Mukul Goel was removed from his post as Uttar Pradesh Director General of Police (DGP), and appointed as the Director General Civil Defence by Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on May 11, 2022, reported Hindustan Times.

As per news reports, Goel was removed for allegedly ‘neglecting work’ and not taking interest in departmental duties. Official records say that authorities were unhappy with the 1987-batch IPS officer’s repeated absence in departmental meetings. However, there is speculation that Goel was sacked for trying to follow due procedure and defying government pressure to do otherwise.

According to Indian Express, Goel inspected Lucknow’s Hazratganj police station in September, 2021 and called for the removal of the station in-charge for poor upkeep of records and lack of hygiene. However, the officer was not removed from duty.

The Hindustan Times reported that Goel was absent from a recent press briefing on important government decisions regarding law and order. Additional Director General (Law and Order) Prashant Kumar, who has now been given temporary additional charge of the DGP’s responsibilities, addressed media persons with Additional Chief Secretary Awanish Kumar Awasthi. The newspaper said that Goel wasn’t called for team meetings and departmental presentations of the home department like that.

In 2007, Goel was among several other IPS officers suspended by the then Mayawati-led government for alleged irregularities in police recruitment. He was reinstated and made ADG Law and Order during the Akhilesh Yadav-led government. This was around the same time that the Muzaffarnagar riots broke out in 2013. Having served as the DGP for 11 months and ADG Border Security Force prior to that, Goel will retire in February 2024.

Likely candidates to replace Goel are Rajendra Pal Singh (DG, Police Training); R K Vishwakarma (DG, UP Police Recruitment & Promotion Board); Devendra Singh Chauhan (DG, Intelligence); Anand Kumar (DG, Prison); and Anil Agrawal (on Central deputation), said the Indian Express.

Related:

This is something spoiling the atmosphere: SC in Dharm Sansad case
Khambat: Muslim women take to the streets to protest continued oppression of the community
UP: Village head threatens Scheduled Caste community with ₹5,000 fine and 50 kicks!
UP: Four reports of cops allegedly committing crimes against women!

The post Mukul Goel removed as UP DGP for allegedly ‘neglecting work’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Hundreds of eminent social activists, writers, filmmakers, defence veterans, retired civil servants, journalists, lawyers, and concerned citizens are raising their voices together against the government’s Rs 1,200 crore proposal to alter the Sabarmati Ashram, one of the most enduring examples of Gandhi’s legacy. According to an Indian Express news report, Gujarat’s authorities have already begun the process of clearing residential properties within Ahmedabad’s Sabarmati Ashram premises. This is being done to begin the Project Gandhi Ashram Memorial and Precinct Development, which according to the report will “develop a world class memorial as part of a project planned under.” The government reportedly wants to make it a “world-class” tourist destination and has earmarked Rs 1,200 crore for the project.

Sabarmati Ashram, is well known the world over as the place where Mahatma Gandhi lived from 1917 to 1930. Gandhi led the Dandi March from the Ashram and pledged not to return until India gained Independence. He disbanded the Ashram in 1933, and after Independence Gandhi’s associates and followers formed Sabarmati Ashram Preservation and Memorial Trust to protect the buildings and archival possessions of the Ashram for posterity. The signatories to the letter opposing the ‘redevelopment’ recalled that “there were five more trusts under the Ashram. They conduct their activities independently. Sabarmati Ashram Preservation and Memorial Trust looks after the buildings including Hriday Kunj—the residence of Gandhi and Kasturba.”

They highlighted the “simplicity and sanctity” of Hriday Kunj that “greets thousands of visitors coming from all parts of the world daily in truly Gandhian fashion, without frisking or security check or sight of armed persons. The visitors also feel touched and inspired by the aesthetics, openness, and sanctity of the place. The museum building designed in the early 1960s by Charles Correa reflects all the above-mentioned values and comes across as an integral part of the premises. Anyone passing by the adjoining road can drop in for a brief visit to Hriday Kunj or can have a glimpse of the museum as per convenience and available time.”

According to the concerned citizens and activists, the government’s proposed project that wants to make the ashram “a ‘world-class’ tourist destination spread over 54 acres” has planned for new museums, an amphitheater, VIP lounge, shops, food court among other things. This they say “is in keeping with the present government’s strategy to appropriate and commercialize all Gandhian institutions in the country” adding that the “worst example of this can be seen in Sevagram.” They state that even more “frightening” is the government move to “control” all Gandhian archives. “As Mahatma Gandhi was murdered by elements whose ideology still inspires some of those in power in India, this danger cannot be overlooked,” they write in the public statement jointly signed to oppose any such ‘redevelopment’ plans.

The proposed plan “severely compromises and trivializes the sanctity and importance of the present-day Ashram, mainly Hriday Kunj, surrounding buildings, and the museum,” they state. There will also be other problems as “access to Hriday Kunj and the present Museum will be blocked as the road passing by it will be closed. The new entrance will have at least a VIP lounge and a new museum before Hriday Kunj and the current museum.”  

The Sabarmati Ashram has lakhs of visitors each year and “has never needed a ‘world-class’ makeover to attract tourists” as the Gandhian “authenticity and simplicity of the place has been enough.” The concerted citizens minced no words and stated that “the proposed plan at best envisions a ‘Gandhi theme park’ and at worst ‘a second assassination’” as “the most authentic monument of Gandhi and our freedom struggle will be lost forever to vanity and commercialization.” They write that public money must continue to be used for “the proper maintenance and upkeep of such institutions, in consultation with eminent Gandhians, historians and archivists from India and around the world”.

The statement may be read here: 

Related:

Twelfth of March: Gandhi and Grande
SC greenlights Central Vista project, decision split 2:1 

The post Prevent Government takeover of Gandhian Institutions: Activists appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the Vinod Dua Sedition matter, the Supreme Court has ruled that a citizen has a right to criticise or comment upon the measures undertaken by the Government and its functionaries, so long as he does not incite people to violence against the Government established by law or with the intention of creating public disorder.

Vinod Dua, who was booked for sedition for criticising the Central Government’s policy of an unplanned Covid-19 lockdown, was granted relief by the top court as it quashed the FIR against him.

The Supreme Court Bench of Justices UU Lalit and Vineet Saran referred to the landmark case of Kedarnath Singh vs State of Bihar (1962), and held that it is only when the words or expressions have “pernicious tendency or intention of creating public disorder or disturbance of law and order” that charges of sedition and public mischief of the Indian Penal Code must step in.

Under this established precedent, the court held that “every Journalist will be entitled to protection in terms of Kedar Nath Singh, as every prosecution under Sections 124A and 505 of the IPC must be in strict conformity with the scope and ambit of said Sections as explained in, and completely in tune with the law laid down in Kedar Nath Singh.”

The court reiterated that for offences of Sedition and public mischief, “only such activities which would be intended or have a tendency to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resort to violence – are rendered penal.”

The FIR registered at Police Station Kumarsain, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh alleged that Dua’s show made unfounded and bizarre allegations against the Prime Minister by stating that he used deaths and terror attacks to garner votes. The complainant said that Dua endorsed in his show that the government did not have enough testing facilities and had made false statements about the availability of the Personal Protective Kits (PPE).

The complainant, BJP leader Ajay Shyam, also claimed that his show could create panic amongst the public and disturb public peace by trying to spread false information. By making such false statements about inadequate facilities, it was alleged that Vinod is spreading fear amongst the people which will result in panic and people hoarding essentials which is absolutely unnecessary. It was also alleged that his show had caused the migrant labour exodus amid the lockdown.

The court noted the allegations and said that by the time Dua’s show was up and running on March 30, migrant workers in huge numbers had already started moving to their villages. “If the petitioner in his talk show uploaded on 30.03.2020, that is even before the matter was taken up by this Court, made certain assertions in his 5th and 6th statement, he would be within his rights to say that as a Journalist he was touching upon issues of great concern so that adequate attention could be bestowed to the prevailing problems”, asserted the court.

The court ruled that Dua was not spreading any false information and that “the situation was definitely alarming around 30.03.2020 and as a journalist if the petitioner showed some concern, could it be said that he committed offences as alleged.”

The court opined that Vinod Dua’s statements, in light of the principles emanating from the Kedar Nath Singh judgment and against the backdrop of the circumstances when they were made, can at best be termed as “expression of disapprobation of actions of the Government and its functionaries so that prevailing situation could be addressed quickly and efficiently”.  They were certainly not made with the intent to incite people or showed a tendency to create disorder or disturbance of public peace by resorting to violence.

Accordingly, the FIR pertaining to sedition and other Indian Penal Code charges of public nuisance and printing defamatory matter were quashed.

The judgment may be read here: 

Related:

SC quashes Sedition case against journalist Vinod Dua
SC mulls laying guidelines for application of Sedition law on journalists

The post Citizens have the right to criticise the Government without inciting violence: SC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“It has been clarified at various levels in Government time and again that till now no decision has been taken to create National Register of Indian citizen,” said the government in response to recommendations of the Parliamentary Standing Committee Report on the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) with respect to apprehensions surrounding the upcoming census, and the possibility of data collected for the National Population Register (NPR) being used instead to create a National Register of Indian Citizens (NRIC) along the lines of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam.

The government further submitted, “All individual-level information collected in Census are confidential. In Census, only aggregated data are released at various administrative levels. Like the earlier Censuses, wide publicity measures would be taken up for creating proper awareness among public so as to conduct and complete the Census 2021 successfully. Questionnaires for Census along with that of NPR have been tested at Pre-test conducted successfully across the country,” reported The Indian Express. 

The Committee headed by Congress Member of Parliament (MP) Anand Sharma, had in February 2020 raised these concerns even as demonstrations against CAA-NRC-NPR across the country. The Action Taken report was tabled in the Rajya Sabha on Tuesday. The protests came to an abrupt end due to the pandemic and the lockdown last year, but the concerns remained, especially with respect to information that will be gathered during the Census. In fact, it was discovered in August 2020, that some controversial questions such as those related to date and place of birth of parents, and mother tongue, were removed, purportedly in wake of widespread apprehensions.

SabrangIndia had previously reported on how NPR in the new format was trying to gather more personal data than the 2010 version. We had reported on how special notes had been made about nationality and mother tongue in the instruction manual. There is a special note in the “nationality” section which reads “Nationality recorded is as declared by the respondent. This does not confer any right to Indian Citizenship”. There is also a special note under the “mother tongue” section, that says, “If you have reasons to suspect that in any area due to any organised movement, the mother tongue is not being truthfully returned, you should record the mother tongue as actually returned by the respondent and make a report to your supervisory officers for verification.”

Meanwhile, the government appears disinclined to use Aadhaar data in the upcoming Census. It has submitted, “Aadhaar number has been developed as a separate database which is being used only for de-duplication purpose and authentication of beneficiaries of various Government schemes.”

Related:

Controversial questions removed from NPR?
NPR 2020: What does it want to know?

The post Government tries to dodge questions about NRIC, says no decision yet appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While comparing the anti-CAA and the ongoing farmers’ protests, we can see certain similarities in terms of their content, aims and methods. But while the anti-CAA protests were initially ignored by the government and at places finally broken up by armed mobs, the farmers’ protest seemingly has all the ears of the government. The government has not just conducted multiple meetings with the farmers but has also made the offer of suspending the contentious farm laws for a year and a half. More recently, it even allowed them to enter the capital to register their protest. What explains the difference in government’s approach in handling these two protests and is this approach partly responsible for the different outcomes of these protests?

Both the anti-CAA and the farmers’ protests have their roots in disenchantment with government policies. While the anti-CAA protests were primarily directed at recalling the discriminatory citizenship laws; the farmers’ protests are about scrapping three laws which they claim will make them vulnerable to the manipulations of predatory capital. Secondly, in terms of demographic composition, women and elderly are part of both the movements. The anti-CAA protests witnessed high participation of women since the very beginning. In the farmers’ movement, the participation of women and the elderly have been noticed by the lordships of the Supreme Court, who in in their divine wisdom, asked them to return to their homes. Such empathy was altogether lacking when it came to addressing the concerns of women and the elderly participating in the anti-CAA movement. Thirdly, in terms of tactics, both the protests occupied and blocked roads coming into Delhi as well as inside the city. The farmers today are squatting at multiple sites near Delhi’s border which have led to the closure of one side of the carriage way. The anti-CAA protest of Shaheen Bagh similarly blocked the road coming into Delhi. There were similar sit-ins across the country and appeals were made to block highways to pressurise the government to listen to their demands. Those making such appeals were overnight made into criminals and are today behind bars but the ongoing blocking of highways by farmers has not led to such an alarm.

 
Farmers Protest (Image: AP)

Over the past many years, speaking against the government has been automatically dubbed as anti-national. Amplified by plaint and ideologically biased media, the power of the government to declare anyone anti-national has become phenomenal. The whole anti-CAA protests were given a bad name by linking it to unproven foreign funds. The government and the media constantly hammered the point that Islamists, had taken over the movement, whose express purpose was to give vent to separatist tendencies. In the ongoing farmers’ movement, similar attempts were made to disparage the protesters by calling them Khalistanis. However, while in the former case, the accusations never ceased, in the latter, this kind of targeting was entirely suspended after some time. Even the premeditated government attacks on these two protests were different. In one case, it was relentless; in the other, the government showed much restraint after realising that such targeting could backfire.

One reason which is being given for the apparent success of the farmers’ movement is that it is inclusive in nature whereas the anti-CAA movement was exclusive. The term ‘farmer’, is it is being argued, in itself is an inclusive secular category which has the potential to attract different religious communities and weld them into a formidable solidarity. Since the ant-CAA movement was primarily driven by the concerns of one community (Muslims), it could never garner such mass support and hence could not succeed in bringing the government to the negotiating table. Nothing could be more facile than this argument.

No doubt, the appeal of the ongoing farmers’ movement is universalistic but to say that the anti-CAA protests were any less is not true. The latter, right from the very start was speaking in terms of constitutional rights and not specifically in terms of Muslim rights. It was precisely because of the deployment of such political grammar that the protest was able to attract a range of ideological positions. This is not to belittle the fact that the ant-CAA movement was started and nurtured primarily by Muslims; they were certainly the backbone of the movement. However, it is also true that it was able to attract a lot of solidarity from other sections of society, especially students. Despite its projected universalism, one cannot deny the fact that the farmers’ movement was initiated by the Sikh community and that later on other sections of society joined the movement. The hoisting of the Sikh flag on the petard of Red Fort only goes on to show the religious motivation of some of the Sikh participants. Not giving due credit to Sikhs as the master movers of the movement is certainly doing injustice to their valour, commitment and sacrifice.

And it is this difference in religious nucleus of these two protests which perhaps explains the different attitude of the government. The events of yesterday make it amply clear that when it comes to dealing with Muslims, the government adopts a very different yardstick. The praise being showered on Delhi police for their extraordinary patience is entirely misplaced. It was the same police force which was aiming for the chest of Muslim youth; it was the same police force which was criminally forcing them to sing Vande Mataram, not very long ago. But yesterday, despite the fact that the police were beaten, abused and at some places had to flee for their lives, they did not fire a single bullet or even attempted to forcefully disperse the protestors. Such ‘exemplary’ behaviour from Delhi police is not possible without express instruction from their political masters. The difference in the way police reacted in both the situations is thus not a matter of policing, but is rather a matter of their complete subservience to the political class. The contrast is very frightening indeed.

Why is it that it is easy for the government to ‘deal’ with Muslims but not with Sikhs? Partly the answer is political. For long the Hindu right’s stated position has been that the Sikhs are an inalienable part of the Hindu society. Being an Indic religion, Sikhism’s Punya Bhoomi (holy land) and Pitra Bhoomi (father land) are both in India. The same cannot be said about Muslims and consequently they have been looked upon with suspicion for having extra territorial loyalties. This division between Indic and non-Indic religions runs so deep that it has almost become common sense with even liberal social sciences adopting this framework to understand Indian society and culture. The present government, having deep roots within such a worldview, thus could not frame the Sikh led farmer protests as anti-national the way it could easily do with Muslim led anti-CAA protests. Moreover, over many decades, the Hindu right has been peddling a discourse that Sikhism arose as a movement to protect Hinduism from the zealotry of Islam. It would be too hard for them to turn around now and call Sikhs anti-national. Certainly, a little compromise is nothing in the interest of maintaining the larger cause of Hindu fraternity.

There is another important reason why the government was accommodative to the farmers’ demands. And this has to do with the relatively empowered position of Sikhs in the country. They are important part of the Indian economy, are well educated and therefore better represented in the police as well as in the military. Any violent action on them would have far reaching consequences which any government can ill afford. Moreover, over the years, and especially after the anti-Sikh pogrom of 1984, they have become an important diaspora in North America, thus having the potential to influence international opinion. In contrast, Muslims mainly provide unorganised labour for the Indian economy, and because of their relative lack of education are hardly represented in the various institutions of the state. Moreover, the current government is not dependent on their votes so Muslims do not even have electoral leverage. It is far easier to otherise Muslims as compared to other communities; even a violent attack on them will not have much repercussion on the larger Indian society.

The reason why the government treated the Sikh led farmers’ movement with the respect that it deserved has much to do with the position of Sikhism within the Hindu pantheon and the political economy of the community. Granted that the farmer protest had an inclusive character and spoke the language of universalism, but it does not sufficiently explain its apparent success. The outcome of any movement is not just contingent on the strategies that it adopts but also depends on how it is perceived by others and how the government responds to it. Given that the present government aligns its response on the religious identity of the protestors, there is very little chance for any Muslim led protest to be heard, far less succeed.

Arshad Alam is a columnist with NewAgeIslam.com

This article was first published in New Age Islam and may be read here

The post The anti-CAA and the ongoing farmers’ protests in India: Similar protests, different outcomes appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Ministry of Road transport and Highways on September 22 revealed that more than one crore migrant labourers walked to their home states between March and June, 2020.

During the Parliament’s Monsoon Session, Members of Parliament Jasbir Singh Gill, Doddaalahalli Kempegowda Suresh, Dean Kuriakose and Mohammad Jawed questioned the Centre about deaths of migrant workers in road accidents during the lockdown period.

In reply, the Minister of State for the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways V. K. Singh said, “As per provisional available information 81,385 accidents occurred on the roads including National Highways during the period March-June 2020 with 29,415 fatalities.”

However, the Union Minister reasserted the Centre’s shocking declaration that the Ministry does not maintain data on the number of migrant workers who died in road accidents during the lockdown.

When asked about the number of migrants who had travelled on foot during the lockdown, Singh said that the Covid-19 lockdown had resulted in the migration of a large number of workers. As per Centre’s data, more than 1.06 crore migrant workers, including those who travelled on foot during the lockdown, returned to their home states.

He said the Ministry of Home Affairs issued regular advisories to state and union territories to take all necessary measures to provide shelter, food, water, health facilities as well as counselling to migrant workers.

“This Ministry had assisted the movement of migrant labourers walking on foot on the various National Highways all across the Country by providing them food, drinking water, basic medicines and foot wears, etc. They were also provided with the resting places to take rest and assistance in terms of the arrangement of transport with the help of local administration to take them to the places nearest to their destinations,” he said.

Singh said that the Ministry’s orders on April 29 and May 1 allowed migrant workers to return to their native places by buses and Shramik special trains, respectively.

AU2044

Related:

No data, so no compensation: Centre’s shocking revelation on migrant labourer deaths!
1 crore unemployed labourers in India: Ministry of Labour and Employment
Strike 2: Centre now says no data on Covid-19 deaths of medical staff!
Strike three and counting! Centre says it no data on death of sanitation workers during Covid-19

The post Gov’t admits that over 1 crore migrant labourers returned home on foot! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MOSPI) and the National Statistical Office (NSO) released a report on Thursday, June 4, that stated that the unemployment rate in India fell to 5.8 percent in 2018-19 from 6.1 in 2017-18. The report stated that the rate of unemployment in males and females in rural areas was 5.6% and 3.5% respectively, while it was 7.1% and 9.9% for men and women in urban areas respectively.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi was caught in the eye of a storm last year when reports emerged that unemployment reached 6.1 percent, the highest in 45 years! The Government, in Parliament last year, said that the unemployment rate in rural areas almost doubled from 2.9% in 2013-14 to 5.3% in 2017-18. In the same period, there was over 50% increase in unemployment in urban areas. The most striking trend has been the rise in unemployment among urban males from 3% to 6.9% during the two year period from 2015-16 to 2017-18.

Key findings

Unemployment

Unemployment rate in India was 5.8 per cent. It was 5.6 per cent among males and 3.5 per cent among females in rural areas, while the rates were 7.1 per cent among males and 9.9 per cent among females in urban areas.

For educated (highest level of education secondary and above) persons of age 15 years and above, unemployment rate in India was 11.0 per cent: 11.2 per cent in rural areas and 10.8 per cent in urban areas.

The unemployment rate among the rural male youth (persons of age 15-29 years) was 16.6 per cent while the unemployment rate among the rural female youth was 13.8 per cent during 2018-19. The unemployment rate among the urban male youth was 18.7 per cent in 2017-18 while the unemployment rate for urban female youth was 25.7 per cent during this period.

Labour force

According to the data, about 55.1 per cent of the rural males, 19.7 per cent of the rural females, 56.7 per cent of the urban males and 16.1 per cent of the urban females were in the labour force. Among persons of age 15-29 years, LFPR in India was 38.1 per cent: it was 37.8 per cent in rural areas and 38.7 per cent in urban areas. Among persons of age 15 years and above, LFPR in India was 50.2 per cent: it was 51.5 per cent in rural areas and 47.5 per cent in urban areas.

Status of employment

The share of self-employed workers in India was about 57.4 per cent among rural males, 59.6 per cent among rural females, 38.7 per cent among urban males and 34.5 per cent among urban females.

Among workers, about 14.2 per cent among rural males, 11.0 per cent among rural females, 47.2 per cent among urban males and 54.7 per cent among urban females were regular wage/ salaried employees.

The proportion of casual labour among workers in India was about 28.3 per cent among rural males, 29.3 per cent among rural females, 14.2 per cent among urban males and 10.3 per cent among urban females.

Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) among persons in major religious groups

The data showed that among Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians the labour force participation was 38.2%, 32.3%, 36.7% and 40.7% respectively.

The unemployment in these religious groups stood at 5.6% for Hindus, 6.8% for Muslims and 7.2% for Christians and Sikhs respectively. This fell from 5.8% and 7.3% for Hindus and Muslims since 2017-18 respectively. For Christians the unemployment reduced from 8.7% in 2017-18, however, for Sikhs it rose from 6.9% in 2017-18.

LFPR among persons in major social groups

Labour force participation of the Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes and OBCs stood at 42.5%, 37.9% and 37% respectively.

The unemployment rate for these social groups had also increased in 2018-19 with the unemployment rates for ST/SC rose marginally to 4.5%, 6.4% and 5.9% respectively while the rates for OBC unemployment fell to 5.9% from 6% in 2017-18.

Data also shows that the rate of unemployment for citizens identified as illiterate fell from 1.1 per cent to 1.2 per cent. Similarly, the rate for literate and up to primary improved from 2.7 per cent to 2.4 per cent. For the middle school graduates, unemployment came down from 5.5 per cent to 4.8 per cent in FY2018-19.

However, many economists and industry experts say that the unemployment percentage will rise once the impact of the lockdown is factored in. According to the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE), as on June 4, 2020, unemployment rates in June stood at 22.42 percent all over India, a little better from May, 2020 when they were at 23.48 percent. The highest unemployment was reported from Jharkhand (59.2%), Bihar (46.2%), Puducherry (58.2%), and Delhi (44.9%).

Read the full report by Government of India below:

Related:

 1.6 billion informal economy workers significantly impacted by lockdown measures: ILO
India needs a stimulus package to fight the COVID-19 Economic battle

The post India’s unemployment rate dipped marginally to 5.8 percent says government appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The  National Fishworkers Forum has written to Giriraj Singh, Union Minister of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, asking him to revoke the order which reduces the uniform fishing ban from 61 days to 47 days. The latest order, issued by the Department of Fisheries, will now override the previous order issued on March 20. 

However the National Fishworkers Forum has said that this order must be revoked, and the earlier order where the ban was for 61 days be honoured. They want this for two simple reasons. This is the breeding season and any disturbances in that cycle will harm the fishing industry for years to come, and the seas are too rough and it is dangerous to go out to fish monsoon months.

The fishermen who work on small and medium boats are the worse hit. Almost all of them have been already grounded when the sudden national lockdown was announced due to Coronavirus spread, and have had almost no financial support. Those registered can claim an allowance when the annual ban is in place, but now, if the ban is lifted too early, they will not get that also, explained sources in the NFF.

Fishing is now banned only for 47 days, along India’s East Coast from April 15 to May 31, and along the West Coast from June 15 to July 31. After that the fishermen will have to venture out to earn their wages. 

“The government perhaps wants to avoid paying the allowance. And fishermen will end up risking  their lives by going out into the sea now,” said NFF General Secretary T Peter who is a co signatory on the letter to the Union Minister. The ministry’s revised order has reduced the uniform ban on fishing, by all fishing vessels in the Indian Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), beyond territorial waters on the East Coast including Andaman, & Nicobar Islands, and West Coast including Lakshadweep Islands. 

The ban aims a “effective management of fishery resources” and ensure “sea safety.” said NFF who on April 2, had written to the the Ministry that they “welcomed the order of a uniform ban on fishing by all fishing vessels in the Indian Exclusive Economic Zone and had mentioned that ban has been formulated to help regenerate marine fisheries in the Indian waters where the monsoon season creates a conducive environment for fish spawning.”

Reducing the days when fishing is banned will be counterproductive to the original plan, say NFF. “It is crucial to protect the marine habitat during the reproduction period. Those engaged in sustainable fishing need to be supported,” said Peter. 

The NFF has said that the uniform ban period of 61 days was implemented with consultation between central and state governments in 2015. “This  uniformity came after many decades of conflicts, especially between sectors and between states, and with demands made multiple times by the NFF,” it stated. According to the NFF’s letter to the minister, the current ban period upholds the spirit of a “Supreme Court interim order in the case of ‘Goa Environment Federation versus State of Goa and Others’ in 2005 which imposed a 67 day ban period ‘keeping in view the prime need to preserve the natural fishing resources as also to protect the traditional fishermen.”

T Peter explained that during these months the seas are rough and can put the boats and of the fishermen on board at great risk. The weather remains cloudy and windy even if it is not raining that instant, and the conditions can change suddenly. “There have been many incidents of the loss of boats and lives of fishworkers as a result of inclement weather during the monsoon months. This is the main reason why in addition to the ecological context, the ban also mentions ‘sea safety’,” stated NFF.

The NFF said  that the long ban period is a positive move that helps the small scale fisheries, “as in those 61 days the mechanised boats do not operate, our community is safeguarded from the impacts of the destructive fishing gears. Trawlers can destroy the marine environment and greatly disturb the spawning cycle,” explained T Peter.

Then there is the lesser known fact that it is in these non-fishing months that the seasonal fishworkers return home to their native states. However, due to Covid-19 pandemic, a ban had started suddenly with the lockdown and had estranged workers in Gujarat and Maharashtra on the West coast. “If the ban is ended earlier in the East coast it will further harm the fishworkers and make them vulnerable to exploitation,” said T Peter explaining the NFF’s objections. 

The Eastern Coast too is yet to recover from the damage caused by Cyclone Amphan, and if the ban is shortened it risks the lives of fishworkers who will be forced to head out into the sea. The NFF has demanded that this order be scrapped and that the fishing ban period revert to the standard 61-day period. 

“The lockdown has impacted the fishing sector severely. However, tampering with the ban order will only work in the favour of the mechanised sector and those who own fish farms,” said the NFF leadership.

They have also warned of the “worsened wind and wave conditions, including the increasing regularity of cyclones, during the monsoon period, the reduction of the ban period puts migrant workers on the fishing boats at immense risk.”  In the wake of the Cyclone Amphan the NFF says it  is “highly irresponsible to push workers out to sea to work during this period”. They add that the Monsoon is already in its onset stages “with a depression forming in the Arabian Sea.”

The post Government risking lives of fishermen by letting them venture into rough seas? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

There is a major calamity brewing. State governments that are unable to respond, because they are hemmed in by an unsympathetic Union, are faced by a people desperate for survival, not only from disease, but from hunger and violence. While everyone looks to governments to somehow get their act together, is it possible to look to ordinary, working people (not NGOs) to release their creativity? Some clues may lie in the existing practice of workers’ organisations.

The pandemic that gives rise to social distancing also creates the conditions for social solidarity. Today domestic maids find that, with the home-stay in force, “madams are now working from home”, so they don’t have to wake up at the crack of dawn and can go at any time during the day. Now that more office-goers are working from home, delivery boys are making more runs delivering food. For bosses who have their own business, drivers are driving but with protection of masks and sanitizers.

The imagination has to recall the 1897 bubonic plague that hit Maharashtra. It was the courageous Savitribai Phule, and her adopted son Yashwantrao, who opened a clinic at the outskirts of Pune as part of the social reform movement. Yashwantrao died while serving patients of all castes and communities. The same kind of social solidarity was demonstrated by Dwarkanath Kotnis in 1938, when he died in service while providing medical assistance to the Chinese in wartime.

Even during the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918 in Philadelphia 2,000 nuns, with little experience and training, answered their Archbishop’s call, signing on for 12-hour shifts. They washed linens, served soup, mixed medicine; provided water, blankets, and comfort. One remembered she was struck with “fearful dread”, yet plunged on. And now the Cubans are demonstrating the same courage, love, and solidarity in serving the world.

The Kerala government has led the way in promoting transparent solidarity practices. It has set aside Rs 20,000 crore for payment of pensions, free food-grains for all, subsidised meals, loans for the needy and other measures. It has turned all government hostels into isolation centres and put in place a contact-tracing system to isolate the disease instead of harshly and insensibly locking down. But its main allies have been the mass organisations of workers, women, and youth.

NGOs have proposed that food be delivered to every door or at PDS shops to anyone, by Local Bodies and the Food Department. But does not the real strength of a community lie within itself? Cannot they mobilise to set up community kitchens to both prepare cooked food as well as distribute it among those who need it most? The capital cost of such a kitchen for 200 people is roughly Rs 50,000, with Rs 50,000 more for daily running costs. Can it become a point of solidarity for committees, information, and support?

Along with food, a useful addition may be slice of lemon or the traditional shikanji[1] replacing tea. Lemon contains vitamin C that may help in preventing infection in the respiratory tract, especially in people with low diets and high physical stress. Sitting out in the sun will also help the body produce vitamin D that helps the body fight respiratory illness. Does the kitchen give an opportunity to reclaim the common space where both distance and solidarity are possible?

Migrants ask for vehicles to go back home;sex workers want access to ART tablets; domestic workers look for online payment; street vendors need space to sell; garment workers don’t know how to get advance payments; piece-rated workers search for jobs; and powrakarmikas[2] struggle against untouchability. Does not every one of these represent an opportunity for solidarity actions, for launching collective enterprises by workers that provide cheap transport, health, information, e-skills, job placements, and legal support?

Masks are needed for health care and sanitation workers, and infected persons. They are made from non-woven Polypropylene fabric of grade GSM 60. The same fabric is used for the production of carry bags but of grade GSM 20. Hence, it is possible to purchase GSM 60 fabric, or use disposed carry-bags, for home-based production of masks by stitching four layers for the correct grade. In Kerala and Assam mass-production has been done in jails and homes.Can the same be done for gloves?

Even more urgent is the requirement for hand-washing but the everyday struggle for adequate water faces most workers and their families. Community hand-washing stations using home-made soap and minimal water through home-made dispensers are a practical possibility. Water, with 1% bleach or 10% vinegar added to it has a limited disinfectant effect, but will need to be washed off quickly with water as it harms the skin. So could a two-bucket station that saves water be explored?

Another area for collective action is in identifying sick people and contact-tracing through quick surveys. Only four questions are needed: Have you been to an affected area? Do you have a fever? Do you have persistent/dry cough? Do you have breathlessness? The addition of a Pulse Oximeter App enables checking for fever and blood oxygen saturation. If there is shortness of breath but the oxygen level is over 95% then medical care is not needed.

The funds needed for all these activities can come from Welfare Boards or credit institutions, ULBs, Panchayats, elected representatives, State Disaster Relief Funds, or individual donors. These are the funds that at least nine state governments (including Kerala) have leveraged while others are slow in following. The essential point, though, is how workers’ organisations can demand these funds to promote social solidarity rather than distancing.

Mobilised communities can be extremely effective within their settlements in identifying families in need of assistance; locating empty jhonpris[3] or plots, even houses and trees, in their localities to act as quarantine quarters; persuading potential carriers to self-quarantine; resolving conflicts early; and providing information: all within the frame of the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments. But could they demand decentralisation to the voting booth level – catering to 1,000 voters?

Do testing kits fall within the frame of solidarity action? Collecting samples is fairly simple. The test procedureis more complex. A kit can be developed in six days, and 15 lakh manufactured each week. Some technologists claim to have already made cheap kits. But the question pro-people scientists, lawyers, managers, engineers, and others have to ask is how to demystify the science, make it simpler, aid collective research and production in workers’ settlements,and reduce the epidemic.

That leaves two obstacles in the actual designing and implementation of such initiatives.

The first is the state of lockdown. Relief work is a good way for people to assemble for care, reduce helplessness and increase empathy. The layouts of the basti[4] and the tola[5] provide the architecture for mobilisation. Provisions – like “acting in good faith” (Epidemic Diseases Act 1897); “involvement of voluntary social-welfare institutions” (Disaster Management Act 2005); no protocol for “lockdown” (Section 144);and “delivery of essential goods” (MHAGuidelines) – can be leveraged by alliances of working people to negotiate the rules for “lockdown”.

The second is how much activists will move beyond relief to mobilising the working poor to meet their own needs: using empowerment to lay claims on government, and reclaiming their rights.That may happen through local discussions about how public infrastructure is being privatized. Do people want food as welfare, or do they wish to decide what food to produce? Do they want funds to be doled out, or do they demand the right to determine how funds will be used? Do they want to be locked up, or do they demand that the government perform its duty? Back in the village, do they want to return to the city, or to restructure the village? – questions that could point to an alternative social organisation.

And, with Pantho Kanai, ring a different bell:

Ghontabajao, doptori

Aar koto din dekhte hobe

Natai baibharo binghuri

Din dupure noshto korbi

Kore jabe monchuri

Ghontabajao, doptori…[6]

(Dunu Roy is Director, Hazards Centre).

___________________________________________

1. Lemonade

2. Sanitation workers

3. Hutments

4. Informal settlement

5. Part of the village reserved for the lower class/caste

6. Ring the bell record-keeper; How many days have we to wait; The spool endlessly reels out the kite; Day and noon you waste; You continue stealing my mind; Ring the bell record-keeper

The post COVID – a space for workers? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Central government has been issuing advisories, notifications, guidelines and other such communiques ever since the COVID-19 outbreak in India. These include travel advisories and guidelines for airports for screening international travellers arriving in India. The next stage of local and community transmissions brought in more and more such notifications and guidelines aimed at not just their several departments but the general public as well. Here we list down and make available these notifications, guidelines and advisories for easy access with a brief explanation on each.

The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MOHFW) has been made the nodal ministry for issuing the major advisories, guidelines and directives to states and for planning of mitigation and containment of COVID-19.

Advisories and guidelines for states

1.       Home Secretary letter on movement of goods, use of SDRF

Through this letter dated March 30, the MHA made some clarifications to the guidelines it issued in light of the nationwide lockdown. These clarifications included allowing transportation of essential as well as non-essential goods, including hygiene products such as soap and sanitary napkins in groceries, allowing news paper delivery supply chain and so on. It also allowed use of the State Disaster Relief Fund for providing relief to migrant workers stranded without income away from their home state.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/SecysMHLetter2932020regconsolidatedguidelinesandmigrantlabourers.pdf

2.       MHA order restricting movement of migrant labourers

The order dated March 29 termed the movement of the large number of migrants as a violation of the nationwide lockdown being strictly implemented. The order directed state and UTs governments to ensure adequate arrangement of temporary shelters for these labourers. It also directed that landlords of rented accommodation shall not demand rent for one month from such workers and labourers and if they are forced to evict, such landlords will be liable for action under the Disaster Management Act for violation of order.

https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/MHA%20Order%20restricting%20movement%20of%20migrants%20and%20strict%20enforement%20of%20lockdown%20measures%20-%2029.03.2020.pdf

3.       Disinfection of common public places

Guidelines were issued on March 29 for disinfecting public places as well as offices. It explains how these spaces should be cleaned so as to minimise the risk of infection.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/Guidelinesondisinfectionofcommonpublicplacesincludingoffices.pdf

4.       Ensuring availability of masks, gloves and sanitizers

The National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority sent a letter dated March 28 to all states and UTs addressing their issue of procuring masks, gloves and sanitizers. It sent them an indicative list of manufacturers for ready reference.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/NPPADOLETTER28032020.pdf

5.       NPR and Census Phase I postponed

On March 25, it was conveyed by the Press Information Bureau as well as the Census office that the National Population Register (NPR) exercise as well the Census Phase I which were to be carried out simultaneously from April 1 onwards are postponed until further orders are issued to that regard.

https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/PR_CensuaNPRpostponed_26032020.pdf

6.       Home Secretary letter for nationwide lockdown

The letter dated March 24, states that while the measures adopted are in the right direction, they lack uniformity and hence may not meet the ends of containment. He asked states to ensure social distancing and complete lockdown.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/DOletter_secretary.pdf

Guidelines for nationwide lockdown from MHA:

https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/Guidelines.pdf

Addendum to Guidelines of MHA

https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/MHA%20order%20with%20addendum%20to%20Guidelines%20Dated%2024.3.2020.pdf

Second Addendum

https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/PR_SecondAddendum_27032020.pdf

Consolidated guidelines (inclusive of addendum)

https://mha.gov.in/sites/default/files/PR_ConsolidatedGuidelinesofMHA_28032020.pdf

7.       Model Micro plan for containment of local transmission

The Health ministry, on March 24, released a plan for containment and management of local transmission of COVID-19 which included measures such as mapping of affected areas, assigning responsibilities to various functionaries, surveillance, contact tracing, logistics management and so on.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/ModelMicroplanforcontainmentoflocaltransmissionofCOVID19.pdf

8.       MHA order restricting passenger traffic

On March 23, the Ministry of Home Affairs vide an order put a halt on all incoming passenger traffic via air, seaports, land ports, rail as well as river ports. Vehicles carrying essential goods are exempt from this order.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/ClosingofImmigrationCheckPosts.pdf

9.       Cabinet secretary letter for containment of COVID-19

The letter dated March 22 was sent by the Cabinet Secretary to all state governments directing them to take pre-emptive actions for the management and containment of COVID-19.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/ChiefSecyDOLetter.pdf

Related notifications:
D.O. Letter from Cabinet Secretary to Chief Secretaries for management and containment of COVID-19 dated 23.03.2020

D.O. Letter from Cabinet Secretary to Chief Secretaries for management and containment of COVID-19 dated 24.03.2020

10.   Directives to Exam Boards

The Human Resources Ministry issued directives on March 18 to get all exam institutions detailing precautions that various exam boards need to take while holding exams as also for postponing certain exams

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/DOSecyHE.pdf

11.   Social distancing

This advisory came on March 16 from the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MOMHFW). It advised states to close all such places with possibility of social gathering such as schools, gyms, tourist centres and such and also asked states to be prepared for the possibility of postponing or cancelling exams for students; as also exploring the possibility of urging private sector employees to work from home.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/SocialDistancingAdvisorybyMOHFW.pdf

12.   Dead body management

This document was issued on March 15 by the Directorate General of health Services under MOHFW which has given complete guidelines on how to dispose of dead body of a suspect or confirmed case of COVID-19.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/1584423700568_COVID19GuidelinesonDeadbodymanagement.pdf

13.   Essential Commodities order for Hand sanitizers and Masks

BY notification the gazette, on March 13, the Ministry of Consumer Affairs included hand sanitizers and masks in the category of essential commodities hence letting the government have control on the supply, production and pricing of these two commodities.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/218645.pdf

Related notifications:

National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) Order regarding Masks, Hand Sanitizers and Gloves

Letter from Department of Food & Public Distribution regarding Hand Sanitizer Production and Availability

14.   High-level GoM – suspension of Visas

On March 11, the high level Group of Ministers met for the second time and decided to suspend all international visas (barring few visa categories) till April 15 and graded China, Italy, Iran, Republic of Korea, France, Spain and Germany as high risk countries requiring mandatory quarantining of people who have travelled from these countries after February 14 for 14 days.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/HFWnCoVGoM11March2020II.pdf

15.   Invoking Disaster Management Act, 2005

On March 11, the government also invoked the Disaster Management Act, thus indicating the outbreak of the epidemic COVID-19 as a disaster.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/disastermanagmentact.pdf

16.   Mass gatherings

This advisory was issued early, on March 5 where all states were advised to avoid mass gatherings in their respective states.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/advisoryformassgathering.pdf

17.   Guidance document for COVID-19 surveillance

This document came as early as January 25 when the government and the rest of the world, for that matter, was unsure of whether this disease can be transmitted from person to person. This document included directing states to send health status report of passengers returning from China, which was the only high risk country at that point in time.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/Guidance%20document%20-%202019-nCoV.pdf

Guidelines for public

1.       For senior citizens

The health department issued these guidelines on March 29 as “Do’s and Don’ts” for senior citizens, asking them primarily to stay at home, to completely isolate and not entertain visitors, exercise and so on.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/AdvisoryforElderlyPopulation.pdf

2.       Use of masks by general public

This document of guidelines was issued on March 11 for informing people on who should be using masks and how to use them. It specifically states that a healthy person need not wear a mask, except in certain situations like caring for an ill person, having cough or cold, or while visiting a health care facility.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/Useofmaskbypublic.pdf

3.       Home quarantine

These guidelines were issued on March 11 for suspected cases of COVID-19 limited to the initial phase of the epidemic whereby people with travel history and people who came in contact with them were being quarantined.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/Guidelinesforhomequarantine.pdf

4.       Home delivery of drugs

Through a notification issued on March 26, the Health department allowed the doorstep delivery of medicines by a licensed person and described who a licensed person is and what steps should that person take while accepting delivery orders and thereafter as well.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/Doorstepdelivery26B.pdf

Welfare packages announcements

1.       Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana

This was announced on March 26, 2 days after a nationwide lockdown was announced by the Ministry of Finance. This included insurance cover for health workers, provision of wheat/rice, pulses for next 3 months to the poor, increase in MNREGA wages and so on.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/MoFPMGaribKalyanYojanaPackage.pdf

For health care sector

1.       SOP for transporting a suspect/confirmed case of COVID-19

This SOP, released on March 29 gives a detailed step by step guide on how to transport a COVDI-19 patient using special ambulances, maintenance of availability of hospital beds, disinfection as well as decontamination of ambulances.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/StandardOperatingProcedureSOPfortransportingasuspectorconfirmedcaseofCOVID19.pdf

2.       Hydroxychloroquine made a schedule H1 drug

Vide a Gazette notification dated March 26, the MOHFW directed that Hydroxychloroquine be treated as a Schedule H1 drug which means it can be brought only by prescription. This was done after a few deaths in other countries where this drug was self-administered by suspected/confirmed cases of COVID-19.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/218927g.pdf

3.       Telemedicine practice guidelines

The Medical Council of India in collaboration with NITI Aayog, on March 25, prepared some guidelines allowing doctors to provide health care on a call. This was done in order to enable easy access to health care so as to avoid people traveling to clinics and hospitals for minor health ailments. This was done to enable doctors to prescribe medicines over a telephone call with their patients.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/Telemedicine.pdf

4.       Guidelines on rational use of PPE

On March 24, the Health ministry issued guidelines to health care sector worker on optimum and rational use of the personal protective equipment (PPE) provided to them while treating or doing related activities for COVID-19 cases. The PPE include goggles, face-shield, mask, gloves, coverall/gowns (with or without aprons), head cover and shoe cover.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/GuidelinesonrationaluseofPersonalProtectiveEquipment.pdf

5.       Advisory for Hospitals and Medical Education Institutions

This advisory was issued to hospitals on March 20, asking them to postpone elective surgeries, to procure adequate oxygen masks and ventilators, to have enough well-trained staff as well as some administrative steps to be taken.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/AdvisoryforHospitalsandMedicalInstitutions.pdf

6.       Indian Council of Medical Research testing guidelines: https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/LabTestingAdvisory.pdf

7.       Discharge guidelines: https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/Corona%20Discharge-Policy.pdf

8.       Specimen Collection, Packaging and Transport Guidelines

These set of guidelines were issued on January 20 to all hospitals, clinics, laboratories to guide them on specific requirements of testing suspects of COVID-19.

https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/5Sample%20collection_packaging%20%202019-nCoV.pdf

The post COVID19 – Central govt advisories, notifications, guidelines appeared first on SabrangIndia.