All posts by admin
Posted on 18 October, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
The Supreme Court of India, by a majority opinion, has struck down the 99th Constitution Amendment, which provided for the establishment of the National Judicial Commission to appoint judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court. Having read the opinion of the five Hon’ble Judges, a few issues arise in my mind.
The key rationale behind the majority opinion appears to be that independence of judiciary is an essential ingredient of the basic structure of the Constitution. This is unquestionably a correct proposition. Having stated this, the majority transgresses into an erroneous logic. It argues that the presence of a Law Minister in the Commission and the appointment of two eminent persons in the Commission by a group, which will, besides Chief Justice of India, comprise of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, will constitute political involvement in the judicial appointments. Judges appointed on this basis may feel gratified to the politicians. Political persons would be obviously guided by their political interest. The Judges warn of “adverse” consequences if politicians were a part of the appointment process. Hence protection of the judiciary from political persons was essential. This is key reason on which constitution amendment, unanimously passed by both the Houses of Parliament and the State Legislature, has been struck down.
Politician bashing is the key to the judgement. One learned judge argues that Shri L.K. Advani has opined that dangers of an Emergency like situation are still there. Civil society in India is not strong and, therefore, you need an independent judiciary. Another argues that it may be possible that the present Government does not favour appointment of persons with alternative sexuality as Judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court. Politician bashing is akin to the 9.00 PM television programmes.
The judgement ignores the larger constitutional structure of India. Unquestionably independence of the judiciary is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. It needs to be preserved. But the judgement ignores the fact that there are several other features of the Constitution which comprise the basic structure. The most important basic structure of the Indian Constitution is Parliamentary democracy. The next important basic structure of the Indian Constitution is an elected Government which represents the will of the sovereign. The Prime Minister in Parliamentary democracy is the most important accountable institution. The Leader of the Opposition is an essential aspect of that basic structure representing the alternative voice in Parliament. The Law Minister represents a key basic structure of the Constitution; the Council of Ministers, which is accountable to Parliament. All these institutions, Parliamentary sovereignty, an elected Government, a Prime Minister, Leader of Opposition, Law Minister are a part of the Constitution’s basic structure. They represent the will of the people. The majority opinion was understandably concerned with one basic structure – independence of judiciary – but to rubbish all other basic structures by referring to them as “politicians” and passing the judgement on a rationale that India’s democracy has to be saved from its elected representatives. The judgement has upheld the primacy of one basic structure – independence of judiciary – but diminished five other basic structures of the Constitution, namely, Parliamentary democracy, an elected Government, the Council of Ministers, an elected Prime Minister and the elected Leader of the Opposition. This is the fundamental error on which the majority has fallen. A constitutional court, while interpreting the Constitution, had to base the judgement on constitutional principles. There is no constitutional principle that democracy and its institutions has to be saved from elected representatives. The Indian democracy cannot be a tyranny of the unelected and if the elected are undermined, democracy itself would be in danger. Are not institutions like the Election Commission and the CAG not credible enough even though they are appointed by elected Governments?
As someone who has spent more years in court than in Parliament, I feel constrained to speak out for Indian democracy. There is no principle in democracy anywhere in the world that institutions of democracy are to be saved from the elected.
The illustrations given had to be on a sounder footing. If one leader feels that there are dangers of emergency, there is no presumption that only the Supreme Court can save it. When in the mid-Seventies the Emergency was proclaimed, it was people like me – the politicians, who fought out and went to prison. It was Supreme Court that caved in and, therefore, for the court to assume that it alone can defend the nation against Emergency, is belied by history. As for the cause of those representing alternative sexuality, the Delhi High Court had decriminalized it. I am a part of the present Government, but I had publically supported opinion of the Delhi High Court. It was the Supreme Court which recriminalized alternative sexuality. The assumption that the cause of the practitioners of alternative sexuality to be appointed as judges, can only be protected by Supreme Court, is again belied by history. The Supreme Court opinion is final. It is not infallible.
The judgement interprets the provision of Article 124 and 217 of the Constitution. Article 124 deals with the appointment of Judges in the Supreme Court and Article 217 deals with the appointment of Judges of the High Court. Both provide for the appointment to be made by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. The mandate of the Constitution was that Chief Justice of India is only a ‘Consultee’. The President is the Appointing Authority. The basic principle of interpretation is that a law may be interpreted to give it an expanded meaning, but they cannot be rewritten to mean the very opposite. In the second Judge’s case, the Court declared Chief Justice the Appointing Authority and the President a ‘Consultee’. In the third Judge’s case, the courts interpreted the Chief Justice to mean a Collegium of Judges. President’s primacy was replaced with the Chief Justice’s or the Collegium’s primacy. In the fourth Judge’s case (the present one) has now interpreted Article 124 and 217 to imply ‘Exclusivity’ of the Chief Justice in the matter of appointment excluding the role of the President almost entirely. No principle of interpretation of law anywhere in the world, gives the judicial institutions the jurisdiction to interpret a constitutional provision to mean the opposite of what the Constituent Assembly had said. This is the second fundamental error in the judgement. The court can only interpret – it cannot be the third chamber of the legislature to rewrite a law.
Having struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment, the Court decided to re-legislate. The court quashed the 99th Constitutional Amendment. The court is entitled to do so. While quashing the same, it re-legislated the repealed provisions of Article 124 and 217 which only the legislature can do. This is the third error in the judgement.
The fourth principle on which the judgement falls into an error is while stating that collegium system, which is a product of the judicial legislation, is defective. It fixed a hearing for its improvement. The court has again assumed the role of being the third chamber. If there is a problem with the procedure of judicial appointments, have those legislative changes to be evolved outside the legislature?
As someone who is equally concerned about the independence of judiciary and the sovereignty of India’s Parliament, I believe that the two can and must co-exist. Independence of the judiciary is an important basic structure of the Constitution. To strengthen it, one does not have to weaken Parliamentary sovereignty which is not only an essential basic structure but is the soul of our democracy.
(The views expressed are personal)
Posted on 15 October, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
The CBI Special Judge Shri O. P. Saini discharged all the accused including Shyamal Ghosh, the former Telecom Secretary in a case relating to fixation of Spectrum User Charges. The Court observed that “there is no doubt that the charge sheet has been filed for extraneous reasons….. Since the charge sheet has been found to be full of distorted and fabricated facts, an attempt has been made to mislead the Court, Director, CBI is directed to conduct an inquiry against the erring officers and take actions as per law.”
Indeed the officers are guilty of fabricating charges against an honest Civil Servant and others. There is no doubt that the Chargesheet was filed at the behest of Shri Kapil Sibal, the Telecom Minister in the UPA Government. At the time when the Telecom sector was riddled with scams, Kapil Sibal selected a retired Judge of his choice and asked him to unearth an “NDA Scam” in Telecom. The Judge opined that there could be an arbitrariness in fixing the Spectrum User Charges for allocation of additional spectrum. An unsustainable charge sheet was filed against an outstanding and honest Civil Servant Shyamal Ghosh. The idea to attack the NDA was by including the Late Pramod Mahajan in Column II as a deceased accused.
I had consistently maintained that this charge sheet was full of fabricated facts. I had written an Article on 2nd April, 2013 in ‘The Hindustan Times’ commenting on this charge sheet. The last three paragraphs of the Article deals specifically with this charge sheet. A copy of that Article, which appeared on 2nd April, 2013, is enclosed. The Court has vindicated what we had always maintained. The CBI Officers who acted on the dictates of the political government will now face an enquiry. But what about the Ministers who conspired to create a fabricated charge sheet and a retired Judge who, for the sake of a post-retirement assignment, agreed to lend his Offices for the same?
Annexure
Tuesday, 02 April 2013
The Telecom Story
By Shri Arun Jaitley
Leader of Opposition (Rajya Sabha) (As he then was)
Courtesy : The Hindustan Times
India’s Telecom sector was a ‘showcase’ for the success of economic reforms. When the Government opened up the sector in 1994-95 to the private sector, there were many skeptics about the private sector being put in control of communications. Within years every critic was proved wrong. Public sector monopoly had led to a sluggish growth of the sector. India’s tele-density at the time of opening out was 0.8 percent. Less than one out of every 100 people had access to a telephone. Contrary to popular perception mobile telephones proved to be a boon for the common and weaker sections. It hugely improved India’s tele-density. The waiting list became a part of history. Costs were radically slashed down; linemen were no longer required. Most Indians felt better connected.
There were apparent mistakes made in the initial years –though made honestly. The licence fees regime could only ensure costlier telephony. The National Telecom Policy 1999 formulated by the NDA government corrected these mistakes. The switch over to revenue sharing reduced the cost to the operator and increased the volumes substantially. The increased volumes ensured much larger revenue to the government and cheaper services to the consumers. Technology began to converge between basic telephony, limited mobility and full mobility. This led to universal access licence which were common to both the basic and the mobile services.
Telecom became the most visible face of the success of economic reforms. They attracted investments, increased employment and India became the fastest growing telecom economy in the world offering cheaper services. The UPA Government inherited this success story of telecom in 2004 and could only make it better.
Regrettably, the entire enthusiasm inherent in the success story has disappeared. Though services have substantially expanded, there are no takers for the spectrum auctions now. Fresh investors are reluctant to look at this sector and those who have invested in the sector despite having earned profits must be regretting the environment in which they function. How did this success story turn sour?
The Prime Minister initially gave the responsibility of telecom department to a Minister who apparently had a conflict of interest. Criminal cases against the first Telecom Minister of the UPA are under investigation. After he was dropped, his successor from the same party, the DMK, decided to run havoc with the Department. In 2007-08 spectrum was allocated at rates determined by the market mechanism of auction in 2001. The sector had hugely expanded in seven years and the value of the spectrum had substantially increased. Despite being cautioned that the price determined at the time of allocation be freshly undertaken either through auction or through indexing, he decided to allot the spectrum at a rate much less than the market prices. The mode of allocation was conspiratorial. The goal post was altered half way through. The criteria of first-come-first-served was changed to those who pay the entry fees ahead of others. This information appears to have been leaked out to the most favoured applicants. The result was disastrous. The report of the CAG shattered the confidence in the credibility of governmental functioning. The CBI had to file charge sheets where the Minister, civil servants and investors were all arrested. The Supreme Court took the extraordinary step of cancelling the licenses. The biggest success story of economic reforms had now become a monumental scam.
Now the third minister was appointed to look after the Telecom Department. He wanted to get the sadistic delight out of the fact that the scams were not new to the telecom sector under the UPA government. He, therefore, selected a Judge of his choice to ‘unearth’ an NDA scam. The Judge’s report was sent to the CBI. The CBI has now filed a charge sheet in the Court. The essence of the CBI case relates to the spectrum user charges. When the service expands, the operators need extra spectrum. Under the NTP 1999 additional spectrum charges is to be paid for through revenue sharing. The policy framed in 2001-02 was that on 4.4 MHZ the initial startup spectrum a 2% user charge would be paid; upto 6.2 MHZ a 3% user charge will be paid and for the entire slab from 6.2 MHZ to 10 MHZ the charge would be 4%. The entire allegation against the NDA is as to why the slab between 6.2 MHZ and 10 MHZ was not broken in two and between 8 MHZ to 10 MHZ an extra 1% charge was not levied.
The spectrum user charges are a tariff fixation. Tariff fixation is an Executive function. The Executive at a given point of time considers various factors while increasing or reducing tariff or while determining the size of the slabs on which a particular tariff is charged. There is no scientific rationale on which this can be done. Tariffs are fixed on a commercial assessment of the market conditions. The underlying consideration has to be the promotion of the sector. An administrator may well feel that lower tariff can reduce costs and increase the volumes and hence benefit both the sector and the revenues. In this case slabs could have been fixed keeping in mind the parity between the basic and the limited mobility. Subsequent reports of the TRAI appear to have accepted the principle on which these tariffs were fixed. If tariff fixation becomes a ground for invoking the Prevention of Corruption Act clauses such as causing wrongful loss to revenue, every Finance Minister who reduces the customs or excise duty in the Budget may be subject to such an accusation. The CBI charge-sheet names my then colleague, Shri Pramod Mahajan, as a conspirator in tariff fixation. Since he is no more he obviously cannot be prosecuted. As a Member of the then government I feel obliged after examining the charge against him to suggest that the charge is absolutely ill-founded and baseless.
The telecom story is a case where the UPA government and the Prime Minister have a lot to introspect. Having inherited a ‘showcase’ success story, the first Minister appointed by the UPA conflicted his personal interest with that of the sector. His successor got trapped in his own shenanigans. The third minister set out to teach the NDA a lesson. Former Civil servants and investors have become his victims. In the process he has damaged the sector further adding to its’ instability.
Posted on 14 October, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
The death by lynching of a member of minority community at Dadri was extremely unfortunate and condemnable. No right thinking person can ever rationalise and condone such an action. Such incidents bring a bad name to the country.
Subsequent to this incident, a series of writers have returned awards conferred on them by the Sahitya Academy. The thrust of the writers’ protest appears to be that under the present Central Government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, an atmosphere of intolerance has been created in the country.
Is this protest real or a manufactured one? Is this not a case of ideological intolerance? There are large number of writers with left or Nehruvian leaning who have been recognised by the Government in the past. Some of them may have been entitled to this recognition. I am neither questioning their academic merits nor their right to have political prejudices. Many of them have spoken out against the present Prime Minister even when he was Chief Minister of Gujarat. After the new Government was sworn in May, 2014, those who had enjoyed the patronage under the earlier establishment, have obviously been uncomfortable with the present Government. This discomfort has been furthered by another political reality in India. With shrinking fortunes, the Congress is showing no signs of revival. The Left is being increasingly pushed to the margin. The new strategy of anti–Modi, anti–BJP sections appears to be to resort to “politics by other means”. The easiest way is to manufacture a crisis and subsequently manufacture a paper rebellion against the Government in the wake of a manufactured crisis.
A few months after the present Government was sworn in, media reports were carried out that there were a series of attacks against the Christian community including attacks on Churches. Protest marches were organised. It was alleged that the minority communities in the country are feeling unsafe. Each one of those “attacks” was investigated and most of them were found to be incidents of petty crimes such as theft or throwing bottles to break a windowpane. None of the attacks in and around Delhi could be attributed to religion or politics. The accused were arrested and are being prosecuted. The principal accused in the case of raping a Nun in West Bengal was found to be a person of Bangladeshi origin. The protest at that time highlighted two factors; firstly that this was an attack on institutions of minority community and secondly, the Prime Minister was quiet about it. Once the truth of these “attacks” as being the cases of crime was established the propaganda and propagandists have both disappeared.
For a cause against the Modi Government, the protesting writers have struggled hard to find a reason. The rationalist Mr. MM Kalburgi was shot dead in Karnataka, a Congress ruled Government. Mr. N. Dabholkar, another rationalist, was shot down on 20th August 2013 in Maharashtra at that time ruled by the Congress and the NCP. Both incidents need to be condemned in no uncertain terms. It is the responsibility of the State government to maintain law and order and provide security to a vulnerable target of attack. Similarly, the Dadri incident took place in Uttar Pradesh, which is ruled by the Samajwadi Party. “Politics by other means”, now dictates an alternative strategy. Combine the three crimes, camouflage the truth and throw all of them in the basket of present Central Government. Nobody has alleged any governmental complacency in these crimes. But to manufacture a revolt, it is necessary to obfuscate the truth and create the impression that the Modi Government is responsible for these crimes even if, they took place in the Congress and Samajwadi Party ruled States. In fact, one of the protesting writers in 2015 while returning her Padma Shri has cited the Sikh killings of 1984 as one of her reasons. It took thirty one years for this writer’s conscience to be aroused by the genocide of 1984. There is no atmosphere of intolerance in the country. The manufactured revolt is a case of an ideological intolerance towards the BJP.
A few questions to the protestors; How many of them courted arrest, protested or raised their voice against the dictatorship of Mrs. Indira Gandhi during the emergency? Did the writers speak against the Sikh killings of 1984 or the Bhagalpur riots of 1989? Was their conscience not shaken by the corruption involving lakhs of crores between 2004 and 2014?
With the Congress showing no signs of revival and an insignificant Left lacking legislative relevance, the recipients of past patronage are now resorting to “politics by other means”. The manufactured protest of the writers is one such case.
Posted on 04 October, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
No society can indefinitely sustain a system where income earners consider tax evasion to be a way of life. Regrettably our high taxation regime in the past eventually ended up encouraging tax evasion. When States tax their people reasonably, they can persuade them to honestly declare their incomes. The early decades after independence witnessed India with high taxation rates, prompting people to evade. The capacity of the State to detect evasion was less than adequate. Over the years, India has slowly started moving towards moderate rates of taxation. It has been a conscious strategy of the NDA Government to put more money in the pockets of middle and low income groups by raising exemption limits and incentivising savings through fiscal policy. This will encourage consumption and bring more money into the system. Consumption increases the volumes of indirect taxation. To make India a more investment friendly destination, I had in the 2015 Budget announced that the rate of corporate tax would be brought down to 25% over the next four years and most exemptions, other than those which incentivise savings, would eventually be phased out. The present Government under the leadership of Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi, stands by this commitment.
The campaign against Black Money stacked abroad
The Government has formulated a conscious strategy to deal with the menace of black money. At the very first meeting of the Union Cabinet, after the swearing in of the Government, we implemented the direction of the Supreme Court to constitute an investigation team headed by two retired Judges of the Supreme Court who would monitor the entire efforts against black money. The UPA Government had tried to evade the Supreme Court direction on one pretext or the other for over three years. The Government swung into action and accelerated all the income tax assessments against those with regard to whom information about holding illegal money abroad in Lichtenstein and in the HSBC bank at Geneva, were available. Most assessments have been completed and wherever illegalities are being found, criminal prosecutions have been launched against beneficiaries of these bank accounts. A total peak balance of about Rs.6500 crores in these accounts has been assessed. The Government, thereafter, proposed a law for imposition of taxation on undisclosed assets held outside the country. Since this tax was being imposed for the first time, a ninety day compliance window was offered to those wanting to disclose their unlawful assets. The compliance window ended on 30th September, 2015. A total tax @ 30% and penalty @ 30% has to be paid by the declarants before 31st December, 2015. Those who chose to declare between this period would not be prosecuted under the new black money law. 638 persons have declared their income amounting to Rs.3770 crores. These declarants can now sleep well. For those who have undisclosed foreign assets but have failed to file such a declaration will now be subjected to penal provisions of this law. They will be liable to pay 30% tax and a penalty of 90%, thus leading to confiscation of the assets plus more. In addition, they will be liable to prosecution where they can be sentenced upto 10 years. This law will create a deterrent in future against the flight of capital from India.
The assessed income of Rs.6500 crore in HSBC and Rs.3770 crores declared income during the compliance window should not be treated as income under any immunity scheme. The comparison of these amounts with amnesty schemes relating to domestic black money is ill conceived. The campaign against domestic black money has to be separately dealt with for which Government is independently taking steps.
In order to encourage international cooperation in the matters of tax evasion, the Government has taken a series of steps. The Prime Minister took the initiative at the G-20 meeting in order to bring about international cooperation in tackling unlawful assets held by the residents of one country in foreign soil. The G-20 initiative is intended to lift the veil of secrecy in banking transactions and in real time inform domestic taxation authorities about transactions of their citizens internationally. The Government has signed an understanding with the US under FATCA wherein United States and India would disclose to each other any real time transaction in accounts with financial institutions, by its citizens in foreign territories. This cooperation would also extend to all those countries which would become signatories to global standards on Automatic Exchange of Information being developed under the mandate of G20. The Revenue Secretary led a team of Indian officials and has held extensive discussions with Swiss authorities. Discussions have also been held at the ministerial level. Switzerland has agreed to provide India with proof relating to several HSBC accounts where India can give some evidence over and above the stolen data, which was delivered to India through France.
It is expected that over the next two years this international cooperation will be worked out and information with regard to illegal assets held abroad, subject to certain conditions, would be available to each of the demanding nations. Thus those with illegal assets abroad, who have failed to make declaration, would now stand the risk of information relating to them eventually reaching the Indian taxation authorities.
Domestic Black Money
The bulk of black money is still within India. We thus need a change in national attitude where plastic currency becomes the norm and cash an exception. Being seized of this problem, the Government has been working with various authorities in order to incentivise this change. The opening of a large number of payment gateways, internet banking, payment banks and the emerging reality of e-commerce will prompt the use of banking transactions and plastic money rise significantly. The JAM Trinity and the Direct Benefit Transfer of subsidies to the accounts of beneficiaries of various Government schemes will also be a step ahead in this direction. Each of the 180 million beneficiaries of the Jan Dhan accounts has been provided with RuPay cards, which will encourage them to use plastic currency and get familiarised with it. The MUDRA Yojana, over the next few years, has target of sixty million people (which means six crore families out of 25 crore families in India) to become entrepreneurs. Loans being made available to them by the banks can only be withdrawn from the ATMs by use of MUDRA credit cards which are being provided to them. More and more of their transactions will be through plastic currency or through the banking channel.
The Government is at an advanced stage in considering the requirement of furnishing PAN card details if cash transactions beyond a certain limit are undertaken. The monitoring regime of the income tax has been strengthened and its capacity to access information and apply technology driven analytical tools to expose evasion, has been enhanced. Its ability to detect large cash withdrawals, or large cash transactions which enter the system, is being strengthened. GST regime once introduced will also be a landmark step in this direction. Thus for commodities like gold where the initial purchase by the exporter is after the payment of custom duty, the subsequent transactions which are mostly in cash, can easily be found out.
The Government’s policy is rationalization of tax structures, taxing at reasonable rates, placing more money in the hands of small earners, encouraging and promoting the use of plastic money by all sections of society and creating deterrence against those who continue to use unaccounted money.
Posted on 27 September, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
The Prime Minister’s visit to the United States of America and his interaction at the West Coast is yet another milestone in India’s increased stature internationally. The Prime Minister’s visits have created an unprecedented impact. Packed stadiums listen to him with great attention. There is an election like mood of frenzy in the audience. Heads of Governments associate with India and the Indian leader at a new wavelength. Heads of major international cooperations want to do increased business in India. It is time to analyse how this change came about? How is it that a mood of despondence that existed sixteen months ago has completely changed?
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is seen as a decisive leader, who is pursuing changes and reforms in the right direction. His directional push to reforms and growth is no way impacted by the antigrowth attitude of the Congress Party. His determination appears to be firm. The result is that even in an adverse environment of global slowdown, India is showing potential of a respectable growth rate. He is strongly embedded to his cultural roots and yet realises the importance of economically modern ideas, technology and faster growth. He is making an equally strong push for social security schemes to lift the weaker sections out of poverty. He has created aspiration in India wherein India is no longer satisfied with 6 to 8% growth but it aims for a higher target.
The role of the successful Indian diaspora cannot be understated. They live in countries where their entrepreneurship has been unshackled. There was a sense of despondency about India. They considered India – their home where opportunities were being squandered. Today they see a Government led by Shri Narendra Modi which has potential to realise their aspirations. Their sense of pride and enthusiasm about India is unparalleled. Together Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Indian diaspora are creating this impact globally.
Posted on 27 September, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
Earlier this year the Prime Minister had launched the Micro Units Development and Refinance Agency Ltd. (MUDRA) to fund the unfunded section of the society. There are 5.7 crores entrepreneurs in the unorganised sector who are responsible for creating 11 crore jobs. There are estimated 24 crore families in India. Thus at the bottom of the economic structure were these unfunded sections of the society. They were dependent upon money lenders for loan on an exploitative rate of interest (24% to 36%). India’s industrial, service and agricultural sector are still not strong enough to absorb them in the employment.
Mundra Yojna has now been launched. There are 120 partners which includes public sector banks, private sector commercial banks, regional rural banks, NBFCs and MFIs. In the current financial year 2015-16; a total amount of Rs.1.22 lakh crores will be given to these unfunded sections of the Indian society. The three categories of loans are; Shishu – upto Rs. 50,000/-; Kishore – Rs. 5,00,000/- and Tarun – Rs. 10,00 000/-. This Yojna will continue for the next few years. The targeted beneficiaries are six crore people who need to be developed into India’s small entrepreneurs. They will all be issued Debit Cards, which will allow them withdrawal of money through ATMs. These people cannot afford securities and hence the requirement of furnishing securities will not applicable for loans to them. These loans will not be given on the strength of personal and political connections but linked to the business proposals of these potential entrepreneurs. At a function in rural Delhi I launched a campaign on the 25th September, 2015 in support of the Mudra Yojna. This was organised by the Punjab National Bank. Vegetable vendors, small shop-keepers, women associated with Beauty Parlours & Boutiques, Mechanics, Electricians, and Plumbers etc. were among the beneficiaries.
Already Rs. 24,000 crores of loans have been distributed. There are 37 lakh beneficiaries as of today. I anticipate that this year the number of beneficiaries crossing 1.5 crores. This number will increase year after year. Past experience has indicated that the recovery rate for such micro finance and similar loans is exceedingly high and the defaulter are few. India may not be able to provide employment to all but our economy will strong enough to provide resources to the weakest to enable them to be self-employed and self-dependent. The model of the present Government is not to give “Buksheesh” but to enable people to make them economically self-sufficient and live a life of dignity. MUDRA scheme will be a game changer over the next few years.
Posted on 21 September, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
I woke up early morning today in Hong Kong to receive the sad news of the passing away of Jagmohan Dalmiya, the BCCI President. His passing away is a great loss to the cricket administration, the BCCI, the CAB, his friends and family. To me it is a personal loss as we shared a warm personal relationship for over two decades.
I first met him in the early nineties when he and Inderjit Bindra another veteran cricket administrator decided to take on the Government of India and defend the BCCI’s right to telecast its’ own cricket matches and support the game of cricket with the revenues generated by Television Broadcasting rights. The Government contended that ‘National Security’ would be threatened if uplinking was allowed to Private Parties. We succeeded in getting an Interim order from the Supreme Court and finally won the case. Thanks to the battle fought by the ‘Dalmiya-Bindra duo, ‘AIRWAVES’ were freed in India and free speech on Television became a reality and more meaningful.
Having economically empowered the BCCI with the TV money, Dalmiya realized the power of the ‘eyeballs’. India alone accounted for more than seventy five per cent of the TV audiences, an equal amount of sponsorship money and hence India’s influence in the International Cricket Council would also increase. Dalmiya became the President of the ICC and India’s influence in the world of cricket has never looked back.
He attracted opposition both within the ICC and the BCCI. The Left Front Government managed to oust him only briefly from the CAB but he made a comeback.
The BCCI ‘created’ charges of irregularities against him only to withdraw them and vindicate his honour. His eventual vindication came when the BCCI in crisis in 2013 requested him to lead it once again since they needed Dalmiya to restore its credibility. By then his health was already failing him. Cricket however was still his first love.
I last met him in Kolkata last month. He was hopeful of recovering. Destiny however, decided otherwise. The game of cricket has lost a great administrator who shifted the Home of cricket to India. I have lost a personal friend.
Posted on 15 September, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
I was present today at the inauguration of the six day long Exhibition at the India Gate Lawns. It was the 50th anniversary of the 1965 Indo-Pak war. The Exhibition recreates all the major battle scenes of the 1965 war and brings back the nostalgic events where our soldiers not only successfully defended the border of the country but also made territorial gains in Pakistan. The Exhibition is open to the general public from 15th September, 2015 to 20th September, 2015 from 9 am to 9 pm. It is indeed a “MUST SEE” for students and others who wish to learn the intricate details of the 1965 war. A superb effort by the Armed Forces!
Posted on 05 September, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
This year we have been focusing on the three I’s of Inclusiveness, Implementation, and Investment for Growth. While we have considerably enhanced our inclusive growth efforts, our efforts related to Implementation and Investment for growth needs to be accelerated in light of the challenges posed by repeated downward adjustments to global growth projections. As per the preliminary implementation status of Brisbane commitments shared by the IOs, while around one third of the commitments have been completed and progress is being made on majority of the remaining commitments, considerable challenges stem from the fact that implementation is lagging in relatively larger economies, hence significantly affecting the growth impact. I would also like to use this opportunity to thank the IOs for their effort and look forward to final quantitative estimates on implementation status and the growth impact of the revised adjusted growth strategy. I suggest that the final quantitative assessment is made available well in time so as to give sufficient time to members to seek clarifications, if any and work on the strategies in case they find it relevant. We acknowledge that the Accountability Assessment exercise this year is far more rigorous and will considerably strengthen the credibility of the exercise.
Coming to the third I , ie. Investment, I ask the members if our efforts on this front have been satisfactory? Given the potential of infrastructure investment to simultaneously address our demand side and supply side constraints, India has been reiterating the need for improved global long term financing for infrastructure projects and the need for better policy coordination at international level for stable macroeconomic settings and improved business climate. Recent episodes of market volatility and currency movements again pose a lingering question on the need for global safety nets for addressing market concerns. I strongly believe that ad hoc, individual, reactionary measures can contain the adverse impact of such events only for a limited period. These cannot provide a sustainable solution which can happen only by global policy coordination.
As for Growth Strategies, one major addition to this year’s adjusted strategies has been the voluntary reporting on issues of secular stagnation, fiscal policy composition, inclusive growth and domestic policy spillovers. This gives members sufficient opportunity to explain and remind the group about the specific setting in which their domestic policies operate including the structural diversity. The new commitments received in adjusted strategies also confirm our perception of the document as a living document. However, as per the preliminary assessments carried out by the IOs and peer review, these new commitments might not be ambitious enough for meeting our 2 in 5 objective. Though final assessments are in process, I would suggest members to revisit their commitments to see if they qualify on the original parameters of being new, realistic and ambitious. I also encourage members to utilize the opportunity presented by adjusted strategies for informing the group about their prospective policy actions that can have significant spillovers on other members.
Given the significant amount of space that the issue of declining potential output in major economies occupied in this year’s FWG discussion, I suggest that our efforts for goods movement and capital liberalization should be complemented by skilled labor mobility. This will be of considerable help to countries facing demographic challenges due to ageing populations.
I suggest members to work out an effective communication strategy which strikes a right balance by convincing various stakeholders about the seriousness of our growth efforts and at the same time suitably explain the challenging global economic scenario in which our strategies are operating.
In addition, if the USP of G20 is collective and coordinated action, then G20 should seek policies which do not place the burden of tackling the impact of negative spillovers of domestic policy actions solely on affected countries. The G-20 should, therefore, seek to strengthen liquidity arrangements via multilateral swap agreements between member countries, possibly coordinated by the IMF. Such well-designed and quickly triggered safety nets should be explored under IMF.
Posted on 01 September, 2015, No Comments Comments admin
The Ordinance to amend ‘The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013’ has lapsed on 31stAugust, 2015. The Bill to replace the Ordinance is pending for consideration before the Standing Committee of Parliament. Questions are being raised with regard to the nature and future of the Land Acquisition Law in India.
The 2013 Act
I am of the opinion that the 2013 Act is badly drafted legislation. It has lot of ambiguities and obvious errors. The effect of certain provisions of this Act is contrary to the language used therein. A series of legitimate difficulties would arise once the Act is seriously implemented. The provisions of the Act would also prevent the development of the rural areas through rural infrastructure and further prevent job opportunities created in those areas by industrialisation. This was the principal object of the Central Government when the Ordinance to amend the Act was issued on 31st December, 2014.
It has been argued by many in the Congress Party that the 2013 law provided for consent of the farmers before the land is acquired and the 2015 law has snatched away this mandatory consent of the farmers. It is contrary to the language of section 2(1) of the 2013 law. For development of the project related to national security, infrastructure, agro-processing, industrial corridors, water harvesting, Govt. aided educational institutions, sports and tourism facilities, rehabilitation project, affected families, housing projects, planned development of villages etc.; no consent is required. This provision is partly diluted by the use of the word “also” in section 2(2) where it indicates confusion in the mind of the draftsperson with regard to non-applicability of the consent provisions to section 2(1). This ambiguity is required to be corrected.
Provisions relating to ‘social impact assessment’ and various steps to be taken therein required a large timetable which taken together could go up to several years. The language of the time provisions uses the word “within” the time period. This time requires to be shortened or exempted in some cases.
2013 Act required the entire acquired land to be utilised within a period of five years. Townships cannot be completed within five years. Since some key corrections were required in the badly drafted legislation, most of the State Governments represented to the present Central Government in 2014 that these amendments should immediately be carried out. It was at the request of the State Governments that the amendment to Land Acquisition law of 2013 was issued. However, after the issuance of the Ordinance, the Congress Party changed its position and wanted to oppose the Ordinance for political reasons. The Ordinance was re-issued on two more occasions but the political stalemate has continued and the Bill requiring amendment is pending before the Standing Committee of Parliament. The Prime Minister convened a meeting of the Chief Ministers again under the aegis of the NITI Aayog wherein all Chief Ministers were of the opinion that some flexibility should be given to the States if the stalemate at the Centre continues, the States should be empowered to bring their own amendments.
Can the State bring amendment to the Central Government?
Acquisition of property is a List-III, Entry 42 subject provided for in the concurrent list. The provisions of article 254(2) clearly provide that a State Government can bring a legislation on a Concurrent List Subject which conflicts with the Central legislation provided the Presidential assent is given to such legislation. The States are thus fully empowered to amend the 2013 Land Law and seek Presidential assent before the amendment can be effected. This has been precisely agreed to in the meeting convened by the NITI Aayog. One State has already brought the amendments and some others are likely to follow.
The States can provide for alternative mechanism which balances the interests of farmers and also provides for land required for acquisition.
Has the Centre moved back?
The amendments to sections to the 2013 Act which were brought by the Ordinance, were incorporated in Section 10A. The provisions of section 10A provide that the States can provide for any or all of the five purposes mentioned in section 10A and exempt the consent and the social impact assessment provisions. The Ordinance, therefore, left it to the wisdom of the States as to whether they wanted to notify any of the five Exempted Purposes. The position in the Ordinance remains unchanged. Pursuant to the decision taken by the NITI Aayog, the State Governments are still empowered to so decide. Earlier, there was delegation under the Ordinance which even otherwise under the Constitution remains on account of land being a concurrent subject and State can amend the law with the approval of the President.
The object of the 2015 Ordinance was to give certain amount of flexibility to the States. They know their requirements the best. That flexibility is made available to the States even now under the decision taken in Chief Ministers’ meeting. The position, therefore, currently remains is as follows:-
(a) The 2013 Act occupies the field;
(b) The Bill remains for consideration of the Standing Committee and if some consensus suggestions are made, the same would be implemented;
(c) That if any State wishes to make some amendments in the Central law, the same would be permitted by the Central Government.
Was the notification under section 105 necessary?
Section 105 of the 2013 Act exempted 13 legislations listed in Schedule IV of the Act from the applicability of the provisions of the Act. They were exempted from consent and social impact assessment provisions. They were also exempted from the provisions of additional compensation, relief and rehabilitation. The section requires issuance of the notification within a period of one year which would make compensation and the relief and rehabilitation provisions applicable to the notified 13 laws. This enhanced compensation was statutorily incorporated in the Ordinance. Since amendment to Ordinance has lapsed on 31st August, 2015, it is incumbent upon the Central Government to issue the notification before 31st August, 2015. The same has been done now.