Responding to this, the PUCL in a detailed statement has outlined how, the views encapsulated in paragraphs 185-188 seek to delegitimize the work of Human Rights organisations around legal aid, fact finding visits and monetary aid. These are vital Constitutional tools that independent organizations use to establish facts, fix accountability and ensure succour for victims of communal strife. By casting aspersions on organisations, the hon’ble court is taking recourse to the baseless narrative of “anti-national” interests working against the State.

This statement by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) provides a comprehensive response to the observations made by the Special NIA Court, Lucknow; against the PUCL and other Human Rights organisations. (FIR 60/2018; Case numbers 1049/2022, 1758/2022 and 2766/2022)/ The statement has been issued by President, PUCL, Kavita Srivastava and V Suresh, General Secretary.

The contentious points in paras 185 to 188 of the judgement delivered in January 4, 2025 are as follows:

• The court observed that ‘the Prosecutors have expressed concern that in NIA courts across the country, when accused in cases under the UAPA or other anti-national/terrorist activities are brought for trial, NGOs—primarily advocating Muslim interests—promptly provide legal aid. This contradicts constitutional principles, as it boosts the morale of undesirable elements.’

• The Court went on to observe that human rights reports by written by various NGOs like Alliance for Justice and Accountability (New York), Citizens for Justice and Peace (Mumbai), Indian American Muslim council, Washington DC, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (New Delhi), Rihaee Manch (Lucknow), South Asia Solidarity group, London and United Against Hate (New Delhi), ‘exert undue pressure on the judiciary and the communal sentiment with stealth creep into the realm of ideas.’

• The Court went on to castigate ‘lawyers from NGOs’ for representing cases of national security, terrorism etc.’ Shocking the Court violates the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court by stating that it’ is not the right of an NGO to provide free legal aid to the accused who are involved in heinous crimes’… NGOS providing legal aid and lawyers is resulting in promoting a point of view which is very narrow and dangerous.’

• The Court concluded that, ‘Citizens for justice and Peace, Mumbai, People’s Union for Civil Liberties, (New Delhi), Rihaee Manch, (Lucknow), United Against Hate (New Delhi), along with NGOs located abroad, like in America and the Great Britian, like the Alliance for Justice and Accountability, New York, Indian American council, Washington, DC), South Asia Solidarity Group (London), were “bogus”, not legitimate human rights organisations. As the Court put it, what could be their interests? Where is their funding coming from, and what are their collective objectives? To investigate this, prevent their unwarranted interference in the judicial process, and to take necessary action to stop them, a copy of this decision should also be sent to the Chairman of the Bar Council of India and the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India”.

 The PUCL in their statement thereafter states as follows

1. Courts should not make adverse remarks against individuals or groups without giving them an opportunity of being heard: Supreme Court of India

Firstly, it should be noted that, none of the implicated organisations were before the Court or were put to notice that observations were likely to be made against them. The Supreme Court has laid down time and again that Courts should not make adverse remarks against individuals or groups without giving them an opportunity of being heard.

In the case of Teesta Setalvad V. State of Gujarat (2004) 10 SCC 88) Supreme Court observed that: “Time and again the supreme Court has deprecated the practice of making observations in Judgments, unless the person in respect of whom comments and criticisms were being made were parties to the proceedings and further were granted opportunity of having their say in the matter, unmindful of the serious repercussions they may entail on such persons. ……Observations should not be made by Courts against persons and authorities unless they are necessary or essential for decision of the case.”

The PUCL has stated that, “We are shocked to note that the ruling has passed prejudiced, unsubstantiated and potentially damaging comments about the role of human rights organisations in general and PUCL in particular, when these comments are not germane to the issues in the criminal trial nor were they based on evidence led during the trial. Apart from the fact that these comments are in the nature of an obiter dicta, the fact that such comments have been incorporated into the ruling in a criminal case, which is bound strictly to the facts on record which have been tested during cross-examination and trial, raises doubts about fairness and impartiality in delivering justice in the specific criminal case.

Further the detailed statement issued by the human rights platform founded by Jayprakash Narayan states that, “It should be pointed out that third parties to the criminal trial don’t have any role or scope to intervene in specific criminal cases. Thus, while parties to the criminal case have the option of filing appeals in higher courts both to challenge the verdict of the trial court and also to challenge comments made in the trial court’s judgment, such is not the case with third parties.”

Besides the PUCL statement makes the following points:

2. Conducting Fact Finding, not unconstitutional or unlawful

Secondly, the incident pertains to communal violence which happened in Kasganj in U.P. in 2018. UP has been a hotbed of growing communal tension and violence since even before the Ram Mandir Agitation that led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid. There have been allegations against the State authorities and the police of helping, provoking, aiding and abetting, communal tension more particularly targeting the minority religious communities. A biased narrative is built up by the authorities invariably blaming the minority community for any violence and then engaged in targeted arrests. It is in this context that it is vital that every such conflagration be investigated by independent civil society organisations to bring forth the true facts. PUCL has been involved in large number of fact findings throughout the country irrespective of the party in power and its fact findings have great credibility. In any case, fact finding, giving legal aid to accused and victims or even providing financial aid to accused or victims can by no stretch of imagination be considered as anti-national activity as sought to be conveyed by the Court. Campaigning on issues, bringing out an alternative viewpoint and public discussion are essential work of civil society organisations, an exercise of constitutional freedom and a key contribution to the idea of an associative democracy.

3. Promoting by peaceful means civil liberties, harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood, agenda of the PUCL 

Thirdly, it should be noted, that even when it comes to the present case as regards PUCL the only action it had taken pursuant to the violence was to act according to the objects of the PUCL Constitution which has as its aim and objects, ‘To uphold and promote by peaceful means civil liberties and the democratic way of life throughout India’

The visit to Kasganj was in pursuance of this object. The aim of the visit is to take forward the fundamental duty enjoined upon all citizens under Art 51(e) which is ‘to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities.’ As such, the PUCL has only acted in accordance with the values of the Indian Constitution and such actions do not merit such prejudicial judicial comments.

The judicial censure seeks to mark and target citizens for forming organisations exercising their right under Art 19(1) (c) and getting together and putting forward a collective voice in defence of the ideals envisaged in the Constitution! As Babasaheb Ambedkar put it, ‘constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated’. The PUCL activities under its Constitution, aims to cultivate the constitutional morality embodied in the principle of ‘harmony’ and the ‘spirit of brotherhood’. This we submit is the responsibility of the state as well as members of civil society.

The UN Declaration on human rights defenders has also unequivocally recognised that, ‘Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to promote and to strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels.’

4. The Public Interest work of the PUCL, through Public Interest Litigation (PILs) in the HC and SC strengthened the basic rights of citizens.

The fact that the PUCL has been a petitioner before both the Supreme Court and High Courts in numerous cases highlights the constitutional work of the PUCL and further exposes the unwarranted and prejudicial nature of the judicial observations. A number of judgments of the Supreme Court which ensure basic rights for citizens including the right to food, freedom from bonded labour and liberation of persons in manual scavenging have had the PUCL as the petitioner. PUCL has also worked towards enhancing the quality of our electoral democracy and has been the petitioner in the Supreme Court decisions recognizing NOTA as a valid option. The PUCL is also the petitioner in the decision of the Supreme Court recognizing that the voter has a right to know the antecedents of their candidate including the assets he or she possesses as well as criminal antecedents.

5. Facts overlooked by the Court 

Fourthly, the judicial comments also violate the judicial discipline of basing conclusions on facts which form part of the record. It should be noted that in terms of ‘facts’,

PUCL did not prepare a fact-finding report, nor did it provide any financial or legal support to families and accused. Though PUCL has in effect done none of the above, we strongly assert that conducting a fact finding is not a crime, providing financial or legal support to families and accused is a humanitarian task and completely within the bounds of the Constitutions.

It is also important for all to know that the PUCL is an unregistered citizens organization and gets no Institutional funding, foreign or Indian and works through contributions of its members and well-wishers and therefore the allegations of funding are baseless.”

Finally, the detailed statements sum up that the stated observations by the NIA court are a) lacking in factual substance; b) attack the credibility of human rights work and c) seek to actively discourage perspectives rooted in the Constitution which seek to expose the state for not abiding by the Constitution. “In the interests of fidelity to the constitutional values of freedom of speech, expression and association, and in the interests of truth and reason, we hope that these prejudiced and invidious observations are suo moto deleted from the reported judgment. “

Related:

Convictions in Kasganj communal riots by NIA Special Court

The post Targeting human rights activism: comments by NIA Court shocking: PUCL appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Significantly, the Center for the Study of Organized Hate (CSOH) documented and analysed 128 X posts targeted at Indians broadly within the Western context. According to the key findings in this study, these posts (in their dataset) received a total of 138.54M views on X as of January 3, 2025. 36 posts received over a million views, 12 of which claimed Indians to be a demographic threat to white America. The analysis further shows that these posts, that originated from 85 accounts, three-fourths of which were (64 accounts) displaying blue verification badges.

As pertinently, the posts, the report states, violated X’s own policies on Hateful Conduct. Violations included Incitement through ‘inciting fear or spreading fearful stereotypes about a protected category,’ slurs and tropes, and dehumanization. As of a week ago, January 3, 2025, 125 posts remained active, eight posts have been marked as sensitive, and one post remains active with limited visibility due to potential violations of X’s rules against Hateful Conduct.  Only 1 of 85 accounts in our database has been suspended by X.

What is the anti-Indian hate directed at?

The analysis in CSOH Report also shows that these attacks were not exclusively aimed at Hindus of Indian or American origin but extended to all those perceived as being of Indian descent, including Sikh community members.

Finally, the CSOH has put out a set of “Recommendations” that may be accessed here: These recommendations, crucial to understanding how hate expressions can be curtailed include: first, the recognition of anti-South Asian slurs, the need for expanded definitions, the requirement of an Establishment Advisory Council, an external stakeholder engagement framework the use of community notes proactively, counter-speech, transparency among many others.

X, formerly Twitter has been full of a barrage of anti-hate campaign that can be traced back to far-right Trump supporter Laura Loomer targeted Indian-Americans on X, following the appointment of Sriram Krishnan as an adviser on artificial intelligence to the incoming Trump administration. After this, the situation escalated when former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy in his own style (sic) criticised American culture for allegedly failing to produce enough skilled tech workers. This was followed by the multi-billionaire X owner Elon Musk, a Trump ally, weighing in by supporting the H1B visa program, noting that he himself had come to the US decades ago, through this same program.

Since then, the posts have spiralled, swamping the X platform. The report has subbed this as “an unequivocal and deeply troubling expression of anti-Indian racism.”

“With Musk and Trump both expressing support for the H1B program, the racism and hatred showed no signs of abating. If anything, it only ramped up in intensity and spread. While it may be easy to label such viral hatred as ‘spontaneous,’ the prominence of certain racist themes and tropes, along with their repeated affirmation, presents a compelling case for seeing it as a form of organised, systematic hatred, fanned by powerful actors,” the report further elaborated.

The analysis crucially analysed how the discourse deteriorated and how the “speed with which the distinction between legal or ‘good’ immigrants and ‘illegal’ or ‘bad’ immigrants collapsed in the discussion about Indians and H-1B visas on X is further affirmation of the clear presence of white supremacist ideology on X.” Of the 128 sampled posts, the most viewed post, with 17.4 million views, was shared by the account @leonardaisfunE. It featured a video of a white man mimicking Indian street food vendors, with the user commenting that it was “the funniest shit” she had seen all year. Another post by the account @callistoroll and viewed 12.3 million times, included a video in which a Japanese man described Indian factory workers as incompetent and stupid.

‘Perpetuated stereotypes about Indians’

Deeper analysis showed that 47 of the 128 posts expressed xenophobic sentiments about replacing white workers. Additionally, 35 posts perpetuated the stereotype of Indians being dirty and unhygienic, while 25 focused on public defecation, cow dung, and cow urine.

Of the posts, some claimed claimed that Indians were “inferior to citizens of Western countries, particularly the United States.” Many alleged that Indians had lower intelligence quotients compared not only to white people but also to other immigrant groups. Others juxtaposed images of the interior of a cathedral with Indian slums to promote the supposed superiority of Western civilization.

“The ranking of IQ among groups has a long history in the alt-right white movement: the obsession with IQ is rooted in longstanding eugenicist and social Darwinist ideas that claim that different races possess different IQs. White people are assumed to be at the top of the IQ ladder,” the report stated.  The report has also noted that verbal attacks extended beyond Hindus of Indian or American origin, targeting all those perceived as being of Indian descent, including members of the Sikh community.

Related:

Facebook, Twitter suspend Trump’s accounts

Twitter acts against hate speech, locks hate monger’s account

Twitter deletes trending casteist slur, terms it hate speech

The post ‘Surge in Anti-Indian Hate on X by supporters of Trump is organised, ampflies racism and xenobia’: CSOH Report appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Recently, Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge – leaders of opposition in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha registered their dissent over the selection process of the NHRC Chairperson calling it a ‘fundamentally flawed’ and a ‘pre-determined’ exercise that ignored consultation and consensus. The dissent note has been made public and can be accessed here.

The previous Chairperson Justice Arun Mishra was appointed to the post 9 months after he retired from the Supreme Court. Arun Mishra had not only described PM Modi as a versatile genius at a public function while being a judge at the Supreme Court, but he also later praised the government for their ‘untiring’ efforts to foster peace in Jammu & Kashmir while being the NHRC Chairperson. The appointment of Justice Arun Mishra as NHRC Chairperson did attract criticism.

From being a flagship institution that people relied on for addressing human rights grievances to its current state of diminished credibility, the reasons for the NHRC’s decline lie not just in the current establishment’s zeal to politicise institutions but also in its inherent structural flaws. This article will highlight one of such structural flaws—lack of independence due to flaws in the appointment process.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India was established on October 12, 1993, under the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA) of 1993, later amended in 2006 and 2019. As an independent statutory body, the NHRC serves as the watchdog for human rights in the country, ensuring the protection of rights related to life, liberty, equality, and dignity as guaranteed by the Constitution of India and international covenants.

Composition and appointment

The NHRC is a multi-member body comprising a chairperson, five full-time members, and seven deemed members. The Chairperson is typically a retired Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court judge. The full-time members include:

• One member who is or has been a Judge of the Supreme Court of India.
• One member who is or has been the Chief Justice of a High Court.
• Three members appointed from among persons knowing of, or practical experience in, matters relating to human rights, with at least one being a woman.
• The deemed members are the Chairpersons of the National Commissions for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Minorities, Women, Backward Classes, and the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities.

Appointments to the NHRC are made by the President of India based on the recommendations of a Selection Committee comprising the Prime Minister (Chairperson), the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, the Leaders of the Opposition in both Houses of Parliament, and the union home minister. The Chairperson and member serve for a term of three years or until they reach the age of 70 years whichever is earlier and are eligible for reappointment following the completion of their term.

The President can remove the chairperson or any member of the office if she/he is adjudged insolvent or; engages during his term of office, in any paid employment outside the duties of his office or; is unfit to continue in office because of the infirmity of mind or body or; is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court or; is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court or; is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for an offence. The President can also remove the Chairperson or any members on the grounds of proven misbehaviour or incapacity. The procedure for the removal however involves referring the matter to the Supreme Court for an inquiry and removing the member on the court’s advice.

Functions and powers

The NHRC is endowed with a broad mandate to promote and protect human rights in India. Its key functions include:

• Inquiry and Investigation: The Commission can suo moto take cognizance of complaints of human rights violations or negligence in preventing such violations by public servants. It can also intervene in ongoing judicial proceedings involving human rights issues with court approval.
• Inspection of Custodial Institutions: The NHRC has the authority to visit jails and other state-controlled institutions to assess the living conditions of inmates.
• Review of Safeguards: It reviews legal safeguards for the protection of human rights and suggests necessary remedial measures.
• Research and Awareness: The Commission undertakes and promotes research in the field of human rights.
• Encouragement of NGOs: It encourages the efforts of non-governmental organizations and institutions working in the field of human rights.

While the NHRC can make recommendations to the government, its decisions are not legally binding. However, it plays a crucial role in highlighting human rights issues and advocating for policy changes.

The NHRC did some pathbreaking work in cases like the Gujarat Carnage case in which it had taken suo moto cognizance through media reports and initiated inquiry into the violence; approached the Supreme Court on behalf of riot victims.  In 1997, the NHRC wrote to Chief Ministers regarding the procedure to be followed in cases of deaths in police encounters. This was done based on a complaint brought before the commission by the Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC). Also in 1997, and thereafter right until 2004, The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), which went through 2,097 cases of killing of youth and mass cremation of their bodies by the Punjab police during the peak of militancy in the State, has ordered a relief of Rs. 27.94 crore to the families of 1,513 victims of such extra-judicial killings. In both the Gujarat carnage case (2002-2004 onwards) and in the Punjab Disappearances case (1997-2004) the NHRC exercised its statutory rights and moved Article 32 petitions on the issue before the Supreme Court of India. Critically, on draconian anti-terror laws like POTA and TADA too, the NHRC has taken a strong stand. In 2000, “Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000: NHRC’s Opinion” The National Human Rights Commission has taken the view that there is no need for the enactment of a law based on the Draft Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000. This unanimous view was taken at a meeting of the Full Commission held on 11 July 2000 and elaborated in a detailed Opinion issued on July 14, 2000. Earlier the NHRC Chair had even written to all Members of Parliament asking them to repeal the stringent Terrorist and Disruptive Act.

Issues with NHRC

There are multiple issues that restrict the scope of NHRC and hinder it from realising its true potential to be an active safeguarding entity of human rights in India. Not only are its recommendations not binding on the government, but it also has jurisdictional limitations i.e. it cannot address violations by private individuals or entities. It does not have the authority to penalise the authorities that fail to implement its recommendations.

The credibility crisis of the NHRC is not just about operational inefficiencies but is rooted in an appointment process dictated by the ruling government. If the government wants a toothless NHRC, it can have one with little effort. Only an independent NHRC, free from political interference, can demand the resources and autonomy it needs but when led by those who merely echo the government’s line, it risks sinking deeper into irrelevance, eroding its very purpose.

What could constitute reform?

There is a serious need to re-imagine how the appointments are made to NHRC.

The Sub-Committee on Accreditation of the GANHRI noted that the current selection committee does not sufficiently promote broad consultation or participation in the selection process. It also noted that the current process does not maximise the number of candidates from a wide range; that the committee does not provide for the formal involvement of civil society organisations in the process. It had suggested a formalisation process to publicise vacancies broadly, to maximise the number of potential candidates from a wide range of societal groups, and to assess applicants on the basis of pre-determined, objective, and publicly available criteria.

The Paris Principles, a set of international guidelines for National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), layout key principles regarding the composition and appointment of NHRIs to ensure their independence and pluralism. Principle 5 emphasizes that the composition and appointment process should guarantee pluralistic representation of various social forces involved in human rights protection.

This principle highlights the importance of diverse perspectives within the NHRI, enabling it to effectively address a wide range of human rights concerns. The selection process, whether through elections or other means, must ensure the inclusion of representatives from various segments of society.

The Paris Principles specifically recommend the inclusion of representatives from:

• Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) focus on human rights, racial discrimination, trade unions, and professional organizations.
• Different philosophical or religious schools of thought.
• Academia, including universities and qualified experts.
• Parliament
• Government departments, but only in an advisory capacity.

A first step would be the incorporation of these principles in letter and spirit in the PHRA, 1993.

Conclusion

The National Human Rights Commission of India stands at precarious crossroads, embodying both the promise of justice and the peril of irrelevance. Yet, all is not lost. The challenges facing the NHRC, though significant, are not insurmountable. Incorporating the Paris Principles in full—ensuring transparency, pluralism, and independence in its appointments—is an essential first step. Equally critical is the empowerment of the NHRC to enforce its recommendations and expand its jurisdiction to cover private entities, enabling it to address the multifaceted realities of human rights violations in contemporary India.

If these reforms are enacted with sincerity and urgency, the NHRC can reclaim its foundational ethos and emerge as a resilient institution, capable of standing firm against injustice regardless of the prevailing political winds. Failing to act, however, risks relegating the commission to a symbolic relic, unable to protect the very rights it was created to uphold.

(The writer is part of the organisations research team)

Related:

UN-linked body GNAHRI defers accreditation of NHRC India for second term, flags absence of autonomy and diversity

Nothing ‘Right’ about India’s Human Rights Commission

Major embarrassment for India: UN rights body puts NHRC accreditation on hold

The post NHRC: Need for accountability to human rights & reforms in appointing members appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The body of a 28-year-old journalist was found in a septic tank on the premises of a contractor whom he had recently exposed for corruption in #Chhattisgarh. #MukeshChandrakar, who worked with a local news channel, was found dead on January 3 in #Bijapur district.

Mukesh, who… pic.twitter.com/tPl7LLFAJO

— Hate Detector (@HateDetectors) January 4, 2025

Chandrakar, known for his in-depth reports on alleged corruption in public construction projects, was also the host of a popular YouTube channel. His family claims he had been receiving threats for exposing a scam related to a road project, suggesting his tragic death may have been a targeted attack. Hours before his body was found, his brother posted a heartfelt video on the channel, appealing for help and revealing the emotional devastation of losing his brother.

Goodbye @MukeshChandrak9 Your reporting for his soil, for society, and for humanity always be remembered. My humble requests to the politicians is that they should not play politics on his death.#MukeshChandrakar #Bastar pic.twitter.com/u99EsLOhPd

— Aarav Gautam (@IAmAarav8) January 4, 2025

Who is Mukesh Chandrakar?

Mukesh Chandrakar, a fearless investigative journalist known for his ground reporting in Chhattisgarh’s conflict-ridden Bastar region, had a remarkable trajectory. From his humble beginnings of selling mahua liquor and working as a mechanic, he transitioned to journalism by renting an office and eventually starting his YouTube channel, Bastar Junction, which garnered 1.66 lakh subscribers. At just 32, Mukesh had carved a niche for himself, bringing attention to crucial issues, especially in a region plagued by Maoist violence and corruption.

Born in Basaguda, a village severely impacted by the armed conflict of the mid-2000s, Mukesh’s early life was marked by hardship. His family, displaced by the violence, sought refuge in a government shelter in Bijapur. After the death of his father when Mukesh was a child and his mother’s untimely death in 2013, Mukesh, along with his brother Yukesh, persevered through the challenges.

Mukesh’s reporting on the dire state of a road in Bijapur, which was tied to his cousin’s construction contract, led to an official inquiry. Angered by the story, Mukesh’s cousin, contractor Suresh Chandrakar, allegedly orchestrated his murder, with his brother Ritesh carrying out the act. Mukesh’s death reflects the risks faced by journalists exposing corruption in volatile regions, as Indian Express reported.

Press Club and Editors Guild express concern over journalist’s safety

On January 4, the Press Club of India expressed its shock and condemnation over the brutal murder of Mukesh Chandrakar. The Club strongly condemned the killing, calling for swift, time-bound action against the perpetrators. In a statement, the club said, “We strongly condemn the killing and demand time-bound action against the perpetrators.”

The Press Club also requests the Press Council of India to take cognisance of the matter and demand that the state government take appropriate action. The Club urged that, “The state government should immediately look into the long-standing demand of local journalists to enact a law to protect journalists.’

The Press Club of India is shocked to learn about the murder of Bijapur (Chhattisgarh)
based young freelance journalist Mukesh Chandrakar.

We strongly condemn the killing and demand
time-bound action against the perpetrators.

The club also requests the @PressCouncil_IN to… pic.twitter.com/cwD1tbYEBj

— Press Club of India (@PCITweets) January 4, 2025

On January 4, the Editors Guild of India issued a strong statement expressing deep concern over the brutal murder of Mukesh Chandrakar. The Guild condemned the suspected killing and raised alarm over the apparent foul play behind his death and said that, “The young journalist’s death is a matter of grave concern as it raises suspicion of foul play.” The Guild, urging the Chhattisgarh government to expedite the investigation and ensure those responsible are swiftly brought to justice, expressed that, “The Editors Guild calls on the government of Chhattisgarh to spare no efforts in investigating the case speedily and bringing the guilty to book.”

The Editors Guild highlighted the broader issue of journalist safety, particularly for those working in smaller towns and rural areas. “The safety of journalists, especially those working in smaller towns and rural areas, is of paramount importance,” the statement continued. “Authorities across the country must ensure that no harm or hindrance is caused to journalists in the course of their professional duties.”

EGI statement on the death of journalist Mr. Mukesh Chandrakar pic.twitter.com/LtOI7oYw3T

— Editors Guild of India (@IndEditorsGuild) January 4, 2025

The Guild further mentioned the essential role of a free press in a functioning democracy. “A free press that is allowed to work without fear is important for any democracy. While the Editors Guild grieves Mr. Chandrakar’s death, it hopes that his passing under unnatural circumstances will serve as a wake-up call and prompt better measures for journalist protection. The country must not let Mr. Chandrakar’s death go entirely in vain.”

Press Council seeks report from Chhattisgarh Government over killing, takes suo moto action

On January 4, the Press Council of India took suo moto cognizance of the suspected brutal killing of journalist Mukesh Chandrakar. It has requested a report on the case from the Chhattisgarh government. Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, Chairperson of the Press Council, also expressed deep concern over the incident.

#pressreleasepci #presscouncilofindia pic.twitter.com/GMV19fLpa3

— Press Council of India (@PressCouncil_IN) January 4, 2025

Mukesh Chandrakar’s heroic role in CoBRA mission

Mukesh Chandrakar played a heroic role in securing the release of CoBRA commando Rakeshwar Singh Manhas, who had been held captive by Maoists in April 2021. This occurred after the deadly Takalguda Naxal ambush in Bijapur, where 22 security personnel were martyred. The CoBRA Battalion, a specialized unit of the CRPF focused on jungle warfare, had been involved in the ambush. Mukesh, alongside six other journalists, helped facilitate negotiations between the security forces and the Maoists, ensuring the safe return of the captured CoBRA jawan.

Public protests demand justice, held Candle march

The brutal murder of Mukesh Chandrakar has ignited widespread protests. On Sunday, January 5, members of the Mahar community organized a candle march, demanding the death penalty for the accused. Journalists also took to the streets, staging a protest at the Raipur Press Club, calling for swift and severe action against those responsible for the journalist’s death.

The candle march began at Ambedkar Bhawan and concluded at Jaistambh Chowk. RD Jhadi, a patron of the Mahar Samaj, stated that all those involved in the murder should face the harshest punishment, as reported in The Print.

Murder of Chandrakar is a grim reminder of the danger faced by Journalists: Kejriwal

While condemning the murder of Mukesh Chandrakar and expressing concern over the safety of journalists, AAP President and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal stated, “The killing of Mukesh Chandrakar is a stark reminder of the risks faced by journalists who expose corruption and speak the truth. The perpetrators of Mukesh’s murder must receive the harshest punishment.”

The murder of #MukeshChandrakar is a grim reminder of the dangers faced by journalists who dare to expose corruption and tell the truth.

The culprits behind Mukesh’s murder must face the harshest punishment. pic.twitter.com/pPmW6qlX7O

— Arvind Kejriwal (@ArvindKejriwal) January 5, 2025

Arrest of key suspect in journalist Mukesh Chandrakar’s Murder

Days after a Chhattisgarh-based journalist was found murdered, the key suspect in the murder of Bastar journalist and YouTuber Mukesh Chandrakar, Suresh Chandrakar, was arrested by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Bijapur police from Hyderabad on the night of January 5, 2025. Police confirmed the arrest after the body of Mukesh was discovered on January 3, hidden in a septic tank at a property owned by Suresh in Chattanpara Basti, Bijapur. Three others involved in the crime—Ritesh Chandrakar, Dinesh Chandrakar, and supervisor Mahendra Ramteke—have already been arrested in connection with the case.

In response to the crime, authorities have moved to seize Suresh Chandrakar’s illegal properties. A construction yard that he had established after encroaching on forest land along the Bijapur-Gangaloor Road has already been demolished. Furthermore, police have initiated steps to freeze Suresh Chandrakar’s bank accounts, with three of his accounts already put on hold.

Alleged motive: corruption in road construction and alleged tide with Congress and BJP

A news report aired on NDTV on December 25, 2024, exposing alleged corruption in a road construction project in Bijapur, is believed to have triggered the murder. The project, linked to contractor Suresh Chandrakar, is seen as the possible motive for the crime. Additionally, Chhattisgarh Deputy Chief Minister Vijay Sharma claimed that Suresh Chandrakar had ties with the Congress party, while opposition parties assert that he recently joined the ruling BJP.

BJP’s Jungle Raj in Chhattisgarh, Congress condemned the killing

On January 3, Congress criticized the BJP-ruled Chhattisgarh government over the brutal killing of journalist Mukesh Chandrakar, questioning the state’s law and order. In a post on its official X handle, Congress wrote:

“BJP’s jungle raj in Chhattisgarh.

Journalist Mukesh Chandrakar exposed corruption in road construction. Enraged by his findings, the contractor responsible for the road lured Mukesh, killed him, and dumped his body in the septic tank of his own house.

In BJP’s jungle raj, no one is safe. The law-and-order situation is in complete disarray.

It’s no surprise that the media won’t highlight this issue or challenge the BJP government, as the ‘Sab Changa Si’ mode is on.

We demand swift and strict action in this case. Mukesh’s family deserves justice, and it should be delivered without delay.”

छत्तीसगढ़ में BJP का जंगलराज

पत्रकार मुकेश चंद्राकर ने सड़क में भ्रष्टाचार का खुलासा किया था. इसके बाद से सड़क बनवाने वाला ठेकेदार नाराज था.

ठेकेदार ने मुकेश को बुलाया और उन्हें मारकर लाश को अपने घर की सैप्टिक टैंक में चुनवा दिया.

BJP के जंगलराज में कोई भी सुरक्षित नहीं है.… pic.twitter.com/vyoiCWIw0O

— Congress (@INCIndia) January 3, 2025

Chhattisgarh government formed SIT probe; alleged accused tied with Congress

Following the incident, the Chhattisgarh government’s orders SIT probe over the incident. BJP alleged a strong connection between the prime accused, Suresh Chandrakar, and the Congress party. Chhattisgarh’s Deputy Chief Minister and senior BJP leader Arun Rao took to his X handle

 “A lie does not turn into truth by shouting loudly, dear Bhupesh ji!

This is the basic mantra of Congressmen.

Anyone who comes in contact with their corruption will be crushed to pieces.

And the Congress contractor did the same with brave journalist Mukesh of Bijapur!

Those defending the contractor accused of murder raised concerns about morality.”

जोर-जोर से चिल्लाने से झूठ सच में नहीं बदल जाता प्रिय भूपेश जी!

कांग्रेसियों का मूल मंत्र है..
जो उनके भ्रष्टाचार से टकराएगा चूर-चूर हो जाएगा।

और वही किया कांग्रेसी ठेकेदार ने बीजापुर के जांबाज पत्रकार मुकेश के साथ!

हत्या के आरोपी ठेकेदार की पैरवी करने वालों ने नैतिकता..(१/४) https://t.co/WFj6XrrIIg pic.twitter.com/20M1Q7iJbU

— Arun Sao (@ArunSao3) January 4, 2025

Letter of boycott of Mukesh Chandrakar by Congress viral on social media

Amidst allegations linking the accused contractor, Suresh Chandrakar, to the Congress party, a letter dated April 29, 2024, from the District Bijapur Congress Committee has gone viral on social media. The letter reveals that journalist Mukesh Chandrakar, along with his colleagues Ishwar Soni, Ranjan Das, and Chetan, was officially boycotted by the district Congress committee. This action was taken after the journalists were accused of publishing and reporting false news about Bijapur MLA Vikram Mandavi. The controversy surrounding this letter has fuelled further speculation and debate, with critics questioning the motives behind the boycott.

Wayanad MP Priyanka Gandhi also condemned the killing, demand strict action

Congress leader and Lok Sabha MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra condemned the killing of Mukesh Chandrakar. She expressed her condolences through her X handle and wrote that, “The news of the murder of Bastar, Chhattisgarh journalist Mukesh Chandrakar is shocking. According to reports, Mukesh was brutally murdered after he exposed corruption in his report. I demand from the state government that strict and immediate action should be taken in this case, the culprits should be given severe punishment and proper compensation and job should be considered for the family of the deceased.

Humble tribute!”

बस्तर, छत्तीसगढ़ के पत्रकार मुकेश चंद्राकर जी की हत्या का समाचार स्तब्ध करने वाला है। खबरों के मुताबिक, मुकेश जी ने अपनी रिपोर्ट में भ्रष्टाचार का खुलासा किया था जिसके बाद उनकी बेरहमी से हत्या कर दी गई।

मेरी राज्य सरकार से मांग है कि इस मामले में सख्त और त्वरित कार्रवाई हो,… pic.twitter.com/I1TwRJXOFW

— Priyanka Gandhi Vadra (@priyankagandhi) January 4, 2025

The tragic death of Mukesh Chandrakar, a courageous 32-year-old freelance journalist from Chhattisgarh, has not only shocked the nation but also highlighted the grave risks faced by journalists in volatile regions. Chandrakar, known for his investigative reporting on corruption within public construction projects, was discovered murdered in a septic tank, raising suspicions that his death was directly linked to his work exposing illegal activities. His death underscores the vulnerability of journalists who dare to challenge powerful figures in corrupt systems. Mukesh’s fearless reporting and his YouTube channel, “Bastar Junction,” gave voice to the marginalized and shed light on corruption and violence in Chhattisgarh’s conflict-ridden Bastar region.

This incident has sparked widespread outrage and concern from press organizations like the Press Club of India and the Editors Guild, who have demanded swift justice and stronger protections for journalists. The brutal killing is a stark reminder of the critical need for legal safeguards and enhanced security for those who report the truth. The ongoing investigation into Mukesh’s murder, with arrests made, is an important step, but it also highlights the urgent need to address the broader issue of journalist safety. Mukesh Chandrakar’s death must serve as a catalyst for stronger measures to protect journalists and ensure that such atrocities do not go unpunished.

Related:

Gauri Lankesh assassination: 6 years down, no closure for family and friends, justice elusive

Gauri, a film on journalist-activist Gauri Lankesh wins international award: Montreal 2023

Gauri Lankesh memorialised as Journalist killed in Line of Duty

The post Investigative Journalist Mukesh Chandrakar killed for exposing corruption appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The union has questioned the “double standards” of the management on its claims of manpower shortage for engaging third parties for provisioning and maintenance of the Fiber to the Home (FTTH) connections, while excess workforce has been cited for the loss incurred by the organisation.

BSNL has been facing multiple challenges since 2014, with the Central government indefinitely delaying the implementation of 4G services, while most private players provide 5G services.

Another VRS in the organisation would potentially end employment opportunities for educated youth and leave the workforce at the mercy of the private organisations waiting to exploit, said the union.

‘STOP PLANS TO IMPLEMENT VRS’

The public sector telecom major implemented the first VRS in 2020, resulting in around 80,000 employees opting for the scheme, “considering the apathetic approach of the union government towards BSNL and its pro corporate policies”, it said.

In a detailed letter to the Chairman and Managing Director of the organisation, the BSNLEU has lashed out at the proposed plans for another VRS to further reduce the workforce of the central public sector undertaking (CPSU). As of March 2024, only 29,750 executives and 26,750 non-executives were working with the organisation, exposing the low strength of the workforce.

BSNL is reportedly spending 38% of its revenue toward payment of salary to the employees, while this figure of other private operators is said to be in single digit.

“Jio and Airtel are earning a massive revenue and thus the percentage of their expenditure for salary payment is insignificant, when compared to their revenue”, the BSNLEU letter pointed out.

While the policies of the government and management remain a major cause for the BSNL crisis, the management is attempting to paint a picture that employee strength is the reason for the crisis, the union has alleged.

INORDINATE DELAY IN PROVIDING 4G SERVICES

Three revival packages were implemented in BSNL, in 2019, 2022 and 2023, but the revenue of the organisation has not shown any improvement. The lack of 4G services, despite private firms rolling out 5G services, is cited as a major concern for loss of customers and subsequently, the revenue.

Customers continue to face problems in getting quality voice and data services wherever the 4G installation is completed by TCS, there is an inordinate delay in completion of installation in several parts of the country, the letter said.

BSNLEU said the “terrible situation” has arisen after the Centre prevented BSNL from procuring high-quality equipment from reputed international vendors, while private players continue to utilise such equipment that helps them in providing quality services.

DISADVANTAGE TO BSNL: PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE 

A parliamentary committee on Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), in a report submitted to Parliament in December 2024 has cited the disadvantages and hurdles faced by BSNL in providing quality services on par with private providers.

The committee also noted BSNL’s delayed adoption of 4G technology, placing it at a disadvantage in a market dominated by 4G and 5G, with only 200 of one lakh planned sites commissioned so far.

REVENUE SOURCES HAMPERED

BSNL was earning most of its revenue from landline connections, whose services were badly affected by the VRS implemented in 2020, while another important revenue source, broadband connections were outsourced.

Despite a massive optic fibre network, BSNL was systematically prevented from expanding its landline connection base, while Jio has managed to emerge as the biggest service provider, the union said.

FTTH services, too, generated a considerable amount of revenue for BSNL, but the present system of engaging private partners for provisioning and maintenance of FTTH is costing the organisation badly.

“Customers are disconnecting BSNL FTTH services and opting for private services, given the lack of service from private parties engaged by BSNL,” the letter pointed out.

The BSNLEU has urged the management and the Union government to adopt policies to favour one of the biggest CPSUs in ensuring quality services to rural and semi-urban areas, instead of framing policies favouring the corporates.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Another VRS Will Kill BSNL, Adopt Policies to Save PSUs, Says BSNLEU appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This progress is evidenced by India’s status as one of the largest producers of fruits, vegetables, and dairy, aided by the veterinary sciences and animal husbandry. In 1974, India conducted its first nuclear test (Operation Smiling Buddha) in Pokhran, moved towards enhancing its energy production, and by 1975, it had developed its own satellite, Aryabhata. Initially dependent on imports such as US wheat and tinned milk from the Netherlands, India quickly achieved food self-sufficiency by invoking “Green Revolution” which was followed by “White Revolution” through Amul Cooperative Society, and “Poultry Revolution”. From the 1980s, various Technology Missions helped achieve such goals. The flagship programmes of the Indian government to improve the nutritional status of children and reduce incidence of malnutrition through the Integrated Child Development Scheme and Mid-Day Meal Scheme are exemplary, not to say of other pro-poor welfare schemes and rural development. Even, the first wave of Indian professionals to work abroad included graduates from the world-class technical institutions established in the post-independence era.

However, despite these noteworthy foundational accomplishments, the quality of research and innovation in India has stagnated over the past two to three decades. This is alarming, particularly because other nations—including the countries that lagged far behind India just 40–50 years ago—have rapidly advanced. With a population of 1.4 billion, a growing focus on Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, and a shortage of job opportunities, India is today at a crucial juncture. Addressing these challenges requires a unified effort from the government, the academia-intelligentsia, and industry. Through appropriate policies, resources, and a shift in research culture, India will acquire the potential to regain its place as a global leader in research and innovation.

Nonetheless, for action after introspection, the relevant data pertaining to our research performance are quite troubling. Some of these may be elaborated below: 

1. Citation Impact: According to the “Scimago Journal & Country Rank” (SJR), which assesses academic impact globally, India ranks outside the top 100 countries for citations per document across all subject areas (https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php), including Sciences, Life Sciences, Engineering, Humanities and Social Sciences. Indian research averages only 12.7 citations per document, significantly trailing countries like the United States, Canada, and scores of countries in Europe, which exceed 25-30 citations per paper. Researchers from several Asian countries, including Saudi Arabia (17.6), Nepal (15.2), Oman (15.1), and Bangladesh (14.5), also surpass India in citation impact. While India performs slightly better in Engineering and Sciences, its ranking is notably lower in Arts and Humanities.

2. H-Index Ranking: India is not among the top 20 nations in terms of the h-index across all subject areas, which measures scientific productivity and citation impact. Although India has largest population, the number of citable documents produced (2.7 million) is significantly lower than that of countries like the USA (14 million) and China (10 million). Particularly the emphasis is quite less in publishing in high ranked journals in the fields of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities.

3. Top-tier [Q1] Journal Publications: High-ranking institutions are often evaluated by their contributions to Q1 (top quartile) journals, representing the top 25% in each field. India’s highest-ranking institutions—the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) and the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS, New Delhi)—are positioned only at 1346 and 1360 globally.

(https://www.scimagoir.com/rankings.php?sector=Higher+educ.&country=IND).

For example, if one looks(Fig.1) at the declining publications in the journals of repute by the researchers at a highest funded, historic and a largest residential public university, the Aligarh Muslim University(AMU), then the scenario gets quite depressing, hence, a matter of great concern.

Fig.1: The research ranking of the Aligarh Muslim University refers to the volume, impact and quality of the institution’s research output. On the X-axis is year and Y-axis is global ranking.
Source: https://www.scimagoir.com/institution.php?idp=3231#google_vignette

4. Global Innovation Index (GII): In the 2024 Global Innovation Index, India ranked 39th out of 160 economies (https://www.wipo.int/gii-ranking/en/india), indicating room for improvement in innovation capacity.

5. Patent Generation: India granted only 0.03 million patents compared to 0.8 million in China and 0.3 million in the United States, illustrating a significant lag in protecting and commercializing intellectual property.

For instance, if one looks (Fig.2) at the declining number of innovation ranking of AMU, the issue is again quite alarming.

Fig.2: The innovation ranking of the Aligarh Muslim University, which is calculated on the number of patent applications of the institution and the citations that its research output receives from patents. On the X-axis is year and on Y-axis is innovation ranking.
Source: https://www.scimagoir.com/institution.php?idp=3231#google_vignette

Root causes of this decline in our academia:

In our estimation, several factors contribute to India’s declining research quality and innovation output, such as:

1. Evaluation standards focused on quantity: Academic institutions often emphasise the quantity of publications rather than quality. Shifting focus to high-impact research would reward rigorous, ethical research practices and enhance India’s international credibility. Prioritising quality over quantity attracts international collaborations and investment, creating an environment that promotes scientific integrity. Strict standards for recruitment, based purely on merit and publication in reputable journals and books, are sometimes compromised. Promotions to higher-level positions are not stringently monitored by institutions. People who publish in journals or magazines that are not even indexed by the h-index are often promoted readily. Publications with publishers that lack rigorous standards and anonymous peer review are accepted without scrutiny. Furthermore, student feedback in both letter and spirit is frequently ignored in universities and colleges.

The primary focus of faculty members in academic institutions therefore should remain on their core responsibilities of research and teaching. These activities not only contribute to personal academic growth but also significantly enhance the institution’s reputation and academic excellence. Engaging in meaningful research furthers the frontiers of knowledge, while effective teaching shapes the next generation of scholars and professionals.

2. Insufficient R&D investment: India’s research and development expenditure is less than 0.7% of GDP, placing it outside the top 150 countries for R&D investment.

In contrast, the developed nations such as the USA (3.5%), Germany (3.1%), and Israel (5.5%) allocate much more for R&D. Even some developing countries, such as Cuba (11.5%) and Oman (6.8%), outspend India in this area. Thus, adequate funding is essential for basic research, which forms the foundation for applied sciences and technology development. This is why it is paramount to strengthen basic research laboratories. 

3. Inadequate focus on basic sciences: Without robust fundamental research in the basic sciences, the applied researches cannot progress. Industries often hesitate to fund basic research due to its indirect, long-term returns. However, government’s substantial financial support is essential here. Breakthroughs in medical technologies, like X-rays, MRI, PET scans, and radiotherapy were made possible by early investments in basic sciences. To foster innovation, India must prioritize basic research alongside applied sciences.

4. Urgent need for financial support in colleges and public universities: To ensure the quality of education in colleges and public universities, it is imperative to prioritise financial support for critical infrastructure. Laboratory courses, which are central to hands-on learning, have been significantly affected by the lack of equipment. Decades ago, these institutions boasted better-equipped laboratories, allowing students to explore and innovate. However, over the past four to five decades, there has been a marked deterioration in these facilities, leaving many students unable to gain practical skills in key areas. Equally concerning is the condition of libraries, which are fundamental to fostering independent learning and research. Many institutions struggle to maintain updated collections of books, journals, and other resources due to insufficient funding. Addressing this issue is vital to bridging the gap between students’ learning potential and the resources available to them.  Moreover, the shortage of faculty members poses a significant challenge. In many colleges, the faculty strength is considerably below the required levels, compromising the quality of instruction and mentorship.  This situation directly impacts the ability of institutions to maintain academic rigor and to support students effectively.  

5. Limited Institutional Autonomy: Granting universities and research institutions more academic and administrative autonomy would enable them to respond quickly to emerging research needs. Accountability frameworks should be in place to uphold ethical standards, ensuring that institutions remain credible and internationally competitive.

A Curious Case of the AMU: Nepotism and Inbreeding Corroding Meritocracy

Let the foregoing discussion be illustrated with the instance of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), a significantly funded, large residential university. There appears to be an increasing trend where around 20% to 25% of the AMU teachers perennially prioritise grabbing administrative positions including those positions traditionally designated only for the non-teaching staff. Extracting this undue benefit has gone up to the extent that even the positions of the statutory officers are filled in on ad hoc basis, in flagrant violation of the UGC rules, and even on illegal basis, as revealed in a recent information obtained through the RTI Act 2005. Some of these “Non-Teaching Professors” have delayed obtaining their PhD degree and have been happily continuing in the administrative positions.

This sorry state of affairs is owing to the fact that, this is often to gain associated “material” benefits over and above salary, including, institutional vehicles with drivers and security personnel serving as domestic servants of the teacher-officers, at the expense of the University exchequer. Many of these teachers have been holding such positions for an outrageously long time, for the last many years, uninterruptedly. Their poor CVs, with no significant/respectable research output, adversely affect the ranking of the University.

AMU, unlike all other central universities (CUs), has got an overwhelming hegemony of the internal teachers inside its Executive Council which also empanels its Vice Chancellors. In the last two empanelment (2017 and 2023), only internal teachers have succeeded in becoming AMU-VCs. This aggravates the practice of nepotism and inbreeding in recruitments and promotions, at the expense of meritocracy. This has had an additional corrosive effect on research output of AMU.

Having developed deeply entrenched, strong clout, they incapacitate successive VCs and create layers of red-tapism just in order to harass and humiliate academically accomplished teachers. The overall atmosphere and ecosystem of the University is made anti-academic. The academically productive ones are harassed by delaying/denying promotions to them, as the VCs are perennially under the pressure of this internal hegemony. Internal teachers becoming as VCs of AMU do not have the independence (or guts) to act against these interests with whom they have been living, working and will continue to live with them even after completing their tenures as VC!

Non-teaching positions are typically designed to support administrative and operational functions, ensuring the smooth running of the University, and are best suited for personnel with expertise in these areas. Unfortunately, these roles are increasingly being used for personal advantage, benefiting the teachers themselves, their family members, and their friends. At some places, the prolonged (rather than a brief tenure) occupation of such positions has led to the formation of regional and sub-regional layers of hegemony and therefore unbridled nepotism in enrolments, recruitments and promotions. These maladies are actively destroying the academic ethos of teaching and research.

Needless to say, this shift in focus dilutes the academic mission and also undermines the intended division of responsibilities within the universities.

By prioritising research and teaching over such non-academic roles, faculty members can better align with the university’s objectives of fostering an environment of intellectual rigour and student development. Clear policies and guidelines can further help delineate responsibilities, ensuring that non-teaching roles are fulfilled efficiently by the appropriate staff while enabling faculty members to concentrate on their academic and scholarly pursuits. This alignment benefits not only the institution but also the broader academic community.

Just as in AMU, other universities too must have got their own general as well as more specific problems. Insiders of those universities also need to expose their endemic problems on these counts.

By tackling the abovementioned critical challenges head-on, India can revitalise its research ecosystem and emerge as a dominant force in the global knowledge economy. Is the government really prepared to listen?

Achieving this vision calls for a concerted effort: substantial government funding, a robust fellowship system based purely on merit, and strong collaboration between academia and industry. With strategic investments, a transformative approach to academic assessment, and greater institutional autonomy, India is poised not only to advance ground-breaking research and innovation but also to become a global beacon of knowledge and progress.

Sajjad Athar is a Professor of Physics at AMU, Aligarh, a renowned name in nuclear physics, a co-author with the Nobel Laureate Prof. Takaki Kajita who tweets @Mohamma84063425;  Mohammad Sajjad is a Professor of History at AMU who tweets @sajjadhist.

The post Alarming decline in quality of research & teaching in Indian Universities appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Many epithets have been used to describe the regime in place at the centre in India since May 2014 and it is no gratification to hear India, always a proud and growing democracy being increasingly described by international institutes as only “partly free” (Freedom House) and a “partially free electoral autocracy.” (Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute). One of the most fundamental and unique aspects of the Indian freedom movement that included within its scope vastly diverse but committed groups and ideologies who saw the exploitation of colonial rule, was the clear articulation for a “one person one vote” system, universal adult franchise.

Dr BR Ambedkar’s articulations before the Southborough Committee (2019) followed by the Motilal Nehru Report (1928) and the resultant Karachi Resolution of the Indian National Congress (1031) buffeted this clearly by ensuring that this – universal adult franchise with  no ifs and buts – became a non-negotiable part of the citizenship project. Not only did this ensure the inclusion of the most marginalised castes, genders and other sections in the Indian decision making process, it also compelled political forces to formulate policies geared to the largest common good. Ambedkar’s articulations was clear when he was categorical that a democratic government was inseparable from the right to vote, and it was voting that would prove to be (one of) the harbinger(s) of political education. India moved from a restrictive 15 per cent of Indians having (limited) voting rights to universal adult franchise, driven by the transformative impetus of the national movement and the ideals of equality and non-discrimination that it threw up.

The world’s largest democracy, India, therefore beat the oldest, the United States of America (USA) when it came to inclusive enfranchisement beyond qualifications. The USA, reeling under the ignominious Jim Crow laws[1] that indirectly disenfranchised racial minorities only gave all citizens the right to vote in 1964 after a Supreme Court’s ruling in Reynolds v/s Sims. [2]

In what seems like clear regression if not an outright counter-revolution, the party and ideological forces in places since May 2014, have in their manipulation and infiltration of institutions ensured that only a skewed version of democracy exists.[3] Post 2014 India has seen a reign of ‘undeclared emergency’ marked by normalisation of terror: a rule by police (law enforcement) raids or executive fiat; where terror and fear of targeted reprisal by the executive affects normative citizens voices and actions, the concentration of brute political power with the state and economic resources with chosen corporates combined with the steady decline of the federal structure of our Constitution has led to an erasure or erosion of democratic values. Crucial institutions of governance have been seen to crumble under this pressure.

On the last day of 2024 it is time to speak only and specifically of the Election Commission of India (ECI) one such that has clearly abdicated any and every semblance of transparency and accountability. If Articles 324-326 enjoin the ECI, a constitutional body to ensure free and fair elections, these articles of the Constitution as its Preamble underline that the ECI is answerable to the Indian people alone not the government in power.  Yet, election after election, especially those held after 2017 –when for the first time a standalone EVM machine was replaced by a three part system (VVPAT attached to a laptop and Symbol Loading Unit) making the EVS open to manipulation—elections have drawn sharp questions from a scattered but active citizenry. The use of hate speech, slur and vitriol by men and women in constitutional posts –including the prime minister and home minister—have gone unchecked despite election law demanding action from the ECI.[4] [5]

2024 saw these questions at their peak. From the general elections that took place in seven phases from April 19 to June 1 2024, to the Haryana and Jammu and Kashmir elections, and finally to the Maharashtra state assembly polls, the questions and anger towards the ECI has not stemmed nor stopped. Towards all these, the ECI has maintained an autocratic and obdurate silence.

Be it TN Seshan or James Lyndhoh in the past, not to mention, Yakub Qureishi these were all chief election commissioners that held governments to account. Today, the men in that position represent a stultified and manipulated Election Commission of India (ECI) that is both structurally and otherwise holding elections in an un-free and un-fair manner violating not just the Preamble of India but Articles 324-326 of the Indian Constitution. Be it in the manipulation of electoral rolls—bogus injection of voters or mass deletion of sections opposed to the BJP, or in the actual manipulation of the Electronic Voting System (EVS) through the vulnerable Symbol Loading Unit and the Microprocessors in the VVPAts. An external laptop is now connected to the Ballot Unit. Both have labile memories and ever since 2017 when the EVM stopped being a standalone unit the vulnerability of external malware changing/shifting and altering votes cast (from one to another candidate and party) began.  Citizens have asked whether it is this possibility of manipulation that is behind the reluctance of the ECI/system to allow the easy checking of the actual microprocessor through independent experts.

Besides these technicalities that are being raised by concerned and active citizens along with experts every day in the public domain, the manner and absence of any transparency in the ECI’s phasing of elections, its obdurate and blind inaction against hate speech during polls (especially when delivered by the prime minister, home minister and other functionaries), its refusal to make 17 C forms public, its flouting of election law and rules by not collecting Index Cards from Returning officers, its changing of data parameters and figures made public (*from 2019 Lok Sabha, 2024 Lok Sabha, Haryana 2024 Vidhan Sabha and 2024 Maharashtra Vidhan Sabha*) makes the actions even more opaque and open to suspicion. In July 2024 the Vote for Democracy Report compiled data and analysis into a report that raised serious issues and questions that remain, to date, unanswered. [6]

On July 19, Citizens served a notice to the ECI that has, to date received no response.[7] The utter and abject refusal of the ECI to answer key questions on the conduct of free and fair elections requires us as citizens to launch grassroots campaigns for a free and fair election, demanding that “Votes Cast be those Counted”, and the removal of the present Election Commissioner. The data collected by the ECI belongs to the Indian people and ECI must function in the interests of the people and not the regime in power.

Among the key aspects of the defaulting conduct by the ECI is its continuing failure to release all data of votes polled and counted, it’s shifting and changing parameters of data release (releasing percentages of voting that too not constituency but district wise) and its over-centralisation of the process, weakening of the Returning Officers role, powers and accountability. The fact that it is the BJP party that has emerged victorious in many if not all the elections as the process because more obscure has not helped matters.

In the latter part of 2023, in his Paper titled “Democratic Backsliding in the World’s Largest Democracy,” (2023) scholar Sabyasachi Das, formerly of the Ashoka University who studied the 2019 General Election to Parliament, says that electoral manipulation can take place at the stage of voter registration (registration manipulation) or at the time of voting or counting (turnout manipulation).  Both the recently conducted Maharashtra Vidhan Sabha elections (November 2024) and the upcoming Delhi state elections (2025) have been marked by serious allegations of mass deletions of legitimate voters and significant additions of possibly “bogus voters.” Between April-June 2024 and November 2024, ECI’s own figures show a 41 lakh increase in voters in the states. The opposition Congress has alleged that the seats that benefitted from this unusual and unaccounted increase benefitted the ruling combine. No coherent answer to the detailed representation has come from the ECI.

Das’ 2023 analysis showed how, at the time of voter registration, manipulation is also done in the form of targeted deletion of names of voters who are unlikely to vote for the incumbent party. At the time of voting, polling officers can strategically discriminate against registered voters, who are likely to vote against the ruling dispensation. Manipulation can take place at the time of counting of votes due to confusion created by variations in voter turnout data and percentages as well as weak or prejudiced monitoring by counting observers appointed by the ECI who are from the State Civil Service (SCS), as opposed to the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) especially those coming from beneficiary states who are pliable. Both these manipulations allegedly happened in the 2024 election also and ECI neither took preventive steps, nor acted upon the many complaints sent to them.

Other questions that are blowing in the wind, answered and unaddressed are:

• Several candidates who lost by narrow margins have complained of a 99 per cent battery in the EVM machine when counting started in certain booths that is unlikely given the battery usage for polling on polling day
• There have been no answers for mismatch in Form 17C and final results displayed by CU (even if one machine shows this anomaly) –Lok Sabha polls
• The ECI has no answers as to why it did not disclose the ABSOLUTE NUMBERS in the first 2 phases of Lok Sabha 2024
• There was no explanation given for unexplained and sudden power cuts during counting
• There was no explanation given for –in certain cases—EVMs being taken out of strong rooms
• There has been no explanation for ruling party candidates accessing mobile phones used by DEOs feeding the data in the ENCORE APP
• There has been absolutely no explanation or answer given for the high, absurdly illogical and abnormal rise in Voter Turn Out (VTR) percentage over two to more days before counting. (In earlier elections pre-2019 this percentage did not vary beyond 1-2 per cent). With the general elections 2024 and state elections this year variations have been from 6-11 per cent!
• There have been no answers foe the ECI’s inaction for its inaction against prime minister, Narendra Modi’s communal slurs during the Lok Sabha 2024 polls and his open fluting of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) and provisions of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951
• No answers for the sharp increase and addition of voters between GE 2024 and Maharashtra Elections 2024
• No answers for the time allowed to the Shinde-Fadnavis-Pawar Government to pay the instalments of freebies to the voters August to October 2024
• No answers for the valid questions raised by technical experts regarding vulnerability of VVPAT, due to its connection with the internet and its potentially dubious role in transferring spurious or manipulated votes to the Counting Unit (CUY)
• No answers as to whether the ECI is in independent control of the Source code in the EVS Unit and why this cannot be made public
• No answers as to why BJP’s members are on the Board of Directors of Government Companies viz. ECIL and BEL, which manufacture the EVMs

Rules that empower citizens and candidates

• Under Rule 32(b) of the Registration of Electors Rules (RER), 1960, the authenticated printed copy of the electoral roll is available at the District Election Officer, on a permanent basis.
• As per Rule 31(e) of the RER, 1960, all the related papers which led to the revision of the electoral rolls viz. enumeration pads, copies of the roll used for house-to house verification, manuscripts prepared on the basis thereof, claims and objections and applications for correction of entries and transposition of entries (Forms 6, 6A, 7, 8 and 8A), and all papers connected with their disposal, shall be retained for at least three years after next revision of electoral rolls.
• As per the Rule 33, the Electoral Rolls and connected papers, as mentioned above, are open for inspection for any person, on payment of the stipulated fee. These rules are not amended and can be used to verify the issues in question.

For India and Indians to celebrate our democracy, we must insist that these questions are answered, that the Election Commission of India bows to the questions raised by the We the People of India. If a weak and confused Opposition flounders, citizens and independent media need to carry the flag. Of Resistance and Accountability.

Happy New Year. Welcome 2025.

[1] The Jim Crow laws were a body of discriminatory legislation, state and local laws introduced in the Southern United States in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries that enforced racial segregation. ‘Jim Crow’ is a perjorative term used for African Americans. The last of the Jim Crow laws were overturned in 1965.

[2] Before this, The Warren Court’s decisions on two previous landmark cases—Baker v/s Carr (1962) and Wesberry v Sanders (1964)—also played a fundamental role in establishing the nationwide “one man, one vote” electoral system

[3] While India experienced a political emergency declared by a previous Congress government between 1975-1977 that also snatched basic human rights, caused disappearances and ran interference with the higher judiciary, the elections declared by prime minister Indira Gandhi in 1977 were free and fair, sweeping her out of power.

[4] In its Report titled “Is the Indian EVM and VVPAT System Fit for Democratic Elections?” released in January, 2021 and submitted to ECI, Citizens Commission on Election (CCE) had said that EVM system does not provide provable guarantees against hacking, tampering and spurious vote injections and the VVPAT system as practiced does not allow the voter to verify the slip before the vote is cast and the absence of E2E verification would lead to voting and counting manipulation and had suggested remedial measures. ECI did not bother to respond.[https://constitutionalconduct.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/citizens-commission-on-elections-vol.-i.pdf].

[5] In August/September 2023, civil society submitted a Memorandum to ECI signed by about 10,000 voters making a specific demand: “The VVPAT system should be re-calibrated to be fully voter-verifiable. A voter should be able to get the VVPAT slip in her hand and cast it in a chip-free ballot box for the vote to be valid. These VVPAT slips should be fully counted first for all constituencies before the results are declared.” [https://www.change.org/p/ecisveep-eci-must-implement-its-constitutional-mandate-to-conduct-free-and-fair-election]. ECI did not even acknowledged this Memorandum leave alone acting upon it.

[6] The report was made public and can be viewed and accessed here:
https://votefordemocracy.org.in/

[7] The Notice served to the ECI may be read here https://votefordemocracy.org.in/

The post Is India’s unique experiment on people’s democracy with the right to universal franchise being lampooned by a compliant Election Commission? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to police investigations, local NCP leader Vishnu Chate had demanded ₹2 crore from the energy company, threatening to disrupt its operations. When Deshmukh intervened to protect the company, he was targeted. Reports indicate that he was forcibly dragged into an SUV in broad daylight, assaulted for hours, and his lifeless body was later dumped on a road near his village.

Chate and three others have been arrested in connection with the crime. However, one of the key accused, Walmik Karad, an alleged close associate of NCP minister Dhananjay Munde, remains at large. This has intensified public outrage, with calls for Munde’s resignation and Karad’s immediate arrest. His daughter, Vaibhavi Deshmukh, made a heartfelt appeal for justice, stating, “My father gave his life trying to save someone from the Dalit community. He stood for justice, and now we demand the same for him.”

December 28, 2024: The Aakrosh morcha

The murder and subsequent protest have exposed fault lines within Maharashtra’s political landscape. NCP (Sharad Pawar faction) president Sharad Pawar and Congress leader Rahul Gandhi previously visited Deshmukh’s family, expressing solidarity. Gandhi linked the case to a larger pattern of threats to constitutional values. Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Uddhav Thackeray announced plans to visit Beed and Parbhani in early January to meet the families of both Deshmukh and another victim, Somnath Suryavanshi.

On December 28, the “Aakrosh Morcha” (March of Anger) in Beed brought together thousands of people, including legislators from both the ruling MahaYuti alliance and the opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi. The protest was a rare show of unity among political rivals, alongside activists, social leaders, and members of the Maratha community, all demanding justice for Deshmukh and his family.

Prominent figures at the rally included Maratha quota activist Manoj Jarange-Patil, Chhatrapati Sambhaji Raje, BJP MLAs Suresh Dhas and Abhimanyu Pawar, NCP MLAs Prakash Solanke and Sandeep Kshirsagar, and NCP (Sharad Pawar faction) leader Jitendra Awhad. Anti-corruption activist Anjali Damania and social activist Dr. Jyoti Mete also joined the protest.

During the rally, Deshmukh’s daughter, Vaibhavi, made an emotional plea, saying, “My father gave his life for justice. He was doing social work and stood for the rights of the people. Now, we demand the same justice for him. Please ensure no one meets a similar fate.”

The murder has led to intense political scrutiny, with accusations of corruption and complicity being levelled against senior politicians. As per multiple media reports, speakers at the protest sharply criticised the government’s alleged inaction. BJP MLA Abhimanyu Pawar declared, “If the accused are not arrested soon, these protests will spread across Maharashtra. Justice cannot wait.” NCP MLA Prakash Solanke demanded that Munde step down, asserting, “To ensure an impartial investigation, Munde must resign until the accused are convicted.”

The protest also saw serious allegations against Munde, who is under scrutiny for his alleged links to the crime. BJP MLA Suresh Dhas accused Munde of winning the Parli Assembly seat using fraudulent means, including bogus votes. Dhas also alleged that Munde’s associate, Karad, controlled key administrative decisions in Beed in exchange for bribes. “Files were cleared only after payments of ₹40 lakh, with ₹9 lakh going directly to Karad,” he claimed. In response, Maharashtra BJP chief Chandrashekhar Bawankule cautioned against public statements that could hinder the investigation, urging Dhas to share evidence directly with Chief Minister Fadnavis.

In addition to this, BJP MLA Suresh Dhas alleged that Karad and his “Akka-boss” (a veiled reference to Munde) are linked to a ₹900-crore money laundering operation tied to the Mahadev online betting scandal. This amount, reportedly transferred from Beed, has connections extending as far as Malaysia. Dhas demanded a thorough investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), highlighting the government’s double standards in investigating financial crimes.

Meanwhile, the proliferation of gun licences in Beed has also drawn scrutiny. Social activist Anjali Damania pointed out that Beed has issued 1,222 gun permits, far exceeding neighbouring districts like Parbhani, which has only 32. Damania has called for an investigation into how so many licences were approved and whether political recommendations played a role in enabling the district’s alarming weaponisation.

Chhatrapati Sambhaji Raje expressed deep concern about the deteriorating law and order in Beed. “The district has been in the grip of criminals for years. The government must act decisively to restore justice,” he said. Sambhaji Raje also criticised the district administration for issuing over 1,200 gun licences, alleging that even the minister flaunted weapons in public.

As per the Hindustan Times, Maratha quota activist Manoj Jarange-Patil warned of state-wide agitation if the government failed to act decisively. “If those shielding the accused are not exposed, the Maratha community will not remain silent. The government must ensure justice, no matter how powerful the accused are,” he said.

December 27, 2024: Protest in Latur

On Friday, December 27, 2024, thousands gathered in Latur to demand justice for the brutal murder. The demonstration, fuelled by public outrage and organised by the Sakal Maratha Samaj, underscored mounting pressure on the ruling Mahayuti government to act against those responsible for the crime, including Karad. Protesters alleged that Karad played a key role in orchestrating the murder.

The march commenced at Sane Guruji Vidyalaya and proceeded to the tehsildar’s office, where a memorandum listing key demands was submitted to local authorities. These demands included the swift arrest of all accused individuals, justice for Deshmukh’s grieving family, and the resignation of Minister Munde, whose links to Karad have drawn intense scrutiny. The rally, which stretched over a kilometre, drew people from various walks of life, all united in their call for action against what they saw as a failure of law enforcement.

Santosh Deshmukh’s teenage daughter, Vaibhavi, became a focal point of the said protest, delivering an emotional plea to the crowd. Fighting back tears, she thanked the participants for their support and urged them to stand by her family in their pursuit of justice. “You all know what happened to my father. He was brutally murdered. I ask you to remain with us and ensure justice is done,” she said, her voice resonating with the pain and determination shared by the crowd.

Addressing the gathering, Vaibhavi shared the immense loss and anguish her family has endured since her father’s death. “The pain of losing him is unbearable. My father was a man of principles who always stood for justice. We will not rest until those who did this to him are held accountable. I consider all of you part of our family now, and together, we must ensure this never happens to anyone again,” she declared, her words drawing applause and chants of solidarity.

The protesters criticised the slow pace of the investigation and the alleged shielding of powerful individuals involved in the case. They also called for systemic reforms to prevent such crimes in the future, urging the government to demonstrate its commitment to justice. The protest served as a prelude to an even larger demonstration planned in Beed, reflecting the growing anger among the public over the state’s failure to provide security and justice for its citizens.

Beed’s crime wave and Santosh Deshmukh’s murder

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut has launched a scathing attack on Maharashtra Chief Minister and Home Minister Devendra Fadnavis over the deteriorating law-and-order situation in Beed district, which has witnessed 38 murders in 2024 alone. Talking to the media, Raut accused Fadnavis of failing in his duties as Home Minister, suggesting he was protecting influential figures connected to the crime. Specifically, Raut pointed to Walmik Karad as the alleged mastermind behind Deshmukh’s murder. Despite being named in an extortion case linked to the incident, Karad has not been apprehended, fuelling allegations of political interference. “If the public believes the real culprit is being shielded, it tarnishes the reputation of the Home Minister,” Raut declared, adding that such a scenario is “unlikely to happen without political blessings.”

Raut also criticised the proliferation of firearms in Beed, where young men are reportedly seen flaunting weapons and uploading videos to intimidate locals. “What kind of generation are we building? Guns and pistols are used for extortion and killings, all under the patronage of powerful leaders,” he remarked, as per the Indian Express.

Ministers have rallied against Fadnavis, accusing him of incompetence and a failure to deliver justice for Deshmukh’s grieving family. BJP MLA Suresh Das accused Munde and his associate Walmik Karad of illegally acquiring land belonging to the Banjara tribal community under the guise of charitable trust development.

Brief background of the case

Deshmukh, a well-respected sarpanch who served for 15 years, was abducted in broad daylight on December 9, 2024. Witnesses reported that he was forced into a black Scorpio vehicle and tortured for three hours before succumbing to severe injuries. His body was discarded near his village, with a post-mortem revealing death from haemorrhage and shock due to multiple injuries. Deshmukh, survived by his elderly parents, wife, and two children aged 13 and 17, had recently opposed an extortion racket allegedly operated by local NCP leaders. His brother, Dhananjay, claimed that the perpetrators sought to silence Deshmukh to set an example. He stated that his brother was killed for attempting to stop the illegal extortion business the accused were running.

As per a report of the Indian Express from their visit to the village where the incident took place, a pandal had been set up beside a local temple, where Deshmukh’s brother, Dhananjay, sat on the ground, receiving visitors who came to offer condolences. A garlanded photo of Deshmukh rested on a table with a Marathi inscription reading: “Nyay pahije” (justice is needed), and another poster in the village boldly stated, “Aamcha rajala nyay pahije” (justice for our king). Villagers spoke of Deshmukh’s unwavering commitment to his community. Mihi More, a 70-year-old resident, described him as someone who helped anyone in need without caring about the benefits of his position as sarpanch. His sole focus, she said, was the development of the village, which is why he held the post for 15 years.

Dhananjay, Deshmukh’s brother, firmly believes that the murder was orchestrated because Deshmukh had attempted to stop an extortion racket being run by the accused. “They wanted to set an example through my brother,” he said. Meanwhile, Deshmukh’s elder daughter, Vaibhavi, who is in class 12, voiced her demand for swift justice and announced her participation in an all-party protest planned in Beed.

The case, initially handled by a Special Investigation Team (SIT), has now been transferred to the Maharashtra State CID. Chief Minister Fadnavis has ordered the confiscation of properties belonging to the accused and the cancellation of gun licences for those found flaunting weapons in public. He emphasised that no political connections would protect the perpetrators.

Meanwhile, the police have arrested four individuals, including Vishnu Chate, but Karad’s continued evasion of law enforcement has fuelled public outrage. The investigation has now been handed over to the Maharashtra State CID to ensure a thorough and impartial probe. Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis assured the legislature that no political affiliations would shield the culprits, promising swift and decisive action.

This incident has become a flashpoint in Maharashtra, exposing cracks in the political and judicial systems while rallying citizens and leaders alike in a collective demand for justice. The growing unrest underscores the public’s frustration with perceived inaction and impunity for those in positions of power. This high-profile case, also with layers of caste-based violence, continues to resonate across Maharashtra, with demands for accountability, an impartial probe, and systemic reforms to prevent such tragedies in the future. For the people of Beed, Santosh Deshmukh’s murder is not just a crime but a symbol of the fight against corruption, extortion, and impunity.

CM Fadnavis’s response amidst mounting pressure

Under mounting pressure, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis assured the assembly that Karad, already booked under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA), would face murder charges if evidence supports his involvement. Fadnavis also transferred the Beed superintendent of police, acknowledging lapses in handling the case.

Minister Munde, facing growing scrutiny, has denied involvement and labelled the accusations as a politically motivated campaign to tarnish his image. Speaking to reporters, he reiterated his demand for the accused to be “hanged to death” and accused the media of conducting a trial aimed at politically “finishing him off.” Despite his denials, the controversy has intensified, with opposition leaders and activists questioning his alleged role in shielding Karad and others implicated in the extortion racket. Notably, Karad holds influential positions in Beed, serving as a group leader in Parli Nagar Parishad, president of the Ladki Bahin Yojana, and as a member of the Beed district planning committee. Both Karad and Chate had been named in an extortion FIR filed just days before Deshmukh’s murder.

Related:

Special Report: ‘They came like monkeys; they came like Nazis.’ Ambedkari Bastis in Parbhani face the traumas of police brutality

State-sanctioned brutality? Dalit communities targeted in Parbhani “combing operations”, women, children abused

Protests rage in Parbhani after Dalit activist dies in custody, allegations of police torture

The post Gruesome murder of Sarpanch Santosh Deshmukh in Beed triggers state-wide protests, political fallout in the ruling government, and rampant calls for justice appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Associated since 1977 with the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) —he was national president in the past– Ravi Kiran Jain was also an erudite legal scholar who wrote regularly for Communalism Combat and Sabrangindia. Committed to a Lohiaite ideology, Ravi Kiran Jain was straightforward, eschewing anyone addressing him as ‘Vakil Sahab’, preferring the direct use of his name, recalls Aflatoon Desai from Varanasi, a long-time associate and founder of the Samajwadi Jan Parishad who mourned the loss of a close associate. Stalwarts like Kishan Patnaik and Surendra Mohan found their home at Ravi Kiran Jain’s residence whenever they visited Allahabad.

In the battle to save Gandhi Vidya Sansthan (Gandhian Institute) in Rajghat, Varanasi –that was cruelly bull-dozed by the orders of the union and state governments’ double engine sarkar in 2023—in court or as an advisor, Ravi Kiran Jain stood by the institute and its employees and stake holders. Jai Prakash Narain had established the Gandhi Vidya Sansthan. Recalling his words, Dr Muniza Khan, former Registrar, who valiantly fought to save the Gandhi Vidya Sansthan after authoritarian forces eyed its violent takeover since 2008, recalls, “I remember his words when he said this government is targeting a rare and extensive library in Uttar Pradeh’s Purvanchal region. Libraries such as these are the sites for reflection and writing, like how and when E.F. Schumacher wrote Small is Beautiful seated in a library like this.” Aware of the crude and brute targeting of the institute by the government– shutting it down without payment of dues to its employees—Jain gave freely of his talent and advocacy in the battle led by erstwhile employees, recalls Khan. “All those associated with the Institute remember him fondly with respect and salute him at his passing,” she told Sabrangindia.

Teesta Setalvad, secretary of Citizens for Justice and Peace paid this tribute on X:

हम सबके रहनुमा रविकिरण जैन साहब
नहीं रहे Iजैन साहब जिंदाबाद Iअभी कुछ देर पहले नाज़रेथ अस्पताल में उन्होंने अंतिम सांस ली I Indian #HumanRights
Movement hs lost a Mentor, Scholar,Advocate:Ravi Kiran Jain Sahab,Allahabad!Saluts Sir!Rest in Power! @cjpindia #Constitution@PUCLindia pic.twitter.com/uo9beSRLm6

— Teesta Setalvad (@TeestaSetalvad) December 30, 2024

Related:

Serious times, grave challenges: India 2023

Senior Advocate and PUCL National President Ravi Kiran Jain writes open letter to the Bar

The post Ravi Kiran Jain, advocate, human rights practitioner doyen of the human rights movement passes away appeared first on SabrangIndia.

History of the Hindu Code Bill

Talks about a Hindu Code Bill had emerged since the 1920s itself. The AIWC (All India Women’s Conference) demanded a revision of the Hindu Code to overcome deficits in women’s rights. This was the crucial difference between the reforms of the 19th century which were piloted from above and these, which were reforms actively sought by the women themselves. The AIWC declared a Women’s Legal Disabilities Day in 1934 at the instance of Renuka Ray. The Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act was then tabled by its author G.V. Deshmukh in the Central Legislature.

The same year, the Shariat Application Bill tabled by H.M. Abdullah was passed which gave the daughter a share in property. However, in both the Hindu and Muslim case agricultural land was exempted from the application of the respective bills. This was because agricultural property fell under the ‘jurisdiction of provincial legislation’ while these two Acts of 1937 were Central legislations. (Chitra Sinha, Debating Patriarchy:The Hindu Code Bill Controversy in India 1941–1956, 2012). Why was this the case? Probably, the vote-influencing elite class couldn’t be touched or angered!

However, the demand for codification of Hindu personal law driven by Hindu women did gain legitimacy with the 1937 “Deshmukh Act.” A Hindu Law Committee was appointed on January 25, 1941 headed by B.N. Rao (who went on to become the constitutional advisor of the Constitution’s drafting committee). Other members were- Shri Dwarakanath Mitter, ex-Judge of the Calcutta High Court, Shri R. Gharpure, Principal, Law College, Poona and Rajratna Vasudev Vinayak Joshi, a lawyer from Baroda. The committee appreciated the role of Women’s Associations across the country. The committee suggested two measures in its final report submitted in June 1941. These were largely related to an enlargement of the terms of reference and the need for provincial legislative changes to apply to the Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act in agricultural landed property.

With these suggestions in mind two draft bills on the law of marriage and inheritance were prepared and presented before a joint committee of both the houses. The two bills together came to be known as the draft Hindu Code Bill and were presented before the Legislature to be debated in 1943-44. The Committee was invoked again and began working from 1945 onwards. Dwarkanath Mitter presented a dissenting opinion stating that of the total number of people interviewed for the bill, only 33.4% supported the codification drive [the percentage being even smaller in the “Hindu Heartland” (coined by Gyanesh Kudasia)]. The figures are from the Report of the Hindu Law Committee, 1947.

Maharashtra offered the greatest support in favour of the Code Bill. Dharma Nirnay Mandal (formed at Lonavala in 1936) which was at the forefront went to many places in Maharashtra raising awareness on the codification issue. It brought out several publications including Why Hindu Code, co-authored by T.K. Tope and H.S. Ursekar. The Hindu Code Bill was thereafter referred to the Select Committee in April 1948. The ball was now in Ambedkar’s court.

Views of Ambedkar and Nehru on the Bill

Ambedkar believed the Code Bill to be a vehicle towards reforming Hindu society. He therefore considered the Hindu Code Bill as historic as the Constitution making process. He spoke of the aims and objectives of the bill in the simplest of terms to make it accessible to all. He stated that – “in order to reduce the confusions surrounding Hindu laws and also to make these more equitable and relevant to contemporary Indian society, the Bill seeks to codify the law relating to certain aspects covering marriage, property, succession etc.”

With these essential points in mind, let us now move to see the people who opposed the Bill who have been grouped into categories by Reba Som in her article ‘Jawaharlal Nehru And The Hindu Code: A Victory Of Symbol Over Substance?’(Modern Asian Studies, February 1994).  We shall simultaneously accentuate the contradictions and paradoxes of these people on the issue which exposes their hesitance for reforms and their unwavering commitment to not want women being treated at par with men. These were-

One. Those stalwarts within the Congress who had been arrayed against the likes of Nehru from 1930s onwards. These were represented by Rajendra Prasad who had been unhappy over the issue since the start. Prasad believed that the progressive idea of introducing basic changes in personal law was only the view of a microscopic minority and its imposition on the Hindu community as a whole would have disastrous consequences. When frustrated by Prasad and others in the assembly over the issue of the bill, Nehru told them that the passing of the bill had become a matter of prestige for him. Prasad had drafted a letter in response to this on which he consulted (luckily for him), Vallabhbhai Patel before sending it. Patel counselled him on the benefits of remaining quiet as this would brighten his chances of being elected the first President of India. Prasad thus, kept quiet and got elected the first President. However, once he assumed this constitutional role, his obduracy over the bill continued, sometimes citing procedural lapses on Nehru’s part (for which there was no provision but only convention) and sometimes by terming the efforts at getting the bill passed as anti-democratic. He in fact, even threatened to withhold Presidential assent to the Bill even if it was passed from both the houses. Surprisingly, Prasad was the President when, later, in five parts the Hindu Code Bill was largely passed by Indian Parliament.

Along with the likes of Prasad were Hindu fundamentalists within the Congress like the Deputy Speaker, Ananthasayanam Aiyyangar who was convinced of the soundness of polygamy. This group never made an earnest effort to carry through the reformist agenda Congress propagated. Some among those who were not so opposed to the contents of the Bill were at sixes and sevens because of the fact that the Bill was piloted by Ambedkar, an untouchable. Pattabhi Sitaramayya, a liberal member of the Congress too criticised Ambedkar for his “professional, pedagogic and pontifical attitudes” which will “only alienate attitudes that have almost been reconciled,” records Reba Som.

Two. The Hindu Mahasabha with people like N.C. Chatterjee and Shyama Prasad Mukherjee who opposed the Bill based on the fact that it threatened the very foundation of Hindu religion. The Mahasabha tried to argue that the “Hindu” Code Bill was a communal legislation (only for the Hindus) and instead that a Uniform Civil Code should be introduced in its place. Thus, it becomes clear that it was not out of a progressive reformist zeal that the Mahasabha wanted a Uniform Civil Code but only so that the state power interferes in Muslim affairs as well. Mukherjee argued that the Hindu Code be made optional, an argument similar to what Jinnah made during the passage of the Shariat Application Bill 1937. Mukherjee had been in Nehru’s cabinet and wholeheartedly supported the Code which he was now opposing and therefore, Ambedkar dismissed his remarks as non-worthy of consideration.

Within this category let us add a subcategory of Hindu reactionaries outside the Parliament represented by the RSS. In March 1949 the All-India Anti-Hindu-Code Bill Committee with Swami Karpatriji Maharaj at its head was formed which opposed the Constituent Assembly’s interference in personal laws of Hindus based on Dharma Shastras. (Ramchandra Guha, India after Gandhi, 2008) Alongside this Committee was also a battery of lawyers from various Bar Councils across the country who absolutely condemned the Code Bill. The Committee held several hundred meetings throughout the country opposing the Bill. The All India Hindu Code Bill Virodha Samiti even published a book, Hindu Code Bill: Praman Ki Kasauti Par in Hindi by Swami Karpatriji Maharaj, condemning the government propaganda about the Bill and presenting the Bill in complete opposition to the ideology of Sanatan Dharma. (Chitra Sinha, 2012) This Committee even marched on to the Parliament raising derogatory slogans like “Down with the Code Bill” and “May Nehru Perish.”

Three. The Sikh group represented by men like Sardar Mann and Sardar Hukum Singh inside the Parliament and Master Tara Singh outside it, who resented being clubbed with the Hindus in the broad framework of reform. Tara Singh denounced the introduction of the Hindu Code Bill in the Parliament. This can be found dated 13th December in G. Parthasarathi edited Letters to Chief Ministers Vol.2 1950-1952. Interestingly, after Ambedkar had resigned and not much alteration had been made to the Bill, Sardar Hukum Singh stated that the Bill could now be passed as the objectionable parts had been removed.

Four. Muslims represented by Naziruddin Ahmad from Bengal who argued that the Hindu Code Bill was a bid to end the Mitakshara joint family. This would lead to division of families and property issues. The most baffling part is that despite hailing from Bengal which was the epicentre of Dayabhaga School, Naziruddin Ahmad chose to speak about Mitakshara. Even more fascinating is the fact that provincialism, evoked by Jinnah during the debate on Shariat Application Bill 1937, was ensured among Bengali legislators by the very same Naziruddin Ahmad. Of the scant information on him over the Internet, his appointment as the chief whip by A.K. Fazlul Haq, then Bengal chief minister is surely significant. The same provincialism is found wanting in Naziruddin Ahmad while speaking on the Hindu Code Bill. When he remarked that Hindu families would suffer the same fate as Muslims, he was given a shut up call by Renuka Ray who asked why he was not ready to let the Hindus enjoy the same advantages that the Muslim society enjoys.

Six. Women Parliamentarians, largely the ones who were consistent in their approach and most fully committed to get the Code Bill passed. Even their criticism, expressed through Sucheta Kriplani and Hansa Mehta, was sound and logical based on the fact that the reforms did not go as far as they should have and that they were half-hearted.

Ambedkar’s resignation and his assessment of Nehru

Correspondence between Ambedkar and Nehru on the topic brings out the differences in views as well as approach to the Hindu Code Bill. On August 10, 1951, Ambedkar wrote to Nehru-

“My health is causing a great deal of anxiety to me and to my doctors. They have been pressing that I must allow them a longer period of about a month for continuous treatment and that such treatment cannot now be postponed without giving rise to further complications. I am most anxious that the Hindu Code Bill should be disposed of before I put myself in the hands of my doctors. I would, therefore, like to give the Hindu Code Bill a higher priority by taking it up for debate and consideration on August 16 and finish the matter of by September 1, if the opponents do not practice obstructive tactics. You know I attach the greatest importance to this measure and would be prepared to undergo any strain on my health to get the Bill through.” (Selected Writings of Ambedkar)

Nehru however, knew that the conservatives were too many and quite vehement in their opposition to the Hindu Code Bill. There was now no Patel to ensure the whip in support of the measure. However, Ambedkar did not pay attention to this view and he felt extremely frustrated that Nehru wasn’t able to get the Bill passed.  The fact remains that with the active support of the then President, many members including the chief whip were all firm in their disapproval of the Hindu Code Bill. Nehru could not hurry it through since elections were also round the corner. As Ambedkar sarcastically put it, ‘I have never seen a case of chief whip so disloyal to the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister so loyal to a disloyal whip.’(Reba Som, 1994) Ambedkar was, however, convinced of Nehru’s sincerity, it was only his lack of determination that he criticised.

There were a few more issues (not connected to Nehru directly) over which he resigned. Nehru’s sincerity is reflected in a letter he wrote to the Chief Ministers on October 4, 1951. He stated- “it was obviously a controversial measure and it was not our desire to suppress debate or even to treat this as a strictly party measure necessitating a Whip.” He cites this as the reason for failure to get even parts of the Bill through. He goes on to say, “I have no doubt that a considerable majority in Parliament desired the passage of this bill with minor alterations. But that majority was helpless before a determined minority and we had to confess defeat.  For the moment at least I do not think, however, that all this time on the Hindu code bill has been wasted. It has kept this important subject before the public and made people think about it. It had made it one of the major issues in India and I have little doubt that it will have to be taken up and passed sometime or the other. For my part I am convinced that progress in India must be on all fronts- political, economic and social. Unless this happens we shall get held up.” 

Nehru’s reaction to Ambedkar’s resignation

Frustrated and flabbergasted over the stoicism of conservative elements within the Congress, Dr. Ambedkar rendered his resignation on September 25, 1951. On his resignation, Nehru spoke in the Parliament with a sense of loss. “It is a matter of regret for me, if for no other reason, for the fact that an old colleague should part company in the way he has done today.”

Moreover, Nehru wrote to Ambedkar on September 27, 1951 with mixed feelings of appreciation for Ambedkar’s efforts and determination on his part to get the Bill through sooner or later. He wrote,- “I can quite understand your great disappointment at the fact that the Hindu Code Bill could not be passed in this session and that even the marriage and divorce part of it had ultimately to be postponed. I know very well how hard you have laboured at it and how keenly you have felt about it.” Nehru goes on to state that “I tried my utmost, but the fates and the rules of Parliament were against us.” He promised to keep fighting stoutly, “personally, I shall not give up this fight because I think it is intimately connected with any progress on any front that we desire to make.” 

Conclusion

Eventually, when the Hindu Code Bill was passed in various parts in 1956, Nehru offered his tribute to Ambedkar. He stated that Ambedkar would be remembered above all ‘as a symbol of the revolt against all the oppressive features of Hindu society’. But he “will be remembered also for the great interest he took and the trouble he took over the question of Hindu law reform. I am happy that he saw that reform in a very large measure carried out, perhaps not in the form of that monumental tome that he had himself drafted, but in separate bits.” (Ramchandra Guha, 2008)

The glowing tribute by Nehru to Ambedkar and Ambedkar’s admission of Nehru’s sincerity of efforts says it all. It was not these two but rather “the orthodox of all religions united” (from the title of Jawaharlal Nehru’s Essay) who were pitted against them on the issue of Hindu Code Bill. What’s more concerning is the remark heard from certain quarters of the Parliament after the passage of the Hindu Code Bill. During 1955 and 1956, when the Hindu Code Bill was enacted in fragments, Ambedkar’s absence was cited as a reason for the smooth passage of the Bill. (Chitra Sinha, 2012) Throughout the trajectory of the Hindu Code Bill, Nehru and Ambedkar remained consistent in pushing for reforms. Therefore, this struggle for the Hindu Code Bill and those who opposed it and actually disrespected Ambedkar should be clearly identified. Lest History Forget!

(The author is a PhD Candidate at the department of history, AMU)

[1] Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh formed in 1925

Related:

Dr BR Ambedkar: How the ongoing tussle between the BJP and Congress is both limited & superficial

What Nehru Flagged as ‘Most Dangerous’ Modi Now Invokes for Votes

Nehru’s Prescient Words During 1st General Elections Resonate Today

Iconoclast: Path breaking biography of BR Ambedkar projects his human essence

The post A principled PM, a determined law minister: Nehru, Ambedkar & Opposition in Indian Politics appeared first on SabrangIndia.