Two Contemporary Scenes of Tolerant India

Two contemporary scenes of incredible India.

Scene 1

JNU Campus, New Delhi

Some leftist and kashmiri students were protesting by anti-india and pro-pakistan slogans to oppose ‘judicial killing’ of Afzal guru. In fact, they had planned to mark hanging of terrorist Afzal guru by a cultural event on 9^th February. The event didn’t get permission when it came into attention of college authority. Though, without permission, they went ahead and organized an event.

Scene 2

Army research and referral hospital, New Delhi

Lance Naik Hanumanthappa Koppad, a brave india soldier, was fighting against death. He was discovered in siachen, buried under 35 ft snow for five days, still conscious. Whole country was praying for her brave-heart son.

A soldier who gives his precious life to serve our nation, to make us feel safe. He remains awake in -30 degree Celsius so that we can sleep with comfort in our beds with soft pillow, beneath a blanket. He strives to defend India and its people from terrorists and external aggression. Then, there are some people who advocate those terrorists. Today, they are doing this for Afzal guru, in the name of kshmiriyat, tomorrow they will do the same for Yakub Memon, then Kasab. Instead of denouncing it, our political superstar (no need to name him) is supporting them by condemning police action against them. Absurdness is that they are doing this with political motivation. All I want to say, political agenda should be left aside, at least matters relating to defence of our country. But our politicians are not mature enough to understand it. There was a time, congress was in rule, they sent opposition leader Mr. Vajpayee to represent India in UN. Pakistan was shocked by that action. He represented India as an Indian, not as opposition leader. In this time, political leaders need to develop that kind of patriotic nature. That kind of political maturity India needs now.

Finally, a salute to L/n hanumanthappa and those nine brave-heart sons of bharatmata. They left us devastated and sad. Om shanti om!  

GCTOC

Finally The Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime (GCTOC) Bill is passed by legislation assembly of Gujarat. First it was introduced in 2004 as Gujarat Control of Organised Crime Bill (GUJCOC), 2003, which was earlier rejected twice by the President due to some of its contentious provisions. In 2004, it is rejected by our presidents A.P.J. Abdul Kalam and in 2008 by Pratibha Patil.  Now it is again sent to the president with the hope to be passed as NDA is in government.

Contentious Provisions in bill

·  The harsh provision in the bill is that custody of accused can be of 180 days instead of 90 days stated in Code of Criminal Procedure. In this period accused may or may not be in judicial custody. i.e. it can be in police custody for 180 days.

·   Nonbailabe term is there in clause 20(4) of the bill. It doesn’t mean no bail at all. It means bail can be acquired by appropriate magistrate. It is stated in article that “Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, no person accused of an offence punishable under this Act shall, if in custody, be released on bail or on his own bond.” i.e. person can’t be released on self bail.

· The Bill include Clause 16 that stipulates that “a confession made by a person before a police officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police…shall be admissible in the trial of such accused, co-accused, abettor or conspirator.”

· The Bill makes “evidence collected through the interception of wire, electronic or oral communication” admissible in the court. It is basically authorisation of interception in telephonic conversions and their admissibility as evidence.
· Clause 25 of the Bill states, “No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against the State government or any officer or authority of the State government for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this Act.” It provides immunity to the State government from legal action. 

Safeguards

•  Under MCOCA and GCTOC, there are several safeguards for the citizen, prime among them being the stipulation that the permission of a Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG)/Additional Commissioner of Police (ACP) is required for registering a case.
•  The investigating officer will have to be of the rank of Deputy Superintendent (DSP).
• The permission of an Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) is required for charge sheeting an accused before a court.
• Critics believe that Phone taping will be done by police to fulfil personal greed and intimidation. What the critics forget is that the normal procedure, of the police obtaining the Home Secretary’s permission, has still to be observed under GCTOC.
• Narendra modi said the bill Xerox copy of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), 1999.
• A heartening feature of MCOCA is that, among those charged under it till now, only a small number is from the minority communities. The Dharmadhikari Committee, which was appointed by the Maharashtra government to go into the working of MCOCA, found no major shortcomings or criticism that would detract from the merits of the Act. Facts such as there being an average of about 40 cases registered annually and about 6-7 persons arrested in each case, especially in a large State like Maharashtra, are testimony to the fact that the use of MCOCA has been extremely selective and not indiscriminate as was the case with TADA or POTA.
• Being situated on the border with Pakistan, Gujarat has every reason to protect itself as well as it can, and the new piece of legislation fits into the scheme of things in the State.

Difference between MCOCA and GCTOC

Basically MCOCA and GCTOC both are almost same having almost same provisions. As MCOCA Also accept the interception in electronic media as evidence and all other provisions. But the only difference is about bail. The MCOCA allows for the court to grant bail as long as the accused wasn't on bail in any other case, while the GUJTOC seems to draw its inspiration from the now repealed Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) which didn't allow for an accused to be granted bail if a public prosecutor were to oppose it.

Final Conclusion

Though GCTOC is called as draconian act, it can be used as harsh weapon against terrorists and criminals for whom talks about human rights is senseless. In past also, laws like TADA and POTA came into enforcement but they were allowed to lapse due to gross abuse of these laws. But MCOCA is successfully implemented and successful result is also obtained by it. That’s why delhi also enact the same law in it’s province. Even US also took strict actions against terrorism after 9/11 without taking account allegations of worldwide human right organisations. And that’s why US doesn’t have terrorists attacks like india has. One surely should think about innocent people being tortured in the name of acts like GCTOC but on the other hand strict action is also necessary against brutal terrorism. And nowdays as we can see the people from india also joining the terrorist organisations like ISIS and mostly communication is done by electronic medium it Is inevitable to enact the law like this. But finally it can be useful only if it is implemented honestly by bureaucrats and government.

Source : The Hindu Newspaper

Beefbam-a necessary step

History:
Let me start with the status of cows in India. As all people know, cow is a sacred animal for Hindus since ancient times and given the status of GAU MATA may be due to its usefulness. It was the status of wealth in ancient times.
Now if we talk about the antiquity of cow slaughter, then it was even banned in initial Mughal dynasty. Even Babar, Akbar prohibited cow slaughter. But down the line, it was allowed with some restrictions like on the occasion of bakri-id. The worst came when, Aurangzeb alleviated ban on cow slaughter with a view to convert whole country into Islam. As the power shifted to Marathas later Mughals again prohibited cow slaughter.
Then came the witty British. They used "divide and rule" policy. Thus, again cow slaughter prohibition was repealed. With an aim to enhance communal discrimination. They succeeded in it as several riots took place after that. And that’s how cow slaughter came into picture once again.

Scenario around 1947:
In 1940, one of the Special Committees of the Indian National Congress opined that slaughter of cow and its progeny must be totally prohibited. Prominent leaders of congress assured people that after getting independence the first action of government would be ban on cow slaughter and that congress lead the country to the pink revolution...! What a paradox...! after independence, The Cattle Preservation and Development Committee was appointed by the Ministry of Agriculture in November 1947 to consider the question of banning slaughter of cattle in all its aspects and to recommend a comprehensive plan of action for preserving the cattle wealth of the country and for promoting its development. They submitted recommend that large number of cattle slaughter resulted into shortage of milk and work bullocks.so cattle slaughter should be prohibited. In fact Sardar Patel wanted ban on slaughter and Nehru did not. So after it, various committees formed regarding this they almost supported previous recommendations but allowed stocking and sale of beef in closed container. But finally central government left the decision on respective states to whether ban it completely or partially.
Recent Scenario:
On 22 December 2000, S.S. Ahluwalia introduced a Private Member’s Bill entitled: Prevention of Cow Slaughter Bill, 2000 in the Rajya Sabha. The resolution stated, "This House is of the opinion that the Government should bring forward a suitable legislation to ban slaughter of cow and its progeny throughout the country." Recommendations were obviously given after a huge study of various issues of economy and developments. In present scenario, States like Gujarat, Rajasthan banned all cattle slaughter. Some eastern states has no ban and some states with limited prohibition.

Personal Opinion:
Now if we think economically, agriculture provides more than 50% employment in India. So India is the country where most people are dependent on primary sector. Much more than secondary and tertiary sector. Those people undoubtably depend on cattle. Even now also India faces the shortage of dairy products mainly, milk. As we know Milk is a complete food. Thus to give sufficient nutrition to the poor we need to provide them with milk and not beef. Before, keeping the interests of big exporter houses, which export beef we should rather concentrate on providing affordable milk to every household in India.
Economical View:
Mechanization in Agriculture was to the tune of 20% only whereas 80% of the agriculture/farm operations were done by bullock drawn implements. The draught power of our 83 million draught animals was estimated at equivalent to 30,000 MW in terms of electric power, equivalent to half the present generation capacity of India. Bullock Gives traction power to 50 million ploughs in villages. Gives employment to 20 million people on full time/part time basis in Bullock cart business. In load terms, bullock carts carry more load than the total load transported by railways. Back bone of rural economy & an asset in bio-diversity terms. For those people who are arguing with "fit-for-slaughter" certificate thing, as of 2004, there were 3,600 legal and 30,000 illegal slaughterhouses in India. So by this, anyone can obviously think how truly it is followed. Even "Not Fit For Work" cattle’s can also be useful by using their dung for Bio-gas, cakes & Bio-fertilizers, Ayurveda products, soaps, shampoos etc.
Act in Democracy:
Democracy doesn’t mean that masses can do anything and implement what they think. But, as we saw cattle and specially cow and its family serves much more alive than dead. Food habits can change but the essential need of a country once sacrificed serves limited purpose. Just as a thought, "Hindu Civil Code”. Wasn’t it also implementation of thought?
Now about the communal fraternity, Hindus revere cow, but nowhere its stated that cow slaughter is a religion practice in any religion. So if cow slaughter hurt religion faith of Hindus then why people of other religions have problem with it. They can try and be more tolerant towards Hindus and live without eating beef entire life. That’s why even some Muslims also have welcomed the legislation enacted by Maharashtra government. A controversy takes place if someone says about mother Teresa, but aren't we indirectly questioning Mahatma Gandhi’s thought who strongly wanted ban on cow slaughter by questioning the act. So I personally think that cattle slaughter ban should be welcomed without questioning it as communal step of the government.