Flash pictures of used sanitary napkins - an upcoming protest in Kerala?

Our society is in a stage of transition. Influenced by our own heritage, and also by that of the West, we are being continuously churned. This period is very crucial, for what we adopt is going to stick on for a long time.

It is keeping this in the background that I view the recent forms of protest in Kerala. It was only a month back that the Kerala society, which is usually slow to adopt to changes, witnessed a totally radical way of protest. To oppose the monster of moral policing, a group of youth decided to take to public kissing. Kissing in public per se is something that will raise eyebrows of many Indians, not to say of the conservative Keralites. It was in such a society that this group of youth, either in the quick and less thought decision that they took or influenced too much by Westernization, or with some other intention, gave a call for public kissing.

My views on Kiss of Love can be read here. (1) (2)

When the Malayali society was debating Kiss of Love, people who had favoured it did talk about the pink chaddi protest of 2009 wherein pink colour under-wears were decided to be sent to the extreme right-wing members who protested the celebration of Valentine's Day.

When pink chaddi happened, its supporters praised it as "novel," and when the Kiss of Love happened its supporters said that it was a fitting reply to the extremist ideologues. A gentle alarm that quite a few had voiced - that the society, the youth in particular, would be misled - went unheeded.

Not a month has passed and those who had warned the society have been proven correct.

Weeks back, in a factory in the Cochin Special Economic Zone, women staff were strip searched to find as to who among them was mensturating because the management had found a used sanitary napkin in the toilet. Though the veracity of the claim made by the women that they were strip searched is yet to be proven, the act, if done, is beyond doubt reprehensible.

There was also an incident were a lady was forcibly asked by the conductor and driver to get off a KSRTC bus which was going to Pamba as it was booked by swamis going to Shabarimala. This act too needs to be condemned and those found guilty should be punished.

To protest against these two incidents, a lady currently in Kerala government service and formerly a television journalist with a Malayalam news channel has put a picture of a used sanitary napkin as her profile picture on Facebook. Her intention: "to show what reality was!"

(The name of the lady has been removed from the screenshot)

Journalists do influence the thoughts of common man. More so if they are television journalists. This lady, by keeping such an obscene picture that too to register her protest, has breached even the farthest boundaries of propriety and decency. It is disgusting that such lowly means of protest is adopted by the educated and the responsible. It is hoped that this nasty act does not get replicated by others who also wish to protest.

Meanwhile, I will not be surprised if a group of people would raise their voice in support of this lady's act.

This is just a reminder to what is in store for the Malayali. An unintentional crushing of the social fabric is happening. The earlier we realize it and act, the better.

Follow @SiddharthMNair

Ms. Kavita Krishnan, you owe an unconditional apology to Baba Ramdev and your followers

Ms. Kavita Krishnan, polit bureau member of the CPI(ML), and also the editor of Liberation, is a known face. She voices her strong opinion, especially about women's rights, in television debates and on Twitter. 

On Sunday she committed an error, an error for which she owes an unconditional apology. She tweeted saying that Baba Ramdev was offering "medicine" for "sexy breasts," and shared a link to substantiate her claim. 

In her subsequent tweet, wherein Baba Ramdev was tagged again, she said that small breasts on women weren't a disease and that the website's claim that women wanting people to look at their breasts was "odiously sexist." 

(Thanks to Politwoops for their deleted tweets service.)

What she said was perfectly fine, except for the fact that the link was not of Baba Ramdev's medicines at all! And, therefore, her whole statement criticizing him fell flat. The criticism was made on the basis of mistaken fact.  

Though the website read "Swami Baba Ramdev Medicines" it was not his. It had a disclaimer at the bottom: "This website (Swamibabaramdevmedicines.com) is not official website of Swami Ramdev Ji , Divya pharmacy or Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. swamibabaramdevmedicines.com is a Free Information website."

But, who doesn't commit such mistakes? You and I do; everyone does. What can, and should, be done is to take full responsibility for the mistake, and offer an unconditional apology. 

Instead, Ms. Kavita has conveniently deleted both her tweets, and is continuing to tweet on other issues. My tweet to her asking if she had deleted her tweets went unanswered. She is often seen taking a moral high ground and asking others to apologize for their mistakes. Why does she come down from that height at this instance? Thousands might have read her tweet, and based on that formed, or changed, their opinion on Baba Ramdev. It becomes her duty to amend that by tweeting the fact. 

Ms. Kavita, you may please apologize to Baba Ramdev. If you do not possess that much courage, at least tweet saying that you committed an error and that you have deleted the tweets so that more people are not misguided. If you don't, you are only reducing your stature. I sincerely hope that you will make amends for your mistake. 

Update - After reading this, Ms. Kavita Krishnan took time out of her schedule to block me on Twitter. Wish she had used that time to tweet a small, but significant, apology to Baba Ramdev and her followers. I had sincerely expected her to do so.

The thoughts of Mr. Justice Krishna Iyer shall continue to lead us

Among the deities that were kept in his prayer area, were two books. One was the Bhagavat Gita. And the other was the Constitution of India, to which he gave life as a judge and jurist. As I saw this in his home on December 5, a day after he had left us, I could not help but weep.

It was only about a year back when I started gaining interest in law that I came to hear about Mr. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer. Though I have still not read even a single judgement delivered by him sitting on the benches of the Honourable High Court of Kerala and the Honourable Supreme Court of India, I could gather from the bits and pieces of writings of his own and on him by others, the man that he was.

Even with a very limited knowledge of him and his works I felt deeply hurt by the loss that his demise had brought to us. I can well imagine what others who knew him closely would have felt upon hearing the news.

It was three days before the day the end happened that I came to know that he was admitted in the hospital and that he was in a critical condition. The Mrityunjaya Mantra, according to the Hindu religion, is recited either for the sufferer to win over the death or, for the God of death, Yemen, to win over the sufferer so that the latter is saved from much pain and sufferings.

I did not know for which of these should I pray in the case of Mr. Justice Iyer. He was really old, a heart patient, and was already, on the hospital bed, undergoing a lot more than what a person of his age could. Without knowing what to pray, I just kept reciting the mantra daily morning and evening.

As late as December 3, a day before he left us, I had asked my friend in Kochi to inquire about Mr. Justice Iyer's health and tell me about it. As I expected his reply about the health condition, I got his message saying that the legend was no more.

I had very much wanted to meet him to get some first hand information about Kamarajar (1903-1975), with whom, though belonging to different political parties, he had been an MLA of the then Madras Assembly in 1952. About Kamarajar, Mr. Justice Iyer had written in his autobiography that he was a 'common man with an uncommon common sense.' I had thought that I will complete the book and in the end go to him to get his views about few events. My wish to meet him will now remain just a wish, forever.

I got the message of his demise while I was in my college in Madras. Soon after the class was over I telephoned my boss and told her that I would want a day's leave to visit Kochi to attend his funeral. She agreed and I set off to Kochi by the night's train.

The city of Kochi did not wear a dreaded look but, I could find quite a few ordinary people on the roads expressing condolence by having his photograph pinned on their pockets along with a black piece of cloth. Even an auto rickshaw union had put up a poster expressing sorrow at the great loss. I was deeply moved when I saw that poster. I have not known of any person, at least in my lifetime, upon whose death sorrow was expressed by as high a person as the President of India and, comparatively, as humble an organization as an ordinary auto rickshaw union. This perhaps best explained the phenomenon that Mr. Justice Iyer was.

From the railway station I straight away went to his home. What I witnessed there moved me even further. Though I was on leave from work that day, I felt that I should write what I witnessed there. A friend of mine told me that I was "lucky" to have been able to pay my tribute to Mr. Justice Iyer on that day. Understanding that I really was lucky to have at least been able to be there for his funeral, I wanted other people to know what it was at his home on that day.  

Following is what I had written for The News Minute.

On Friday, from afternoon, people from all walks of life walked into a small compound located on the famous Mahatma Gandhi Road (M.G. Road) in the Ernakulam district of Kerala.

A black flag and a board that read "Satgamaya" welcomed the people to the home of Mr. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, 100, whose soul ascended to heaven on Thursday afternoon.

From Kerala cabinet ministers, High Court judges, senior officials of the state government, to representatives of various social and religious organizations, and the common man, all waited under one shamiana (roof), perhaps representing the maxim of equality before law, in pin-drop silence, to pay their tribute and last respects to the doyen of jurisprudence of our country.

As one steps into the modest, mosaic-tiled house where he had been living for over twenty years, one sees a number of his portraits gifted to him on his 100th birthday.

The week-long celebration of his 100th birthday saw many people re-establish their old connections with Mr. Iyer. This is evident from the many portraits that hung in the hall.

Towards the left is a small room to which a library is attached. A large portrait of his wife, Sharada, hangs on one wall. The wall opposite to it has portraits of the young Krishna Iyer, as a cabinet minister of Kerala, in the first democratically elected Communist government in the world in 1957, with the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.

The library consists of books ranging from spirituality to nuclear science. The wide range of subject matters on which he read stands testimony to the erudition of the administrator, jurist and humanist that he was.

The next room is even more fascinating. Apart from a larger portrait of his wife and many other portraits, in a corner, facing the East, is the prayer area. A garlanded portrait of his wife is in the centre surrounded by portraits of many Gods. Just in front, on a small table, is a lighted lamp in the middle of two books. One the Bhagvat Gita and other, the Constitution of India, to which he gave life as a judge of the High Court of Kerala and later of the Supreme Court of India.

Other rooms have a lot more portraits of the great man with other great men like the former President Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, Mata Amritanandamayi and His Holiness The Dalai Lama.

Among the large group of women and men who had assembled in Satgamaya was, from Dharmashala, Tenzin and his colleagues of the "Friends of Tibet".

"Mr. Iyer was a great proponent of the Tibetian cause and was an amazing friend of His Holiness The Dalai Lama. We have come to pay our last respects to him," Tenzin said.

As the ambulance that carried his body entered the compound, all rose with their hands crossed. Sooner was the body placed on an elevated platform, one-by-one all the people present paid their last respects and walked away in silence.

He was cremated at the Ravipuram crematorium on Friday at 6.30 p.m. Though his mortal remains would leave us, his thoughts, which he has written as books that amount to more than that of his age, will continue to guide and inspire his countrymen.

The greatest tribute that can be given to Mr. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, in general, will of course consist in studying what he had preached and practicing it in our own lives. In particular, it should consist in making all out efforts to render justice to the have-nots, a task which he was engaged in until his last breath.

Let us walk in the path that he laid, let us make his soul rest in content.   

Jai Hind! 

Kiss of Love is nothing but a cheap publicity stunt

The event "Kiss of Love" that is scheduled to be organized in Kochi on November 2 is nothing but a publicity stunt. All that the organizers want is attention.

If their protest is, as they claim, against moral policing, they could have thought of enough and more ways to register their protest. Novel ways other than kissing in public do exist and can be put to use.

The fact is that had they thought of some means of protest of that sort; a human chain along the beach or a candle light march for instance, they would not have got the kind of response that they now have got on their Facebook page.  

I have seen the interviews the organizer Mr Rahul has given to different organizations. It is clear from the interviews that he has no concrete justification for the simple question as to why he has chosen public group kissing as a means of protest. The only answer he has is that he is against moral policing. Probing him further is of no use as he repeats the same answer again and again.

One needs to remember that the immediate cause for this proposed protest was the destruction of a cafe in Calicut by the members of Yuva Morcha who acted as moral police. The fact that the protest venue has been conveniently shifted to Kochi itself speaks a lot about their real intention. They know that an event like this will garner more support in Kochi than Calicut.

This is a symbolic protest anyway; then why not give more impetus to the symbolism by protesting in Calicut itslef? After all, Calicut too has a wonderful beach!

The name of the event and its logo is so designed that it catches the attention of people, precisely what the the organizers want. The words "Moral Policing" is conspicuously absent in their logos. This fact only shows how serious the organizers are about the issue that they claim they are protesting against. Their issue, it therefore seems, is not being allowed to kiss in public, and nothing else.  

The organizers remain totally blind and puzzled when they are asked about any untoward incident that may happen on that day. They are not prepared to take any responsibility. The organizer Mr Rahul in an interview made his mind clear when he said that it was upto the police to see that nothing of that sort happened. He, however, forgets that it is the same police and few other officials of the state who have warned them about the very much probable and dire incidents that their "protest" can invite.

The organizers of "Kiss of Love" are simply not bothered. All they are bothered about is to ascertain their right to kiss in public. May God save this bunch of misguided youth.

Some in Kerala feel that kissing in public will keep moral policing at bay

A cafe in Kozhikode named Downtown was vandalized few days back by a group of Yuva Morcha members. The attack was after Jai Hind TV, a Malayalam news channel reported that there were immoral activities, including drugs, going on inside the cafe. The video footage had showed a couple kissing.

The owner, though shocked upon hearing the allegations, re-opened the cafe the same evening. Many showed their support to the cafe owner by visiting the place. Few influential people, including those from the cine industry, had posted messages in social networking websites condemning the attack and supporting the cafe. 

I am in full support of those who condemned the attack. The members of the Yuva Morcha who are involved in the attack need to be brought to book. Violence can never be justified. 

But, taking this as an opportunity, in the garb of showing their protest against moral policing, a group of individuals have come together. This group plans to organize an event called the "Kiss of Love" in the city of Cochin in Kerala. 

The event managers have invited people to be at Marine Drive on 2 November evening with their "spouse or lover." People have been asked to publicly hug and kiss their partners. This is to defy the organizations that indulge in moral policing, the organizers say. 

They have made a Facebook page "Kiss Of Love" and an event inviting people. At the time of writing, the page had been liked by 3,521 people and 1,700 people had accepted to take part in the event.   

"Kiss of Love," the organizers say is an event be to defy moral policing. "We cannot stand moral policing any more; let us put an end to it. There is a limit to everything. Our society should be free from all this evil," the event co-ordinator said. 

Can people get more stupid? To defy and try putting an end to moral policing this group of people have, of all things, this as a solution? Ridiculous! And they call themselves "Right Thinkers!" 

They are soliciting people to publicly engage in an act that is usually done in private. Tomorrow if an incident of moral policing occurs again what will they suggest? 

True, India is a country where people have vast freedom. But, the "right thinkers" like these should not exploit it.

The same people who had condemned the cafe attack and inspired people to go to the cafe should put some sense into these right thinkers' heads and ask them to withdraw this event.       

Hon'ble Prime Minister of India erred, sidelined ethics

The connection between one of India's largest business group owned by the Ambanis and the Hon'ble Prime Minister of India needs no elucidation.

Such intimate connection between politicians and big businessmen will always be questioned. The extent to which a politician can be close to a businessman may be best decided by a politician himself. 

Today, Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi was in Mumbai to inaugurate the Sir H.N. Reliance Foundation Hospital and Research Centre. Only selected news organizations were permitted to cover the event. News channel CNN IBN, of which Reliance owns majority stake, was present. 

The channel telecast the full event live. According to me, and according to few people whom I spoke to, it was unethical on the part of the news channel to do this. 

However, what is depressing and even more unethical is the fact that Mrs. Nita Ambani's speech was tweeted live by the official Twitter handle of the Prime Minister of India. 

Mrs. Nita Ambani is a private individual and her speech was not required to be tweeted at all. If she had to say something that was important for the world to know, given that the official Twitter handle of the PM of India is followed by politicians of numerous countries and various international organizations, a single tweet could have still been justifiable. Instead, the fact is that there were seven tweets mentioning what she had said. And the content of it - did it have anything worth to be tweeted by the official Twitter handle of the Prime Minister of India? No, it did not.

Here are few of the tweets by PMOIndia.

In a short time you have launched a number of impactful initiatives that have a deep connect with healthcare: Mrs. Nita Ambani to PM
— PMO India (@PMOIndia) October 25, 2014

We are witnessing a new India under your visionary leadership. You have captured imagination of billions across the world: Mrs. Nita Ambani
— PMO India (@PMOIndia) October 25, 2014

But, the Prime Minister and Mrs. Ambani are friends, right? Friends can do such things, can't they? Of course, they can. But, here is the more depressing issue. If the Prime Minister felt that his friend's speech was to be tweeted live, it could have been done through his personal Twitter handle. The fact is that his personal Twitter handle (@narendramodi) has 7.34 million followers, way more than the Prime Minister's official handle (@PMOIndia) which has only 3.14 million. 

It seems to me that the intention, therefore, was not to make what Mrs. Ambani said reach more number of people but, perhaps, was to give an "official" recognition to a close and a needy friend.  

I hold this act by the Prime Minister completely unethical. Just because one has money and (s)he is your friend, what they have to say cannot find place in the Prime Minister of India's official tweets.

But, alas, who am I? Just an ordinary Indian citizen, neither moneyed nor influential. All that I can do is to express my displeasure, nothing more, nothing less. 

P.S.: For the unethical conduct of the news channel, I vow to not watch CNN IBN hence.

Added later - He is what a senior colleague of mine had to say about the issue.
"All said and done one needs to understand that neither Nita Ambani nor Mukesh Ambani are on Twitter and by live tweeting Nita Ambani's vision the PM of India seems to have become their voice on Twitter."

My letter to Shri Narendra Modi on the issue of Shri Bimal Nepal's photograph

The Honourable Prime Minister of India

October 24, 2014

Subject: Request to issue clarification and/or apology - Mr Bimal Nepal

My dear Modiji,

It was real pleasure to see the entire nation united and happy on the day of Diwali over your decision to spend the auspicious day with our dear soldiers at Siachen. Your gesture was appreciated by almost all political parties and most political observers. I take this opportunity to firstly thank you for your generous decision.

Whilst you made the nation proud on the day of Diwali, some of your followers were bringing shame to our country by abusing and trolling an award-wining photographer on Facebook. I am not sure whether you have been apprised about the issue because it is of comparatively lesser or of no significance at all to be brought to the knowledge a Prime Minister of a country. But, as a Prime Minister who likes to hear from his people and, as one who cares even about small and minute issues, I think this must be brought to your notice.

Mr Bimal Nepal is a Nepal-born US-based award-wining photographer who, in his Facebook page on October 21, the day of Dhanteras, claimed that the photograph that your Facebook page used for greeting the people was his, and that it was used without his permission.

He claims that all of his photographs are protected by US copyright laws. For the moment, let us keep the legality aside. For a photographer's work to be shared by the Prime Minister of a country like ours is in itself a great honour. But, one cannot use this as a shield to deflect the issue of not taking his permission. It is basic courtesy that one takes prior permission or give due credit to the creator of the art before using it. Just like how we respect the brave soldiers we must also respect artists and their contribution to the society.

This may be a trivial issue for many but now that he has raised the concern, your Facebook page managers are duty bound to issue a clarification, sir. The mistake, yes it is a mistake, that they committed is a small one. But however small the mistake on ones part is, an apology and/or adequate correction only makes us great.

You are from the land of Gujarat which produced greats like Mahatma Gandhiji, Sardar Patel and Morarjibhai Desai. All the three had kept ethics above everything in their lives. I am sure you will be able to understand.

I truly trust that you will ask your Facebook page managers to do the needful. A small positive gesture from your side will instil a lot of confidence in the people of Nepal, America and here in India. In today's world where ethics is taking backstage, a word from you will be seen as a great effort in changing the status quo.

I should also bring to your notice that some of your followers are trolling him on his Facebook page. I wish that you put out a small advice for them urging them to refrain form such slander.

A 140-character tweet from the Honourable Prime Minister of India can make a lot of change!

Jai Hind!

P.S.: I am making this letter public so that the probability of it reaching you is more.

Your friend,
Siddharth Mohan Nair
Kerala, India.

Why protests against Shri Yesudas' "jeans" comment is blown out of proportion

The legendary singer and recipient of many a prestigious awards including the Padma Bhushan, Shri K.J. Yesudas' comment that women should avoid wearing jeans created a furore, especially in the social media. 

He had made this comment while addressing students of Sri Swathi Thirunal College of Music in Thiruvananthapuram. The seventy-six-year-old singer had said the following: 

 What should be covered must be covered. Women should not trouble others by wearing jeans. When they wear jean, all you can notice are the things beyond those jeans. Women should not try to become like men but must behave modestly. The attire is inappropriate of Indian culture and what lends beauty to a woman is her modesty and politeness.

There already prevails an atmosphere in India where many feel that women are unsafe. The increasing number of crimes reported against women in the recent years has only resulted in further reinforcing this sad truth.

Even in the national capital women do not feel safe; and this is a shame to us, our society. There is no belittling of the fact that those men who indulge in such activities against women are wrong. No mercy should be shown to such people. 

However, just like there are always more ways than one to prevent some wrong from happening, even in this particular case of harassment against women, there needs to be concerted and coherent action. Whilst on one hand it need not be said that men who indulge in these acts are wrong, but, on the other, it is to be understood that at some instances provocation caused by means of the dress what is worn triggers these men to act in a wrong way. 

Women who wear clothes that expose their bodies are more prone to abuse. I do not intend to say that it is because of such clothes, or, that only because of such clothes, women have to go through such wrongs. There are cases where even a 'properly' dressed woman does undergo harassment. All that people like Shri Yesudas intend to say is that avoiding such attire can, to an extent, prevent the wrong from happening.       

He had only made that comment as a piece of advice to the college students. He was not forcing his view on anyone. He said that to them, in much likelihood, as a man who is as old as their parents.

Women's rights activists say that he is no one to make such comments. What women wear is their individual freedom, they assert. What Shri Yesudas did was merely an act of expressing his mind. It really does not matter as long as it does not hurt the feelings of any section of people. And it goes without saying that no women were 'hurt' by his comments. 

The President of the Kerala unit of Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) Smt Anu Chacko has demanded that the police register a case against the singer for his comment, which she feels was a "threat to all the women." However, the police refused to heed to her demand. This makes it abundantly clear as to what extent the people have stretched their responses.

The fact that this respectable singer was trolled, and still continues to be, in all platforms one can think of for a comment like this is something that one needs to seriously ponder.

There are many educational institutions and even work places where dress code is prescribed for men and women. For instance, in the Government Law College in Tamil Nadu it is clearly written in the rules that the girl students are supposed to wear a kameez that is long enough that it extends till the knee and salwar that is stitched. It is clearly written that leggings and jeans are not to be worn as salwar. Why do women’s rights activists not agitate against this? 

It is, therefore, clear that only when it suits us, we think of our freedom and choice of the dress that we wish to wear. We conveniently forget about it when there are laid down restrictions which cannot be questioned.

Just as many claim that they have the right to wear what they feel, others have the right to speak; the only caveat being it should not cause harm

Senior journalist Shri Rajdeep Sardesai tweeted saying “Maybe legendary singers like Yesudas should stick to what they do best?” Is it necessary that experts in one field should not speak on any other field? If this is the rule, in which field is a journalist specialized? Doesn’t a journalist question or engage in every possible discussion under the sun? Therefore, we cannot simply say that a singer should stick to his profession alone and not express his views on any other issue.

A section of women in Kerala complained to the police that the auto rickshaw drivers should not be allowed to wear veshti or lungi because they were exposing their legs beyond the limits of decency, causing discomfort to women. The transport officials issued a circular making it compulsory that auto drivers wear trousers. Now, is this not an infringement into the freedom of men? Even men can have the same discomfort when they see women exposing their bodies. Would it not be funny if men had told the women that it was their right to wear what they wanted and that none should question their choice of dress?       

Shri Yesudas' comments should not have been taken as nothing more than a small bit of advice from an old, honourable man. Rather, the so-called rights activists chose to make an issue out of this, so much so, that even some foreign newspapers have carried this news. By doing so, we have only lowered the status of our country in the eyes of other countries.

After speaking to many people I am sure that there are many men and concerned parents who find nothing wrong in what the singer has said. But, they shy away to engage in a discussion with those who find fault with Shri Yesudas. Why? The only reason is that in today’s atmosphere it does not go down well even to suggest something to a woman with an intention to help her from getting abused. The trend is to find fault with men, and that alone!

I am sure that by writing this I will be seen as “prejudiced,” “chauvinist,” and what not. But, I strongly feel that I must speak side of the reality.      

Kerala observed a day of forced mourning

Kerala observed, or rather was forced to observe, a day of 'mourning' following the murder of a member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) yesterday. He was hacked to death in Kannur district by allegedly some members of the Communist party. The RSS immediately called for a state-wide strike (hartal) in protest.

A political murder happens and the organization which lost its member calls for a state-level hartal!
Undoubtedly, the violence needs to be condemned. But, is putting to rest the lives of the entire people of the state, reasonable? Certainly not!

Indian political democracy is so much inter-wined with politics that every issue that happens is linked with politics and politicians have a say in it. This murder was clearly a political issue and the general public should not have been made to suffer. By no logic can the declaration of a hartal for such a reason be acceptable.

'Let the law take its own course' is the favourite phrase of most of our politicians and the people in public life. Why didn't the RSS leaders wait for that course when the murder happened? There would have been anyway a police investigation into the issue.

If the organization still considered it essential to mark its protest, it could have organized a procession in the district and ended the matter. Or it could have made a press statement condemning the violence and also could have written to the Chief Minister and the Home Minister asking them to give special attention to the police investigation.

Or, if the organization wanted to condemn the murder and mourn for the loss, it could have assembled all its members before its state office and maintained a minute of silence or prayed for the departed member's soul. Or it could have observed a day of fast!

Leaving behind all these options, the organization decided that it will ensure that all people of the state should suffer for the loss that they incurred.

It is high time organizations like the RSS and political parties act with maturity. Politicians in India hardly become role models. Let them, at least, not earn the ire of the common people.

Jai Hind!

Shri Bipan Chandra's soul ascends to heaven

One cannot do without History if one has to stride in the right direction. One has to learn from the past. For making the knowledge of the past available to us, Historians play a very vital role and everyone should thank them for their contributions.

India's pre-eminent political and economic historian Shri Bipan Chandra died today in his sleep at the age of eighty six. 

He was considered as India’s foremost scholars and an authority on Mahatma Gandhi. A life-long coloumnist and author of numerous books on modern Indian History  including The Rise and Growth of Economic Nationalism (his earliest one), Communalism: A Primer, The Indian Left: A critical appraisal, The Epic Struggle, Ideology and Politics in Modern India and Freedom Struggle. 

Born in 1928 in Himachal Pradesh, he was educated at the Forman Christian College, Lahore; the Stanford University, USA and the Delhi University, where he completed his PhD. He had worked as a Reader at the Hindu College, New Delhi and then joined as a Professor of History in the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi soon after the university was founded.

He was also the Chairperson of the Centre for Historical Studies, JNU; Member of the University Grants Commission in 1993 and the Chairman of the National Book Trust from 2004-2012. He was awarded the prestigious Padma Bhushan for his works. 

Shri Bipan Chandra (L) with Shri S.I. Habib

He had also co-authored India’s Struggle for Independence and India since Independence, books considered as the Bible, Gita and Koran for modern Indian History for competitive examinations, especially the civil service examination. My exposure to the historical treasure that he had produced was by reading these. All civil service aspirants and civil servants will remember him, for it is his works that helped them get a hang of the subject.  

Being a civil service aspirant and a student of modern Indian History, I gained immense knowledge studying his works. His death brings sorrow. Observing a day of fast in his memory. 

May his soul rest in peace!

NJAC: The cure may do more harm than good

(Published in The News Minute on 19.08.2014)

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) and the Constitution Amendment Bill which aims to replace the controversial collegium system that selects the judges to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts, has been passed by both houses of the Parliament. What remains for the bill to become an act are the resolutions to this effect by more than 50% of the states and the assent of the President. But there are certain pertinent issues that need to be considered. 

Much of the hue and cry from among the judicial quarters comes down to one moot point - the absence of majority in the Commission for the judicial members. The Commission comprises the Chief Justice of India, two judges of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Union Law Minister and two eminent persons. The members from the judiciary (three in number) and the others have an equal strength. From the collegium system, wherein the total power for selection of judges was vested in the hands of the judges themselves, the NJAC reduces the power of the judiciary to half. A considerable section of the judiciary sees this as a blatant attempt by the legislature to clip the wings of an independent judiciary. 

Many voices raise concern that the phrase 'eminent person' has not been elucidated in the Bill. From the bar, some raise concern that they have not been represented in the NJAC, which, to my mind, is a justifiable concern.  

Section 5 (2) of the Bill as passed in the Lok Sabha is dreadful. It reads: '... Provided further that the Commission shall not recommend a person for appointment if any two members of the Commission do not agree for such recommendation.' 

It is here that the attempt to pierce through the independence of the judiciary is most conspicuous. This clause mandates, in other words, that from among the 6 members of the Commission, minimum 5 should agree to the name of a candidate if he/she is to be offered judgeship, i.e., a whopping 83.33%. Not only is this way above a simple majority (51% or more), but also of a special majority as is needed in the Parliament (67% or more) to amend/pass certain special legislations. This clause makes it clear that a candidate cannot be offered judgeship even if the CJI, the two Judges in the Commission and one more member agrees to his/her candidature. The power of veto that is provided in the Bill is grossly overweening. 

Another important concern is that the Bill remains silent on the transparency of decision making by the NJAC. The raison detre of the NJAC is the lack of transparency in the existing collegium system. Merely by diversifying the members who select/reject the candidates for judgeship, transparency does not come in. 

Would the NJAC entertain RTI applications that seek to know the grounds on which a particular candidate was selected/rejected? Or would the process of selection be carried out as if in an open courtroom where any one interested can witness the proceedings? If either of the two is not incorporated, the constitution of the NJAC will make no much difference vis-a-vis the transparency of existing collegium system. Not just that, it will make a mockery of the institutions of such high regard as the Judiciary and the Legislature. The government has very conveniently stayed silent on these important points. 

It is to be seen whether the guidelines as will be laid down by the Commission will include in it the above mentioned, or similar, measures for bringing in transparency and accountability. Further, if it does, it should be seen whether the Parliament would pass the guidelines with the same level of interest as it had shown in passing the NJAC Bill. Only then will one be able to understand the true intention of the legislators while they passed this Bill. 

Meanwhile, there are already 2 petitions that have been filed in the Hon'ble Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Bill. The ironical situation where the country's highest court itself sits on judgement of a petition that has been filed in order to prevent it from being caged will be worth a close watch.

Union government's solution to the UPSC row is preposterous, sets a bad precedent

(Published in The News Minute on 04.08.2014)

After long days of protests by civil service aspirants the government today has come out with its solution. The Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office Shri Jitendra Singh announced in the Parliament today that the marks for the English section in the civil service preliminary examination will not be included for gradation or merit.

Though the demands by the protesting civil service aspirants were more than one, the government has, for the moment, attended to just one, and the most sensitive – that related to the language. The protests were largely focussed on the first of the three levels of the civil service examination – the General Studies Preliminary examination, commonly known as the CSAT. The concerns were that the questions based on quantitative aptitude, logical reasoning, etc. were favouring those candidates who had graduated in Science than humanities; the English language questions were of high level and that the Hindi translation of the questions that are asked in English were improper. The protests itself, in my view, were unjustified (Read - http://www.thenewsminute.com/news_sections/870).

Shri Yogendra Yadav, a former member of the Universities Grants Commission and now the Chief Spokesperson of the AAP, who is also a sympathiser of the protests, had in his article in the Indian Express (http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/and-the-winner-is-english/99/) opined that the language question laid ‘at the heart of the current controversy’ and stated that the students ‘have not raised objections’ to the qualifying paper in English in the Main examination of the civil service. He said that the agitation is ‘not against English but against the dominance of English’ in the examination and that hence the demand for a better translation was ‘not a small detail.’

Instead of introducing a better way for translation, the government has jumped over the issue altogether. The proposed solution is just a balm; it does not cure the disease. It has now taken the energy out of the questions based on language. If those questions are not considered for grading, they remain a mere time waste. Why should one even bother to attend those eight to ten questions? Instead, why doesn’t the government ask the UPSC to just remove these questions?

The government had to make this hasty decision only because the protesting aspirants had intensified their struggle – they attempted to torch a police post, they blocked rail tracks, (yes, they are IAS/IPS aspirants of tomorrow) they protested in front of the Home Minister’s bungalow.

 What if they still protest? Remember, only one of their demands has been met. What if they intensify their protests demanding that the questions based on quantitative aptitude, logical reasoning, etc., too, not be calculated for grading? Will this government make exclude those questions from gradation or  merit?

The government has erred woefully. The Arvind Verma committee that had been set up to review the pattern of the civil service examination had suggested no changes be made to the current pattern. The committee’s recommendation has been thrown into the winds. On the other hand, the government has not managed to come out with a sound strategy for the conduct of the exam on its own. Such demands to lower the difficulty level of a competitive examination should never have arisen. The protests were unjustified; the solution that has been put forth is preposterous.  A simple and effective solution would have been to announce that the translation of questions shall be done in a proper manner. The government so as to further pacify the protestors have given another sop. It has announced that it will grant one more attempt to the aspirants who appeared in the 2011 examination. The protesting aspirants themselves are not satisfied with the solution. Nor have political parties that backed them.  

The moral of the episode is that if a 1,000 of 4,00,000 aspirants of any examination, a paltry 0.25 percentage, protest demanding a change, however unjustified it be, the government would succumb. A very bad precedent has been set. Aspirants of all competitive examinations have been provided with a handle to seek all kinds of demands in future. Also the government in power has reduced the status of a highly respected constitutional body, the Union Public Service Commission that conducts the civil service examination.

Why protests by civil service aspirants are unjustified

Over the last few days a number of civil service aspirants have been protesting in New Delhi demanding alteration in the pattern of the preliminary examination of the civil service examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). They have two main demands with regard to the second paper of the civil service preliminary examination. One, to make easier the questions that include quantitative aptitude, logical reasoning, data sufficiency, etc. Second, to do away with the English comprehension passage. Both these demands are unjustified.

The questions of aptitude, reasoning, etc. are of a very basic level. Even the banking examination conducted by the Institute of Banking Personnel and Selection (IBPS) has questions under these topics at a more difficult level. The state Public Service Commission (PSC) examinations have questions from these topics with the same difficulty level. The Common Admission Test (CAT) for admission into India’s top B-schools has questions under these topics at the highest difficulty level. Despite the Indian Civil Service examination being one of the most difficult civil service examinations in the world, the questions under these topics are much easier in this examination. Such questions are asked in every competitive examination. A demand to reduce the difficulty level of such questions should never have arisen in the first place. A candidate is expected to answer the questions that are asked. Certainly, the question setters know best the level that is expected of the candidates who are aspiring to become IAS, IPS, and other All India Service officers. 

An argument put forward by those protesting is that those candidates who belong to the Science and engineering backgrounds are at an advantageous position when such questions are asked. The argument is true but those putting forth this argument should also not forget that these students had graduated having obtained less time to prepare for the civil service examination, if at all they had started preparing during college days, than arts and commerce graduates.

The second demand that the questions of English comprehension passage be done away with is fallacious. It is so because the argument of the protesting candidates is based on the premise that the candidates from English medium schools are at an advantage vis-a-vis those from the non-English backgrounds. The questions asked in English language under this category are of class X level. Those civil service aspirants protesting demanding removal of questions of such level is ridiculous, to say the least. A person with a basic understanding of English language can answer the questions with ease. Comparing with the questions asked in the IBPS bank examination and the CAT, the questions asked in the civil service examination is much easier. Isn’t the basic knowledge of English a prerequisite for a candidate aspiring to become an All India Service officer? To those candidates who say that they are not comfortable with English of this basic level, the question to be asked is, if not now, when are they going to learn the language? How would they work in different states and in the centre without basic knowledge of English? Even if they feel that the questions in this section are difficult and amounts to a bias against the candidates from non-English backgrounds, it is to be noted that the number of questions in this section are at most 10 out of a total of 80 questions, a mere 12.5%! In the light of these points, are these protests justified?

The irony is that when some days back when there were rumours of Hindi being given more importance than other languages, most protested, and favoured continuance of the usage of English, the very language whose use is now being protested.

Another fact that needs to be highlighted is the continuous increase in the cut off marks in the preliminary examination. Whilst in 2012 the cut off was somewhere near 210, in 2013 it was 245. A rise in this magnitude was hitherto unseen. The rise in cut off mark clearly indicates that the candidates are scoring better. This by itself shows that the protests are unjustified.

Civil service examination is a competitive examination. Elimination is the main aim at every level of this examination. From over 4 lakh applicants only close to 1200 candidates are selected. The competition keeps increasing every year. Those willing to appear for the examination should be willing to rise to the expected level of the UPSC than asking them to lower the standard. Pressure groups and political parties backing the current protests should understand that they are playing with fire. By backing such protests and trying to enforce on the UPSC their demands, they are setting a wrong precedent. If this goes on, in future we may have to witness candidates appearing for the IBPS bank examination, CAT, the examinations of Charted Accountancy and the Company Secretary ship, GATE, etc. protesting demanding to set the question papers according to their demands. May better sense prevail!

Shri Gopal Subramanium and his Judgeship

Today, as we observe the 39th anniversary of the ominous Emergency declaration and remember with pain how the world's largest democracy was reduced to a mere 'tin-pot dictatorship,' it looks like we have not yet been saved completely from the tyranny of politicians. 

Shri Gopal Subramanium, Senior Advocate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and former Solicitor General of India, despite having been recommended to be elevated to the Bench of the highest court of the country by a collegium headed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India, the executive had sent his name back to the collegium for reconsideration. 

That such an action has been taken by the government, which, in a way, is tantamount to contempt of the collegium that selects judges to the top court of the country, and also lack of faith in its initial selection, has to be protested against. Shri Subramanium 'is a sound lawyer with great integrity and will be a tribute to the Supreme Court Bench if he is installed as the judge of the Supreme Court of India,' said one of the most revered judges of the country, Shri Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, former judge of the Supreme Court, in a statement he issued couple of days back calling the Prime Minister's attention to the issue. 

Today we hear reports that Shri Subramanium has withdrawn from the race to the prestigious Judgeship. 'It is (a) sad day as the judiciary has been compromised,' he says. He adds that 'in these circumstances' he 'does not consider it consistent with his notions of self-respect to be a judge of the Supreme Court.' 

Rather than rallying for support, he has proven his integrity and has also vindicated the decision of the respected collegium for having unanimously selected his name. Had he waited for some more days and had the collegium recommended his name again to the government, it would have been binding on the executive to approve his name. The upholding of one's pristine self-respect at any rate is a lesson that we should learn from the way this great legal luminary has handled the situation. 

But, there is a more important lesson for us to learn. In his interview to Shri Bhupendra Chaubey of CNN IBN he expressed wonder that the judiciary did not protest against the government for acting in such manner that compromised its independence. Whilst some days back we saw a large group of lawyers from Tamil Nadu agitating against the 365 day working suggestion put forward by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India, we see not a single lawyer agitating against this tyranny of the executive. It is for such issues that one should agitate. It is worth the effort. Though Shri Subramanium has made it clear as daylight that his decision to withdraw is 'final and irrevocable' we should not take it as a reason to not register our protest. 

I hope that the legal fraternity of our country, forgetting all, if at all any, professional jealousy, come together and mark its protest. I also hope that the students of law come together in this effort. Lastly, I hope that every responsible citizen of India who understands the importance of a free, independent and strong judiciary join. If we do not, we are shamelessly submitting to the tyranny of the worst kind. May on this anniversary of the ominous Emergency every citizen remember, along with his/her rights, the duties which certainly include protecting the prestige of every public institution in the world's largest democracy.  

Jai Hind!

Apology to Shri Rajdeep Sardesai

Despite you being one of my favourite journalists, during the time of AAP-RIL spate over KGB, I had mistaken you to have taken the side of Reliance during the ensuing debates. I had tweeted that you had been 'sold out' to Reliance and had also thought ill about you. 

However, this report by Live Mint (http://www.livemint.com/Companies/rqT2Oi8fwv4XVjJcHzlcVN/Inside-the-Network18-takeover.html) shows that you had refused to take sides. The report says that when RIL 'wanted a complete blackout of Kejriwal and AAP' you 'refused, saying it was just not possible.' You indeed did put journalism first, sir.  

For your refusal to have bowed down despite this massive pressure mounted on you and your channel, I salute you, sir. During those debates many a followers of the AAP had written and would also have had thought ill about you, just like me. On behalf of all of them, and also from my own side, I render genuine and sincerest apologies. 

You remain one of my favourite journalists! I shall pray for your wellness. 

Apologetically and with love,

Siddharth Mohan Nair

We may well need a Twitter Penal Code!

(Published in The News Minute on 22 June 2014)

Aware, empowered and strong we all become because of the spread and the ease of access of the social media, especially Twitter. Right from the Prime Minister of the country to the person next door we get to know what people do and what they think, on a minute to minute basis. News – information (at times disinformation) and views – come so quick and in plentitude. 

I use the word ‘empowered’ because in Twitter, unlike the conventional information providing media, one can not only hear what one says but, also respond – second, argue and question. To our response comes another response, and to it another, and it goes on and on. It becomes a potpourri of views, to an extent empowering.

But, sadly, all is not so rosy in Twitter. There thrives a fervent section among the Twitterati, who mount vociferous abuse on those who speak something against their beliefs and faith. Criticism is fine and even necessary, but certainly not abuse in the guise of it. If one does not like a particular person’s views, he can very well not ‘follow’ that person on Twitter. But, far from doing that, there is a strange section among the Twitterati who ‘follow’ more carefully those with whom they have diagonally opposing viewpoints, wait for them to speak, and then pour abuse like molten lava in an indefatigable manner with an intention to stifle them. Among those tweeple on the receiving end; some do succumb, tweeting no more of that. Some are sangfroid, with a say-what-ever-you-want kind of attitude. Some, albeit very few, fight back. Many ignore; but not beyond a level. Indeed, the level of toleration needs to be too high, and if one wishes not to bow down and to keep tweeting their views, what they should develop is a thick skin. 

Here are some celeb Twitterati who get the most of it.

On 8 June Smt Sagarika Ghose of the CNN IBN tweeted ‘Why is press freedom in jeopardy across the globe? Delighted to be presenting India paper at global media women retreat!’ Not much time had passed when her tweeple ‘haters’ took her to task. ‘I swear I read that as ‘Global MediaWORM Retreat’ – a place better suited for you perhaps,’ tweeted one. Another tweeted, ‘Who will listen to you jeehadi brainless anchor who has been strip(ped) off from IBNLIVE? Keep tweeting bullshit Indian not interested.’ 

On 2 June when she tweeted ‘Its been a long and wearying election & its time for a break at last! Stay well and stay cool folks.:),’ a follower of hers replied ‘Come back soon… India needs journos with spine, now, more than ever!’ To this tweet came a reply, ‘Can’t say about the spine – but on FTN (Face The Nation, a show she hosts) one certainly saw the biceps :)’ Abuses in professional to personal front, such is the level to which some tweeple can stoop!

When Shri Shashi Tharoor tweeted yesterday ‘Someone needs to remind PM @narendramodi of these views of CM Narendra Modi..’ sharing a link where Shri Narendra Modi as Gujarat CM had asked Shri Manmohan Singh to withdraw the hike in freight charges, a tweeple replied thus: ‘Yes we have also reminded him about synonyms death of a lady…. Yaad bhi hain ki bhul gayein.’ It seems some tweeple do not even let free those who have ascended from earth. When there were abuses all along, Shri Tharoor, probably pained at what he was reading, did not bother to reply. A tweet came, ‘shashi ji do you ever read our tweets even,’ and Shashiji replied ‘sometimes!’ Alas, what else could be have said?

Politicians and journalists are not the only ones to be heaped with abuses. Academicians, too, get their share for voicing opinion on Twitter. On 7 June when Shri Ramchandra Guha, a pre-eminent historian tweeted that ‘The largest and most influential ‘foreign-funded NGOs’ in India are in fact BJP and the Congress..’ and shared a link of a newspaper article titled ‘Delhi HC finds BJP, Congress guilty of receiving foreign funding,’ an exasperated man replied thus: ‘MORONS 1st,this story is 25 years old..2nd political party is against India?U r true moron and invloved in anti national activites.’ 

Well, to who say that historians should stick to topics of History alone, here’s what happened. On 10 June when he tweeted ‘Gandhi, speaking in Madras, March 1919: ‘There is too much recrimination, innuendo and insinuation in our public life...’ the tweets in reply were ‘From our eminent distorian,’ ‘someone seems to be a fan of " Back to the future",’ ‘… there is not a single favorable comment on this joker's tweet’ and so on. 

This morning Shri Siddharth Varadarajan, former Editor of The Hindu tweeted ‘My twitter day usually starts with a bunch of Hindutva types copying me on some anti-Muslim rubbish and me then muting them. Score today: 18’ In less than a minute he got a tweet in reply, ‘wow. That’s all you are reduced to now. What a fall.’ 

It was a trend in India in the past to call people who had opinions contrary to theirs as Communists and agents of the CIA. Very recently Shri Sanjay Jha, national spokesperson of the Congress party had, following a dispatch authored by a US Department of State diplomat, in a tweet on 25 April, called Shri Subramanian Swamy a CIA agent. Swamyji, the maverick he is, took the issue head on by accusing the Congress spokesperson of libeling him and served a legal notice on him. Sanjayji replied to the notice saying that his ‘impugned tweet’ was an attempt by him ‘solely to invite discussions in the social media to seek perspectives…’ and tendered an ‘unconditional apology’ and also promised to ‘delete the said tweet forthwith.’ 

Seldom do instances like these happen. Very few people read such tweets that come in response to theirs, let alone take them seriously. However, abuse should be stopped. Without which, rather than being a beautiful platform for sharing information and views, Twitter would turn into an ugly place. The easiest way is to not ‘follow’ those whose views one never concurs. But the urge in you to know what they tweet does not let you to do so, you must not reply, or at least, reply with civility. No one likes to see abuses being piled when they enter the world of Twitter. If nothing of these works, perhaps, we may well need a TPC, a Twitter Penal Code! Let such a day never come. Happy Tweeting!

Why has the language debate been revoked? We need closure

(Published in The News Minute on 20 June 2014)

The Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi's taking oath in Hindi during the oath taking ceremony, and many of his ministers following suit had sparked a minor speculation about the re-emergence of the most dangerous, yet, for long subsided, language debate in our country. It was being said that there was a possibility that Hindi would be made the official language of the Union of India. The speculation received further mileage when the Prime Minister spoke in Hindi to the SAARC heads and also in the Bhutanese Parliament. His speaking in Hindi shouldn't have been given such a dimension given the simple fact that he is more comfortable and at ease in communicating in Hindi than English.

However, the development that has now taken place needs to be given some serious thinking. The central government has ordered its officials to use Hindi on social media accounts. Political reaction came immediately from the DMK head Shri Karunanidhi. "No one can deny it's (the central government) beginning to impose Hindi against one's wish. This would be seen as an attempt to treat non-Hindi speakers as second-class citizens," said the former Tamil screen play writer turned politician. 

To understand the language issue in perspective, one must turn back into the pages of history. The first opposition to Hindi came even before independence in 1937 when Madras was under the Congress ministry headed by Shri. C. Rajagopalachari. In order to equip the people of Madras to be 'employable all over India' he had made learning Hindi compulsory in government run schools. However, understanding the difficulty that would be faced by some to learn a 'foreign' language, he said that failing in the Hindi examination would not block the students' promotion to the higher class. He likened Hindi to 'chutney on the leaf,' asking people to 'taste it or leave it alone.' 

The issue was as simple as that but the opposition parties in general and the Justice Party (which would later become the Dravidar Kazhagham under Periyar E.V.R. and even later split to form the DMK under Shri Annadurai) in particular politicized the issue and saw it as an act of undermining the Tamil language. Hindi was viewed as Aryan and incorporating it in Dravidian Madras was something that the parties could not brook. Protests in large scale were organized under the leadership of Shri E.V.R. Naicker. Arrests, by the beginning of 1939, had reached a figure of 683. The policy was later dropped by the British when the Congress ministry resigned following the second world war. The protests took a toll on the popularity of the Congress party in Madras and strengthened the position of EVR (he was since then referred with reverence as Periyar, the Elder One) and his protege Shri Annadurai, fondly called Anna. 

The next major opposition came in 1965. Republic Day of that year was pregnant for it celebrated the fifteenth anniversary of our cherished Constitution and it was this date that was set by its makers to make Hindi the official language. Fifteen years 'grace period' had been given for all regions to learn Hindi. The makers of our Constitution had chosen Hindi as the official language, but not without opposition. The fact is that the motion was passed with a majority of just one single vote. However, when there were unending misgivings about Hindi being given such a status, the Official Languages Act of 1963, on the insistence of the then Prime Minister Shri Jawaharlal Nehru included a clause that English 'may' still be used along with Hindi in all official communications. But, sadly, Jawaharlalji would not live till 1965, the deadline. After his death, the Hindi zealots had tried their best to enforce what the Constitution had laid. Their main argument remained that Hindi was the most spoken language in India. Strongest reactions came from Madras. The ever articulate Anna, who was then the leader of DMK, replied with a ridicule. 'If we had to accept the principle of numerical superiority while selecting our national bird, the choice would have fallen not on the peacock but on the common crow.' The centre did not relent.

On the Republic Day two men in Madras self immolated in protest. I sacrifice my life at the altar of Tamil, one wrote before committing the act. Madras was in a fury. There was rioting, a police station was set on fire, boards displaying names in Hindi were blackened, arrests crossed thousands and two central ministers from Madras resigned. The centre then bowed. Prime Minister Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri announced that Jawaharlalji's promise would be kept, notwithstanding what the Constitution had laid. 

Since 1965, there hasn't been much of the language debate. But, the issue remains far from being fully settled. It is like a sleeping volcano, the lava of which has gained more heat and vigour because of Modiji and his government's order. 

Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav of the SP has demanded a ban on use of English in Parliament. "We are ready to speak in Hindi if Mulayam Singh is ready to talk in Tamil. Let him learn Tamil, and we will learn Hindi," Shri T.K.S. Elangovan of the DMK is reported to have said some days back in response. More recently, yesterday, he said that if the 'government respects the Parliament it will respect Nehru's words.' The ruling party in Tamil Nadu, the AIADMK had issued an order that only Tamil shall be taught upto class tenth. It says that the students, if interested, can learn other languages later. It would be detrimental if politicians and political parties make such demands and issues such orders. They should be more accommodative and act as statesmen than politicians. 'The bane of India,' said Shri Nani Palkhiwala 'is the plethora of politicians and the paucity of statesmen.' Imposition will never help the language cause. Debates and consensus alone will prove fruitful and lasting.  

The three language formula that had been advocated should be put to practice. What Shri Robin Sharma said is true that 'what makes relationships, communities and countries great are not the things that we have in common but the differences that make us unique.' Of course as a sub continent, we are diverse, but, it is good to have as an official language one that has its origin in our own land, than having’foreign’ English. Whether it should be Hindi, or Tamil, or some other language can be debated. Hindi may be numerically superior but the concerns of every language should be taken into account. Politicians issuing statements that are contradictory to each other from every corner of the country can affect the existence of our country. 

The government at the centre should put an end to this debate once and for all. It has a clear mandate to take a decision. It should immediately convene a conference of states and find a concrete solution for the problem lest it pave way for riots and unnecessary animus between people speaking different languages. For the sake of its existence, the central government should not sink responsibility and yet again leave the issue hanging. It is a difficult decision to be made, but, imperative. 

'Those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything,' Mr George Bernard Shaw had said. May those who take part in the language debate do so with ideas in their minds that can accommodate change.

Jai Hind!