Where the mind is with fear
Satish Deshpande | Professor of sociology at Delhi University
The Indian Express
Deshpande writes that public memory is notoriously short and many have already forgotten the “institutionally-enabled suicide” of Rohith Vemula. “Critical injuries inflicted on our public universities are not those caused by lathis in uniform or iron rods in masks” he adds and lists many other injuries inflicted on public universities. The first being the “deliberate diminishing of the public university as an instrument of social justice,” states Deshpande. Where once higher education was an instrument for rapid mobility for the have-nots, today with dominant prejudices at work and dilution of the reservation policy, dominant groups have disproportionate access to higher education, he adds.
The second injury, Deshpande notes, is the crippling of public universities to promote free and rigorous thinking. However, he concedes that “much of it was ceded by academics rather than snatched by bureaucrats or politicians.” He also mentions pressure by the current dispensation “on courses and syllabi in the social sciences and humanities to make them conform to its ideological expectations.” According to Deshpande, the final and most serious injury is the “Modi regime’s ceaseless efforts to turn public opinion against universities, intellectuals, and more generally, against reasoned debate.” Ending on a sombre note he writes that it seems not much has changed in the past four years and the same tactics used against Vemula and his comrades are being used in several universities today.
Preventing mob lynching
M.P. Nathanael | Retired Inspector General of Police, CRPF
The Hindu
Nathanael writes that incidents of mob lynching have created a heightened sense of insecurity among marginalised communities and states that he does not know why the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) had not compiled any data on lynching. He notes, that in 2018, “The Supreme Court described lynching as a ‘horrendous act of mobocracy’” and told both central and state governments to frame laws to tackle the crime.
Nathanael writes that Manipur was the first such state to do so and the law specified that “police officers who fail to prevent the crime of lynching in their jurisdiction are liable to be imprisoned for a term that may extend from one to three years with a fine limit of ₹50,000.” Next to follow was Rajasthan in August 2019 and then West Bengal. Talking about what the central government can do, Nathanael notes that it should “incorporate sections in the law for penal action against doctors who stand accused of dereliction of duty, for delay in attending to victims of lynching, or submitting false reports without carrying out a proper and thorough medical examination of the victims, either under coercion by the police or due to their own prejudice against the community or religion of the victims.”
He also argues that compensation to the victims should be given by perpetrators of the crime and that, “while framing the laws, the Centre could even provide for punitive action against political leaders found guilty of inciting mobs. Until a zero-tolerance attitude is adopted in dealing with mob lynching, this crime will continue to show a rising trend.”
Celebrating the life and legacy of Nani Palkhivala
Soli Sorabjee | Former Attorney-General of India
Hindustan Times
Sorabjee remembers jurist Nani Palkhivala a day after his 100th birth anniversary on 16 January. Sorabjee talks about Palkhivala’s education and states that the latter applied for a lecturer’s post but didn’t get it. He writes, “Had Palkhivala got the lecturer’s post, Bombay University would have got a brilliant lecturer, but the world of law would have been a loser.” Despite having no godfathers in the world of law his rise was meteoric, writes Sorabjee. He adds, “For sheer advocacy, Palkhivala was unsurpassable. Clarity of thought, precision and elegance of expression, impassioned plea for the cause he espoused, excellent court craft, and extraordinary ability to think on his legs rendered him an irresistible force.”
Palkhivala reached the pinnacle of fame for his submissions in the Kesavananda Bharati case when he told the Supreme Court that the Constitution could not be amended to change its very basic structure. To assert his point, Sorabjee recalls what one the judges on the bench said, “The heights of eloquence to which Palkhivala had risen have seldom been equalled and never been surpassed in the history of the Supreme Court.” Palkhivala’s feats were not only limited to India but also internationally when he represented the country in three cases. He could speak without notes and reel off facts and figures and hold the audience’s attention, notes Sorabjee. He concludes that in spite of all these achievements his most outstanding quality was “his willingness to help people in need and his humility and modesty”.
Getting real on infra-led growth
Renu Kohli | New Delhi-based macroeconomist
Financial Express
Kohli criticises the strategy to revive growth through “ambitious infra-investment targets much beyond the economy’s financing capacity”. Such projects have adversely affected the country’s private sector, public and private banks and NBFCs in the past, she argues.
“Having let current expenditure expand both on and outside the budget over the last six years”, the Modi government “only has itself to blame for not having the space to invest in infrastructure”, she writes. The only solution now is to borrow and invest, she adds.
Historically, most infrastructure investments have come from central and state governments. “The 2008 crisis, and the resulting sharp dip in GDP growth led UPA II to reorient its growth strategy and put infrastructure investment at the core plan for economic revival,” she writes. However, this was unsustainable, leaving corporates with “weakened balance sheets” and banks “saddled with NPAs.” Entrepreneurs and bankers were blamed instead of the government’s growth strategy, she explains.
The Modi government’s ambitious road and railway projects like NIP have also been financed through off-budget spending, “ostensibly to achieve a $5-trillion economy”. “The narrative sounds familiar – should we worry?”, she asks.
The puzzle of inflation going up despite low demand in India
Himanshu | Associate professor, JNU
Mint
Himanshu argues that high government stockpiles of wheat, play a role in rising inflation which rose to 7.35 per cent in December 2019. With “actual” growth lower than 5 per cent and demand at a low, “climbing inflation will only lead to increased vulnerability, while making an economic recovery harder”, he writes.
Himanshu explains that the “culprit” of spiked inflation is food inflation, while core inflation has stayed low. This suggests that the “inflation story is not just an onion story” or one that is seasonal but “far more widespread and serious”. Some may be due to the “transmission of global food prices” which have been on the rise in the last half year, he writes.
However, the “bulk of the blame lies with government policy”. Failure to distribute wheat through the public distribution system has led to “an artificial scarcity in the market”, observes Himanshu. The “artificial scarcity has not only pushed up wheat prices, but also led to higher demand for coarse grains and fodder, almost all of which have seen double-digit inflation”, he explains.
Hello to the New Permit Raj
Omkar Goswami | Chairman, Corporate and Economic Research Group (CERG)
Economic Times
Goswami writes a scathing criticism of the “Independent Directors Registration process” involving “useless, information-overloaded sarkari paperwork” and embodies “bureaucratic overkill”.
The registration is to be mandatorily completed before February 29 on the ministry of company affairs’ (MCA) portal, he writes. He then lists out what filling the forms entails, from one’s passport number to detailing all past and present directorships. A director must then pay Rs. 5,900 annually to the Indian Institute of Corporate Affairs (IICA), affiliated with the MCA, who will include this data in its inventory. Then, all directors who have served less than 10 years on boards, must take an online exam administered by IICA on corporate governance, and “secure at least 60% to pass”.
Goswami questions the “locus standi of IICA”. He argues that it is a body that only gets “annual grants from MCA” and “is not the MCA”. Additionally, though personal data is meant to reside with Governemt of India and not with “databanks of institutes funded by GoI”, the IICA is an exception in this case.