Gujarat summit 2015: the diplomacy of business

For the first time in its 10-year history, the Vibrant Gujarat Summit 2015, which opens on Sunday, will be used as a stage for business-related diplomacy with the U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon attending the high-profile event.

Started as a brainchild of Mr. Modi in 2003, the biennial event has been steadily rising in stature with every edition. The seventh edition of the three-day Summit, is set to get grander in terms of the sheer number of participants and the guests involved.

This year’s event will see eight countries, Canada, Japan, China, Australia, the Netherlands, Singapore, South Africa and the U.S. partnering with the State. With aggressive campaigning, the government expects participation from over 2,000 companies, two million-plus visitors and over 2,500 international delegates.

In the last six Vibrant Gujarat Summits, the States signed MoUs worth Rs. 48 lakh crore. However, the investment generated has been way below the intention expressed in these summits.

The summit will have a series of seminars on various themes, prominently Mr. Modi’s pet project of smart cities and Gujarat’s potential as a Defence production hub. Other areas include water security, health, sustainable energy, innovation and technology and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).

However, amid the tall claims of the government and the huge figures of MoUs signed at every Summit, questions are getting louder about the actual impact of the event on the ground.

As per the figures collated by the Opposition Congress, a total of 17,719 MoUs were signed in the last six Summits from 2003 to 2013. The total worth of these MoUs was Rs. 39.6 lakh crore. However, only 9.14 per cent of these intentions have materialised into actual investment.

“The focus of the event has always been big business. Figures are bloated and do not present the reality. The State is using public money to host industrialists. Even without the Summit, Gujarat attracted 25 per cent of the investment pie of the country,” former Congress president Siddharth Patel said at a press conference here on Saturday.

The government’s own data reveals the chasm between their claims and the reality. The State’s Socio-Economic Review 2013-14, claims that projects commissioned and under implementation constitute 57.40 per cent of the investment intentions of Vibrant Gujarat 2003 to 2011, as on March 31, 2014.

But, according to the ‘Industries in Gujarat (Statistical Information) 2013’ by Industries Commiserate, investment in large-scale projects, between 30 years from 1983 to 2013 is worth Rs. 10 lakh crore. The investment in commissioned projects was Rs. 2.38 lakh crore and for projects under implementation was Rs. 8.21 lakh crore. Investment in micro, small and medium enterprises (MSME) from 2006 to 2013 has been Rs. 63,000 crore.

No live telecast

Principal Correspondent reports:

Ahmedabad: In a last-minute decision, the government of Gujarat, which is hosting the Vibrant Gujarat Summit 2015, has decided against a live telecast of the Global CEO conclave — a crucial programme of the event.

“The meet will be held in camera. There is no live telecast,” Bhagyesh Jha, Director of Information, toldThe Hindu.

Source - The Hindu

[Ed] Ordinances have been ‘handy tool’ since 1952

They infected governance long before Parliament took a disruptive turn’

When the President promulgated the Citizenship (Amendment) Ordinance on Wednesday, it was the ninth invocation of Article 123 by the Modi government in a little over seven months, but it was also the 646th ordinance since 1952.

In fact, says Shubhankar Dam, Assistant Professor of Law at the Singapore Management University, and author of Presidential Legislation in India: The Law and Practice of Ordinances , the past 15 years or so have actually seen a “rather significant decline” in the number of ordinances.

Contrary to public perception — fuelled by successive governments citing disruptions in Parliament to justify the ordinance route — Professor Dam points out that “ordinances infected governance in India long before Parliament took a disruptive turn; the Nehru-Gandhi years were especially damaging.”

Though Jawaharlal Nehru, the freedom fighter, had called ordinances — in play since 1861 — a “charter of slavery”, he along with B. R. Ambedkar batted for its inclusion during the Constituent Assembly debates, and 66 ordinances were promulgated under Prime Minister Nehru’s watch between 1952 and 1964. If he paved the way for repeated use of Article 123 by governments that followed, he also made a U-turn on ordinances as an acceptable norm within the political class.

Once out of government, every political party bills ordinances as “authoritarian’’ and a subversion of parliamentary democracy, but a cursory look at the ordinances promulgated over the years shows how Article 123 becomes a handy tool of governance once in power.

The Janata Party years (1977-1980) saw 28 ordinances, the National Front years (1989-1991) 16, the United Front years (1996-1998) 77, and the first incarnate of the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (1998-1999 and 1999-2004) saw 58 ordinances.

In all, the last decade of the United Progressive Alliance saw 61 ordinances being promulgated, inviting the charge of “ordinance raj” from the BJP, among others, with current Finance Minister Arun Jaitley then calling the use of Article 123 “an abuse of the legislative power to issue ordinances”.

Now, Mr. Jaitley is fighting criticism over the slew of ordinances in the fortnight after the close of the Winter Session of Parliament as a demonstration of the “firm commitment and determination of the government to reforms” and an announcement to the world including investors that India “can no longer wait even if one of the Houses (of Parliament) waits indefinitely to take up its own agenda.”

This has translated into some ordinances, like the potentially divisive Land Acquisition Ordinance being promulgated without an attempt to take the Bill first to Parliament, even though the Lok Sabha has functioned largely disruption-free. This is something the UPA did too; in fact, only six of the 36 ordinances promulgated in the 14th Lok Sabha and only three of the 25 in the 15th Lok Sabha involved Bills stuck in Parliament.

Governments are particularly prone to introducing ordinances without prior attempt at tabling Bills before Parliament. UPA-1 introduced eight ordinances in its first six months in power, none of them first taken to Parliament, including ordinances repealing the stringent anti-terror legislation.

Source - The Hindu

ISC paper on aviation won’t be made public

A controversial paper presented at the recently concluded Indian Science Congress here on ancient Indian aviation technology will not be made public, the organisers of the session told The Hindu.

For the first time in its 102-year history, the congress included a session on “ancient Indian sciences through Sanskrit” on its agenda. Many delegates hailed it as a belated but welcome decision.

But it soon became controversial because of the tall claims made in some of the papers presented at the session. One of them was on ancient Indian aviation technology, presented by Captain Anand Bodas, a retired Principal of a pilot training centre, and Ameya Jadhav, a lecturer.

“We had earlier decided to upload all the presentations on our website. But we have changed our minds. We will only upload a report on the session,” Uma Vaidya, chairperson of the session and Vice-Chancellor of Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, told The Hindu.

The paper had already sparked a controversy. “Why add to it,” she asked.

Gauri Mahulikar, Head of the Sanskrit Department of Mumbai University, said there were copyright issues as well. “We fear that others who have nothing to do with this research will claim it as their finding,” she said.

Captain Bodas, too, refused to share the presentation. When approached for a copy at the Indian Science Congress, he redirected the correspondent to the organisers, who said they had to seek his permission. “If he has redirected you to us, he does not want to share the copy,” one of the organisers said.

The paper had said Maharshi Bharadwaj had given detailed guidelines for making aircraft. “Maharshi Bharadwaj has narrated guidelines for making aeroplanes. There are 97 reference books for aviation. InBrihatvimanshastra, he has given 500 guidelines,” Captain Bodas had said at the presentation.

Source - The Hindu

Sindhushree Khullar named NITI Aayog CEO

A 1975 batch UT cadre IAS officer, she was appointed the now defunct Planning Commission’s Secretary in April 2012.

The Modi Government on Saturday appointed former Planning Commission Secretary Sindhushree Khullar as the first CEO of the National Institution for Transforming India (NITI) Aayog.

Ms. Khullar, a 1975 batch UT cadre IAS officer, was appointed Planning Commission’s Secretary in April 2012. She continued to hold the post even after the Modi Government scrapped the Cabinet resolution in August 2014 through which the Planning Commission was set up.

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Narendra Modi appointed noted economist Arvind Panagariya as Niti Aayog’s Vice-Chairman. He also appointed Economist Bibek Debroy and former DRDO Chief V K Saraswat as full-time members.

Mr. Modi is the Niti Aayog’s Chairman.

He also made Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh, Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, Railways Minister Suresh Prabhu and Union Agriculture Minister Radha Mohan Singh as Ex-Officio members. Union Roads and National Highways Minister Nitin Gadkari, Union Human Resource Development Minister Smriti Zubin Irani and Union Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Thawar Chand Gehlot were made Special Invitees to the Niti Aayog.

Source - The Hindu

SC has no option but to set rapist free

‘He may have deserved the severest punishment under the law’
The Supreme Court set free a man sentenced to life imprisonment for the rape and murder of a seven-year-old girl after medical examination found he was a juvenile at the time of the crime.

The judgment by a Bench of Justices T.S. Thakur and R. Banumathi comes shortly after the apex court, in November 2014, had acquitted a 40-year-old murder convict in another case when he too had successfully claimed ‘juvenility.’

In its verdict dated January 8 this year, the Bench expressed its misgivings over letting loose a man found guilty of rape and murder of an “innocent young child.”

“The circumstances, in our opinion, form a complete chain and lead to the irresistible conclusion that the appellant was responsible for the offence of rape and murder of the hapless baby-girl,” Justice Thakur wrote.

“But for the protection available to him under the Juvenile Justice Act, the appellant may have deserved the severest punishment permissible under law,” Justice Thakur observed in the verdict.

Justice Thakur, however, noted that the only relief for the court was the “cold comfort” it drew from the fact that the man spent 14 years in jail.

Section 7 A of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 provides that an accused can claim he was a juvenile at the time of the alleged crime during any stage of the case and before any court. If medical examination proved his claim right, the court had to treat him as a juvenile, no matter what his present age was.

Being treated a juvenile would mean that punishment, even for heinous offences like rape and murder, would be reduced to a round of advice, community service or a period of two years in a special home.

In the present case, the accused, who is deaf and dumb, was found guilty of picking up the seven-year-old victim while she was sleeping and then raping and murdering her in April 1998. He was sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial court in January 2004.

The Rajasthan High Court had confirmed the sentence.

In his appeal before the Supreme Court, the accused, in a fresh plea, said he was a juvenile in 1998. Medical examination proved that the accused was just over 17 years of age when he allegedly committed the crime. This left Justice Thakur’s Bench with no option but to let him go.

This is the second case in which the apex court has expressed its helplessness over the provisions of the juvenile law.

In November 2014 hearing, a Bench led by Justice Dipak Misra had found the juvenile law “far too liberal” and had questioned the legality of Section 7A.

Justice Dipak Misra, who led the Bench, had then asked in open court: “What is this? Somebody can claim juvenility even after final disposal of the case...”

Source - The Hindu

President conveys sharp reminder on ordinance limits

Govt. must ensure extension of tenure after Parliament reconvenes
President Pranab Mukherjee reminded senior Ministers of the Narendra Modi government that the validity of an ordinance was for just six weeks after Parliament reassembled.

Mr. Mukherjee’s comments to the Ministers when they called on him to explain the urgency for promulgating three ordinances imply that the government will have to get these turned into Acts of Parliament. In order to do this, the government must get the contentious legislation passed either through the Rajya Sabha, where it doesn’t have the majority, or call a joint sitting of the two Houses.

The President told Ministers Arun Jaitley, D.V. Sadananda Gowda and Nitin Gadkari at a recent meeting that it was up to the government to ensure that the validity of the legislation extended beyond the mandated six weeks after Parliament resumed, The Hindu has learnt.

Under Article 123 of the Constitution, the President has to satisfy himself that “circumstances exist” that require him to “take immediate action” when both Houses of Parliament are not in session. Also, an ordinance has the “same force and effect” as an Act of Parliament.

“They [the government] could call a joint session of Parliament, where they have a majority. But it would be better if the consensus route was adopted,” the former Attorney-General, Soli Sorabjee, told this newspaper.

In the absence of Rural Development Minister Birender Singh, the President is reported to have sought detailed clarifications from Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on the urgency of on the ordinance amending the Land Acquisition Act, 2013. While seeking reasons to justify the urgency of issuing this and two other ordinances amending the Motor Vehicles Act and the Citizenship Act, Mr. Mukherjee is said to have pointed out that the impact of the ordinances would be permanent.

Source - The Hindu