The Indian liberals, who had graced the seminar to free Kashmir from India organised by Ghulam Nabi Fai in July 2010 at Capitol Hill in US, are now running for cover, claiming to be innocent, unaware that Fai was an undercover arm of the ISI. But are the liberal guests at Fai’s show in US really innocent? A look at the facts publicly known about Fai, as far back as 2001, which the well-informed liberals cannot feign not to know, clearly rules out their claim to innocence. The US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which had kept tracking Fai and his Kashmiri American Council (KAC) for years, has now confirmed more than what was already known about them. Here is a telling account of the fact, already known, that Fai was a front for extremists; also of the new fact, brought out by the FBI affidavit, that Fai is additionally an ISI proxy.
The Institute of Conflict Management with excellent faculty, led by the legendary K P S Gill, had in a paper dated June 1, 2001, stated: ‘The HM (Hizbul Mujahideen) is closely linked to the Jamaat-e-Islami’, and ‘is allegedly backed by Ghulam Nabi Fai’s Kashmiri American Council’. Praveen Swami, well-known expert on terror, also then a special correspondent of Frontline, a magazine from The Hindu stable, wrote in February 2003: ‘The Hizb also regularly received funds gathered in the United States and United Kingdom by activists like Ayub Thakur and Ghulam Nabi Fai.’ (South Asia Intelligence Review: Weekly Assessments and Briefings Vol 1, No 31, February 17, 2003). So, Fai was even funding terror. Praveen Swami again wrote (in 2006): “Geelani used the cover of the Haj pilgrimage to hold extended discussions with…….the US-based Islamist leader, Ghulam Nabi Fai.’ (Ibid Vol 4, No 31, February 2006). The authentic facts uncovered by neutral experts had already exposed Fai as an accomplice of Hizbul Mujahideen. The leading lights of liberal India cannot feign that they did not know about Fai’s antecedents. Their claim to innocence is a post-facto alibi.
On May 30, 2010, two months ahead of the Capitol Hill meet on July 29-30, which the Indian liberals had attended, the second most popular daily from Kashmir, Early Times, wrote an article titled ‘Anti-India meet in July: Washington has become the hub of anti-India activities’. Conceding that “Kuldip Nayar, Justice Rajindar Sachar, Professor Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Rita Manchanda, Harinder Baweja, Gautam Navlakha” were indeed attending the meet, the paper wrote, “they are Indians, but only in name” adding that they “have been consistently damaging the cause of India by putting forth….essentially pro-Pakistan and pro-separatist solutions. The article concluded: “they are the mouthpieces of Pakistan.” Just look at KAC’s website. (www.kashmiri.com). Its goals written by Fai explicitly proclaim its pro-Pakistan character. Fai’s demands completely echo Pakistan’s. Fai has never hidden his real character from any one. The US only delayed acting on him.
And now comes FBI’s damning affidavit on Fai sworn by special agent FBI Sarah Webb Lindon on July 18, 2011. It is a stunning, meticulous document. Its full version appears in www.scribd.com/doc/60370771/Syed-Ghulam-Nabi-Fai-Affidavit. According to Lindon, the FBI “investigation revealed that elements in Pakistan government including ISI were directly involved with the activities of Fai” who acted “at the direction and with the support” of ISI (Note to Para 7); confidential witnesses (CWs), seeking mercy, had confessed the true facts to FBI agents as far back as 2005, and again in 2006 and 2010; CW1 admitted having fudged, using ‘Straw’ (proxy) donors, the origin of the money transferred by the ISI to Fai; The ISI grant of $500,000 was thus obscured in 1998 alone. (Para 9); the ISI grant to Fai since mid-1990s totalled $4million. (Para 26); according to CW2, Fai’s ISI bosses were: some “Abdullah”, Brigadier Javeed (aka “Rathatore”, “Abdullah”), Touqeer Mehmood Butt, and Sohail Mehmood. (Para 22); CW2 also admitted that ISI dictated “80%” of Fais’ public statements and approved the rest “20%”(Para 15) making him a 100 per cent ISI mouthpiece; Fai has been in contact with his handlers 4,000 times since 2008 (Para 24); the ISI approved Fai’s annual budgets including payments to US Congressmen (Para 53); the FBI has foolproof evidence of the ISI-Fai link through intercepted e-mails, telephone and conversations (Para 2). The FBI gives chronological details of the monies transferred through proxies, meetings, e-mails, tele-talks, (Paras 35-130), which prove Fai as the ISI front beyond all doubts. The FBI also gives telling evidence of the ISI funds ($160,000) funnelled for hosting the 2010 seminar attended by our secular liberals (Paras 108 to 111). The FBI narrates how the police intercepted hard cash of $35,000 intended for the Fai show and how Fai’s lies to cover it using straw donors were nailed (Paras 111 to 123). Our liberal guests of Fai were thus hosted out of the ISI money.
But, the FBI has only given new evidence to support what was widely known in the public domain, namely Fai and his KAC were fronts of extremists.
But, there is confusion about who had not attended Fai’s show. The Early Times (May 1, 2010) report mentions neither Harish Khare, the prime minister’s media adviser, nor Dilip Padgaonkar, the PM’s J&K interlocutor. All other media have listed Padgaonkar’s name. But only the Free Press Journal (July 21, 2011) adds Khare’s name. Khare has denied knowing or meeting Fai; but Padgaonkar has not. Despite the Free Press Journal’s report it is not clear whether Khare did attend the meet. Therefore his denial has to be accepted unless clear evidence emerges to the contrary. Curiously, the KAC website gives no detail of the participants. The presence of Subramanian Swamy seems to have been secured by Fai only to show the “other’ face at the meet. Swamy claims to have checked up with Indian embassy about Fai. But anyway only the secular liberals fit into Fai’s pro-ISI agenda, not the ‘illiberal’ Swamy.
QED: Fai invited them not as neutrals to add credibility to his show, but as accomplices to push his anti-India agenda. Fai has finally exposed the real face of the Indian liberals to Indians.
The writer is a well-known commentator on political and economic issues.
E-mail: comment@gurumurthy.net
Mocking at the West’s Left-liberal intelligentsia, many of whose leading members had returned from all-expenses paid trips to the Soviet Union to pay glowing tributes to its dictator and his police state, Stalin is believed to have once said, “They are useful idiots, but idiots nonetheless.” Chroniclers of the Stalin era dispute this attribution, insisting it was Lenin who scathingly referred to “useful idiots” in the capitalist West who “will sell us the rope with which to hang them”. Scholars of Lenin’s vast body of articles, speeches and pamphlets, as well as commentary recorded in party papers, deny he ever said this. Despite its disputed origin, the phrase “useful idiots”, used for describing apologists of the USSR till the Soviet Empire collapsed and passed into history, has survived. Today it is used for describing Left-liberal intellectuals who wittingly or unwittingly become propagandists for dubious and disreputable causes.
It was almost close to midnight when news broke of the FBI arresting Ghulam Nabi Fai, executive director of the Washington-based Kashmiri American Council, for acting as a front of the ISI, the Pakistani spy agency which unabashedly sponsors global jihad, for close to two decades. His colleague, Zaheer Ahmad, managed to give the FBI the slip; he is reported to be in Pakistan at the moment. By itself, the news was worth little, apart from the fact that the famed FBI had remained in the dark for so many years about the real identity and intention of a Pakistani spy who had easy access to offices of Senators and Representatives on the Capitol Hill and lobbied to influence US policy on the issue of Jammu & Kashmir. Or, conversely, it is only now, with relations between the US and Pakistan rapidly unravelling and the CIA at war with the ISI, that the Americans have thought it fit to expose someone about whom they had known all along. After all, various US agencies were aware of the ISI’s links with Daood Syed Gilani, also known as David Coleman Headley who too, like Fai, is an American citizen of Pakistani origin.
But there’s more to the Kashmiri American Council story than the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba’s Chicago cell and its activities which makes it far more sinister. Headley facilitated the multiple strikes by Pakistani terrorists on high profile targets in Mumbai on November 26, 2008, resulting in a ghastly carnage and terrible loss of human lives. But what Fai and his associates, as well as those who sponsored his activities in the US, are guilty of has wider ramifications and greater implications. In a sustained, sophisticated manner they sought to legitimise radical Islamist impulses in the Kashmir Valley and separatism disguised as a political cause although it is terrorism by another name. For this the services of usual suspects on the Hill, including Dan Burton, were secured — for a price. The lubricating power of ‘Brylcreem’, the code word used for millions of dollars supplied by the ISI and funneled into ‘lobbying’ activities by Fai, remained unknown till the KAC racket was exposed.
Along with many others in Delhi, this writer was on the mailing list of Fai’s KAC and would regularly receive invitations to attend ‘conferences’ organised in one of the Congressional chambers on the Hill. A detailed report on who all had attended the ‘conference’ and who had said what would follow, often penned by Victoria Schofield, one of the many Western journalists whose proximity to the Rawalpindi establishment is the subject of much speculation, none of it flattering. In the absence of any of the participants refuting the contents of these reports, they also serve as irrefutable documents of their having accepted Fai’s — and hence by implication the ISI’s — hospitality, including business class tickets, five-star hotel accommodation and a ‘token’ fee which really means an undisclosed amount of money, its quantum depending on how ‘influential’ the participant was perceived to be. It is entirely possible that Arundhati Roy who spends her afternoons in the company of Maoists listening to grasshoppers sing or helping radical Islamists hoist the Pakistani flag in Srinagar, Kuldip Nayar whose columns are published by a larger number of newspapers in India and Pakistan, Justice Rajinder Sachar of ‘Sachar Committee’ fame and Dileep Padgaonkar who was earlier editor of The Times of India and now heads the panel of interlocutors for Jammu & Kashmir set up by the Union Government had higher budgets allocated to their participation than, say, Bharat Bhushan who is editor of Mail Today and Gautam Navlakha who turns apoplectic with rage every time he is told India is a sovereign country with a republican Constitution. We don’t need to go into the details of their denunciation of the Government of India’s policies, the abuse they heaped on the Indian Army, the allegations they levelled against our security forces fighting terrorists and the horrible lies of rape and murder they repeated knowing full well these were slanderous and unsubstantiated. They are far too well known to merit elaboration.
All of them now say they were not aware of Fai’s links with the ISI or that the KAC was a front organisation of the Pakistani spy agency, that if invited again (of which there are slim chances), they won’t go. That’s balderdash. None of them is a novice in his or her chosen profession and the linkages of ‘think-tanks’ are a badly kept secret in Delhi. Back in the mid-1980s, some of us would receive invitations from Gurmit Singh Aulakh, the self-appointed ‘President’ of the imaginary ‘Council of Khalistan’, to attend ‘conferences’ organised by him in the Congressional chambers on the Hill. That’s not the only thing he shared in common with Fai; every ‘conference’ would be graced by Dan Burton. In those days there was no e-mail or fax; the invitations came by airmail in plain white envelopes containing neatly typed letters carrying the ‘official seal’ of the ‘Council of Khalistan’. It’s difficult to recall anybody accepting Aulakh’s invitations or travelling at his expense to Washington, DC — everybody knew it was a Pakistani operation, abetted, if not aided, by the CIA. So we would all have a laugh at the expense of Aulakh and his sponsors, and the invitations would go straight into the wastepaper basket. Similarly, everybody knew Fai’s antecedents and instinct should have told them that there was nothing kosher about his KAC or the ‘conferences’ organised by him. So, it’s difficult to believe them when they say that they did not know about Fai’s intentions and the KAC’s ISI link; in any event, as any court in the world would tell an accused, ignorance of the law is not an admissible plea. This brings us to where we began. A friend and fellow columnist described the beneficiaries of Fai’s hospitality with the ISI picking up the tab as “useful idiots, but idiots nonetheless”. I thoroughly disagree with him: They are not idiots, but yes, they have proved to be useful for Pakistan.
Fai’s KAC was only one of the many such operations by the ISI. The Kashmir Centres in London and Brussels are two more examples. How many of our Left-liberal intellectuals attended ‘conferences’ organised by these Kashmir Centres? And how many of them attended ‘seminars’ organised in nondescript American and European universities to ‘discuss’ the Kashmir problem? One such conference, “Kashmir in Crisis: Pathways to Peace”, was organised at the University of Colorado, Boulder, ostensibly by its students. The real organiser was a certain Ayesha Nawaz, Development Director of Al-Imtiaz Foundation, who was sending out mail and following up on travel plans for those invited to attend the ‘conference’ from “Pakistan, Kashmir and India”. A simple check on the Internet reveals that Al-Imtiaz Foundation has its headquarters at Mansehra Road, Supply Bazar, Abbottabad, Pakistan. Surely our Left-liberal intellectuals who attended this conference and held forth on India’s ‘villainous misdeeds’ in Jammu & Kashmir were not unaware of these details?
-The writer, a former senior officer of R&AW, is a strategic affairs commentator.
B RAMAN
Indian journalists and intellectuals who participated in all-expenses-paid conferences organised by the ISI-funded Kashmiri American Council in the US must make a full disclosure. They owe it to their country and the people
There are two aspects to l’affaire Fai, the case relating to the arrest last week and the proposed prosecution of Ghulam Nabi Fai, head of the Washington, DC-based Kashmiri American Council on the charge of working as an agent of influence of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence.
It has been alleged that his organisation was in receipt of large funds over the years from the ISI for making contributions to the electoral funds of some US politicians and for holding international seminars on the Kashmir issue which were attended by journalists and other opinion-makers from India. It has also been alleged that their travel and stay expenses were met by his organisation out of funds received by him from the ISI.
The first aspect relates to the American angle. Why did the US’s Federal Bureau of Investigation and Justice Department choose to act against Fai now after having shut their eyes to his apparently illegal activities for many years? Does the US have an agenda in proceeding against him now?
The second aspect relates to the Indian angle. Many questions arise here. The first is: Have Indian participants in Fai’s ISI-funded seminars violated any Indian law calling for any legal action against them? No, they have not. Their claim that they were unaware of Fai’s ISI background can’t be just dismissed as an after-thought.
Which brings us to the second question: Was it wrong or unwise on their part to have participated in ISI-funded seminars organised by Fai? Yes, their actions do show a lack of wisdom. While Fai’s ISI background may not have been known to them, his reputation as a person of dubious credentials with a Pakistani agenda was widely known for years.
There have been detailed reports on him carried by the Indian print media over the last 20 years. Journalists based in Washington had been reporting about Fai from time to time. Here is a man promoting the agenda of Pakistan, India’s adversary with which we have fought three wars and which has been sponsoring terrorism against Indian citizens, inviting Indian opinion-makers to his seminars in an ill-concealed attempt to use them to earn respectability for himself and his organisation.
Was it wise on their part to have let themselves be thus used by him? It was definitely not. Any right-thinking person should have no difficulty in admitting this.
The third question arises from this. Do the Indian participants owe an explanation to the people of this country regarding their actions? The word explanation is strong and inappropriate, but they definitely have an obligation as Indian citizens to welcome and facilitate a detailed inquiry into the matter in order to see whether their unwise actions have in any way compromised our national interests.
The last question that arises is: Does the fact that many of those who attended seminars organised by the KAC are journalists give them any protection from public and legal scrutiny? It does not and should not.
They did not attend the seminars at the instance of their media houses to cover them as an event for their respective publications. They went there as individual Indian citizens and, hence, their actions should be subject to the same public and legal scrutiny as those of any other Indian citizen. They cannot claim — and should not be allowed to claim — any special protection from public and legal scrutiny by virtue of the fact that they are journalists.
The arrest of Fai and the filing of an affidavit against him by the FBI is only the beginning of l’affaire Fai. More details regarding his and the ISI’s methods of operation could come up during the trial if he does not make a plea bargain with the FBI.
The Indian participants in his seminars should seek to avoid any future embarrassment by taking the initiative in informing the public and the Government about the details of their participation.
Such actions are normally not required in respect of participation in foreign seminars. But once it turns out that a seminar was funded by the ISI and organised at the instance of the ISI by one of its agents of influence, prudence demands that one takes the initiative in informing the people and the Government of the details.
In a bid to empower all the 226 talukas of the state, Gujarat government today held a programme relating to its ambitious ‘Chalo Taluke' campaign.
Speaking on the occasion Chief Minister Mr. Narendra Modi said that ‘Chalo Taluke' campaign will infuse a new vigor to the decentralized administrative mechanism. The campaign will be instrumental in taking the benefits of growth to the village level realizing the mantra of ‘Sauno Sath, Sauno Vikas' (Cooperation from all, growth for all) and will serve as a new model for the taluka development.
The campaign will be held during July 28 to September 8, covering all 225 talukas of the state, while a pilot campaign will be held initially on July 22 and 23. Teams comprising of in-charge ministers, guest ministers, in-charge secretaries and district officials–office bearers will stay for a full day in their allotted taluka and will give guidance on the development issues.
Giving details of the campaign Chief Minister said the state government aims at providing enough resources and infrastructural facilities to the villages to successfully implement the development plans on the root level. “State government wishes talukas to have beautiful schools, have its people empowered enough to fight malnutrition, have units for water management and not a single family living below poverty line”, he said.
Chief Minister exuded faith that the campaign will evoke appetite for growth in every taluka. With the success of ‘Chalo Taluke' campaign, the talukas will land themselves on the growth-route in a span of a single year, he said.
Revenue Minister Mrs. Anandiben Patel said that various programmes will be held at talukas level so as to enable them to work for their own empowerment, to plan for their own growth and to plan for rooting out poverty. At present, about 124 different services are being provided on the taluka level by the public service centre and Rs.182-crore has been allocated for it in the budget, she said.
Giving details of the campaign Revenue Minister said that a grant of Rs.375-crore has been allotted to the campaign. Teams of ministers and officials will go to the talukas and will fix the goals for them. They will also hold meet with the leading citizens of the talukas. Entire campaign will be concluded in 16 days covering 14 talukas everyday.
Finance Minister Mr. Vajubhai Vala, Agriculture Minister Mr. Dilip Sanghani, parliamentary secretaries, MLAs, state government office bearers and officials were present on the occasion.
Dear Friends,
It’s quite obvious that the significant event that happened last week in America draws the attention of every patriotic citizen. It has revealed how and up to what extent Pakistan ISI can influence India’s so-called intellectuals…
The matter was so grave that America was bound to arrest Ghulam Nabi Fai; but this important matter didn't hold any importance in the recent India-Pak Foreign Minister-level meeting.
This makes it obvious for the country to assume that Delhi’s UPA Government supports and protects the pseudo intellectual preachers of India.
Last week, I came across so many eye-opening articles which I find worth sharing with you. Do read and make others read them too… and do share your feedback and thoughts about the same through comments, so that the whole country can awaken to the truth.
The links of the articles are here:
1) Fai has exposed them - S. Gurumurthy, The express buzz
2) Fai's ISI link was known to all - B Raman, The pioneer
3) The truth behind ‘Pseudo Secular Intellectuals’ reveled - Suresh Chiplunkar on Blog
4) Junketing on the ISI's money - Kanchan Gupta, The Pioneer
Yours,
Exhibit-A : The cop
What he did not mention was the discretionary manner in which the Mayawati government, early this year, allotted this land to him and another10,000 sq m farmhouse plot to his lawyer son Jayant Bhushan. And in what raises questions of conflict of interest, Jayant Bhushan has appeared against Mayawati in the Noida statue park case.
..
The cost of each farmhouse plot is Rs 3.5 crore and allottees had to pay just 10% — Rs 35 lakh — at the time of allotment, the rest in 16 instalments. This is less than a quarter of the market rate, according to Vikas Singh’s petition.
Source : IE (Bhushans get land from Mayawati)
Exhibit-B : The Robber
Amid mounting opposition pressure on Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yeddyurappa to quit following the controversy on allocation of prime urban land to his family members, the BJP leader’s son and daughter have surrendered their plots in the city.
Official sources said B Y Raghavendra, MP, submitted a letter to the Bangalore Development Authority surrendering 50 x 80 feet plot allotted to him in the upscale R M V Extension.
Source : IE (Yediyurappa Son /Daughter surrender plots)
A quick conversion of units :
Prashant Bhushan allotted 10,000 Sq Mt Noida farmhouse = 45 grounds (40×60 sq ft each) = 2.5 acres ; about 22 TIMES the size of Yeddy’s son BS Raghavendra.
Jayant Bhushan also allotted 10,000 Sq Mt Noida farmhouse = 45 grounds (40×60 sq ft each) = 2.5 acres ; about 22 TIMES the size of Yeddy’s son BS Raghavendra.
Actually, I dont mind these two luminaries taking crass advantage of this quota system. What really pisses me off is this defiant statement :
When contacted, Shanti Bhushan told The Indian Express: “My son and I were among the applicants and we were surprised when we got the allotment letters. I agree there is no transparency in the scheme and allotments have been made without any clear criterion. But why should we challenge this? The people who applied and were not given the farmland should challenge it. I have heard that bribes have passed hands for these allotments but, obviously, not from us. There may be a case for a scheme like this to be cancelled.”
Source (emphasis mine) : IE (Bhushans get land from Mayawati)
What ? Only people who get the shaft should challenge system ?
Then why are you (and your Dad) in the drafting panel ? You obviously dont know the feeling of shaft.
You, and your son sought to take full advantage of a system. One which in your own words
is not ‘transparent”
without “clear criterion”
you have heard bribes passed hands
This is pretty much what everyone who will appear before your Lokpal will claim.
—–
In another development, Mother India has been shown the door and Tiranga is in. Predictable.
6 comments
Lokpal – report-generator or jail-sender
Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on April 17, 2011
My previous post might have been misconstrued as blind support to the elected few.
Lets consider what the elected few have been up to lately :
The maximum sentence even if everything proven in corruption cases is only 7 years. No need to declare bankruptcy or have property attached.
CBI produces a weak chargesheet. The only person from the political side named is Mr A Raja. It flies against all commonsense that his party will allow him to keep all proceeds and not use it for the party.
Sibal and Co agree to a Jan Lok Pal
DOT silently opposes cancellation of the licenses. There is simply no outrage or urgency to recover national losses – even though BSNL and MTNL are being run aground. BSNL loss is 5,000 Cr loss while operating in a very lucrative industry.
In all the above cases, we cant accept these malafide actions just because they have been perpetrated by the elected. Unconditional subservience to the acts of elected humans is not democratic – suggesting and creating a public demand for strong checks is. This is where the Ombudsman can play a vital role.
In this post, I give my humble suggestion to the Lokpal drafting committee members.
With more power comes more baggage
Why a report generator lokpal is better than a jail-sender lokpal.
It is important to understand where the difference of opinion lies.
Do we need a civilian ombudsman at all ? I assume most of us say YES to this, because we all welcome a check to the elected running riot. Nothing undemocratic about that.
How much power should the civilian ombudsman have ? This is where we differ.
Here is what I would like to see in a Lokpal which are not in the government draft
Receive complaints from public
Able to subpoena and investigate
No sanction required to summon any elected representative
Produce a report and submit to the Lok / Vidhan Sabha & put it on website for social media to pick up
Move on to the next case
This is a major climbdown from what Anna Hazare and company want.
What is wrong with Lok Pal with Killer Shark like powers ?
Thank you very much. We will take it from here.
My opposition to a high power Killer Shark Lokpal is rooted in my belief that it cannot be independent of the primary social justice platform. However, any association of people are expected to satisfy the protectors of this platform. Even worse, its findings will be repudiated with contempt unless the composition of the committee is to the satisfaction of various benefit protectors. The more power the Lok Pal has the more it has to conform.
It is not the end of the story.
Constant and on-going negotiations for tweaking
There will be nominees from minority, caste, and race based groups. Once selected, these nominees will naturally be conscious.
A position in the powerful Lok Pal will turn into yet another adhoc benefit and strengthen the political benefit protector even more.
This will lead to even more pressure not to measure the benefit regime – because Lok Pal positions are now added to the heap of stakes.
A Lok Pal which only produces a report will have far more headroom.
A shark like Lok Pal must win a beauty contest
There has been extended commentary about the way Anna Hazare has been railroaded because he said this about the Gujarat CM. This led to this strong condemnation from civil society.
“We, academics, activists, artists and intellectuals strongly condemn the recently reported statement made by Anna Hazareji in which he has brazenly endorsed Narendra Modi, a politician who not only symbolizes the politics of division but unconstitutional governance. For the veteran anti-corruption social activist, …,” the activists said in a joint statement.
Source : Anna Hazare condemned - 2 circles
Lets leave Modi alone for a moment. What amused me reading reactions to Anna Hazare’s fast was the opposition to the mother India banner behind the fasting leader.
Consider this reaction :
Well, this throws up more disturbing concerns. Physically he conducted this prayer in the backdrop of a buxom picture of Bharat Mata bejeweled to the hilt including the proverbial crown standing on a white flex board Indian map!
..
Maybe it is mere coincidence that many of the faces that have appeared in this drama have a Magsaysay award tucked under their belt (and a sacred thread over their shoulder).
..
Source : Blog post - Of a few, by a few – Bobby Kunhu http://www.countermedia.in/?p=663
Manu Joseph was also amused by the “shapely mother india”.
azare, who is on a raised platform, has acquired many of the mannerisms of Mohandas Gandhi, including a thoughtful tilt of his head. Behind him are images of Gandhi and a very shapely Mother India.
Source : Comic revolution of an obsolete man
You may be stunned at such an attack on caste and religious basis for a mere hunger strike. It is not like there was an image of mother Durga and the protesters were made to chant Durga slokas. Even such token mother India imagery, we consider innocent and secular kosher is not acceptable to many in this country. This is just a trial show of what is to come once the Lokpal is set up. Many activists and leftists are prudently waiting by the sidelines biding their time. Once the bill passes, the hope is to appropriate it and mold it using the old primary social justice die. Why oppose it now and deprive yourself of a useful tool which is certainly yours ?
The more power to Lok Pal the more self conscious it must be. It is not enough to satisfy the majority, they must align with the sensibilities of the elite and left liberals.
2 comments
Jan Lok Pal – Caveat Emptor
Posted in Uncategorized by realitycheck on April 6, 2011
Anna Hazare has announced that he intends to fast unto death until the Jan Lokpal bill is adopted. He has disallowed all politicians from approaching him. According to him and his supporters, this is a “non violent non political” movement. Prominent supporters of this ‘non political’ movement are Kiran Bedi (Magasaysay – we will come to that shortly), Arvind Kejriwal (also Magasaysay), Medha Patkar, Aamir Khan, Madhur Bhandarkar, Shekar Kapur, among others. Sure enough tonight various media outlets NDTV, CNN-IBN and others hopped on to this bandwagon. Civil Society it appears is feeling good about this bill.
It pains me to see thousands of young and impressionable Indians being sold snake oil.
It is important to separate the two issues here :
The Draft Jan Lokpal Bill itself.
The voluntary assembly of Indians unaffiliated to any political outfit all outraged by high corruption.
The second point first. Such voluntary and spontaneous assembly of Indians is something to be proud of. This is a great event for sure. I have highest respect for Anna Hazare which makes this post a bit difficult to write.
The real purpose of this blog post.
Top 5 reasons why I think the Draft Jan Lokpal Bill is the most hare brained piece of document ever produced.
A Microsoft Word document of the draft bill can be found here. You can also search “Jan Lokpal Bill” on Google and use the Google Document Viewer.
5. Comparison with Hong Kong ombudsman bill is incorrect
Many supporters of the Draft Jan Lok Pal Bill are quick to drop Hong Kong as a reference. This is invalid because the Hong Kong Ombudsman has 1) no powers of prosecution 2) only produces a report and submits to the Chief Executive (like our PM) 3) is appointed by politicians. The first thing I did after being confronted with the Hong Kong Ombudsman parallel was to read the whole Hong Kong Ombudsman act. I suspected a bluff. I simply could not believe that other countries could allow civil society nominees to actually initiate prosecution against citizens. I was right.
4. Reckless in its promise and scope
An example is Section 10.2
(2) Lokpal, after getting such enquiries and investigations done as it deems fit, may take one or more of the following actions:
a. Close the case if prima facie, the complaint is not made out or
b. Initiate prosecution against public servants as well as those private entities which are party to the act
c. Order imposition of appropriate penalties under CCS Conduct Rules Provided that if an officer is finally convicted under Prevention of Corruption Act, major penalty of dismissal shall be imposed on such government servant.
d. Order cancellation or modification of a license or lease or permission or contract or agreement, which was the subject matter of investigation.
e. Blacklist the concerned firm or company or contractor or any other entity involved in that act of corruption.
In other words, from dismissing a case outright to cancellation to blacklisting a firm – the Lokpal has unbridled powers. We can only appeal to the merciful benevolence of its members.
3. Police and court all rolled into one
It does not matter that Lokpal members are not trained to be policemen, but I invite you to read Sec 12.
We are police.
12. Lokpal to be a deemed police officer: (1) For the purposes of section 36 of Criminal Procedure Code,
the Chairperson, members of Lokpal and the officers in investigation wing of Lokpal shall be deemed to be police officers.
(2) While investigating any offence under Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, they shall be competent to
investigate any offence under any other law in the same case.
We are also court.
See Section 10.2
(2) For the purpose of any such investigation (including the preliminary inquiry) the Lokpal shall
have all the powers of a civil court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , in respect
of the following matters, namely:-
(a) Summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath;
(b) Requiring the discovery and production of any document;
(c) Receiving evidence on affidavits;
..
(3) Any proceeding before the Lokpal shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding with in the
meaning of section 193 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The all important selection policy
Jan Lokpal Bill is open ended and confers unlimited powers. So it goes without saying that selecting the Lok Pal Members is the single most important task. There are no checks and balances at all in the bill that would make it idiot member proof. In other words, if the mainstream institutions have been compromised, there is NOTHING in the bill that would prevent the Lokpal from being compromised too. It gets worse because of two reasons.
The mainstream institutions (CVC, CBI, CAG, etc) can be turned around by people power every 5 years. That it doesnt seem to happen is due to there not being enough free agent voters in the system. We can hope for a 20-25% increase in free agent voters which will straighten these institutions in short time.
A compromised Lokpal will wreak havoc and lay to waste the other institutions. There is no chance of getting them voted out.
Let me try to make it clearer.
If Indian citizens wanted to get a compromised Lok Pal off their backs – this is what they have to do. Study hard, do great research, win a Nobel Prize or work hard on social issues and win a Magasaysay Prize. Then and only then do you get to have a say in who the Lokpal members are. Experience has taught us that such a system is bound to fail. Very quickly such an immune and isolated group congeal around a particular social or ideological position.
Adhoc selection criteria without rhyme or reason very prone to dilution hence ruining spirit of the bill
Here is who gets to select the Lokpal members.
5. A selection committee consisting of the following shall be set up:
a. The Chairpersons of both Houses of Parliament
b. Two senior most judges of Supreme Court
c. Two senior most Chief Justices of High Courts.
d. All Nobel Laureates of Indian Origin
e. Chairperson of National Human Rights Commission
f.Last two Magsaysay Award winners of Indian origin
g. Comptroller and Auditor General of India
h. Chief Election Commissioner
i.Bharat Ratna Award winners
j. After the first set of selection process, the outgoing members and Chairperson of
Lokpal.
The adhoc ness of this list will immediately lead to its dilution. Why on earth should Nobel Prize Winners of Indian origin , who are citizens of other countries get to decide the Lokpal members ? What is great about the “last two” Magasaysay award winners (Kejriwal) ? Why not last ten ? Why not Padmasri Winners ?
These awards cannot possibly confer powers to put other people in jail.
1. Unelected people cant dont put people in jail
I simply do not want unelected people to have the power to put other Indian citizens in jail.
What I want
Lokpal should be stripped of its prosecution powers, Lokpal members cannot have a police rank, Lokpal cannot blacklist or seize private property, cannot conduct judicial hearings.
Lokpal should promote the democratic way of addressing corruption.
Highlighting exemplary work done by people like Subramanian Swamy. Who would incidentally be ineligible for Lokpal, Chandan Mitra (also ineligible), various government servants and professionals (all ineligible because you have to quit everything).
Promoting the wisdom that politicizing corruption is the democratic way. If you are corrupt we gonna vote your ass out. No bullshit about “larger issue of systemic ingrained structural defects”.
Be a true ombudsman like your Hong Kong counterpart. Time for me to turn it around. By all means accept complaints, investigate, gather evidence, and produce a report to the public and to the state. We bloggers will pick it up.
People wake up !! This one is a lemon.
Some lemonade to break your fast
