janardhan Dwivedi told reporters. (Watch: Everyone should welcome Ayodhya judgement, says Congress)

Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi said, "I welcome the court's decision and appeal to all to maintain peace. We should all work towards harmony. I am happy that the judgement now paves the way for building a Ram temple in Ayodhya. This judgement will work as a catalyst for the country's unity." Modi's views were also echoed by senior BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi. (Watch: Narendra Modi on Ayodhya verdict)

CPM's Sitaram Yechury asked the people of India to maintain peace and not fall prey to any provocation. "This judgement requires to be fully studied. There may be questions on the nature of the verdict," the CPM Politburo said in a statement.

UP Chief Minister Mayawati threw the ball in the Centre's court over the implementation of the verdict and ensuring peace and harmony in the state. She alleged that the Centre had not provided enough paramilitary forces for security. Rupees 250 crore investigation on Bofors scandal that yielded no resultsIndia's major Bofors saga has been closed. After two decades of investigations, a Delhi Court has allowed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to close the country’s biggest corruption scandal that brought down the Rajiv Gandhi Government.  The Tis Hazari Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vinod Yadav allowed the case against an Italian businessman, Ottavio Quattrochi (pictured) in the Bofors kickback scam to be closed, accepting the CBI’s plea to withdraw the case. The court observed that Rs 250 crore had already been spent on looking at the merits of the case. The judge said “When will this spending end? Attempts to extradite Quattrocchi have also failed". ET   reports the case relates to Rs 1,437-crore deal between Swedish arms maker Bofors AB and the Indian Government in 1986. The company would supply 410 units of 155mm Howitzer field guns. The deal was signed in March 1986, and soon after, allegations emerged that Quattrocchi, close to the then PM Rajiv Gandhi's family, brokered the deal. Quattrocchi has been accused of receiving a payoff for the Bofors

artillery guns purchased for the Indian Army in the 1980s. However, Quattrocchi never appeared before any court in India in the over two-decade-old case. The CBI in its closure report in the Bofors scam had earlier told the court that it had received no fresh instructions in the case. The investigating agency pleaded before the court that Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ruling on kickbacks paid in Bofors case was “nothing new” and its application for withdrawing the proceedings against Quattrocchi should be allowed. CBI made the same disclosure even after the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had ruled that illegal commissions had been paid to Quattrocchi n the Bofors scam. The CBI has maintained that the investigations into Bofors scam have hit a dead end and wants the case closed citing lack of evidence. The CBI’s attempts to extradite Quattrocchi have failed several times. The CBI had filed an application for closure of case against Quattrocchi stating that no material evidence has come up after two decades and the case be closed in the public interest. Advocate Agarwal had filed an application before the court stating that the high-profile case against Quattrocchi should not be closed and he should be treated as complainant in the case. The process to give a silent burial to the Bofors case began in 2004 when the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance Government came to power. The Government first removed the freeze on Quattrocchi’s accounts in London. The Interpol later withdrew the notice against the Italian businessman. Public interest litigator and activist, Prashant Bhushan told a news agency that it was totally wrong to close the case when there was clear evidence of wrongdoing in the case. Water Resources and Minority Affairs Minister and senior party leader, Salman Khursheed commenting on the judgment said, “The case has been through several levels of judicial adjudication but when a report has to be filed for closure, it has to go to a magistrate and the magistrate has to apply his mind and finally come to a conclusion. If the magistrate has accepted the closure report, that should be end of the matter". Do you think it was justified for the government to spend this huge amount on this case which ended being buried? The country cannot afford to spend hard-earned money of the people of this country on Quattrocchi’s extradition which has already cost Rs 250 crore. So much money was spent for nothing. That apart, the badly-handled case has left the general impression that in India justice can be sabotaged through the influence of money flaunted by arms dealers. The whole Indian system seems to have failed in this unenlightening saga that lasted nearly two decades.

5) Is corruption on an all time high in India currently? What can be done?

2G spectrum scamFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe 2G spectrum scam in India involved the issue of 122 licenses by the ruling Congress-led UPA alliance[1] of the 2G spectrum to 85 companies[1] including many new telecom companies with little or no experience in the telecom sector at a price set in the year 2001.The scam involved allegations regardingthe under pricing of the 2G spectrum by the Department of Telecommunications which resulted in a heavy loss to the exchequer, andthe illegal manipulation of the spectrum allocation process to favour select companiesThe issue came to light after the auction of airwaves for 3G services which amounted to  677,190 crore (US$151.01 billion) to the exchequer.[2] A report submitted by the Comptroller and Auditor General based on the money collected from 3G licenses estimated that the loss to the exchequer due to under pricing of the 2G spectrum was 176,379 crore (US$39.33 billion).[3]

The scam came to public notice when the Supreme Court of India took Subramaniam Swamy's complaints on record [With Case type:Writ Petition (Civil),Case No:10, Year:2011].[4]

Contents [hide]1   Civil Servants, Politicians and Corporations Involved in scam 1.1   Politicians, Ministers and Parliamentarians involved 1.2   Bureaucrats involved 1.3   Corporations involved 1.4   Corporate personalities involved 1.5   Media persons and lobbyists involved 2   Politicans, Ministers and Parlimentarians involved 3   Petitioners to 2g scam 4   Loss to Exchequer 5   Relationship between media and government 5.1   Ratan Tata petitions over leak 6   Response to scam 7   Arrests and Chargesheets 8   P.A.C. (Public Accounts Committee) 9   Impact on stock markets 10   See also 11   References 12   External links

[edit]Civil Servants, Politicians and Corporations Involved in scamAll the accused have been booked under sections 120(B) (criminal conspiracy), 468 (Forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using as genuine a forged document or electronic record), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) and 109 (abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence, and where no express provision is made for its punishment) of the Indian Penal Code.[5]

[edit]Politicians, Ministers and Parliamentarians involvedAndimuthu Raja, Union Cabinet Minister for Communications and Information Technology : The Comptroller and Auditor General holds Raja personally responsible for the sale of 2G spectrum at 2001 rates in 2008, resulting in the previously mentioned loss of up to Rs. 1.76 lakh crores (US$40 billion) to the national exchequer.[6] In August, 2010, evidence was submitted by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) showing that Raja had personally signed and approved the majority of the questionable allocations.[7]

Kanimozhi Aravindhan, Member of Rajya Sabha : On April 25, 2011 Kanimozhi was named as a co-conspirator in the supplementary chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the 2G spectrum case. The chargesheet submitted before the Supreme Court establishes how Rs 200 crore connected with the scam traveled from a partnership firm of businessman Shahid Balwa of Swan Telecom to the Karunanidhi family-owned Kalaignar TV.[5] She has been charged with section 7 and 11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The sections deal with acceptance of alleged gratification.[8]

[edit]Bureaucrats involvedSiddhartha Behura, Civil Servant (IAS officer of 1973 batch UP cadre) : He was the Telecom secretary who served in the DOT at the time of the 2G allocation.Pradip Baijal, Civil Servant (IAS officer of 1966 batch MP cadre) : He is alleged to have recommended policies that favored certain Telecom companies when he was heading the TRAI. Post retirement, Baijal joined Noesis, a consulting firm.[9][10] Raja has made references to Baijal's decisions in 2003 as the basis for his decisions in 2008; something which has been attacked by Arun Shourie and several media pundits. The houses and offices of the bureaucrat were recently[when?] visited by the Central Bureau of Investigation as part of their investigations.[11] However, Baijal is expected to get a clean chit in this issue [12]

R K Chandolia, Civil Servant (IES officer of 1984 batch cadre) : He was private secretary of Raja during UPA-I when the licences were awarded. When Raja became the Telecom Minister once again in UPA-II, Chandolia had been promoted to the Joint Secretary rank. Raja re-designated him Economic Adviser, that gave him the charge of all important policy-related work. Chandolia interacted with all the licensees. It is said that it was Chandolia who, from DDG-access services A K Srivastava's room, had handed out letters of intent to representatives of various companies.[13]

[edit]Corporations involvedAllianz Infra[14]

AircelDishnet WirelessLoop MobileSistema Shyam Mobile (MTS) – Sistema Mobile RussiaReliance CommunicationsS TelSwan TelecomTata Tele ServicesUnitech GroupVideocon Telecommunications Limited

Vodafone EssarVirgin Mobile India[edit]Corporate personalities involvedAnil Ambani - Reliance Group (ADAG)[15] -Ratan TataShahid Balwa - Swan Telecom (now Etisalat DB)Vinod Goenka - Swan Telecom (now Etisalat DB)Venugopal Dhoot - Videocon GroupPrashant Ruia - Essar GroupSanjay Chandra, Managing Director of Unitech Ltd and Unitech WirelessAll of them have either been questioned by the CBI or are prospective suspects in the scam.[edit]Media persons and lobbyists involvedNira Radia, a former airline entrepreneur turned corporate lobbyist whose conversations with politicians and corporate entities were recorded by the government authorities. The contents were later leaked by unknown parties creating the Nira Radia tapes controversy[edit]Politicans, Ministers and Parlimentarians involvedDayanidhi Maran, former Union Cabinet Minister for Textiles : The main allegation revealed by Tehelka magazine and followed up in several other reports, is that Maran forced C Sivasankaran, owner of Aircel, to sell the telecom company to Maran's Malaysia-based friend T Ananda Krishnan in 2006. The reports allege that Maran deliberately delayed issuing spectrum licenses to Aircel's sister concern, Dishnet Wireless, when it was owned by Sivasankaran. He issued the licenses soon after it changed hands to Ananda Krishnan who owns Maxis.[16]

P. Chidambaram, current Union Cabinet Minister for Home Affairs : Subramaniam Swamy states that when the 2g Spectrum rate was finalised, P.Chidambaram was the finance minister of India and he had a major role in deciding the spectrum price with A.Raja. Subramaniam alleges that Chidambaram had received kickbacks and undervalued the spectrum cost.[17]

[edit]Petitioners to 2g scamSubramaniam Swamy, activist lawyer and politician, whose letters to the Prime Minister demanding action and affidavits and cases in the Supreme Court brought the issue into the public limelight.Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, a journalist who was one among the very first to write on the irregularities in the awarding of 2G spectrum allocation by the Telecom Ministry. He is also one of the petitioners in the 2G PIL currently being heard in the Supreme court.[18]

Prashant Bhushan, on behalf of the Centre for Public Interest Litigation.Anil Kumar, on behalf of the civil society organisationTelecom WatchdogOthers:Several eminent people like former chief election commissioners J.M. Lyngdoh, T.S. Krishnamurthy and N. Gopalaswami and former central vigilance commissioner (CVC) P. Shankar are also petitioners in the suits filed by civil society groups.[14]

[edit]Loss to ExchequerThe Controller and Auditor General of India used three different methods to assess the presumptive loss to the exchequer resulting from not auctioning 2G spectrum.[19]

The first method was based on the fact that S Tel, one of the licensees, explicitly offered to pay significantly higher license fees for the spectrum. Based on the fees offered by S Tel, the CAG estimated the loss to the exchequer at  67,364 crore (US$15.02 billion)The second method was based on the price recovered by the 3G auction in 2010. The CAG reasoned that since 2G is really 2.75G (EDGE), its price should be comparable to that of 3G licenses. Based on this method, the CAG estimated the loss to the exchequer to be  176,000 crore (US$39.25 billion)The third method was based on the fact that some of the licensees received FDI in the form of equity, shortly after the spectrum allocation. The CAG reasoned that this equity infusion was entirely due to the value of the allocated spectrum; this can be construed as re-sale of the spectrum by the licensee, and hence was a valid basis for assessing loss to the exchequer. Based on this method, the CAG estimated the loss to the exchequer to be anywhere between  57,666 crore (US$12.86 billion) (based on Etisalat's investment in Swan Telecom) and  69,626 crore (US$15.53 billion) (based on Telenor's investment in Unitech).For its part, the Congress-party led government has publicly defended itself on this count and Kapil Sibal, who replaced A. Raja as the communication minister, has refuted the CAG reasoning.[20] He has also justified his government's decision not to auction 2G spectrum as being in line with the policy guidelines laid down by the 10th Five-Year Plan.[21][22]

[edit]Relationship between media and governmentMain article: Nira Radia tapes controversyMedia sources such as OPEN and Outlook reported that Barkha Dutt and Vir Sanghvi knew that corporate lobbyist Nira Radia was influencing the decisions of A. Raja.[23] The critics alleged that Dutt and Sanghvi knew about corruption between the government and the media industry, supported this corrupt activity, and suppressed news reporting the discovery of the corruption.[23]

[edit]Ratan Tata petitions over leakThe tapes leaked to the public include conversations between Nira Radia and Ratan Tata. Tata petitioned the government to acknowledge his right to privacy and demanded accountability for the leak, with the Minister for Home Affairs, CBI, Indian Income Tax Department, theDepartment of Telecommunication, and the Department of Information Technology as respondents in the petition.[24]

On April 4, 2011 Indian Parliament's Public Accounts Committee (PAC)questioned Tata Sons Chairman Ratan Tata and corporate lobbyist Niira Radia regarding their roles in 2G Scam.[25]

[edit]Response to scamIn early November 2010 Telecom Minister A Raja resigned.In mid November the controller Vinod Rai issued show-cause notices to Unitech, S Tel, Loop Mobile, Datacom (Videocon), and Etisalat to respond to his assertion that all of the 85 licenses granted to these companies did not have the up-front capital required at the time of the application and were in other ways illegal.[26] Some media sources have speculated that these companies will receive large fines but not have their licenses revoked, as they are currently providing some consumer service.[26]

In response to the various allegations, the Govt of India has replaced the then incumbent Telecom minister, A. Raja with Kapil Sibal who has taken up this charge in

addition to being the Union minister for Human Resources Development.Mr Sibal contends that the "notional" losses quoted are a result of erroneous calculations and insists that the actual losses are nil.[20][21]

The CBI conducted raids on Raja and four other telecom officials - former telecom secretary Siddharth Behura, Raja's personal secretary R K Chandolia, member telecom K Sridhar and DoT deputy director general A K Srivastava on 8 December 2010.Kanimozhi, DMK MP and Karunanidhi's daughter, was arrested and sent to Tihar jail by a Delhi court which dismissed her bail plea in the 2G spectrum scam, saying there was a possibility of witnesses being influenced considering the "magnitude" of the crime.[27]

[edit]Arrests and ChargesheetsOn February 2, 2011, the Central Bureau of Investigation arrested former Telecommunications Union Minister Andimuthu Raja. The CBI also arrested R.K. Chandolia, Raja's personal aide, and Siddharth Behura, the former Telecom Secretary.[28][29] Both Raja and Chandolia are heard in conversation with Niira Radia in the released Radia tapes.On February 8, 2011, the CBI arrested Mumbai based Dynamix Balwas (DB) group managing director Shahid Usman Balwa in connection with the 2G spectrum allocation scam. The CBI has evidence from the Income Tax department that Shahid Usman Balwa, considered close to Raja, was instrumental in channelling the kickbacks allegedly received by the former telecom minister.[30]

On March 29, 2011, in Delhi, the CBI arrested Asif Balwa (younger brother of the arrested former Managing Director of DB-Etisalat Group,Shahid Balwa) and Rajeev Agarwal for their alleged involvement in money transfer to the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam's (DMK) Kalaignar TVchannel.[31]

On April 2, 2011, the CBI filed its first 80,000 page chargesheet in the 2G spectrum scam before a Special Court in Delhi naming nine individuals and three companies. It said the wrongful acts of the accused deprived the government exchequer of possible revenues amounting to INR Rs 30,985 crore (USD $ 6,983,322,233). The accused include the following individuals:[32]

Andimuthu Raja, former Telecom ministerSiddharth Behura, former Telecom SecretaryR.K. Chandolia, Raja's former personal secretaryShahid Usman Balwa, former Director of Swan Telecom (now Etisalat DB)Sanjay Chandra, Managing Director of Unitech Ltd and Unitech WirelessGautam Doshi, Group MD, Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani GroupHari Nair, Senior Vice-President, Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani GroupSurendra Pipara, Senior Vice-President, Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group and Reliance Telecom LtdVinod Goenka, Director, Swan Telecom (now Etisalat DB)The three companies named are:Swan TelecomUnitech WirelessReliance TelecomIn the first chargesheet, the CBI had named lobbyist Niira Radia and 124 others as witnesses.

On 25 April 2011, in its second chargesheet in the scam, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) named five more accused individuals:[33]

Kanimozhi - Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament (DMK) and daughter of Tamil Nadu ex-Chief Minister M KarunanidhiSharad Kumar of Kalaignar TVKarim Morani of Cineyug FilmsAsif Balwa of Kusegaon RealtyRajiv B Agarwal of Kusegaon RealtyOn 20 May 2011, Special CBI Judge O P Saini of the Delhi court ordered the arrest of DMK Member of Parliament Kanimozhi and Kalaignar TV Managing Director Sharad Kumar after rejecting their bail pleas in the 2G spectrum case.[34]

[edit]P.A.C. (Public Accounts Committee)Public Accounts Committee, a 21-member committee, with chairman as Murli Manmohar Joshi, was formed to investigate, independent of other committees like JPC. The chairman submitted a draft report on 2G scam to Lok Sabha Speaker on Saturday 30-04-2011, and insisted that it be tabled in the Parliament. UPA members' claimed that the report had been "rejected", and 11 MPs of same committee(majority out of 21) had "rejected" the report - which was termed as "unconstitutional" by MM Joshi pointing out that such a possibility does not exist till the report is "read" by members and "discussed" para by para. Defending his action of calling witnesses from diverse fields in connection with the 2G scam probe, Joshi said it was the duty of the PAC to "trace and examine the way the money of common man is spent". He alleged that on 28-04-2011, during the last meeting of the committee, ministers passed on "chits" and called up PAC members to speak and behave in a particular manner; that said trouble started when a decision was taken to call top officials of the PMO, Cabinet Secretary, Attorney General and CBI director for questioning. A minister reportedly commented that the PAC draft report will be thrown in the dustbin, to which the chairman regretted and questioned if Parliament's proposals and then Supreme Court orders would be given the same treatment.[35]

[edit]Impact on stock marketsThe first casualty in Stock Markets once Raja was arrested was DB Realty.[36] 20% fall in the stock prices of DB Realty. Sun TV had its shares fall by 10%.[37] Sun TV COO refused the allegations. Swan Telecom Chief Balwa was arrested on Feb 8 [38] and this led to rumours of links with Anil Ambani's Reliance ADAG and it led to 20% fall of his stocks . Its reported that nearly 2 Billion USD was eroded from his stocks .[39] Spicejet stocks went down after reports of investigation on Maran's recent takeover of Spicejet .Behind the S-band spectrum scandalEvery well-informed schoolchild knows this is rising India's Age of Uninterrupted Scams. No government before the present United Progressive Alliance regime has had to deal with such a dizzying succession of exposés of corruption scandals — 2G spectrum, the Commonwealth Games, Adarsh Housing, money laundering, and the rest that have come tumbling out. The latest in the series is the Indian Space Research Organisation's deal — hatched in secret and sought to be covered up over a period of six years — to launch two customer-specific satellites and give away 70 MHz of high-value S-band for unfettered commercial exploitation at a scandalously low price of just over Rs 1000 crore to a private company, Devas Multimedia Private Limited. The transaction and its

implications were first exposed by Business Line, the business daily of The Hindu group, in a detailed report published on May 31, 2010.Despite Telecommunications Minister Kapil Sibal's defence of the indefensible, enough is known about the 2G spectrum allocation scam to place it at the top of the list of independent India's corruption scandals. But what is the essence of the S-band spectrum deal concluded in January 2005 between ISRO's commercial arm, Antrix Corporation, and Devas Multimedia which, it turns out, was born of an incestuous relationship with India's space programme? The agreement (the full text is available under Resources at www.thehindu.com) relates to two customer-specific satellites, GSat-6 and GSat 6-A, which ISRO is contractually committed to design, build, and launch in order to make available to Devas the S-band spectrum for commercialising a range of multimedia, broadband services across India. What is special about the S-band, which is defined as radio waves with frequencies that range from 2 GHz to 4 GHz? According to “The 2.6 GHz Spectrum Band: Unique Opportunity to Realize Global Mobile Broadband,” a 2009 report prepared for the GSM Association: “As mobile voice and data traffic increases, wireless operators around the world will require additional spectrum. However, as a finite public commodity, few bands remain available for new allocation to mobile wireless services and even fewer exist for global harmonisation of wireless spectrum assets. The 2.6 GHz band is one exception. The 2.6 GHz band (2500-2690 MHz), sometimes also referred as the 2.5 GHz band, was allocated by the World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) in 2000 for terrestrial mobile communications services. The band provides an opportunity to meet rapidly rising demand for capacity to deliver mobile broadband services on a widespread, common basis across the world.”Armed with secret knowledge of what ISRO could do for it by launching customer-specific satellites to make available at a throwaway price a large chunk of S-band spectrum, Devas Multimedia — a venture founded in 2004 at the initiative of former officials of the Indian space programme and involving foreign investors — thought it had struck gold. In July 2008, it even sold a 17 per cent stake to Deutsche Telecom AG for $ 75 million (around Rs. 318 crore at the time) and over the next year was clearly looking forward to a time of unrivalled growth in valuation. According to a preliminary estimate by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, whose search for the relevant documents within the Department of Space has been actively obstructed, the presumptive loss of revenue to the government in the event of the Antrix-Devas deal going through now would exceed two lakh crore rupees (approximately $44.4 billion).ISRO and the Department of Space have scored many successes and enjoyed a good, clean reputation over the decades. Fortunately, in late 2009 some outraged insiders blew the whistle on the secret deal — so secret that ISRO's chief, K. Radhakrishnan, had to admit at a press conference on February 8, 2011 that for reasons that were being “reviewed” internally, ISRO failed “explicitly” to inform the Union Cabinet that GSat-6 and GSat-6A were customer-specific satellites that would be “predominantly used for a novel and commercial application developed by Devas Multimedia in association with global experts.” Towards the end of 2009, thanks to the whistle-blowers and perhaps not unrelated to the stink raised by the 2G spectrum allocation scandal, a view began to form at the top levels of ISRO that the Antrix-Devas deal must be

annulled. The Space Commission also wanted the deal to be annulled and the Prime Minister was informed on an indeterminate date.But nothing much happened until Business Line published its report in May 2010, which the CAG followed up conscientiously despite the bureaucratic hurdles placed in its path. Among the concerns registered by the CAG in its process of enquiry were the following: S-band spectrum was being given away without inviting competitive bids; organisational control systems were not followed; the Prime Minister's Office, the Cabinet, and the Space Commission were not properly informed about the contract details; public resources were being diverted to building two customer-specific satellites; and the contract terms deviated from the terms of previous contracts entered into by ISRO and Antrix. To cut the story short, the publication of the results of the specialBusiness Line investigation, backed up by documents and other reliable evidence, in The Hindu and Business Line has brought the CAG's commendable efforts to light — and placed the nature, scale, and modalities of the S-band spectrum scandal on the public agenda. True to form, those at the receiving end have questioned the accuracy of the media reports or suggested they are overblown. It is a matter of satisfaction that the deal now seems to be heading for annulment — but no thanks to due diligence and oversight by a central government whose procrastination, lack of transparency, obfuscation, and indeed delinquency in this affair have shocked the nation.India angry, blames govt for corruption, inflationNEW DELHI:Inflation is beginning to hurt seriously,corruption is at an all-time high and the government is not doing enough to tackle either problem. That is the way India'sbig cities feel on the two big issues dominating headlines in recent months, according to an 8-city survey done exclusively for TOI. 

Asked what impact rising prices have had on their household budgets, only 3% said it has had a small impact. About a fifth of all respondents said they had been forced to reduce consumption of some items, one in six said they had put off some purchases, a quarter said it had reduced their savings and a little more than one in three said they had felt all of these impacts. 

Asked who was responsible for such runaway prices, six out of seven blamed either the Centre or the state governments or both. Close to two-thirds said the government has not done all it could. 

On corruption, the anger is even more evident. An overwhelming 83% said it is at an all-time high. Three out of five blamed politicians for this state of affairs and less than one-third of those polled believed the government is serious about the problem. Almost everybody maintained corruption scandals had tarnished the government's image. 

Interestingly, almost two-thirds of the respondents believed that had corruption not been so pervasive, government revenues would have been higher allowing scope for some tax cuts. In other words, the objection to corruption isn't just on moral grounds. 

The survey, done by Synovate, a global market research agency, polled almost 2,500 respondents in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Ahmedabad

and Lucknow and covered people from socio-economic categories A, B and C. 

Two shocks, different responses 

Interestingly, however, there are significant differences in the details of the responses from various cities. 

Almost everybody in urban India, for example, admits that rising prices have forced changes in family budgets, but people in different cities seem to have adjusted differently to the economic shock. In Hyderabad, for instance, the predominant response was that it had led to a reduction in consumption levels, with 46% offering that answer. In Mumbai, however, the impact would appear to be mainly in the form of reduced savings with 45% saying that's how they have coped. 

Even the perception of who is to blame for this varies across cities. While overall 23% blamed the Centre, 12% blamed the state government and 51% said both were responsible, cities like Ahmedabad, Kolkata and Lucknow, all in Opposition-ruled states, saw the blame sharing skewed more towards the government in New Delhi. 

Has the government done all it could to rein in prices? A majority in Delhi took a charitable view on this issue while three-fourths in Chennai returned a decisive NO. 

Asked whether the poor have been the worst hit by spiralling prices, overall 46% said yes while 34% said the middle class had been equally badly hit. In Lucknow, however, 75% averred that the poor had indeed been worst hit while Chennai swung to the other extreme with 51% saying no. 

Just how much corruption is grabbing mindspace was evident in the fact that 83% said it is at an all-time high, but if that is an impressive figure consider this: in Lucknow 99% said yes and in Hyderabad and Kolkata too the number touched 90%. 

Politicians, not surprisingly, emerged as most peoples villains on the issue of corruption, but the mood was particularly marked in Chennai, where 67% blamed the netas, a reflection perhaps of the fact that a prominent Tamil Nadu politician, A Raja, has been at the centre of the most high-profile scam. Mumbai, in contrast, revealed an introspective streak with 41% saying all of us are to blame for corruption. 

As on inflation, so also on corruption, Delhiites were the most inclined to be charitable to the government, with 52% saying they believed the government was serious about dealing with corruption. It was joined by Ahmedabad, where 43% trust the governments intent. 

It is hardly a surprise that just about every respondent thought the governments image had taken a beating because of the corruption scandals. There were, however, differences on just how badly they have dented its image. Hyderabad was at one end of the spectrum with 80% saying they had very badly damaged the governments image,

while Ahmedabad at the other end saw only 33% voicing that opinion. 

Could we have lower taxes if we had less of corruption? Again, the responses were varied. The city that most accepted this link was Chennai, with 96% saying taxes could be lowered because less graft would mean more revenues for the government. In contrast, Mumbai and Ahmedabad, arguably the two most economically savvy cities, were most circumspect on this point. 

Finally, would an amnesty scheme to flush out black money be a good idea? In a somewhat unanticipated response, 54% said it would. Perhaps just as surprising, the city where the idea was most welcomed was Kolkata (87%), while the one most opposed to it was Hyderabad (74% saying no). 

TOI-Synovate mood of the nation survey 

*97% say price rise has impacted family budget *86% blame Centre and state govts for inflation *62% say govt hasn't done all it can to curb prices *83% say corruption at all-time high *60% feel politicians main culprits *64% say govt not serious about tackling graft *96% say central govt's image damaged by spate of scamsWill legalizing 'lobbying' prevent corruption in India?Bangalore: Corruption is something which every Indian is familiar with, just like his mother tongue. Now, when I say lobbying and its increasing effect on policy making in the country, surely a questioning eye brow and a sharp stare will barge in from here and there. But before we give a thought about lobbying as a practice which can check a corrupt democratic setup like ours, we should definitely understand the contours at which corruption and lobbying differs. Though used interchangeably with corruption, it can refer to a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals or groups. Indeed one could argue that lobbying is just a special form of corruption focused on legislative bodies or some other rule-making agency. However, there are some important differences between lobbying and corruption. They centre on the notions that corrupt practices are illegal, that corruption activities tend to involve bribes or illegal payments and, arguably the most important difference, that corrupt practices tend to directly benefit a small number of 'users' (often one individual) while lobbying activities are carried out in order to benefit a group of users that share a specific interest. 

In U.S., lobbying is a huge, established industry unlike India which lack legitimate lobbies and is ravished by corruption scandals like 2G scams. The ability of individuals, groups, and corporations to lobby the government is protected by the right to petition in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and the lobbying market is worth $3.5 billion. Every year the U.S. govt. allows about 2000 lobbyists based on their expertise. Interestingly, since 1998, 43 percent of the 198 members of Congress who

left government to join the private sector have registered to lobby using the 'revolving door of influence'. There are now an estimated 15,000 lobbyists who have put down their roots in Brussels, striving for their voice to be heard by the EU.

The fact that lobbying is mainly aimed at policy-making institutions rather than the bureaucracy brings up another major difference thus making lobbying an activity that makes bribing irrelevant if it succeeds in influencing policy and an activity that makes bribing easier if it succeeds in undermining law enforcement. In other words, lobbying can be a substitute for, or a complement to, corruption. The difference strikes out when American govt. appoints lobbyists for U.S. airlines who work on taxes, regulation, infrastructure and market access while a similar situation in India would have seen a civil aviation scam or an Indian airlines corruption scandal with lot of private parties (business magnets) involved and lack of policy making from lobbyists.

As global corporations woo a billion customers, there are tax breaks and contracts to be wrested from Indian officialdom. Some companies still get them by corrupt means, covering their tracks with middlemen, as some foreign managers acknowledge in private and as high-profile Indian media investigations have alleged. But many companies are turning to lobbyists who use subtler tools of influence, partly out of fear of anti-bribery laws which threatens jail time even for chief executives if they let workers pay bribes overseas.

But if thought from a contrary point, replacing one evil with another is not a perfect solution. Lobbying itself is heavily regulated as it is very easy for a lobbyist to stray into bribery, the most direct way to influence legislation, obviously, is to bribe enough law makers to ensure that the bill you support passes. It is of inconspicuous harm to both private and public sectors but yet better compared to grass root corruption. Leave apart the 2020 dream India vision, we are still among the top 70 countries corruption list and when reality calls, we have to answer - either lobbying or the resident evil - corruption. Public opinion always makes the difference

Is it okay for the politicians to use websites like Twitter to convey messages to media and masses.Twitter has become the buzz word in India after the controversy involving Minister of State for External Affairs Dr Shashi Tharoor. As of now only a very few politicians is using Twitter and there is only a handful of them who uses it regularly (MP from Kannur K Sudhakaran is another politician who tweets regularly). After the controversy involving Dr Tharoor broke out, lot of people started questioning the wisdom of politicians especially ministers and elected representatives using Twitter on a daily basis to communicate with the people. Use of Twitter by politicians has lot of plus points and here are six of them.1 – Best Tool Available To Politician To Make News ViralAssume a Member of Parliament (MP) visiting his constituency finding out that in a recent accident in a railway level crossing, a teenage girl lost both her legs and needs financial help for treatment. In the normal circumstance, the MP may be contacting the Chief Minister or the other ministers or the officials of the state government and give

apetition regarding help for that girl. He may also conduct a press conference describing the plight of the girl and leave it to the mercy of the news editors to decide if that news needs to go the print.Now what you can do with Twitter – Dr Shashi Tharoor on his visit to his constituency met with a girl who has lost both her legs and on the same day he tweeted –“Visited a girl who lost both legs to a train when crossing the track bcoz road to her home was underwater. One more tragedy of underdevpmnt”“Will look for prosthetic help for the girl. In her final year of high school. Desperately poor. A couple of Jaipur Feet cld change her life”That 280 letters changed the life of that girl. The same day itself offers for help came from all over the world and last I heard that girl is undergoing treatment. Could such quick response possible without Twitter? What does that show? Doesn’t that show that politicians and elected representatives can use twitter to spread the word faster than any other media out there?2 – TransparencyWe the people always wanted transparency in the conduct of politicians and Twitter is the most effective tool for the politicians to create that transparency in their activities. By tweeting daily about what they have done to the people who elected them, the politicians are becoming more transparent with the people they represent. Now the people in turn can judge the work of the politicians and if the people find that their elected representative is not doing a good job they can raise this in a very big way in Twitter thus bringing it to the notice of the politician forcing him to mend his ways.3-To Understand the Pulse of the PeopleIf you are a politician and active in Twitter, read all the tweets addressed to you and you could understand the pulse of the people, issues they face and the solutions to the issues that need your help. For example if you go through the tweets Dr Tharoor receives he gets a lot of complains about the passport offices especially from certain areas. Within few days he could conclude which all passport offices are not working efficiently and can take steps to correct it. The same process may be taking months to find out if we go through the normal route.4 -Spreading the World of the Good Work DoneThe elected representative or the politician may have done lots of good work for the people they represent. But all those need not reach the people due to poor coverage by the media – both print and visual. In such circumstances the Twitter is the best friend for the politician. This is the best tool available for the politician to spread the word about the good work he has done without depending on any one. See the photo below. It is the photo of the first ever Indian Female Formed Police Unit in Liberia. None of the news media had this photo but was there in one of the tweets of Dr Tharoor. So Twitter is a powerful tool for the politicians to let the people know about the real hard work they are doing for the people.5 – Letting People Know the Lighter Side of YouPoliticians are public figures and people may like to know the personal tastes of the politician they have elected to represent them and there is no tool better than Twitter for a politician to do that. See this tweet from Dr Tharoor “Having lived abroad in places without Indian mangoes, have literally become "aam aadmi" this year, or at least "aam ka aadmi" - eat 6 a day!” Anyone who reads this and understand the correct meaning of

it will easily feel that politician who tweets this is one among them. Thus Twitter is a great tool for politicians to show their lighter side to the people they represent.6 – Record of Work Done by the Politician for the PeopleA politician who tweets regularly about what he did for the people can always direct the people to go back to his old tweets and see for themselves what he did for them in a particular issue. Thus tweets become a public record of the services of the politician to his people. For the people, his tweets will become a record of how effective he was in tackling the day to day issues faced by them.Now the common complaint we hear is that the number of internet users are very less in India and hence concepts like Twitter doesn’t reach vast majority of people. But the use of internet is fast catching up and within a next decade the use of internet is expected to grow exponentially and politicians will be forced to connect with the people they represent using micro blogging sites like Twitter.

Can MBAs be successful entrepreneurs?4 Reasons an MBA Is Bad for EntrepreneursI don’t think entrepreneurship can be taught.In fact, the list of entrepreneurs who dropped out of school reads like a who’s who of company builders: Bill Gates, Richard Branson, Larry Ellison, Paul Allen (Microsoft), Sean Parker (Napster, Facebook), Walt Disney, Mary Kay Ash (Mary K), Coco Chanel (Chanel), Barry Diller, Simon Cowell, Michael Dell, Henry Ford and Steve Jobs are just a few of the Spicoli-esqueeducated.I think not only is getting an MBA a waste of money and two years of your life; it may also, in fact, reduce your chances of building a successful business. Here are four reasons why:1. MBA programs teach causal reasoningOne of the most compelling pieces of evidence that an MBA is a poor investment for aspiring company builders comes, ironically, from one of the institutions that would benefit most if aspiring entrepreneurs got a degree in business. Prof. Saras Sarasvathy, a researcher at the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business recently completed a study in which she compared 45 super-entrepreneurs (all had at least 15 years’ experience, had started at least four companies and had taken one public) with a group of equally successful big-company CEOs. One of her key findings was the difference between how entrepreneurs and big-company execs approach planning for the future.Sarasvathy found that the corporate types (many of whom have MBAs) in her study use “causal reasoning,” which means they tend to set goals and systematically develop plans for reaching them. That is, they start with the goal and then figure out how to get there.Super-entrepreneurs (few of whom have an MBA) use what Sarasvathy calls “effectual reasoning,” which means they start by assessing the resources they have at their disposal and then ask themselves what can be created. “They are less like gamblers,” explains Sarasvathy in an attempt to bust one of the common myths about entrepreneurs, “and more like an Iron Chef who has the skills to bring together readily available ingredients, whether mundane or exotic, in delicious ways that make us want to pay more for a taste of the end product.”

Sarasvathy found the people who displayed causal reasoning in her study were much more likely to be working for a big company after receiving their MBA.2. MBA programs teach adaptive thinkingIn another academic study, Dr. Michael Kirton found that people can be categorized into two groups based on their approach to creativity:“Adaptors” are those people who prefer to take others’ ideas and improve them. These people are fairly cautious and pragmatic. They prefer incremental innovation. Their motto is to do things better.“Innovators” are those people who prefer to find new ideas by sometimes overturning concepts or industry models. These people challenge others and can be risky and difficult to work with. They are into “big bang” innovation. Their motto is to do things differently.The Kirton Adaption-Innovation model plots people on a continuum between Adaptor (bank employees typically score high on adaptive behavior) and Innovator. High-growth entrepreneurs are off-the-chart Innovators.By their nature, entrepreneurs look to overturn concepts and rigid industry models, the very things that MBA schools teach. In fact, spend too much time learning the “right” answers at school, and your intuition to experiment will dull. Like sausage factories, MBA programs churn out management consultants and bankers who know the rules, not entrepreneurs who invent them.3. Your fellow classmates will not be entrepreneursEven the MBA entrance criteria themselves act as a barrier for truly entrepreneurial people to get in. Top-tier MBA programs typically accept excellent students from top-tier undergraduate schools. Getting into a top-20 undergrad program is easier when you’ve gone to the “right” private high school. Getting into the right private school, likewise, usually requires having attended an elite primary school. Most kids in the top prep schools have keen parents who believe strongly in the importance of a formal education. Not surprisingly, many of these parents are bankers, consultants, and lawyers.Enroll in an MBA program at a top school, and you’ll be around a group of people who have been taught from an early age to do as they are told. In fact, they have succeeded because they are very good at being right.Ask 10 successful entrepreneurs what they were doing in school, and most will tell you about a little money-making venture they had going on the side. They probably did well enough at school to keep their parents off their backs, but I’m betting they were not accepting the awards for most gifted student. They were too busy hawking and peddling their way to some extra pocket money and learning the skills they needed to survive in the world of company building.In a tier-one MBA program, your peers will have gotten to the top of their class by answering the question correctly, not by examining the efficacy of the question itself. By the time these model citizens have put the finishing touches on their pristine educational credentials, every ounce of creativity has been replaced by pounds of correctness.4. Don’t waste 40% of your “risk-free” years in a classroomAlthough there are, of course, exceptions, the average person who considers getting an MBA is between the ages of 25 and 30. Having long since passed those years myself, I can say with confidence that the late 20s is an all-too-short five-year period when most

people are yet without serious attachments. Kids, orthodontist bills, and a mortgage are typically all still in the future.And this means it is the perfect time to pour yourself into starting a business. You have more energy and optimism at this age than at any other time in your life, and at the exact same time, you can afford to take a financial risk or go without a paycheck for a year or two. Trust me when I say those 60 glorious months truly present a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Your last five years as a 20-something are a finite resource not to be wasted in a classroom. These risk-free years are the time to try things, make mistakes and learn from them. Waste them on an MBA, and by the time you get out, the pressure of paying the bill for the new initials beside your name, combined with kids, a mortgage and all of the responsibilities of adulthood, will make taking a steady job look much more appealing than starting up a company.If you want to be the next Branson, Gates, or Jobs, an MBA is not a necessity. In fact, I think it may do more harm than good.

Should an entrepreneur have an MBA?I usually hear the “Should I get my MBA?” question at least once a month. If you’re an entrepreneur, the glib answer is “no.”  It’s also the wrong answer.

Last week I was having coffee with an ex engineering student of mine now on his second startup (and for a change it wasn’t a Web 2.0 startup) who wanted to chat about career choices.  “I’m thinking of going back to school to get my MBA.”It was said less as a clear declaration than a question. It was six years since he had left school and three and a half years ago he had joined an 8-person startup as a product manager. The company was now 4-years old and 70+ people, profitable and growing fast.I didn’t say anything as he continued, “I’m now director of product management, but I think I’m missing stuff I ought to know; finance, marketing, and operations management. We’re starting to hire senior execs as VP’s and all the jobs specs have ‘MBA’ as a requirement.  What should I do?”The easy answer would have been, “Yes, go back and get an MBA. You fit the perfect profile; you have an engineering background, work experience in two startups and you’ll be limited in your career growth without one.”  But the answer I gave him was a bit different.In between the coffee and breakfast I drew the diagram below:

I explained that as startups grow, they go from the box on the left to the box on the right and the skills people need at each step of a company’s growth evolve and change. The skills required when they were an 8-person startup trying to “search for the business model” wasn’t the same set of skills needed now that they were a 70-person company “executing the business model.”  I offered that it sounded to me as if his company was going through the transition (the box in the middle) where it was starting to put in place the processes needed to build and execute the business model.I suggested that perhaps his first question shouldn’t be whether he needed an MBA. Rather the question he should be thinking of was: In which part of a company’s lifecycle did he think he wanted to spend the rest of his career?  Did he enjoy the early chaotic stage of the startup?  Was he fondly telling stories of how much better it was when the company was smaller? After the rocketship ride of this successful startup, did he now want to be a founder of his own startup?Or was he more comfortable now that there was more structure, repeatability and he was managing a staff? Was his goal to be a large company executive managing large groups of people?  And if a larger company was his destination, did he want to manage complex technology projects or did he see himself in more general management in sales, marketing or finance?His vision about the trajectory of his career would answer what type of education he should get – and where he might get it.I pointed out that if he wanted to work in a larger company he actually had two choices – go to business school for an MBA degree or go back to a graduate school of engineering for a Engineering Management degree.  (I find a disconcerting number of my MBA students with engineering backgrounds realized too late that they ought to have been in an engineering management program. They had picked the MBA route because it was trendy or they hadn’t thought through that managing engineering projects was what really excited them.)I could see I was having an effect when he blurted out, “You know my happiest times in these startups were when we were a small team figuring out the business model. The chaos and camaraderie gave me an adrenalin rush and incredible satisfaction. While I’m really good at managing the process, this phase of the company feels like a job. I’ve been bouncing some ideas about a company with some fellow employees who feel the same way. Maybe I do want to do startups as a career.”Then he asked me the real hard question. “So what type of graduate school do I go to get the skills to be a great entrepreneur?”

I congratulated him.  “You already have started your apprenticeship. You have two startups under your belt as one of the first 10 employees. If you decide that you want to be a founder of a startup you’ve made a good start.”“But where do I learn all the things a founder needs to know, not just an early employee? Team building? Creativity and innovation? Entrepreneurial finance? Agile Development? This Lean startup stuff?  Where’s the school for that?”I said, “Welcome to the wonderful world of entrepreneurial education.  It’s everywhere and nowhere.”Almost all business schools now have entrepreneurship programs or departments. (At U.C. Berkeley that’s exactly the program I teach in.) But you can also find entrepreneurship programs in most engineering schools. (At Stanford that’s the program I teach in as well.)And startup “accelerators” like Y-Combinator, Techstars, etc. also offer a crash course in Darwinian education.Of course, if your passion is starting your own company, learning by doing is also an equally viable choice.

Should euthanasia be allowed for the patients who ask for it?

Euthanasia and Assisted DeathEuthanasia is a term still new to many of us. It is a Greek term meaning ‘good death’. It means self imposed death in a relatively painless and merciful way. Euthanasia is most often confused with another term, ‘assisted death’. The difference is, in euthanasia, the person who is dying performs the last act while in assisted death another person performs the act. For example a physician can help in the process by giving lethal medications through the oral or intravenous routes. If the physician himself administers it then it is physician-assisted suicide, but, if he sets up the injection apparatus and the person who wants to die presses the button then it translates into euthanasia.There has been a long standing debate on whether euthanasia should be legalized. On one side it has been argued that for people on life support systems and people with long standing diseases causing much pain and distress, euthanasia is a better choice. It helps in relieving them from pain and misery. In cases like terminal cancers when the patient is in much pain and when people associated with them also are put through a lot of pain and misery, it is much more practical and humane to grant the person his/her wish to end his/her own life in a relatively painless and merciful way.On the other hand there are ethical issues and political issues concerning the same subject. Oregon, Belgium and The Netherlands are the only places in the world that have laws specifically permitting assisted suicide. In 1997, Oregon was the first to enact the physician-assisted suicide law in the United States. This law, known as the Death with Dignity Act, requires the Oregon Department of Human Services to collect and analyze data on the people involved in the act and to publish annual reports. In this way statistics are maintained. This law allows only physician-assisted suicide. Euthanasia is still illegal.In conclusion, though it is not ethical to assist or be involved in a human beings death, in some cases, taking into consideration the involved person’s quality of life, euthanasia should be legalized. It will lead to a person having an option to consult his/her medical

practitioner and choosing the right time and right way to end his/her life. But at the same time laws should be in place to make sure that there are proper standards in place to avoid unnecessary deaths in our present day stress filled lives.Supreme Court allows passive euthanasia, rejects Aruna Shanbaug's pleaIn a path-breaking judgment, the Supreme Court today allowed "passive euthanasia" of withdrawing life support to patients in permanently vegetative state (PVS) but rejected outright active euthanasiaof ending life through administration of lethal substances.Refusing mercy killing of Aruna Shanbaug, lying in a vegetative state for 37 years in a Mumbai hospital, a two-judge bench of Justice Markandeya Katju and Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra, laid a set of tough guidelines under which passive euthanasia can be legalised through high court monitored mechanism.The apex court while framing the guidelines for passive euthanasia asserted that it would now become the law of the land until Parliament enacts a suitable legislation to deal with the issue.The bench also asked Parliament to delete Section 309 IPC (attempt to suicide) as it has become "anachronistic though it has become Constitutionally valid.""A person attempts suicide in a depression, and hence he needs help, rather than punishment," Justice Katju writing the judgment said.The apex court said though there is no statutory provision for withdrawing life support system from a person in a permanently vegetative state, it was of the view that "passive euthanasia" could be permissible in certain cases for which it laid down guidelines and cast the responsibility on high courts to take decisions on pleas for mercy killings."We agree with senior counsel TR Andhyarujina (who assisted the court in the matter) that passive euthanasia should be permitted in our country in certain situations, and we disagree with attorney general (GE Vahanvati) that it should never be permitted," said the bench.While dismissing writer Pinky Virani's plea for subjecting to mercy killing of the KEM Hospital nurse who was sexually assaulted by a ward boy, the apex court cast the responsibility of taking a call on passive euthanasia on high courts, if the plea is made by close relatives or friends who have strongly opposed such a step.The bench, in its 141-page ruling, said in the case of Aruna, the plea for her mercy killing could be permitted if KEM Hospital makes it to the Bombay high court on her behalf and the high court accepts it."A decision has to be taken to discontinue life support either by the parents or the spouse or other close relatives, or in the absence of any of them, such a decision can be taken even by a person or a body of persons acting as a next friend," it added."It can also be taken by the doctors attending the patient. However, the decision should be taken bona fide in the best interest of the patient," and should be approved by the high court, it said.In the case of nurse Aruna "it is for the KEM hospital staff to take that decision," and not writer Pinky Virani, the bench said, adding that "the hospital staff have been amazingly caring for her day and night for so many long years, who really are her next friends, and not Ms. Pinky Virani.""Hence it is for the KEM hospital staff to take that decision. And the KEM hospital staff have clearly expressed their wish that Aruna Shanbaug should be allowed to live," the bench said, rejecting the plea for Aruna's mercy killing at present.

Euthanasia Pros and ConsMahatma Gandhi, the great proponent of non-violence, opined thus about euthanasia in the October 1928 Gujarati weekly Navjivan: “…Just as a surgeon does not commit himsa when he wields his knife on his patient's body for the latter's benefit, similarly one may find it necessary under certain imperative circumstances to go a step further and sever life from the body in the interest of the sufferer". The reason why Law Is Greek has prepared such an in-depth, comprehensive series of legal information on euthanasia is due to the real time feedback and suggestion from Prasanna Kumar who can be followed on Twitter @constantinum.  He is an American Civil war enthusiast and a great fan of President Lincoln. We value every feedback and suggestion that you send us.  So, the Euthanasia series begins here and do share your questions, suggestions and thoughts with us. Euthanasia Debate and Key Court RulingsWhile India still remains in a dilemma whether to legalize euthanasia, Netherlands became the only country to legalize euthanasia in April 2002. The US state of Oregon also legalized euthanasia in 1997. Oregon’s “Death with Dignity” Act enabled patients to practice euthanasia by administering lethal injections themselves. However, surveys suggest that passive euthanasia has been routine in several European countries, where doctors help end sufferings of several thousand of terminally ill patients every year. Neena Bonarji caseNotable Indian cases where the plea for euthanasia was declined include: Tarakeshwar Chandravanshi plea in the Patna High Court and BK Pillai in the Kerala High Court. However, despite these legal mandates, infrequent reports of euthanasia have been heard in India (, India Today April 15, 2002).However, experts opine that doctors who administer euthanasia must be cautious about attracting charges for murder under section 302, IPC. Therefore, it is recommended that such cases be reviewed by an expert panel of physicians, psychologists, neurologist, psychiatrists and lawyers, and mandatory judicial assent be taken.A notorious case of doctor audacity in administering euthanasia was Michigan’s Dr. Jack Kevorkian case. The doctor claimed to have aided euthanasia in over 130 people, one of which was videotaped by him. The accused was sentenced to 10-25 years in prison in April 1999.In fact, the skepticism surrounding the legalization of voluntary euthanasia is mainly attributed to corrupt, involuntary euthanasia gaining ground.

Does GDP reflect economic well being of a country?

6.3. GDP and Economic Well-BeingDiscuss and give examples of measurement and conceptual problems in using real GDP as a measure of economic performance and of economic well-being.Explain the use of per capita real GNP or GDP to compare economic performance across countries and discuss its limitations.GDP is the measure most often used to assess the economic well-being of a country. Besides measuring the pulse of a country, it is the figure used to compare living standards in different countries.

Of course, to use GDP as an indicator of overall economic performance, we must convert nominal GDP to real GDP, since nominal values can rise or fall simply as a result of changes in the price level. For example, the movie Titanic, released in 1997, brought in $601 million—the highest amount ever in gross box office receipts, while Gone with the Wind, released in 1939, earned only $199 million and ranks 49th in terms of nominal receipts. But does that mean that Titanicactually did better than Gone with the Wind? After all, the average price of a movie ticket in 1939 was 25 cents. At the time of Titanic, the average ticket price was about $5. A better way to compare these two movies in terms of popularity is to control for the price of movie tickets—the same strategy that economists use with real GDP in order to determine whether output is rising or falling. Adjusting the nominal box-office receipts using 1998 movie prices to obtain real revenue reveals that in real terms Gone with the Wind continues to be the top real grosser of all time with real box-office receipts of about $1.3 billion. As illustrated by this example on revenues from popular movies, we might draw erroneous conclusions about performance if we base them on nominal values instead of on real values. In contrast, real GDP, despite the problems with price indexes that were explained in another chapter, provides a reasonable measure of the total output of an economy, and changes in real GDP provide an indication of the direction of movement in total output.We begin this section by noting some of the drawbacks of using real GDP as a measure of the economic welfare of a country. Despite these shortcomings, we will see that it probably remains our best single indicator of macroeconomic performance.Measurement Problems in Real GDPThere are two measurement problems, other than those associated with adjusting for price level changes, in using real GDP to assess domestic economic performance.RevisionsThe first estimate of real GDP for a calendar quarter is called the advance estimate. It is issued about a month after the quarter ends. To produce a measure so quickly, officials at the Department of Commerce must rely on information from relatively few firms and households. One month later, it issues a revised estimate, and a month after that it issues its final estimate. Often the advance estimate of GDP and the final estimate do not correspond. The recession of 2001, for example, began in March of that year. But the first estimates of real GDP for the second and third quarters of 2001 showed output continuing to rise. It was not until later revisions that it became clear that a recession had been under way.But the revision story does not end there. Every summer, the Commerce Department issues revised figures for the previous two or three years. Once every five years, the department conducts an extensive analysis that traces flows of inputs and outputs throughout the economy. It focuses on the outputs of some firms that are inputs to other firms. In the process of conducting this analysis, the department revises real GDP estimates for the previous five years. Sometimes the revisions can paint a picture of economic activity that is quite different from the one given even by the revised estimates of GDP. For example, revisions of the data for the 1990–1991 recession issued several years later showed that the recession had been much more serious than had previously been apparent, and the recovery was more pronounced.The Service Sector

Another problem lies in estimating production in the service sector. The output of goods in an economy is relatively easy to compute. There are so many bushels of corn, so many pounds of beef. But what is the output of a bank? Of a hospital? It is easy to record the dollar value of output to enter in nominal GDP, but estimating the quantity of output to use in real GDP is quite another matter. In some cases, the Department of Commerce estimates service sector output based on the quantity of labor used. For example, if this technique were used in the banking industry and banking used 10% more labor, the department would report that production has risen 10%. If the number of employees remains unchanged, reported output remains unchanged. In effect, this approach assumes that output per worker—productivity—in those sectors remains constant when studies have indicated that productivity has increased greatly in the service sector. Since 1990 progress has been made in measurement in this area, which allows in particular for better estimation of productivity changes and price indexes for different service sector industries, but more remains to be done in this large sector of the U.S. economy.[19]

Conceptual Problems with Real GDPA second set of limitations of real GDP stems from problems inherent in the indicator itself. Real GDP measures market activity. Goods and services that are produced and exchanged in a market are counted; goods and services that are produced but that are not exchanged in markets are not.[20]

Household ProductionSuppose you are considering whether to eat at home for dinner tonight or to eat out. You could cook dinner for yourself at a cost of $5 for the ingredients plus an hour or so of your time. Alternatively, you could buy an equivalent meal at a restaurant for perhaps $15. Your decision to eat out rather than cook would add $10 to the GDP.But that $10 addition would be misleading. After all, if you had stayed home you might have produced an equivalent meal. The only difference is that the value of your time would not have been counted. But surely your time is not worthless; it is just not counted. Similarly, GDP does not count the value of your efforts to clean your own house, to wash your own car, or to grow your own vegetables. In general, GDP omits the entire value added by members of a household who do household work themselves.There is reason to believe this omission is serious. Economists J. Steven Landefeld and Stephanie H. McCulla of the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis estimated in a 2000 paper the value of household output from 1946 to 1997. Their estimate of household output in 1946 was 50% of reported GDP. Since then, that percentage has fallen, because more women have entered the workforce, so that more production that once took place in households now occurs in the market. Households now eat out more, purchase more prepared foods at the grocery store, hire out child-care services they once performed themselves, and so on. Their estimate for 1997, for example, suggests that household production amounted to 36% of reported GDP.[21]

This problem is especially significant when GDP is used to make comparisons across countries. In low-income countries, a much greater share of goods and services is not exchanged in a market. Estimates of GDP in such countries are adjusted to reflect nonmarket production, but these adjustments are inevitably imprecise.Underground and Illegal Production

Some production goes unreported in order to evade taxes or the law. It is not likely to be counted in GDP. Legal production for which income is unreported in order to evade taxes generally takes place in what is known as the “underground economy.” For example, a carpenter might build a small addition to a dentist’s house in exchange for orthodontic work for the carpenter’s children. Although income has been earned and output generated in this example of bartering, the transaction is unlikely to be reported for income tax or other purposes and thus is not counted in GDP. Illegal activities are not reported for income taxes for obvious reasons and are thus difficult to include in GDP.LeisureLeisure is an economic good. All other things being equal, more leisure is better than less leisure.But all other things are not likely to be equal when it comes to consuming leisure. Consuming more leisure means supplying less work effort. And that means producing less GDP. If everyone decided to work 10% fewer hours, GDP would fall. But that would not mean that people were worse off. In fact, their choice of more leisure would suggest they prefer the extra leisure to the goods and services they give up by consuming it. Consequently, a reduction in GDP would be accompanied by an increase in satisfaction, not a reduction.The GDP Accounts Ignore “Bads”Suppose a wave of burglaries were to break out across the United States. One would expect people to respond by buying more and louder burglar alarms, better locks, fiercer German shepherds, and more guard services than they had before. To the extent that they pay for these by dipping into savings rather than replacing other consumption, GDP increases. An epidemic might have much the same effect on GDP by driving up health-care spending. But that does not mean that crime and disease are good things; it means only that crime and disease may force an increase in the production of goods and services counted in the GDP.Similarly, the GDP accounts ignore the impact of pollution on the environment. We might produce an additional $200 billion in goods and services but create pollution that makes us feel worse off by, say, $300 billion. The GDP accounts simply report the $200 billion in increased production. Indeed, some of the environmental degradation might itself boost GDP. Dirtier air may force us to wash clothes more often, to paint buildings more often, and to see the doctor more often, all of which will tend to increase GDP!Conclusion: GDP and Human HappinessMore GDP cannot necessarily be equated with more human happiness. But more GDP does mean more of the goods and services we measure. It means more jobs. It means more income. And most people seem to place a high value on these things. For all its faults, GDP does measure the production of most goods and services. And goods and services get produced, for the most part, because we want them. We might thus be safe in giving two cheers for GDP—and holding back the third in recognition of the conceptual difficulties that are inherent in using a single number to summarize the output of an entire economy.International Comparisons of Real GDP and GNPReal GDP or GNP estimates are often used in comparing economic performance among countries. In making such comparisons, it is important to keep in mind the

general limitations to these measures of economic performance that we noted earlier. Further, countries use different methodologies for collecting and compiling data.Three other issues are important in comparing real GDP or GNP for different countries: the adjustment of these figures for population, adjusting to a common currency, and the incorporation of nonmarket production.In international comparisons of real GNP or real GDP, economists generally make comparisons not of real GNP or GDP but of per capita real GNP or GDP, which equals a country’s real GNP or GDP divided by its population. In 2007, for example, Japan had a real GDP of about $5,000 billion and Luxembourg had a real GDP of about $25 billion, both figures in U.S. $2,000. We can conclude that Japan’s economy produced far more goods and services than did Luxembourg’s. But Japan had almost 300 times as many people as did Luxembourg. Japan’s per capita real GDP in 2007 was $40,656; Luxembourg’s was $54,482, the highest in the world that year.Figure 6.9, “Comparing Per Capita Real GNP, 2007” compares per capita real GNP for 11 countries in 2007. It is based on data that uses a measure called “international dollars” in order to correct for differences in the purchasing power of $1 across countries. The data also attempt to adjust for nonmarket production (such as that of rural families that grow their own food, make their own clothing, and produce other household goods and services themselves).Figure 6.9. Comparing Per Capita Real GNP, 2007

There is a huge gap between per capita income in one of the poorest countries in the world, Liberia, and wealthier nations such as the United States and Luxembourg.The disparities in income are striking; Luxembourg, the country with the highest per capita real GNP, had an income level more than 200 times greater than Liberia, the country with the lowest per capita real GNP.What can we conclude about international comparisons in levels of GDP and GNP? Certainly we must be cautious. There are enormous difficulties in estimating any country’s total output. Comparing one country’s output to another presents additional challenges. But the fact that a task is difficult does not mean it is impossible. When the data suggest huge disparities in levels of GNP per capita, for example, we observe real differences in living standards.K E Y T A K E A W A Y SReal GDP or real GNP is often used as an indicator of the economic well-being of a country.Problems in the measurement of real GDP, in addition to problems encountered in converting from nominal to real GDP, stem from revisions in the data and the difficulty of measuring output in some sectors, particularly the service sector.

Conceptual problems in the use of real GDP as a measure of economic well-being include the facts that it does not include nonmarket production and that it does not properly adjust for “bads” produced in the economy.Per capita real GDP or GNP can be used to compare economic performance in different countries.T R Y I T !What impact would each of the following have on real GDP? Would economic well-being increase or decrease as a result?On average, people in a country decide to increase the number of hours they work by 5%.Spending on homeland security increases in response to a terrorist attack.The price level and nominal GDP increase by 10%.Case in Point: Per Capita Real GDP and Olympic Medal Counts

In the popular lore, the Olympics provide an opportunity for the finest athletes in the world to compete with each other head-to-head on the basis of raw talent and hard work. And yet, contenders from Laos tend to finish last or close to it in almost any event in which they compete. One Laotian athlete garnered the unenviable record of having been the slowest entrant in the nearly half-century long history of the 20-kilometer walk. In contrast, U.S. athletes won 103 medals at the 2004 Athens Olympics and 110 medals at the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Why do Laotians fare so poorly and Americans so well, with athletes from other countries falling in between?Economists Daniel K. N. Johnson and Ayfer Ali have been able to predict with astonishing accuracy the number of medals different countries will win on the basis of a handful of factors, including population, climate, political structure, and real per capita GDP. For example, they predicted that the United States would win 103 medals in Athens and that is precisely how many the United States won. They predicted 103 medals for the United States in Beijing; 110 were won. They did not expect the Laotians to win any medals in either Athens or Beijing, and that was indeed the outcome.Johnson and Ali estimated that summer game participant nations average one more medal per additional $1,000 of per capita real GDP. With per capita real GDP in Laos less than the equivalent of $500 compared to per capita real GDP in the United States of about $38,000, the results for these two nations could be considered a foregone conclusion. According to Johnson and Ali, “High productive capacity or income per person displays an ability to pay the costs necessary to send athletes to the Games, and may also be associated with a higher quality of training and better equipment.” For example, a Laotian swimmer at Athens, Vilayphone Vongphachanh, had never practiced in an Olympic-size pool, and a runner, Sirivanh Ketavong, had worn the same running shoes for four years.The good news is that as the per capita real GDP in some relatively poor countries has risen, the improved living standards have led to increased Olympic medal counts. China, for instance, won 28 medals in 1988 and 63 in 2004. As the host for the 2008 games, it won an impressive total of 100 medals.While not a perfect measure of the well-being of people in a country, per capita real GDP does tell us about the opportunities available to the average citizen in a country. Americans would surely find it hard to imagine living at the level of consumption of the

average Laotian. In The Progress Paradox: How Life Gets Better While People Feel Worse, essayist Gregg Easterbrook notes that a higher material standard of living is not associated with higher reported happiness. But, he concludes, the problems of prosperity seem less serious than those of poverty, and prosperity gives people and nations the means to address problems. The Olympic medal count for each nation strongly reflects its average standard of living and hence the opportunities available to its citizens.

Should there be a cap on endorsements by Sports-persons?

Banning endorsements can repulse corporates from cricketChennai April 15 Current focus is not on scoreboards but on the contracts of cricketers. Recent days have seen stern announcements from the BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India) in the form of caps and other controls on endorsements by cricketers, followed by stories of `softening' too. At the time of writing, the Board is reported to have completely ruled out any talks with the sponsors or agents of the players.What is the agent side of the story? Business Line sought to find out, by connecting to a popular agent, Latika Khaneja, Director of the New Delhi-based Collage Sports Management (www.collageindia.com) . "The Board makes its money from corporates who choose to associate with the game of cricket. By banning cricketers from endorsements, you are reducing their communication options and repulsing them away from cricket," she says. Her client-list includes: Virender Sehwag, Dinesh Mongia, Sanjay Bangar, Gautam Gambhir, Dinesh Karthik, Lt. Col. Rathore, Abhinav Bindra, Jaspal Rana, Ayaan and Amaan Khan, and young cricketers such as Dheeraj Jadhav, Ravinder Jadeja, Mayank Tehlan, Pradeep Sangwan and Ishant Sharma. Collage manages contract negotiation and all `off-the-field' business and marketing endeavours, including endorsements, financial planning, promotions, charitable pursuits and personal appearances, as one learns from the site.Well, do we need agents? Yes, says Khaneja. Pray, why? Because the average cricketer is `a young boy in his twenties with very little exposure to commerce and business'. When suddenly propelled into superstardom, he has little idea of how to cope with it, she points out."He is surrounded by sycophants who promise him the world." And there are all those demands for the cricketer's time, be it for networking, press, commercials, or appearance requests. Agents free the player from these concerns, by filtering through the chaff and ensuring that the player's limited time goes to the right cause, says Khaneja. "We ensure he is not being cheated and he is getting his due from the market."Curtailing endorsements may appease a few, she concedes. But such a drastic move can also dilute the dream of young cricket lovers who aspire to grow up and become the next big star, fears Khaneja."It will dilute the glamour and fanfare that makes cricket the religion of a nation by slowly moving corporate support out of cricket. It will no longer attract the best talent, who will be driven by their parents and well-wishers into less risky and more assured livelihoods. It will be highly regressive, sending cricket back to where other sports currently exist in the minds of the public."

On why the agents are a despised lot, Khaneja has an interesting explanation, as follows, "The cricket fraternity generally comprises senior cricketers who never had it so good and board officials who would like to be in a monopoly situation. They resent the agents for being the alternative power centres of the game."The Board should understand the cricketers' concerns as very gifted sportsmen with a limited shelf life trying to maximise their careers, pleads Khaneja. "The Board should understand that by giving the companies opportunities to tie up with individual stars we are actually propelling them towards the game."The jury is out, shall we say, on contracts?

Are Naxalites terrorists?

Naxalism and Terrorism - What and Why?There are three types of nations - underdeveloped, developing and developed. Countries like Sumatra fall under underdeveloped category, countries like the US and the China fall under developed and our India falls under developing nation. From this we have derive a point that India still has some goals to reach. It has some missions to be accomplished, in order to advance itself to the developed category. But, to achieve success is not so easy. There are many obstacles which hinder one's speed in the path of success. Similar is the case of India's development scheme. There are many problems which India faces. Although there are many like economic problem, population problem etc. but there are some more problems which India suffers from and which have proved themselves to be the top class priority demanding obstacles in order to clear the road to reach the success sooner. Not only India but the whole world today is a victim of these things, but India has proved herself to be an exception. I am sure that till now, it was not a very clear one. Let me now talk about those two things which are really very big hindrances in the path of India's success. They are Naxalism and Terrorism. What are they?

Terrorism basically means non-legitimate operations which are violent in nature and are made to kill others. Even naxalism is the same thing but what creates a difference is their positions in the nation. It is just like the external and internal type of thing. Terrorism is the violent and ill-legitimate thing which terrorizes the nation from outside and naxalism is something which engulfs the country from the inside. Today, we are no more safe as in every part of India, we are threatened, directly or indirectly and the value of our lives seems to be less in front of the political India. Decades ago, we used to think that maybe terrorists can attack from outside. Who knows? But today, day has changed brother. We are no more safe with that mentality. Today every son fears to let his father go outside in the suburbs during the night time. No one knows, we can die just the next second. Yes this was always true. We could die anytime, but today it is not because of accident, it can be naxalism or terrrorism.

Now let us talk about the problems. Which one is more danger? Terrorism or naxalism. Both are equally danger because there is no substitute for death. Death finishes the lives and leaves an impact of it in many other people's life as well. Terrorism is taken as the activities done basically by organizations such as Alquaida and Taliban. Basically

the name Muslim is highlighted and Muslims suffer from this all throughout their lives. This channel continues to persist - a channel of death. Muslims are blamed by terrorism, terrorism says that it will continue that because Muslims are being tortured, again terrorism kills, and again Muslims are blamed because of terrorism. Just because of perceptions like this there have been many conflicts, which have led our people meet their creator. Besides just loss of lives, terrorism snatches many things away from our lives. One must watch the movie New York to know what it actually means, what can be the result of severity. On the other hand naxalism also stretches it's hands to our collars and it threatens the piece of our lives. The cause of terrorism may be different but the causes of naxalism are more or less always same. Why does naxalism exist. It is because of social factors like poverty, unemployment, and racial discrimination. According to an estimation, if corruption keeps persisting as it persists today then in not more than a decade about 30% of the people would have become naxalites or would be having some connection with them.

Naxalism and terrorism are something about which we fear to talk about even. It is only and only we who can change the time. Without saying much I would say that if we wish to change the times, we need to see a change in ourselves because change causes change. 

What should we call it naxalism or terrorism?

DANTEWADA MASSACRE’ ‘Naxals hit bus’ ‘Naxals killed local leader’ such headlines are common these days in India. But our government is still firming up plans to counter the Naxal problemwhich has affected 20 states. Who is responsible for this? Why innocent people are being targeted by Naxals without any fault? Are not these Naxalites terrorists, who are gunning down people without any second thoughts?

If terrorism   is violent and ill-legitimate thing which terrorises the nation from outside then Naxalism is something which engulfs the country from the inside. It seems our government has more sympathy with Naxalites, may be they are very own people. Had terrorists from outside hit the bus or killed 76 police personnel in Dhantewada, then it would have become an international incident and headlines. But, here these Naxalites got away with it.

And the worst part is our politics, even home minister refused to accept them as terrorists. Some political parties are supporting Naxalites from outside and some are watching it as mute spectators. We have social activists, thinkers and authors likeArundhati Roy who is openly supporting the Naxals and glorifying them through her articles. The media is too keen taking interviews of these Naxalites. Question is that if Arundhati Roy and media can reach them, than why our police can’t? Is it lack of political will or our poor trained forces?

In my view, it is time to treat them as terrorists. They should be detained or killed. Government should take strong actions against them without any delay as Naxals are using military style tactics to kill innocent people and they are not ready to resolve their

problems in a peaceful conduct. This is the only way to teach them a lesson as they are trying to take law in their hands. Initially and still some set of society have sympathy for them as they are recognised as the tribals and poor people without any resources to live. But now, with their heinous acts of killing innocent people, have lost all rights of sympathy.

Will the post-PC devices(smart phones, tablet PCs etc.) make the conventional personal computers obsolete?

What’s a Post-PC device?Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer argues that the tablet computers (aka slates, media tablets or iPads) are PCs. Steve Jobs argues that they are post-PC devices. There are analogies to trucks, cars and various metaphors for what these new devices symbolize. Some argue that because the iPad needs a PC, it’s not a post-PC device.But how to define a new generation of computing? Since the PC is not the beginning of computing, it may make sense to look to the eras of computing that preceded it.The first post-mainframe computers worked alongside mainframes and were typically used by engineering departments (vs. the finance and accounting departmental role occupied by mainframes.) They did not require a dedicated (often external) mainframe service team and could be administered by in-department system administrators. Input was not through dedicated data entry personnel and output was not a ream of folded paper. Users could use a CRT terminal to interact with the computer directly. Digital Equipment Corporation, Control Data, HP, Honeywell, Prime, et. al. grew up in the shadow of IBM but thrived. Their products were cheaper and simpler to operate. Initially, the products were not more powerful.The first post-minicomputer microcomputers (also known as PCs) were used alongside mainframes and mini-computers. They were typically used for 2-dimensional spreadsheets analysis by individuals in many departments and were easier to justify cost-wise than the time-sharing cost structure of the incumbent computers. Many microcomputers were able to access mini-computers and mainframes through terminal emulation software (and sometimes special hardware boards) so they were still able to work with existing business processes. They did not require dedicated personnel for administration but had a shared support department. Input and data storage were on the “desktop” as was printing. Compaq, Dell, HP, Apple and IBM embraced this new form factor. Their products were cheaper and simpler to operate than the previous generation of computers. Initially, the products were not more powerful.The first post-microcomputer tablets are used alongside microcomputers for tasks such as presentations and entertainment. They have software available that allows access to desktop computers and services dependent on PC-architectured servers. They depend on PCs for data backup and software updates. They do not require IT support. They do not require a keyboard or a desk. Apple and many mobile phone vendors are embracing the new technology. They are cheaper and simpler to operate. The new products are not more powerful.To define a new generation of computing by its isolation and exclusion of the previous generation is not sustained by the history of computing.

I would suggest that the definition of a new generation of computing is that the new products rely on new input / output methods and allow a new population of non-expert users to use the product more cheaply and simply.I might add that the consequences of each generational shift are:Consumption increasesSkill required decreasesSupport required decreasesThere are new applications and use casesThe economics are not favorable for incumbentsThe economics are favorable for new entrantsThe older generation slowly fades through diminished growth but never disappearsThe post PC era: will personal computers disappear in the next years?After the iPad 2 official announcement, where Steve Jobs mentioned a few times the Post PC era, and the three devices from Apple that marked its beginning (the iPad, iPhone and the iPad) I’ve read lots of articles about what this really means (this is a good one), about whether SJ is right or not.So what better way to write the post number 1000 on AllTouchTablet.com than putting my own thoughts on paper about what tablets really mean for us and maybe throw in a few predictions for the years to come.The evolution of personal computersI’ve been using a PC since 1995, from the times of 486, 14 inch monitors and 3.5 inch diskettes. For me back then a PC was a desktop, that’s the first image that comes to my mind when thinking about personal computers. Things have evolved a lot since then: better graphics, more powerful computers, large monitors, lots of new peripheral and then come laptops. At first they were meant for those with large pockets, but soon become mainstream, as consumers interest towards portable computing devices increased dramatically.Then came Tablet PC, which introduced one important new element in the equation: a touch screen.  Sure the fact tablet PCs were expensive and the lack of optimized hardware lead to their extinction, but people liked touch screens, as a few years later they were back in PDAs and today’s smartphones. All till last year, when Apple introduced the iPad, a slate tablet like we’ve never seen before. You can argue that its a large smartphone, or a laptop without the keyboard, but for me it’s just an evolution in customers needs, an expression of what people want now: portable device which can do 90% of daily tasks and can last through the day without needing a recharge.What’s a personal computer?For me a personal computer is a device that allows me to do things related to my personal interest, so it excludes any business use. So a personal computer is defined by the current tasks people need to perform on a device. If people only listen to music, browse the Internet, watch movies and share statuses on Facebook then a personal computer is one that can do all that. It’s that simple. And believe me or not, the iPad can do most things people need today. It can’t do everything a user needs, but it can perform 100% of the tasks 90% of consumers want. The iPad is an expression of what people really do with a computer today. And it’s not just the iPad, but other tablets too. Just that the iPad does it better, at least for now.What about laptops and desktops?

Don’t worry, as you are still able to buy a desktop today, you’ll be able to get a laptop in a few years from now. The only difference is that laptops and desktop will become a niche, compared to tablets, which have the chance to become mainstream computing devices. Tablets will get better at what they do, will include peripherals like keyboard, ports for businesses to connect specific devices, more storage, video outputs and so on. And a few years more down the road expect something else to be discovered, something to replace tablets. Personally I hope it will be a gadget that connects directly to our brain so we’ll be able to use our mind, eyes and hands as input methods, so we won’t need peripherals anymore, but we’ll have to wait and see.

Should Non-Citizen Residents be concerned in the UID project?

The UID Project in India: Should Non-Citizen Residents be Concerned?Section: ViewsSahana Basavapatna

Introduction

This essay attempts to comprehend the potential implications of the Unique Identification project (UID) or “Aadhaar” on non-citizen residents in India, specifically, refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons and other “illegal” migrants who fall within the grey zones between citizens and non-citizens in India. The Aadhaar project poses a number of questions, including the constitutional right to privacy and issues of surveillance 1, on identity, the costs of the project, and many others. It gives an impression that only welfarist objectives animate the project but given the scale, costs and what it seeks to achieve in reality, it would be naïve to assume that such a system would leave non-citizens untouched especially in the context of the high degree of anxiety over issues of both internal and external national insecurity.

The unique identification number debate, it is argued needs to consider the possible impact it would have on non-citizen residents. They make up a small yet significant cross section of the resident population in India and find themselves in a society and polity that displays unique features in terms of how it regulates the presence and exit of foreigners in its territory. Further, the incoherence of the legal and administrative mechanism regulating asylum seekers, refugees and stateless persons in India has the potential to translate the lack of or precarious legal identities in social life of these individuals in ways that may negatively impact them. At the same time, it would be worth thinking aloud whether, on the contrary, the UID project would benefit refugees in the Indian context given that their limited rights are not translated in reality in the existing social, economic and political institutional set up. Questions of identity, surveillance and the citizenship of refugees/stateless/asylum seekers are all the more relevant given the anxieties displayed by the Indian state in relation to them. It is in this specific context of resident non-citizens that this paper intends to comprehend the complexities of this project. 

As the mechanism and institutional structures to implement the Unique Identity Project

have been put in place only recently and few reports 2 evaluating the pilot projects are available, this paper would arguably run the risk of speculation vis-à-vis the impact it would have on “foreigners”. It would thus be important to note that the points flagged and conclusions arrived at are drawn from personal experience of working with refugees and asylum seekers in Delhi as well as in Mizoram and the existing primary and analytical literature on the Unique Identity project.

The Origins and Salient Features of the UID Project 

A pan-India project to “identify” each resident was formally inaugurated in 2009, with the establishment of the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) as an office attached to the Planning Commission. 3 Headed by Mr Nandan Nilekani, the Chairperson with powers equivalent to that of a Minister of a Cabinet Rank, the UIDAI has a mandate to ensure a “unique” number to every resident in India to facilitate easy access to government schemes, eliminate fraud such as duplication of identities resulting in significant savings to the state. The unique number would include an individual’s demographic and personal information and biometric information – finger prints as well as the scan of the iris. The Unique Identity numbers are proposed to be issued between August 2010 and February 2011 and over the next 5 years, it is expected to reach 600 million residents. 4

The UID “architecture” and the problems in the way the UID is visualized including its objective are well articulated in a recent article by Dr Usha Ramanathan. 5 Some points may be reiterated as they are relevant in the context of refugees and other immigrant whose legal status is precarious. The UID is not mandatory and is “demand driven” – meaning that the way the project is visualized is to lead to a situation where residents would voluntarily opt for the number because of the benefits that would accrue. 6 Considering that it is linked to services and benefits and the fact that the UIDAI has signed numerous Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) with bodies, including banks, public sector agencies, private companies and civil society organizations, it is bound to compel an individual to apply for a number. 

Though now projected as aiming to ensure better access to services and benefits for the poor by assigning and authenticating identity, the origins of the project can be traced to a series of events in the 1990s and after and debates within the government on the question of national security, terrorism and illegal immigration in India. 7 The Kargil conflict between India and Pakistan is considered to have triggered the idea of the need to ensure that “terrorists” are not allowed to enter the Indian territory. The Kargil Review Committee 8 in its recommendations among others, noted the “gross inadequacies in the nation’s surveillance capability…”.9 It further recommended that “…steps should be taken to issue ID Cards to border villagers in certain vulnerable areas on a priority basis, pending its extension to other or all parts of the State. Such a policy would also be relevant in the North-East, Sikkim and part of West Bengal”. 10 Several committees/bodies were set up in the 1990s 11 with a view to probe issues concerning internal security, border management, etc and evaluate the aspects of national security. The idea of the smart card system is not articulated explicitly anywhere excepting the

Recommendations of the Kargil Review Committee but debates in the Lok Sabha between April and December 2001 see a number of questions being asked on smart cards system to be used for various services. 12 In 2006, the national e-governance plan of the Ministry of Information Technology listed the “National Citizens Database” 13 as one of the 27 Mission Mode Projects towards ushering in “era of e-governance” so that it improves “the delivery of public services and simplify the process of accessing them”. 14 Later in 2007, the Working Group on Development Policy in the Planning Commission came up with a report titled “Entitlement Reform for Empowering the Poor: The Integrated Smart Card Report (ISC)” 15 where the idea of the identity card was elaborated.

The National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 (hereafter called the UID Bill) which if passed, would regulate the UIDAI does not mention the government’s national security concerns. Only a passing reference is made in the confidential document published by UIDAI titled ‘Creating a Unique Identity Number for Every Resident in India” 16 where it notes that the inability to identify residents “complicates government efforts to account for residents during emergencies and security threats”.17 The UID Bill118 makes this clear in its Preamble where it notes that the objective is,“to provide for the establishment of the National Identification Authority of India for the purpose of issuing identification numbers to individuals residing in India and to certain other classes of individuals and manner of authentication of such individuals to facilitate access to benefits and services 19 to such individuals to which they are entitled and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”

Thus, the overarching character of the Aadhaar project appears to be “welfare”, which on a perfunctory reading may not amount to a red herring, but nevertheless relegates to the background several other crucial concerns. In giving the “welfare” hue to the Unique Identification numbering project, it makes what is clearly a simple, liner assumption of a direct link between an individual’s identity and access to benefits. The rationale is that the lack of identification results in the denial of services to those entitled to it. The document, ‘Creating a Unique Identity Number for Every Resident in India” 20 is relevant, for nowhere else among the UID documentation is this welfare argument explained in more detail. It notes, “A crucial factor that determines an individual’s well-being in a country is whether their identity is recognized in the eyes of the government. Weak identity limits the power of the country’s residents when it comes to claiming basic political and economic rights. The lack of identity is especially detrimental for the poor and the underprivileged, the people who live in India’s “social, political and economic periphery”. Agencies in both the public and private sector in India usually require a clear proof of identity to provide services. Since the poor often lack such documentation, they face enormous barriers in accessing benefits and subsidies”.21

For a state that makes a very clear distinction between citizens and non-citizens and ensures that the latter are excluded as not entitled to be part of the membership of the political community, the reference to “residents” and their inability to access benefits is intriguing. Further, the link between a person’s identity and her access to benefits due to

her is mediated through a variety of factors, including class, caste, gender, religion, race and access to information. Thus, to assert that the root cause of poverty and marginalization is solely an individual’s inability to identify to the satisfaction of the state is to refuse to acknowledge the role played by these factors in marginalizing individuals and creating an impoverished population. Second, identity itself is a fluid concept and cannot be easily frozen in rigid categories. 

The Bill includes two other important points, on the question of surveillance, profiling and safeguarding of the information so that there is no misuse. Section 9 of the Bill states that, “The Authority shall not require any individual to give information pertaining to his race, religion, caste, tribe, ethnicity, language, income or health”. Among the features of the UID, it is noted is that it will not contain intelligence because “loading intelligence into identity numbers makes them susceptible to fraud and theft. The UID will be a random number” 22. Lastly, Section 30 of the Bill ensures security and confidentiality of identity information of individuals. Section 33 makes an exception where it states that information can be disclosed if required by an order of a competent court 23 or in the interests of national security.24

It has been argued that even though the Bill is silent and denies either profiling or centralizing information, “convergence is a predictable and inevitable consequence of the UID project”.25 Dr Ramanathan goes on to show how the UID along with other initiatives such as the National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID) makes it clear beyond doubt that surveillance is one of the key objectives of the project.26

The “Key that Opens all Doors” 27? What does the UID have in Store for Non-Citizen Residents? 

As mentioned in the foregoing section, neither the UID Bill nor other related documents of the Authority make any mention of resident non-citizens, who include asylum seekers, refugees, stateless persons or “illegal” migrants or the likely implications the project may have on them given that it makes some strong assertions of the problems it seeks to remedy. It is thus logical to assume that the Bill is an innocent and innocuous piece of legislation with the sole purpose of assigning, verifying and authenticating “identity” with the aim to ensure better access to benefits for the poor. However, going by the history of the identity cards the world over 28, and India’s perennial anxiety over “terrorists” and “infiltrators”, it would be naïve to conclude that the project would exclude from its scope a small yet significant chunk of the population in India, which has continued to be seen as a “national security” concern for the state.

Should then this category of residents be concerned about the UID project? Will they benefit considering that they are easy targets for discrimination and exploitation in India or do the costs to them (in terms of monitoring, surveillance and profiling) outweigh the likely benefits? It would be pertinent to sketch in detail the nature and character of migration, their experiences and the broad framework under which they are regulated before an attempt is made to answer some of these questions.

Refugees, asylum seekers, stateless persons and other “illegal migrants” form a broad category of residents with fluid identity in India. A large majority of them share some form of ties with India – historical, religious, ethnic, language. The legal basis for their stay is varied. For instance, Nepali nationals are allowed to live, own property and carry out economic activities 29 under the Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship, 1950. Refugees and asylum seekers usually have some form of identification 30 and are considered to live legally in India. This category includes nationals from the African continent (Somalis, Sudanese, Congolese, Ethiopians), those from within the South Asian region, including the Burmese, Sri Lankan Tamils and Sinhalese, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, Afghans, and Tibetans and lastly others from outside of South Asia including the Palestinians, Iranians, and Iraqis. It is impossible to say with accuracy, atleast in case of those who share common ties with those of the North East India for instance, whether they are foreigners or part of Assam, Manipur, Mizoram or Arunachal. Some others such as stateless (for instance the Nepalis of Bhutanese origin who are unable to go back to Bhutan and are not recognized in India) and refugees who do not submit a claim for protection to UNHCR in New Delhi are “illegal foreigners” and if detected, are subject to deportation. 

For the purposes of the law however, these are foreigners whose entry, stay and exit is regulated by a collective of legislations and orders passed under the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939, the Passports Act and the Citizenship Act. As these legislations emerged in a specific context of history and therefore do not take into consideration the complexities of immigration in India, they are inadequate in dealing with this category of non-citizens. Be that as it may, experience suggests that this they are dealt with uniformly (as in, treating all of them as foreigners, as opposed to recognizing the differences between a recognized refugee, a stateless person or a migrant), without acknowledging the specificities of their presence. 

Most, if not all immigrants falling within this category share some similarities with the local host population, as in case of Bangladeshis, the Burmese, Nepalis, Sri Lankan Tamils and Pakistanis. Although the government has managed to monitor its borders on the western front more successfully and shows visible hostility towards the citizens from Pakistan, migration from across Bangladesh 31 and Burma 32 is relatively easier due to easy permeability of the borders, and informal trade. Bangladeshi nationals in the current political and economic dispensation have also attracted immense hostility. 33 

Immigration and immigration management is complex because under the broad framework of the Constitution and the laws applying to foreigners and citizens is a combination of mostly ad-hoc administrative policies, agreements and practices that reflect the nature of migration, the nationality of immigrants, India’s foreign policy and the political relations between the two countries. The powers of the Central government are plenary 34 and because they involve questions of “national security”, policies and regulations may be kept outside the purview of the citizen’s right to information. This information asymmetry has practical and adverse implications for refugees and asylum seekers and generally in understanding the framework within which this specific

category of non-citizen residents are managed and regulated. 

Furthermore, under the broad policy can be seen a network of institutions at the Central as well as State level that through various practices regulate and monitor the immigrant population in India. Important to name at the central level is the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) which is overall in charge of immigration and citizenship, the Foreigners Regional Registration Office, a body constituted under MHA which monitors and registers all foreigners entering India, including refugees, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which within a limited mandate in India carries out refugee status determination of individuals other than nationals from Sri Lanka and Tibet, the police and civil society groups. At the state level, similar bodies and authorities are mandated with powers in relation to immigration, citizenship and foreigners. 

Ad-hocism in the existing broad immigration policy means that each refugee or immigrant community is dealt with separately in terms of its rights and entitlements. It may not always be detrimental for it offers space for refugees, in certain situations to use this ad-hocism to their advantage. A classic instance is the ease with which Burmese nationals who are recognized refugees in India are able to hold Indian passports. 

Thus what is true of one refugee community may not necessarily apply to others. Two examples may be given as an illustration of the ad-hoc nature of the policy. Sri Lankan Tamil nationals and the Tibetans in India are recognized as refugees fleeing persecution and are accorded a legal status. This overt acknowledgment by the government of their status as refugees affords them opportunities for employment, education and health care. In case of the Sri Lankan Tamils, for example, the Government of Tamil Nadu is closely involved in monitoring and assistance. On the other hand, the Somalis and other refugees from the African region receive a minimal support in reality even though they are accorded refugee status by UNHCR. Most Somalis for instance, due to reasons of race, religion, absence of the knowledge of the local language etc are unable to access opportunities, social and economic protection and legal rights that is in theory open to them.

While differences in policy have a bearing on the practices of care, the geographic location of refugees/asylum seekers/stateless persons also assumes an important role and determines the response of various administrative bodies. Thus for instance, recognized Somali refugees living in Delhi and those living in Hyderabad get treated differently. Those in Delhi get a monetary assistance from UNHCR, those in Hyderabad are denied the same. This is due mainly to the inability of UNHCR to monitor refugees in Hyderabad. 

The question of identity assumes importance in the context of refugees, asylum seekers and stateless persons. For instance, the Burmese, especially the Chins, Kachins, Arakanese and the Burmans, are known to seek asylum in India. However, the fact that the Chins, Kachins, and Arakanese are also native of India (the Chins, Kachins and

Arakanese were divided during the partition into two separate states of India and Burma) and live in Mizoram, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh makes it difficult to identity with accuracy an Indian from a Burmese. 35 The problems that this may create are not difficult to anticipate like the following example suggests.36 An article in Business World reported how Indian citizens were categorized as foreigners despite holding valid Voters Identity Card issued by the Election Commission of India because they identified Nepali as their mother tongue.

In yet another instance, Chin refugees (who mostly flee from Chin state and Sagaing Division in Burma) are most often indistinguishable from the Mizos in Mizoram. Additionally the informal trade and the political situation in Chin state has lead to a large number of Chins to live and work. This is recognized and allowed with the active knowledge of those in power. Informal conversations with UNHCR and unverified reports from the Burmese community in Delhi also suggest that Mizos have claimed refugee status pretending to be Chins as this community has benefited the most from resettlement initiatives. In responding to the large influx of Chins in Mizoram, a civil society group called the Young Mizo Association recently initiated a project of identifying each Chin in the entire state. Though conceived in earnestness with a view to deport those that engage in “criminal” activities, it has not been possible for such a mapping to succeed. 37 

In a last example, the Kachin refugees from Burma, though small in number in comparison to the Chin refugees (approximately 1 per cent of the approximately 8000 Burmese refugees in India 38) share ethnic, religious and cultural similarities from the Kachins who are found to live in Arunachal Pradesh. What is being suggested is that events such as seasonal migration, and factors such as religious and ethnic ties call into question the assertion that identity can be frozen, verified and authenticated thereby resolving either issues of security or access to welfare measures. Likewise, the Afghans, Somalis and other nationalities who arrive in Delhi, Hyderabad or other cities in India are equally subject to fluid identities; some are students, others asylum seekers, and yet others stateless because neither government – the state of which the person is a national or the state in which he seeks asylum – recognizes him as a member of its community.39 

The experience of refugees and asylum seekers in urban cities like Delhi in the way they relate to institutions and the society are mixed. There exists a high level of distrust with state institutions such as the Ministry of Home Affairs, the FRRO and the Police. 40 A sense of ineffectiveness with other institutions like the health care system and the educational system is also prevalent. Under the UNHCR policy and the informal understanding between the government and the UNCHR, refugees and asylum seekers are entitled to state support in areas of health care and education. Employment is legally not permitted but a large number of refugees and asylum seekers work in the informal sector. State support means that with the assistance of UNHCR and its Implementing partner agencies, refugees and asylum seekers have avenues for health care and education in state institutions. As several studies suggest, multiple factors such as lack of information, insufficient support structures, and absence of documents

are responsible for the extent of success.41

This sketch of the non-citizen resident population brings the question of identity, surveillance and welfare to the centre stage. In a paradoxical situation, the institutional hold over the refugee in the existing scenario is immense but at the same time, there is enough opportunity to get past the institutional barriers. What is intended to be conveyed by the foregoing sketch of the situation of refugees and others is that they inhabit a zone of the excluded with attempts to take on the identity that is convenient to them to ensure that the law does not reach them merely because the political realities does not favour their presence within the territory. The exclusion is built into the political system; a clear instance of which is the absence of a refugee law but covert recognition of some refugee groups. 42 The UID then is a technology that assists in further excluding the already marginalized. The project asserts that it is only in the “identity business” 43 and that the “responsibility of tracking beneficiaries and the governance of service delivery will continue to remain with the respective agencies…”.44 

Conclusion

If the basic assumptions made in the UID project is any indication, residents of India are unlikely to benefit from such a project. Access to benefits and schemes and detection and elimination of fraud are worthy goals and are not denied. However, there exists numerous ways in which residents’ identity is verified and sufficient documents that aid in authenticating the same. If the passports and ration cards run the risk of being misused, there is no guarantee, given the scale and the reach of technology in India, that the unique numbering project will be error free. 

It is important to reiterate that the assumptions made are an oversimplification of a complex society that witnesses the interplay of caste, class, gender in relating to individuals and the society as a whole. To then assert that technology will play a role in overcoming all these barriers is to valorize technology at the cost of social, economic and political realities. 

Earlier in this essay, while pointing out that the importance given to the welfare goal in the project may not be a red herring, I wish to indicate that given the experiences of individuals who find themselves in the margins of the political society, the over emphasis on welfare for the poor and the marginalized does deflect attention from the core issue – i.e., the use of this mechanism to monitor the movements of immigrant in India. Going by the track record of various identity card projects, it is safe to conclude that detection of and control of illegal immigration has been one of the important reasons for opting for such a mechanism.45 It is for the immigrant community, including those who are illegalized and criminalized in law to be aware of the ramifications of such an initiative.