Indian Presidential Elections 2012: Hype or Hope?

The only thing Indian media has been revolving around, for the last whole month, is speculating who would be India's next President. The value of Indian Rupee is contantly slipping and the inflation soaring, but that didn't seem as much important to the media houses. Interestingly, the speculations and the crazy merry-go - round over the successor to Pratibha Patil at the Rashtrapati Bhavan appealed the masses as well. Prime time shows and editorial pages of the newspapers were all packed with the Presidential news.

This trend is unprecedented. For the first time, there is so much fuss about who would be our next President.  Does that not indicate about how much the people are annoyed with our present President? As is evident from a bare reading of our Constitution, the President hardly has discretion to exercise and decisions to make on his own. Almost everything the President does, during whole of his term is on the 'Aid and advice of the Council of Ministers'. Why then would everyone be so anxious to have a new, a better president with minimal powers? Is it that a better successor would at least create a better global image of the nation? 

Pratibha Patil has been criticized as a President even more, probably because her predecessor was a highly qualified and an inspirational Scientist. People do not expect a President to perform exceptionally well as the first citizen of the country, but at least make such public appearances that would carry the image of brand India and not the ones that are marred by various controversies. Mrs. Patil was dragged into various controversies. Be it regarding protecting her brother in a murder case, or divulging funds to a family owned trust or her post- retirement home. That is the least one would expect to go around even with the President. 

Be it so, the hunt for President started like a TV reality show, with all the melodrama. Political Parties gradually got into the act of deciding the Presidential candidate. Firstly, Congress not naming their candidate for so long. Once they officially name Pranabda as their candidate, their most trusted ally, for no reason apparent, TMC leader and Bengal CM, Mamata Banerjee teams up with Mulayam to name none other than the present Prime Minister as their preferred choice for the post.Such a statement is obviously intriguing as it reflected that Mamata has no faith either in Manmohan Singh as PM and Pranabda as Prez. Let us not go into the coalition dharma debate but accept the fact that the UPA is definitely vulnerable. They badly need those 20 seats of Bengal, which Mamatadi holds. Further, Sangma from NCP and Ram Jethmalani from  BJP have decided to contest the elections, even with a god idea of the support Pranabda has. 

However, in the end, Pranab da is nominated as the Prez candidate by Congress also getting expressive support from SP and BSP and with speculations that he would sweep an easy victory even if he is contested. But one more issue needs to be gone into. Pranab has been a savior for UPA in the times of crisis, then why was only he named as Prez. Evidently, he could not do much to save Indian economy from the world crisis. The Rupee kept on slipping, inflation rising and market transactions at the low of a decade. But, he deserves a retirement of this kind. A man who has been at the whelms of Congress since 70's surely deserves it all. 

Let us now hope that 19th July gives us a new, a better, a rather more inspirational President who would lead India from the front and take us ahead with the vision of India 2020. 

Jay Hind.

    

UP Polls

With the beginning of the year 2012, the election fever was already on as 5 states went to polls in the first quarter of the year. Punjab, Uttarakhand, Goa and Manipur did not gain as much attention as UP did during the elections. But that is fair, as UP is a State with a population way over 200 Million and is bound to attract more eyes. Moreover, the political heavyweights were all trying their luck in UP. If BJP exported Uma Bharti, SP brought a fresh wave with the young Akhilesh Yadav. Congress played its trump card of Rahul G(Ji), and BSP had its dalit ki beti, Mayawati to lead the election campaign.

Congress played its old trick of 'woo muslims and get into power'. Salman Khursheed promising a 9% sub-quota for Muslims, then defending himself saying that he quoted what was transcripted in Congress manifesto, although the said manifesto was found not to have specified the quantum of reservation. SP was not behind in Muslim appeasement for various contents in its manifesto. It promises to provide reservation to all Muslims, treating them as backwards, in proportion to their population on the lines of Dalit reservation. The other salient features of the manifesto relating to the minority community are construction of boundaries of graveyards, a 'Special Dargah Act' with special package, modernisation of madarsas, removal of encroachment from all waqf properties, protection to artisans and handicrafts, waiver of power dues on weavers, special incentive of Rs 30000 for every Muslim girl who has passed class X, university status to several minority institutions and fulfilling Azam Khan's dream of setting up Jauhar University in Rampur. 

Minority appeasement had to be an important issue in UP, for its 18% Muslim population.

On the other hand, BSP supremo Mayawati could not think of anything beyond dalits and continued with the Kashiram's line of politics. BJP, as expected, had Ram Mandir contruction in its manifesto, though it seemed to be a  forced inclusion as it was not talked about during the rallies. 

The 7- phased election in UP came an end and the speculations began with the media coming up with contradicting exit polls, where some predicted a President rule, while some others showed SP a clear majority. 

On 6th of March, the real picture was unveiled and the political turnaround was round the corner. Akhilesh Yadav, turned out be the real Nawab of UP. SP won 224 seats out of 403. That says a lot about the Mayawati regime and its failure. But, more than Maya, it was a setback to the national parties. Rahul Gandhi campaigned with full enthusiasm and confidence, but success rate in the constituencies where he campaigned was merely 11%. Even the Amethi and Rae Bareli seats were lost. And that Congress stood 4th as far as the number of seats were concerned.

It was not a good day for BJP either, as it lost a big opportunity. Certainly, Uma Bharti did not work. The star campaigner for BLP, the Gujarat Cm, Narendra Modi was missing. There in no unanimity in the opinion of political analysts, whether, his presence could have been better or worse for BJP. But for sure, Ram Mandir issue has to be reconsidered by BJP, as it lost its Ayodhya seat for the first time since 1990. BJP has been winning elections in other states for its agenda of Development and upliftment of the poors, and the same should have been the prime concern in UP as well.

Ultimately, Akhilesh won it for SP, and gifted the CM's chair to his father. What worked for SP is still unknown. Was it the anti-incumbency factor? Was it the poor governance by Mayawati? Was rampant corruption by Mayawati government the decisive factor? Was it the minority appeasement that worked? Did the people of UP forget the goondaraj by SP, half a decade ago? Did Mayawati commit a blunder by wasting hundreds of crores of Rs. from public exchequer for her own statues?

The people of UP have reposed faith in SP, and there is a glimmer of hope and anticipation of regret in the SP for its goondaraj in the early years. Good, corruption-free governance is expected from SP. Now, it is upto them to prove thir point and come true to the expectations of people.

Jai Hind

My views on 62nd Republic Day

26th January, 1950. This day made our country a sovereign, a democracy and a republic at one go by enactment of the Constitution. We are, proudly, world's largest democracy. But, is it enough to give the country, a democratic status?? Would a mere democratic status confer every freedom to the people of India.

What we, the people of India deserve is a progressive democracy. A democracy, where the principles of right to life and personal liberty, right to speech and expression, right to equality before law and supremacy of Constitution are actualized. A democracy where the Fundamental rights of each subject are protected. A democracy where the Directive Principles are paid heed to. 

A democracy where everyone a point of view and the same is respected by others; where there is no Raj Thackerey to abuse people of UP & Bihar; where there are no strikes for seperation of states; where there is no Mayawati (or even her billions worth statues) in one of the most backward states of India; where a Salman Rushdie is not restricted from arriving in the country.

We deserve a functional, progressive and participatory democracy. Hope to see a turnaround and an India that our Constitution framers had dreamt of, though after 62 years.

Jai Hind

Price for defaming a SC Judge: Rs. 100 Crore

Electronic media has been a soft target for anyone and everyone. The Pune Court affirmed this statement with its judgment in the defamation case filed by former Supreme Court Judge P B Sawant. A complaint was filed by Justice Sawant against Times Now, a leading NEWS channel for showing the former's picture for about 15 seconds suggesting involvement in the Ghaziabad PF scam. The same was apologized by the channel for 5 consecutive days after such technical BLUNDER was committed. There is a fair chance of mistake due to similarity in names, as the Judge actually involved in the scam had similar kind of a name. 

Pune Court took the issue too seriously to award damages of 100 Crores for the libel. Considering the value of Indian Rupee, how can a Court come to such an abrupt conclusion, awarding 100 crores for libel of a former Judge. It was a criminal case. Probably, the Pune Court failed to appreciate the fact that the channel had expressed extreme apologies and most essentially the absence of MALICE. 

The said order was severely criticized by various jurists, lawyers, judges and most importantly media persons.  The order is undoubtedly abrupt and damages, disproportionate. But the criticism of the High Court and Supreme Court in this case is improper as these Constitutional Courts have merely followed the procedure established by law. It a settled law that the Appellant needs to deposit the damages with the Court in case of an appeal to the High Court in any money decree. The same was done in this case too. Further, the powers of Supreme Court in a SLP filed under Art. 136 are limited and the Apex Court does not interfere with any intermediary order of the High Court. So where have these institutions gone wrong??? NOWHERE !!!

There are fair chances that the Pune Court order would not be upheld by the Bombay High Court. But is this a warning bell for MEDIA?? Do they really need to take care that they don't end up paying hundreds of crores for such inadvertent errors??

Does the Media need to be regulated???

Media has always been an eye-opener to the people. There are mentions of the print media playing a pivotal role during the Indian independence. Since then, this FOURTH PILLAR of the Indian democracy has become more and more concrete. Media has certainly done a lot of good to the nation. Various scams have been divulged by Media recently. It keeps the murder and rape stories burning. It has put immense pressure on the bureaucrats and judiciary to perform.

But, the issue is has the media, along with its numerous positives, crossed the line? Has it transgressed the limits? Has the idea of self-regulation of Media a failure during the era of cut-throat competition in the industry?

The Media has been accused of conducting the trial on their own and making the accused, a convict by the hype and speculations. Probably that is the reason why Kanimozhi and Raja are finding it hard to get their bail sanctioned. The hype created by media disables the Court to do so, something that is done in normal course. The Media has on several occasions gone a bit far affecting various persons.

The question still stands tall, is there a need for the media to be regulated by an outside body??

If the answer is in affirmative, would it not be hindering with the pious and sacrosanct right of the Media to ‘Speech and expression’ guaranteed under the Constitution. Further, with the fastening world, political developments are vary fast. Would the media be waiting for an approval of a body, every time some controversial story has to be broadcast.

Media, should be allowed to regulate itself. One should repose more faith in them with a belief that they would collectively ensure that no wrong is promoted by them.