Category: India

Chief Justice of India N V Ramana, who retired on August 26, took over the reins of the Supreme Court in difficult times when the fundamental rights and civil liberties of the citizens were under threat as never before.

His predecessors, former CJIs Ranjan Gogoi and SA Bobde, had left behind disappointing legacies, with one adjudicating a case that was against his own self, among other disappointing decisions, and the other refusing to take the Centre to task for its many failures in handling the COVID-19 pandemic.

But Justice Ramana – with his order against the Internet ban in Kashmir, vocal defense of fundamental rights and civil liberties and the very fact that he was part of the five judge bench that held that the office of the Chief Justice of India comes under the purview of the Right to Information Act – was going to be different.

Speaking against the government or its policies was treated as equivalent to speaking against the Indian state. People of all hues, including political opponents of the present dispensation, journalists, social activists, artists, and comedians, irrespective of their age or standing in life, were booked under the sedition law or the draconian Unlawful Activities and Prevention Act (UAPA), making it difficult — almost impossible — for them to obtain bail.

From putting the sedition law on hold to reviewing the money laundering verdict, and ordering probes into Pegasus snooping and Lakhimpur Kheri cases to ensuring appointments of record 11 judges in the top court and over 220 in high courts, Chief Justice of India N V Ramana took significant judicial and administrative decisions in his 16-month tenure.

Proceedings live-streamed

On his last day in the office, the 48th CJI ensured live-streaming of SC proceedings of the ceremonial bench headed by him, a first in the history of the apex court. In 2018, the top court had allowed such webcasts, but it was not implemented until Friday.

Tears and tributes

Senior advocate Dushyant Dave broke into tears while bidding adieu to the outgoing CJI, saying he maintained checks and balances between the judiciary, executive and the parliament and did so “with a spine”.

While Dave described Ramana as citizens’ judge, his colleague, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, said the court will remember him for “maintaining balance even in turbulent times”.

Attorney General K K Venugopal termed as “remarkable” the efforts of CJI Ramana in filling up vacancies in higher judiciary and tribunals, saying that for the first time, the Supreme Court worked at full strength of 34 judges during his tenure as head of the institution.

CJI Ramana said the only way out was to reform the functioning of the system. “We need to deploy modern technology tools and artificial intelligence to find a lasting solution,” he said.

“Unfortunately, during the past 16 months, my tenure as CJI, full-fledged hearing was possible only about 50 days,” said CJI Ramana.

He said he was demitting office after being part of the judiciary for 22 years “with utmost content” and added that he had done his bit for the judiciary to the best of his ability.

“People may come and go, but the institution remains forever. Of course, each one has to make our own contribution. I have done my bit to the best of my ability”, said CJI Ramana.

However, criticism has mounted against the Court after he and his colleagues let go free the 11 convicts in the 2002 Gujarat riots case on India’s 75^th Independence day. Bilkis Bano was gang-raped in 2002 during post-Godhra riots in Gujarat. Her three-year-old daughter was among the 14 members of her family who were killed. The accused were found guilty of gang rape and murders, and sentenced to life sentence.

The Supreme Court, however, has said on it did not order release of the people convicted for gang rape and murder during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

Hearing a bunch of petitions challenging the remission granted to the 11 convicts a week after they were released from a Gujarat jail, Chief Justice of India NV Ramana’s bench said, “We have to see whether there was an application of mind or not. This court didn’t order for their release but only asked the state to consider remission as per the policy.”

In spite the failings, Raanna has been praised by most for his adept handling of the situation, especially with the pressure on the Judiciary by the executive branches of the government to bend law in factor of the ruling party.

Former Delhi High Court Judge Rekha Sharma writes on NV Ramana’s tenure as Chief Justice of India: “Justice Ramana faced the onerous task of restoring the people’s faith in the judiciary. To his credit, by and large, he lived up to what was expected of him — though he could have done much more.”

For much of the two thousand years of the Common Era, India was the largest economy contributing a third of the global output. Archaeological evidence traces the origins of ancient India’s Indus Valley Civilization to the 5th millennium before the Common Era. During medieval times too India witnessed several glorious empires and great civilizations spread across millions of miles under enlightened emperors.

Towards the last quarter of the last millennium, India came under the influence of East India Company for almost a century during 18th and 19th centuries. Thereafter the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857 compelled the British to place India directly under the British Crown for another ninety years. For almost two centuries, therefore, India was anchored to Great

Britain serving the interests of only the British Empire. Of all the colonies the British conquered, controlled and immensely benefited from it was India that was by far the biggest and the wealthiest and was often referred to as the Jewel in the (British) Crown. Before finally leaving India the British divided the Indian subcontinent into two countries in three parcels – India, Pakistan West and Pakistan East. India’s population then was 330 million and the GDP was INR 2.7 trillion – a paltry 3% of the global GDP. A country which accounted for a third of the global output for much of two millennia before had thus been bled bone dry by the colonial masters.

Independent India

India has come a long way since it attained freedom on August 15^th, 1947. India was primarily an agrarian economy in 1947. The contributions to Indian GDP by agriculture, industry and services sectors were 56%, 15% and 29% respectively. Agriculture employed the largest work-force of 72% with Manufacturing and Services providing 10% and 18% jobs respectively.

Today, the service sector accounts for 54% of Indian GDP. The Industry and agriculture follow with 25.92% and 20.19% respectively. Life expectancy on the eve of independence was 32 years. It has now gone up to 70 years.

In 1950, infant mortality rate in India was 145.6/1000 live births and maternal mortality ratio in the 1940s was 2000/100,000 live births which declined to 1000 in the 1950s. There were just 50,000 doctors across the entire country and the number of primary healthcare centres was 725. Today, infant mortality is 27.7 per 1000 births and maternal mortality rate is 103 per 100,000. India now has more than 1.2 million doctors. There are 54,618 Sub-Health Centres (SHC), 21,898 Primary Health Centres (PHC) and 4,155 Urban Primary

Health Centres (UPHC), as on December 8, 2021. There are as many as 70,000 public and private hospitals. As of April 5, 2022 there were 117,771 Ayushman Bharat-Health and Wellness Centres (AB-HWCs) are operational in India apart from 748 e-Hospitals established across the country as part of the ‘Digital India’ initiative of the government.

The India we see and are proud of is a result of decades of conscious planning, benefitting millions of rural and urban population. Quoting Ambassador A. R. Ghanshyam, who wrote in a previous edition of theunn.com, who pointed to the vibrancy of Indian democracy. He wrote: “Independent India has witnessed seventeen free and fair Parliamentary Elections with fifteen Prime Ministers at the helm – each contributing his/her mite to the growth, stability and development of the Indian Nation, its society and economy. How individual Prime Ministers of India tried to build a modern India from the debris of two centuries’ rule by the British Empire is in itself a great story and has been narrated by many authors, Indian and foreign.”

And this India, where people of different faiths, social strata and

In the seventy five years since independence, India has negotiated a difficult, at times treacherous, journey replete with five wars (1948, 1962, 1965, 1971 and 1999) and facing frequent occurrence of natural calamities i.e. floods, famines, droughts and epidemics. Two of its elected Prime Ministers were brutally assassinated and a third died mysteriously after signing the Ceasefire Agreement in the Soviet city of Tashkent post the India-Pakistan 1965 War. A stretch of 21 months during 1975-77 remains an aberration in India’s otherwise uninterrupted democracy when fundamental rights of Indian citizens were suspended during the period of national emergency.

Progress achieved

Much water has flown in the Ganga since India attained her independence. During 1950-51 the contributions to Indian GDP by agriculture, industry and services sectors were 56%, 15% and 29% respectively. Agriculture employed the largest work-force of 72% with Manufacturing and Services providing 10% and 18% jobs respectively.

Today the service sector accounts for 54% of Indian GDP. The Industry and agriculture follow with 25.92% and 20.19% respectively. Life expectancy on the eve of independence was 32 years. It has now gone up to 70 years. In 1950, infant mortality rate in India was 145.6/1000 live births and maternal mortality ratio in the 1940s was 2000/100,000 live births which declined to 1000 in the 1950s. There were just 50,000 doctors across the entire country and the number of primary healthcare centres was 725. Today, infant mortality is 27.7 per 1000 births and maternal mortality rate is 103 per 100,000. India now has more than 1.2 million doctors. There are 54,618 Sub-Health Centres (SHC), 21,898 Primary Health Centres (PHC) and 4,155 Urban Primary

Health Centres (UPHC), as on December 8, 2021. There are as many as 70,000 public and private hospitals. As of April 5, 2022 there were 117,771 Ayushman Bharat-Health and Wellness Centres (AB-HWCs) are operational in India apart from 748 e-Hospitals established across the country as part of the ‘Digital India’ initiative of the government.

As for education, when the British left India there were 210,000 primary schools, 13,600 middle schools and 7,416 higher secondary schools in India apart from 498 colleges and 27 Universities. Today there are 1.6 million schools, 42,343 colleges and a thousand Universities. More than 250 million children are going to school today in India and close to 40 million are enrolled in our Universities.

India survived a devastating once in a century pandemic of Covid 19 and its economy contracted by 7.3% in the financial year 2020-21. It may be some consolation that this contraction was lower than in other major economies. As per latest available estimates the growth rate of GDP for 2021-22 is pegged at 8.7% which has to be seen in the context of 7.3% contraction in the preceding year.

India is bound together as a great nation by the strength and stability of its democracy, the rule of law and a breath taking diversity of its populace in terms of religion, language, culture, climate, history, geography and more. At the time of India’s first census in 1951 Hindus were 305 million (84.1%), Muslims 35.4 million (9.8%), Christians 8.3 million and Sikhs 6.86 million (1.9%). In 2022 the estimated population is 1090 million Hindus (79.80%), 200 million Muslims (14.23%), 31.2 million Christians (2.3%), 23.7 million Sikhs (1.72%), 9.6 million Buddhists (0.70%), 5.1 million Jains (0.37%) and 9.1 million (0.66%) other religions and 3.3 million (0.24%) religion not stated. There are two million Hindu temples, 300,000 active mosques, 8,114 Jain temples a few of them abroad, more than 125 Buddhist temples, monasteries, stupas and pagodas, some 35 Jewish synagogues etc. At the time of independence many predicted that India will splinter into pieces based on caste, creed, tribe, language, culture etc., but she has remained in one piece and stronger than ever.

Future Prospects

In the last ten years, despite a sliding down of growth rates since 2016 till the economy picked up this year and a significant unemployment burden haunting policy makers in the country, there is a quiet revolution taking place in the arena of technology, digitization and innovation

spearheaded by young Indian companies. The government’s Atmanirbharta crusade has given an impetus to it.

Latest research of the Indian economy in the last ten years by analyst Ruchir Sharma has a few exciting revelations. In 2011 India had 55 Billionaires with a cumulative wealth of US $ 256 billion which was then equivalent to 13.5% of India’s GDP. Ten years later in 2021 India hosts 140 billionaires with the cumulative wealth US$ 596 billion equivalent to 19.6% of the GDP. Sharma adds that 110 of these are new Billionaires created during the course of just last decade. At the time of independence India was the sixth largest economy in the world. In 2021 it retains the same position which is no mean achievement with India’s population having more than quadrupled.

Notwithstanding the above, there is no room for complacency because (a) India still have a large population that lives below the poverty line, estimated by the World Bank at 140 million which is 10% of the population, (b) the formal and informal sectors may not able to absorb the large number of educated young who are passing out of colleges (2022 estimate is 10.76 million), (c) external and internal factors will keep haunting the policy establishment in its effort to achieve double digit GDP growth rate which is the need of the hour for India. Be that as it may India also has several advantages – (i) a median age of less than 30 years, (ii) a strong and focussed government, (iii) growing market, and, (iv) an innovative Indian youth. If India persists with its pursuit of building and consolidating its infrastructure, keeps the society cohesive and harmonious, stabilizes predictable consistency in policy formulation and implementation, a brighter future can be ensured for its future generations.

[Ambassador A. R. Ghanashyam is a retired Indian diplomat who has served as Ambassador of India to Angola and High Commissioner of India to Nigeria]

It was in May 2020 that Indian Prime Minister Modi made a clarion call for a Bharat that was “Aatmanirbhar”. It is important to clarify what this meant and what it did not. While a rough translation of the word is no doubt “self-reliant”, it is nevertheless not the kind of self-reliance that India arguably believed and practiced in the early years of its independence up until the seventies and eighties. It is easy to state what it is not. It is certainly not autarchy; it is certainly not inward-looking; and it is most certainly not stopping imports and making every product at home. It may be more prudent to think of “Aatmanirbharta” as Self- Reliance 2.0.

In this framework of Self-Reliance 2.0, the PM clarified that rather than be self-centred, India will open up even more to the world outside, guided by its motto: Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, or our Earth is just one family. PM Modi went on to say that Aatmanirbharta will stand on five pillars: economy, infrastructure, technology, demography and demand. PM explained the raison d’être of Aatmanirbharta by saying that this should prepare India for participation in global supply chains and that this is a battle India cannot afford to lose.

There is little doubt that the global pandemic i.e. COVID-19, played a significant role in India’s push for Self-Reliance 2.0. Take the simple example of PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) and N-95 masks. At the beginning of the pandemic, India was not making any N-95 masks. Today, India manufactures at least 200,000 N-95 masks a day, if not more. Even more impressive is India’s own record of vaccinating its mammoth population. In 2020 when COVID emerged, almost no one believed India could ever fully vaccinate its population and that such an exercise would take years and years. Yet, in July 2022, about 18 months the first vaccination began, India completed 2 billion doses of vaccines for its citizens. The story of how this was achieved is worthy of a case study which will cover vital issues such as public-private partnership, centre-state cooperation and not to mention building awareness among citizens and getting their participation willingly in this exercise. Indeed, the WHO and others have praised India and the best practices here will be emulated the world over.

Proving that Self-Reliance 2.0 is not just for  Indians, India also exported a large number of vaccines and PPE countries all over the world. The latest statistics from the MEA website talks of 240 million (approx) vaccines which have been delivered to 101 countries, of which there are developed, developing and least-developed countries. The story of India being the pharmacy of the world is too well known to bear any repetition here. All of this is real “aatmanirbharta” at work.

The COWIN platform that India used for distributing vaccines to its mammoth population was remarkable. COWIN is essentially a cloud-based IT solution for planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating COVID vaccination in India. By July 2021, India decided to make this open platform available to all countries for their use. In the COWIN global conclave organized in July 2021, as many as 142 countries in the world expressed interest in adopting this platform. Again, this is Aatmanirbharta at work.

The war in Ukraine has had a profound impact not just in Europe, but more importantly for developing and least-developed countries. Specifically, the war has impacted food, energy and commodity prices adversely. Wheat shortage in particular, is expected to affect Africa and the Middle-East quite significantly. At a time like this, it is comforting to know that India’s position when it comes to food security for its huge population is satisfactory. This is yet another manifestation of Self-Reliance 2.0. Indeed, not only was India able to give away food-grains and lentils to 800 million of its citizens as part of the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana, India was also able to carry out modest exports of food-grains to low income countries that needed it. Again, Aatmanirbharta at work.

Yet another amazing success story of Aatmanirbharta is the case of Unified Payments Interface (UPI) which is a government-backed centralized digital payment gateway, widely popular in India. To understand the significance of UPI, consider this: India accounted for the largest number of worldwide digital transactions in 2021 at a whopping 48 billion, a number that is nearly three times bigger than China’s (18 billion) and is at least six times bigger than the transactions of US, Canada, UK, France and Germany combined. Voices in the US are saying that we must learn from India which is leapfrogging into the uture. Again, Aatmanirbharta at work.

The above is not to suggest that everything is rosy. India faces monumental challenges with regard to eradication of poverty, job creation and investment in health/education/skills of its vast population. But the lessons are clear: India is sui generis and it is only an “Indian” model that will work for India and Indians. Hence, the capital importance of Aatmanirbharta. After all, as we have seen above, ‘Aatmanirbhar Bharat’ is not just good for India but also for the world at large.

[Ambassador (Dr.) Mohan Kumar is a former Indian Ambassador and afull time academic now.]

I am not a Midnight Child. My mother was in no hurry. I was born several months later. But I am still older than the Republic of India, even if I missed its birth as an independent nation, bloodied in the severance with its brother, Pakistan, and crying for those tens of millions of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, and some Christians too, who were killed, raped, looted, and forced to flee their homes.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants us to hail the 75th year of Independence no less but as the “Nectar of Immortality Grand Festival”, the Amrit Mahotsav.

He also wants us to simultaneously observe the day with a “Horrors of Independence” memory. He wants the Hindus and the Sikhs, who fled their homes in West Punjab, the Frontier provinces, Baluchistan and Sindh, to remember the murder of their parents and grandparents, the rape of their aunts and sisters, and even mothers, as they left their homes and villages to race to the Independent India. Many fell to sword, knife, and gun long before they reached the border. Many women lived, but never made it to the border.

But Mr. Modi’s media and social media army tell us in so much unsaid shouts that no Muslim was killed, that the Muslim was the killer, the abductor, the rapist.

I’ve seen no reports in the national and international media if Pakistan, whose people celebrate Independence a day earlier, on 14th of August, is also observing a “Horrors of Partition Day”. They would have every right to do so if their government or ruling party so chose. And if we did not give them ideas.

India and Pakistan have enough visual, audio, and documented material on the horrors. Much of Pakistan is bereft of Hindus and Sikhs who were born there. The bodies would have been cremated on mass pyres or buried in pits and old wells. Many of the women left behind, or “captured’, possibly married their captors, and had children.

It happened here, in India, too in what are today Punjab, Haryana, Jammu, parts of Rajasthan, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and even beyond the Narmada, and in the East, in the sliced Bengal, and areas of what is now Assam.

Partition has impacted politics in both India and Pakistan for 75 years, much more than 200 years of colonial rule. The Deccan was spared to an extent, and the lands of the Tamils, the Kannadigas, the Konkans and the Malayalees.

The difference was that even after partition, a very large number of Muslims chose to remain in India, by choice or by default. In Pakistan only a handful of Sikhs and Hindus remained. A few of them have crossed to India in the last few decades.

Mr. Modi’s arousing passions in India, seventy-five years later, has little to do with sympathy for the wounded. It has to do with his preparation for a third term in the battle of general elections of 2024, for which his party has again chosen him as the commander-in-chief.

He wants no hitch, no pothole, no barrier and certainly no person or party to come in his way.

Mr. Modi can use the Partition, and bend history his way, because there really has been no counting of the dead, no allowing the ghosts to find peace, and no balm to those whose kin is still missing.

Neither India nor Pakistan has issued White Paper on the human toll of Partition across the line drawn by the colonial British, whose officers were still controlling large numbers of police and military in both countries under the nominal control of the governments of two independent nations.

With several wars, a constant threat of subversion and terrorism and a nuclear bomb-powered military stand-off between the two countries, there is no question of any talk of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to heal wounds and give the two nations and their new generations of citizens a clean slate to write their future. Only a handful of human rights activists in the two countries dare to dream of a future with peace.

It would be difficult to guess a body count now. But many Hindus live in properties in India once owned by Muslims, as much as Muslims in Pakistan live in houses of Hindus which were allotted to them or captured by them during or after the partition violence. These properties are now known as Enemy Property, under laws in the two countries.

Periodically, social media and television stories abound of siblings re-uniting now in their nineties – a brother Hindu and a sister Muslim, or vice versa, depending on how they were separated from their families. The rich nawabs and Rajput Muslims of Pakistan still cross the border to take brides from families of their rank for their grandsons.

Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru could have been overwhelmed by the refugees wading through rivers of blood. It goes to him and his colleagues that almost every Hindu and Sikh was given house or land and compensation. The national capital itself changed not just in its historical character but demography too.

I know these first-hand. As newly-weds, my wife and I lived among the refugees from West Punjab and later in a colony where those from East Bengal were settled; we lived half a decade among them. We listened to their stories of sheer horrors of Pakistan, their struggle in the refugee camps, and how, with just a little money, they had rehabilitated themselves. I met people, who had begun living in tents, and running small shops on pavements, who had risen to be industrialists, police officers, politicians, and even Member of Parliament. I also knew a real gangster of the stature of a local godfather.

The stories of resilience of these people, including that of the gangster, gave all of us hope that left to themselves and with a nurturing environment, these victims of Partition could heal themselves, and regain their strength and dignity.

The people, responding to Modi’s dog whistle, surely are a new generation, a third or fourth generation of people who are rootless not because of Partition but because of unemployment, inequity, and increasing gap between the super-rich and the average and poor citizens. Mr. Modi has not bridged the gap. His policies, and his open favours given through official channels to a handful, help a cartel of industrialists of his choice.

How will these groups, marching to the drum beat of private armies of the likes of the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh and the traditional but now hugely inflated ranks of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, pave the way for a third-term Modi. And will that Modi be benign now that his mark on India’s history has been deeply carved, or will he speak of a thousand-year Reich?

We all know how thousand-year Reich ended. Therefore, what about the final quarter of the independent nation’s centenary?

No midnight child I am, but as a grandfather of a 14-year-old boy of a mixed Telugu-Syrian-Bengali heritage (with a dash of East Bengali genes), I ask this question: What is the India my grandson, then a man in his late thirties, will see?

The first quarter of new India’s century was one of courage, soothing balm, healing, and hope. Despite the shock of two wars, in 1948 stand-off with the nascent Pakistan, and a humiliation at the hands of China in 1962, Nehru laid the foundations of education and technology that in time have seen a Punjabi Indian scientist, Har Govind Khurana, win a Nobel prize. And an entire army of technocrats from India’s flowering Institutes of Technology, science, and medicine, would join the post-World War II leap of science and technology in the United States of America. India is well set to send a man to the moon, a mission to Mars, and may even discover a new molecule which will enable Indian and global pharma to make cheaper life-saving drugs. As Pakistan and the neighbours seem to disintegrate into military doctorships and fundamentalist politics, India consolidated its democracy.

The second quarter of the century consolidated democracy further.  But it was first marred by the State of Emergency imposed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi after she lost a democratic election. Her defeat was propelled by a popular movement that morphed into a rebellion against her. She lost the general elections after Emergency; but won the next as those who defeated her could not continue together.

Her return to power in a couple of years was marred by the rise of aberrant political forces such as the Khalistan movement which eventually led to the military action in the Golden Temple, holy to the Sikhs, and the consequent assassination of Indira Gandhi by her Sikh guards. Possibly more than 5,000 Sikhs were stabbed or burnt to death in the national capital and several towns of the north. A regiment of the Indian army mutinied.

The third quarter of the century has seen the rise of Hindutva. It began with the decision of the Bharatiya Janata Party, which was rebuilt on the Jana Sangh of the pre-Emergency period, that it could become a political challenge not on a popular or economic platform, but one designed to gather the Hindu masses in a matrix of militant faith. The existence of the Muslims in free India despite partition, and the slogan to rebuild a Hindu Rashtra were to be the fuel and the goal.

Mr. Modi can be said to be the best product of the slogan first raised by Mr. Lal Kishan Advani, a refugee from Sindh, as he began his march in the 1990s to rebuild Ram Temple after razing the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya. The 500-year-old mosque was razed by Sangh armies as the police, the Army and the Supreme Court watched, and the Congressman Prime Minister, Mr. P.V. Narasimha Rao, had a long siesta.

The period saw Mr Rao privatize the economy and dilute the socialism Nehru and Indira had brought in. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund were happy, as was India Incorporated.  After an intervening seven years of BJP leader Atal Behari Vajpayee’s rule, considered benign in retrospect, Congressman Manmohan Singh completed the task he had begun as Mr Rao’s Finance Minister.

Mr Modi won the general elections of 2014 fair and square, if you can see fairness and lawfulness in a campaign built on a rhetoric of elimination of a group of citizens of their citizenship and possibly life itself.

Mr Modi is not unfamiliar with bloodshed as a consequence of hate. He presided over the massacre of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002.

Patently he is not threatened by, or afraid of, any national or international opposition to these policies. He thinks the cadres he and his Home Minister Amit Shah have trained will overcome any resistance that may come during the 2024 general elections or the ones after that.

Is he correct in his thinking, or will the nation, and its people, ensure that the years towards the Century, in 2047, will again be of rebuilding, and encouragement to reason, science and a commitment to the welfare of all people.

I would like to hope that Nehru’s dream, and the dream of those of us now as old as Independent India, will not shatter. (The Indian Currents)

The midnight of August 15, 1947 is perhaps noted as the most significant in the pages of Indian history. In the words of Jawaharlal Nehru, India awoke to life and freedom. But if freedom is the hard earned dream come true for the nationalist leaders of India, then stitching together the hundreds of territorial pieces into a distinct whole was an aspiration much harder to realize and as of August 15, lay yet unfulfilled. The departure of the British from Indian territory was accompanied by the question of how to bring together the 500-odd chiefdoms and states they had left behind.

The Indian Independence Act of 1947 gave princely states an option to accede to the newly born dominions India or Pakistan or continue as an independent sovereign state. At that time more than 500 princely states have covered 48 percent of the area of pre Independent India and constituted 28% of its population.

These kingdoms were not legally part of British India, but in reality, they were completely subordinate to the British Crown. For the British these states were the necessary allies, to keep in check the rise of other colonial powers and nationalist tendencies in India. Accordingly, the princes were given autonomy over their territories, but the British acquired for themselves the right to appoint ministers and get military support as and when required. However, several states were adamant over their decision to not join India. Some of them wanted independent statehood, while others wished to join hands with Pakistan.

Here are the five princely states that were against integrating with India:

1. Travancore

Known for its maritime trade and richness on both human and mineral resources, Travancore was one of the first princely states to refuse the integration. A distinguished lawyer by profession, Sir CP Ramaswamy Iyer was the dewan of Travancore. By 1946 he had declared his intention of forming an independent state.

Historian Ramachandra Guha in his book says that CP Iyer had support from both Mohammed Ali Jinnah and the UK government in this matter. However, he opted to change his mind after an attempted assassination by the Kerala Socialist Party. Thus, Travancore joined India on July 30, 1947.

2. Jodhpur

Maharaj Hanwant Singh, the ruler of the Rajput state of Jodhpur was in confusion about the whole matter. Even though the maharani (queen) wanted to join India, he was lured by Jinnah to join Pakistan in the promise of offering full port facilities in Karachi. On the other hand, Vallabhbhai Patel too tried to contact the Maharaja and offered him with sufficient benefits. After many dramatic acts, Hanwant Singh signed the Instrument of Accession on August 11, 1947.

3. Bhopal

Ruling over a majority of Hindu population, Hamidullah Khan, the Nawab of Bhopal, always wanted independent statehood. He was against the Congress rule and he had mentioned about the same to Lord Mountbatten. But when the Nawab saw many princely states being integrated with India at large, he too decided on the same by July, 1947.

4. Hyderabad

The Nizam of Hyderabad, Mir Usman Ali, was adamant in his decision to be independent and wanted to join the British commonwealth. However, it was not encouraged by the British. The situations in the princely state took violent turn which Vallabhbhai Patel saw as a cancer in the belly of India. On September 13, 1948, under Operation Polo, the Indian troops were sent to Hyderabad. The armed encounter lasted for four days. Thus, on September 18, 1948 the princely state joined India after the army gained full control over the state.

5. Junagadh

The princely state of Junagadh was ruled by Nawab Muhammad Mahabat Khanji III. Even though Lord Mountbatten during his address to the princes advised to join the Indian Union, Nawab of Junagadh wanted independence. Junagadh had asked Pakistan for accession, which later got accepted. This move enraged India and thus ordered for a plebiscite. On February 20, 1948 the plebiscite was conducted and 91 percent voted to integrate with India.

In the 20th century, the global media spoke of democratic India “as a hope giving marvel”. Today, the country is “in the hands of diligent leaders and dedicated organisations whose first commitment is not to democracy or equality” but Hindu nationalism, leaving out the biggest question of “What does India stand for”, writes biographer and historian, and Mahatma Gandhis grandson, Rajmohan Gandhi as he reflects on the state of the nation in the 75 years since Independence.

“In the 20th century, the world’s newspapers spoke of democratic India as a hope-giving marvel. A densely populated country with high levels of illiteracy and poverty, a bewildering variety of religions, castes, and languages, and a history of internal conflict was functioning as a democratic polity and trying to become a society of liberty, equality, and mutual friendship!

“Today, however, the Indian state is in the hands of diligent leaders and dedicated organisations whose first commitment is not to democracy or equality. Hindu nationalism may summon noble stories from the past. It may evoke passions to avenge supposed wrongs enacted a thousand years ago. But it will never permit equality to a Muslim, a Christian, a Sikh, or a Buddhist. Unless they say they are really Hindus, that their Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, or Buddhism is secondary to their ‘Hinduness’. Which most of them will never say, not even under duress,” Gandhi writes in “India After 1947 – Reflections and Recollections” (Aleph).

If Hindu nationalism permits of no equality to those outside the Hindu world, “within that world it only permits tactical, not genuine equality. The virus of high castes, low castes, and outcastes is a stubborn legacy from out past”, Gandhi writes, lamenting that “despite the injustice lying at its heart, Hindu nationalism commands vast resources. It possesses state power, street power, and money power, and controls the bulk of the media”.

In such circumstances, Gandhi maintains, “the prospect of rebuilding Indian democracy must seem quixotic. Overcoming Hindu nationalism in India is likely to be as hard a test as, for example, overcoming Islamic nationalism in countries like Turkey and Iran. Or perhaps even harder. The challenge is probably beyond the capability of political leaders, no matter how gifted, or of parties, no matter how large”.

Contending that the ball is thus “in the court of the Indian people, a frequently underestimated force”, Gandhi writes: “The people will act or react at times of their choosing, when events throw up opportunities. At times elections may provide opportunities, and moments may arrive when our people openly or quietly press the change button.”

However elections are “dicey affairs” going by India’s experience and that of countries like Iran and Turkey, the author writes.

“Many things, and a variety of parties, must come together if a juggernaut backed by great wealth and claiming to represent �the national religion’ is to be defeated at the hustings,” Gandhi states, admitting that it is not reasonable to expect political parties to perform miracles, “whether of unity, dazzling appeal, or something else, before circumstances change” and blaming them “when miracles are not produced is a waste of energy”.

Until circumstances change, the author writes, “we should welcome any stroke for liberty and democracy, no matter how inadequate or isolated. We should not mind whether the stroke comes via the political platform and vote , or through the power of disciplined protest, or through the bravery of a judge, bureaucrat or reporter, or the words of a poet or songwriter, or in any other form”.

Such stokes not only can come but have been coming day after day, in place after place, Gandhi notes.

“These last few years, India has witnessed an array of creative and courageous young women and men, and their older compatriots, fighting for precious values, and willing to pay a price” and they include students, reporters, photographers, artists, poets, singers, scholars, lawyers, judges, and more, Gandhi maintains.

Asserting that democracy has been India’s strongest card but one that has weakened in recent years, the author warns that “a Hindu Rashtra will snuff out candles of hope in nations far from India and those close to it”.

Gandhi also depreciates the fact that the unceasing debate on India’s standing in the world, and whether it has gone up or down in recent years, “usually leaves out the biggest question. What does India stand for?”

“What are the ideas that India is contributing to our world? Calm, poise, and mindfulness through yoga? No doubt about that. While not everyone in the world who benefits from yoga or allied practice thinks of India while engaging in it, Indians can feel legitimate pride in this steady extension of an Indian or eastern insight to all parts of the earth”…but “Indians do not exist for India alone”, the author writes.

“India has to offer a message to a humanity where doctrines of supremacy are once more resurgent, yet equality’ and mutual respect’ are not the headlines that jump out of today’s India,” Gandhi write.

Gandhi closes with a grim warning that with India’s footprint being stamped more and more across the world, “in all these countries, it’s not just India’s name that is at stake. The daily life of people of Indian origin everywhere is affected by the state of Indian democracy. In much of the world, Christianity or Islam is the religion of the majority. Denying rights to India’s Muslims and Christians causes problems straightaway for Indians outside India. It’s an anti-Indian exercise, not just an anti-democratic exercise. Anything more foolish is hard to imagine”. (IANS)

India’s most famous lawyer and veteran human rights defender Prashant Bhushan has slammed the country’s Supreme Court saying it is now complicit in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s comprehensive assault on civil and political liberties of religious minorities such as Muslims; human rights defenders; the civilian population of India’s only Muslim-majority province of Kashmir; the government’s critics; and dissenters.

“The Supreme Court has been virtually abdicating its role as the guardian of civil liberties and human rights of the people in India,” Bhushan said at a Briefing organized Wednesday by US-based civil and political rights groups. “[The Supreme Court has] indeed gone further in some cases to even assault the civil liberties of the citizens.”

The Constitution gave the Supreme Court the “very important responsibility of protecting fundamental rights [and] human rights of the citizens” and ensuring “that the executive and the legislature function within the norms or within the bounds of their power.” But the court had failed to deliver on that mandate to protect civil and political liberties.

In the eight years since Modi came to power in 2014, India had seen a “rampant trampling” of the people’s rights with a “full-blooded assault on minorities. “There are lynch mobs out on the streets. There are lynch mobs on social media. Laws are being made to somehow reduce [Muslims] to second-class citizens.” Muslims were being extra-judicially killed in “fake encounters;” their homes “bulldozed” merely for protesting.

“Civil rights of dissenters” were being crushed. “Anybody who stands up and speaks out against this government, especially journalists or activists,” was targeted

Saying that a “very large number of our activists and journalists are in jail,” many of them falsely accused of carrying out the anti-Muslim violence in Delhi in 2020, Bhushan said activists were being charged under draconian laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and “kept in prison for years altogether [and] denied bail.

“In such a situation, the role of the Supreme Court and the High Courts…  becomes even greater because it is really their responsibility and their power and duty to protect the rights of people whose rights have been trampled,” Bhushan said.

However, habeas corpus cases, petitions against the anti-Muslim Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), and cases challenging imprisonment on bogus charges of sedition under UAPA, the Penal code, or “even the National Security Act, which allows preventive detention those cases, are not being heard,” Bhushan said.

Bhushan said the Bhima-Koregaon case, so called because it arose from upper-caste Hindu violence against lower-caste Hindus in a village of that name in Maharashtra state, was “clearly a false case. Several forensic experts have shown that the material based on which [the accused] are charged has been planted in their computer. But now it’s been almost four years and these people are still in jail” and the Court has failed to give them bail. Over a dozen human rights defenders are incarcerated in this case.

“There are many people in Kashmir who have been in jail,” and many petitions have challenged the revocation of Constitutional Article 370 that had given special status to Jammu & Kashmir state. But the Supreme Court has refused to hear those petitions.

“In many cases, bail has been denied by the High Court or even sometimes by the Supreme Court,” Bhushan said. The Supreme Court “has been abdicating its responsibility [by] denying bail in obvious cases where the charge is bogus.”

Bhushan said the Supreme Court was “absolutely faulty” in its “interpretation of the draconian provisions of bail” under the UAPA. The “normal principle” is that “bail is the rule, jail is the exception.” Bail can only be denied if there were reasonable grounds to believe the accused would “flee,” “tamper” with the evidence or commit a crime.

Bhushan slammed the Supreme Court for last month upholding the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) “reversed” the “burden of proof.” Now anyone accused under PMLA would need to” prove innocence” to get bail. “It is virtually impossible before trial for anybody to prove his innocence before even the trial begins.”

Bhushan also criticized the Supreme Court for its recent ruling that ignored evidence against Modi’s complicity in a pogrom against Muslims in Gujarat state in 2002 and virtually ordered the arrest of human rights defender Teesta Setalvad who had long exposed Modi’s role in that violence 20 years ago. This ruling showed that the Court had taken the abdication of its responsibility to a “different level,” Bhushan said.

He also criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling last month that rejected testimonies from indigenous people in Chhattisgarh state that the police had carried out mass killings.

Several Opposition Parties in India have strongly criticized the Narendra Modi led  Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Government for targeting its opponents and critics, saying that Modi has “unleashed a relentless campaign of vendetta against its political opponents and critics through the mischievous misuse of investigative agencies”

“Prominent leaders of a number of political parties have been deliberately targeted and subjected to harassment in an unprecedented manner. We condemn this and resolve to continue and intensify our collective fight against the anti-people, anti-farmers, and anti-Constitution policies of the Modi government that is destroying the social fabric of our society,” a statement issued by the Opposition parties said.

The Modi regime’s attack against members of the Indian parliament has led to rising concerns over a shrinking political state and the backsliding towards an authoritarian state.

After questioning Rahul Gandhi, the leader of the Congress Party for three full days, each day for as many as 10 hours,  India’s Enforcement Directorate (ED) has now targeted Sonia Gandhi, the leader of the Opposition party. 

In a show of strength, the Congress staged street protests and its leaders courted arrest across the country last week as the party chief Sonia Gandhi was questioned by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case related to the National Herald newspaper.

Gandhi, who was recovering from Covid, was summoned again on July 25. The 75-year-old replied to dozens of questions last week, media reports stated. According to Congress leader Jairam Ramesh, the ED said it had nothing to ask of her either Thursday or Friday. After which Sonia Gandhi said she was willing to appear on July 25th, he said. The Congress party slammed the agency’s action against its top leadership and termed it “political vendetta”.

“All Congress MPs and CWC members have courted mass arrest outside our party headquarters in a show of collective solidarity with Sonia Gandhi, a target of ‘Vishguru’s’ political vendetta,” said Congress general secretary Ramesh.

Leaders of 13 political parties, including the DMK, Shiv Sena, RJD and the Left, met at Parliament House and issued a statement accusing the government of unleashing a “relentless campaign of vendetta against its political opponents and critics through the mischievous misuse of investigative agencies”.

According to reports, an alarmingly high volume of cases register by the ED in recent years. The total number of cases registered by the ED under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) has jumped almost three times in the first three years of the second term of the BJP-led government (2019-20 to 2021-22) as compared to the corresponding period in its first term (2014-15 to 2016-17), as per the data shared by India’s Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary in a written reply to Lok Sabha on July 25, 2022. 

The ED registered 14,143 cases under FEMA and PMLA between 2019-20 and 2021-22, as compared to 4,913 cases in 2014-15 to 2016-17 — an increase of over 187 per cent. The break-up shows that 11,420 FEMA cases were taken up for investigation in the first three years of the second term, up from 4,424 cases in the first three years of the first term — an increase of over 158 per cent. The cases registered under PMLA increased by more than five times in this period — from 489 between 2014-15 to 2016-17 to 2,723 in 2019-20 to 2021-22 — a jump of over 456 per cent. According to the year-wise data, 2021-22 saw the highest number of money laundering and foreign exchange violation cases in the last eight years of the Modi government. In 2020-21, the ED filed 5,313 cases under FEMA (the previous high was 3,627 cases in 2017-18); and 1,180 under PMLA (up from 981 in 2020-21).

Another tool used by the Indian Government in recent years to contain dissent has been the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). As per the submission by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) before the Parliament on July 20, 2022, there is  a huge gap between the number of persons who are under-trial and those who have been either convicted or acquitted under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) in the country during 2016-2020.

Out of 6,482 persons under trial, only 80 persons have been convicted and 116 have been acquitted. The increasing number of persons undertrial is concerning and is a poor reflection on the Indian judicial system.It suggests that the law is merely enabling their continued incarceration. “Thus, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, (UAPA) is allegedly being misused to incarcerate political dissidents by a vindictive regime,” critics pointed out.

Amnesty India International has been critical of India and its human rights violations for several years. The annual reports by the agency that monitors violations by the state/federal government agencies across the nation have come under fire by the ruling party led by Narendra Modi.

The harassment of the Amnesty India International by the Indian Government agencies has led to the suspension of its activities in India in September 2020. “Because of the bank freeze, Amnesty International India has been forced to cease work in India,” reports pointed out. 

Now, as per the latest reports, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) of India has imposed penalties of Rs. 51 crore and Rs 10 crore, respectively, on Amnesty India and its former head Aakar Patel, citing violations of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA).

The agency said in a statement that Amnesty International UK had been remitting large foreign contributions “through its Indian entities (non-FCRA companies) following the FDI route in order to evade the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA)” and expand its activities in India.

This was despite the Home Ministry’s denial of prior registration or permissions to Amnesty International India Foundation Trust and other trusts under the FCRA, it said in a statement last week.

“The Adjudicating Authority of Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has adjudicated a Show Cause Notice issued to M/s Amnesty India International Pvt. Ltd.(AIIPL) and its CEO Shri Aakar Patel for contravention of the provisions of The Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) and imposed penalty to the tune of Rs. 51.72 crore and ₹10 crore respectively,” said the ED statement.

The funds were transferred to “expand its NGO activities in India, despite the denial of prior registration or permissions to Amnesty International India Foundation Trust (AIIFT) and other trusts under FCRA by Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India”, the ED statement said.

In 2018, ED began conducting searches of properties of Amnesty India over allegations that AIIPL was formed to receive foreign funding, violating FCRA rules. In 2019, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed a case against the NGO alleging violation of foreign exchange rules.

In 2020, the Executive Director of Amnesty International India Avinash Kumar stated: “The continuing crackdown on Amnesty International India over the last two years and the complete freezing of bank accounts is not accidental. The constant harassment by government agencies including the Enforcement Directorate is a result of our unequivocal calls for transparency in the government, more recently for accountability of the Delhi police and the Government of India regarding the grave human rights violations in Delhi riots and Jammu & Kashmir. For a movement that has done nothing but raise its voices against injustice, this latest attack is akin to freezing dissent.”