C. Bhargavi

Description of Russian government structure:

Chief of State: President Dmitry Anatolyevich MEDVEDEV

Head of Government: Premier Vladimir Vladimirovich PUTIN

Assembly: Russia has a bicameral Federal Assembly (Federalnoye Sobraniye) consisting of the Federation Council (Sovet Federatsii) with 178 seats and the State Duma (Gosudarstvennaya Duma) with 450 seats.

Description of Russian electoral system:

The President is elected by absolute majority vote through a two-round system to serve a 6-year term.

The Premier is appointed by the president.

In the Federation Council (Sovet Federatsii) 178 members are appointed by regional governing councils to serve 4-year terms*. In the State Duma (Gosudarstvennaya Duma) 450 members are elected through a closed-list proportional representation system to serve 4-year terms.**

* There are 89 constituencies with a district magnitude of two.

** Seats are allocated using the Hare quota. There is one, nationwide district and a minimum threshold of 7%.

Russian Legislative elections, 2011

Legislative elections were held in Russia on 4 December 2011. At stake were the 450 seats in the State Duma, the lower house of the Federal Assembly of Russia (the legislature). United Russia won the elections with 49.32% of the vote, taking 238 seats or 52.88% of the Duma seats.

This result was down from 64.30% of the vote and 70% of the seats in the 2007 elections. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation received 19.19% of the vote and 92 seats, while A Just Russia received 13.24% and 64 seats, with the Liberal Democratic Party of Russiagetting 56 seats with 11.67% of the vote. Other parties did not cross the 7% election threshold. The list of parties represented in the parliament did not change.

United Russia lost the two-thirds constitutional majority it had held prior to the election, but it still won an absolute majority of seats in the Duma, even though it had less than 50% of the popular vote. The Communist Party, Liberal Democratic Party and A Just Russia all gained new seats compared to the previous 2007 elections.

Electoral irregularities and assessment

During and after the election international media and local independent websites reported serious irregularities during the election, including ballot stuffing, misuse of state resources, media bias and lack of impartiality by the election commission. The Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti reported more than 1,100 official complaints filed of election irregularities across the country, including vote fraud, obstruction of observers and illegal campaigning.

Reports by participating parties

Members of the A Just Russia, Yabloko and Communist parties reported that certain voters were shuttled between polling stations, casting several ballots. The Yabloko and Liberal Democratic parties reported that some of their observers had been banned from witnessing the sealing of the ballot boxes and from gathering video footage, and others groundlessly expelled from polling stations. The ruling United Russia party alleged that opposition parties broke campaign law by distributing leaflets and newspapers at polling stations, and that at some polling stations the voters were ordered to vote for the Communist party with threats of violence.

Reports by independent groups and observers

At a number of polling stations throughout the country, observers reported that final results published by the Central Election Commission differed drastically from results recorded by observers, with the “official” numbers sometimes showing the United Russia vote inflated by a factor of two or three.

In Moscow, the opposition activist group Citizen Observer estimated that United Russia had stolen 17% of the popular vote from other parties.

In Saint Petersburg, independent activist group Right to Elect (”Право выбора”) attempted to register all differences between observers’ protocols and the data of the Central Election Commission. They found that comparable shares of differences in votes were in favour not only of the United Russia, but of CPRF and LDPR parties as well (2.68%, 1.49% and 2.67% respectively as of the data on 13th December).

Reports by international observers

International observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) documented numerous violations of electoral law They found that whilst the preparations for the elections were technically well administered, they were marked by a “convergence of the State and the governing party” They said they witnessed “undue interference of state authorities”, “partiality of most media” and “lack of independence of the election administration”. Denying registration to some political parties narrowed political competition, according to the OSCE The OCSE concluded that “This…did not provide the necessary conditions for fair electoral competition.” However, international observers from the Commonwealth of Independent States reported that the elections “were held legally and without serious violations.”

Official reaction to the reports on irregularities

According to Vladimir Putin’s Press Secretary, Dmitry Peskov, the known accumulated volume of all reports on falsifications affects no more than 0.5% of total votes, and so this could not be a basis to reconsider the results of the elections

Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev called for an investigation of all reports on irregularities, but voiced his disagreement with slogans and calls by the protesters on the post-election meetings.

Yury Chaika, the Prosecutor General of Russia, said that the data on falsifications will be analyzed, but said also that violations were local and didn’t affect the overall result, and that therefore there is no reason to cancel the results of the elections.

Vote rigging?

Opinion polling

In the run-up to the election, opposition activists were rounded up by police or detained in Moscow.1 During the elections a wide array of traditional manipulations were used such as ballot box stuffing or pressure on civil servants to vote. Similar to former elections, regional leaders were ordered to return high votes in favor of the incumbent ruling party.2 Thus, Soviet-like high figures were registered in the North Caucasus republics, with a special mention for Chechnya, where allegedly 99.48% of voters backed United Russia, with a turnout of 99.51%, while United Russia support in Dagestan, Ingushetia or Kabardino-Balkaria reached a record high of 90%-91%. These results can be explained – to a great extent – by a system based on authority. North Caucasian leaders rule these republics like their private fiefdoms, especially in Chechnya, where Ramzan Kadyrov has ruled with an iron fist since 2007.

A more modern way to silence the opposition was also employed: cyber attacks on liberal media websites (Kommersant daily, LiveJournal blogs) and on the site of the sole Russian independent election observer, Golos. In the two days following the election, between 6,000 and 15,000 people rallied in Moscow to protest the results and several hundred did the same in other regions.

According to independent rights group Agora, up to 1,000 people were arrested in the capital. In the meantime, opposition Yabloko party head Sergei Mitrokin was briefly detained. On 10 December 2011, at least 25,000 people, the biggest demonstration since 1991, gathered in the center of Moscow to denounce the election outcome. Given all these events, we can consider that Russia has entered a new cycle in its political life.

United Russia’s monopolization of power has ended, as it could not change the Constitution to please the Kremlin again. The next Duma will be more open for debate, especially in serious matters like the federal budget vote. Thus, real parliamentarianism and democracy could emerge in the country, if the three other parties play the role of constructive opponents and take an active part in decision-making. The future of United Russia will depend on its ability to compromise with the other political forces for the sake of the country. Yet, since the early 2000s this party has been used to impose its views on every matter.

Contrary to many analysts’ beliefs, the announcement by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin at United Russia Congress on 24 September 2011 of job swapping with Dmitry Medvedev, in case he returns to the Kremlin in March 2012, deeply shocked many Russians, especially among the emerging urban middle-class, the young and educated people. Those people were attracted by Medvedev’s promises of modernization and the corresponding changes in the economy, society and politics. By preventing President Medvedev from running for a second term, Putin committed a political mistake. Instead, he should have decided to leave as his historical role – the consolidation of the Russian state – has been achieved. The aftermath of Duma elections lays the ground for a more competitive presidential election, on 4 March 2012, which will be closely watched by the Russian voters, as well as by national and foreign observers.

Aftermath of Duma elections – Protests

The parliamentary elections that took place in Russia on 4 December 2011 usher in a new era for the post-Soviet political system in the country. The poor results registered by the Kremlin’s party, United Russia – amid allegations of wide- spread vote-rigging – show that its decade-long domination is over.

Tens of thousands protested December 10, 2011 in Bolotnaya Square, Moscow over allegations of election fraud in parliamentary elections won by United Russia, the ruling political party, led by current Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

The exact number of protesters present is unknown; estimates for the Moscow protest vary from twenty thousand to one hundred thousand, and rallies on a more minor scale also took place in other Russian cities—including Saint Petersburg. Voice of America(VoA) reported the demonstrations as the largest pro-democracy protests since Vladimir Putin came to power eleven years ago. Other reports describe the demonstrations as the greatest since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Police estimated that ten thousand people were present at demonstrations in St. Petersburg. Corruption and a rejection of Putin were the most commonly-cited grievances from questioned protesters.

Opposition leader Evgenia Chirikova told VoA the protests were in favour of fresh elections, and the release of political prisoners. During the demonstrations, protesters chanted “[p]olice, part of the people” at the riot police. Echo of Moscow host Alexei Venediktov described the protesters as “the new generation, the Putin generation”. These people “voted, had their votes stolen, and now they want a fair system”, said Venediktov.

Konstantin Kosachyov, a United Russia parliamentarian, dismissed the concept of discussions with the protest organisers. “With all respect for the people who came out to protest, they are not a political party,” he stated. Student Daniil Klubov, a leader of the St. Petersburg rally, told the BBC that he does not “belong to any political movement” and is “just a student who is tired of all these lies”.

In December 2011, Russian police arrested an estimated 1,600 people after street protests. In anticipation of yesterday’s protests, fifty thousand police and riot police were drafted into Moscow. Under one hundred arrests were made across the country during the day of protest.

Television stations operated by the Russian government provided no coverage of protests in Russia from last week’s election, but lifted the blackout one week on, broadcasting images of thousands filling a Moscow park, spilling over a bridge and covering a facing embankment.

On 23.12.2011, Moscow authorities declared an obligatory test for all high school students, scheduling it for the exact time of protests on Saturday; protest leader Alexey Navalny is currently imprisoned by order of a Russian judge. And, a Russian health board warned of respiratory diseases being contracted when being in large crowds. Russian Ground Forces cautioned that they would be observing, looking for instances of draft evasion as protesters walked through metal detectors.

On 24.12.2011, Mikhail Gorbachev, who resigned as Soviet president 20 years ago, has urged Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to follow his example and step down. Gorbachev said if Putin stepped down now he would be remembered for the positive things he did during his 12 years in power

In March 2012, Putin himself will face voters, seeking a new six-year term as Russian President. VoA reported in December 2011 that his presidential bid looked likely to succeed; however, that outcome now seems less predictable.

Election Review Impossible says Putin (Source: edition.cnn.com)

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on 27.12.2011 discounted calls for a review of the disputed December 4 parliamentary elections that have sparked widespread protests and calls for reform.

“The elections to the State Duma are over,” Putin said. “All parliamentary factions have started to work. The speaker has been elected. The Duma is functioning. Any kind of revision is out of the question,” Putin said.

The only exception, he said, would be if any irregularities were found, “the court will have to look into them and adopt an objective ruling.”

Putin’s ruling United Russia Party received 49.5 percent of the vote, down from 64 percent four years ago, in an election widely viewed as marred by vote rigging and ballot-box stuffing. It kept Putin’s party in power, although in diminished form.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

******

Bhargavi Chandrasekharan

What prompted a Food Security Bill?

India’s high economic growth rate in the past decade has not been fully reflected in the health status of its people, with 22 per cent of its population undernourished. According to the National Family Health Survey 2005-06, 40.4% of children under the age of three are underweight, 33 per cent of women in the age group of 15-49 have a body mass index below normal and 78.9 per cent of children in the age group of 6-35 months are anaemic. These are disturbing statistics which point to nutritional deficiencies. The National Advisory Council (NAC) proposal for a National Food Security Bill (NFSB) is perhaps the most important national effort yet to address these deficiencies in India.

Intent of NFSB

The NFSB proposed by the NAC is a potentially revolutionary bill that can have a huge impact on the economy. Well crafted and effectively executed, it can transform the lives of people. The salient features of the NFSB proposed by the NAC are:

• Legal entitlement to subsidized foodgrains to be extended to at least 75% of the country’s population – 90% in Rural areas and 50% in urban areas
• The priority households (46% in rural areas and 28% in urban areas) to have a monthly entitlement of 35 Kgs (equivalent to 7 Kgs per person) at a subsidized price of Rs. 1 per Kg for millets, Rs. 2 per Kg for wheat and Rs. 3 per Kg for rice
• The general households (39% rural and 12% urban in phase 1 and 44% rural and
• 22% urban in final phase) to have a monthly entitlement of 20Kgs (equivalent to 4 Kgs per person) at a price not exceeding 50% of the current Minimum Support
• Price for millets, wheat and rice
• The minimum coverage, entitlement and price to remain unchanged until the end of the XII five year plan
• Government of India to specify the criteria for categorization of population into priority and general households
• In the first phase, food entitlement to be extended to 72 per cent of the population. In the final phase, to be completed before March 31, 2014, full coverage of food entitlement (to 75 per cent of the population) to be ensured
• Legal entitlements for child and maternal nutrition, destitute and other vulnerable groups
• Reform of the Public Distribution System

Estimates of Foodgrains Required for Implementing the NFSB

Million tonnes

*Population – Scenario 1 – October 2010; Scenario 2 &3 – Phase 1-October 2011; Phase 2- October 2013

Foodgrain Production and Procurement – Trends and Projections

Production and Procurement of Wheat and Rice

Million tonnes

* Projections as per Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Govt. of India **Assuming an optimum procurement of 30 per cent of total production

NFSB tabled in Lok Sabha

The much-awaited National Food Security Bill, 2011, which makes cheaper foodgrains a legal entitlement to 63.5 per cent of the country’s population, was tabled in the Lok Sabha on 22.12.2011.

The Bill was introduced by Food Minister K.V. Thomas in the presence of Congress president Sonia Gandhi, who has been keen on ensuring that the law is enacted. It seeks to “provide food and nutritional security by ensuring access to adequate quantity of quality food at affordable prices to people [to enable them] to live a life with dignity.”

The proposed law marks a paradigm shift in addressing the problem of food security — from the existing welfare approach to a right-based approach. Besides expanding the coverage of the Targeted Public Distribution System, it will confer legal rights, enabling eligible beneficiaries to receive foodgrains entitlements at highly subsidised prices.

Also, Section 32 of the bill mentions the States’ responsibilities: they will at their own cost organise the grains’ intra-state transport and deliver them to fair price shops in time for distribution among the beneficiaries. The States must ensure the grains reach the target population. They must set up and maintain storage facilities at the state, district and block levels. If a State fails to supply the entitled quantity of grains (or meals) to a beneficiary, it must pay them a “food security allowance” out of its own pocket.

Benefits of NFSB – Free Meals

The law will also confer legal rights on women, children and other special groups — destitute, the homeless, disaster-and-emergency-affected persons and persons living in starvation — to receive meals free or at an affordable price.

The law will entitle people eligible under the priority category (Below the Poverty Line families) to a monthly allotment of 7 kg of foodgrains, comprising rice, wheat and coarse grains, per person. Rice will be provided at Rs. 3 kg, wheat at Rs. 2 and coarse grains at Re. 1.

The general category will get at least 3 kg of grain at a rate not exceeding 50 per cent of the minimum support price.

The subsidy will be extended to up to 75 per cent of the rural population and up to 50 per cent of the urban population — with not less than 46 per cent of the rural population and 28 per cent of the urban population designated as priority households.

Maternity Benefits

Every pregnant woman and lactating mother will be entitled to meals free of charge during pregnancy and six months after childbirth, through the local anganwadi.

The Bill provides for a maternity benefit of Rs. 1,000 a month for six months. Besides, every child up to the age of 14 shall have entitlement to nutritional needs. For children between six months and six years, appropriate meal would be provided free of charge through the local anganwadi to meet nutritional standards. For children in the 6-14 age group, one mid-day meal would be given free of charge every day, except during holidays, in all schools run by local bodies, and government and government-aided schools up to class VIII.

Effect of Food Security Bills – Tamil Nadu perspective

Under the proposed National Food Security Bill, 2011, no State would be able to provide subsidized food to anyone that the Centre rules out of its beneficiaries’ list

The Bill, tabled in a hurry ahead of the UP polls faces criticism from non-UPA-ruled state governments like Bihar and Tamil Nadu, as it prevents the states from enlarging its ambit to benefit poor that the Centre does not identify.

TN CM Jayalalithaa’s letter to the PM

Chief Minister Jayalalithaa on 20.12.2011 expressed her “strong opposition” to the draft Food Security Bill, 2011 and urged the Centre to exempt Tamil Nadu from the purview of the Bill.

In her letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, she said the proposed Bill was replete with “confusion and inaccuracy.”

The proposed classification of target groups into priority household (PHH) and general household (GHH) for delivery of food entitlements would surely invite sharp criticism and furious opposition from everybody concerned. The very basis of such classification was unscientific and unacceptable.

Similarly, no reason had been adduced for restricting the coverage under Targeted Public Distribution System (TDPS) to 75 per cent of the rural population and 50 per cent of the urban population under the proposed Central Bill.

“The most significant point is that the forced implementation of TPDS, as contemplated under the Central Bill, will entail an additional financial burden of about Rs.1,800 crore per annum with no statutory commitment forthcoming from the government of India,” Ms. Jayalalithaa said, adding that the annual food subsidy for the State was Rs.5,000 crore.

TN’S Loss: The Hindu dt. 24.12.2011

If National Food Security Bill is adopted in its present form, Tamil Nadu stands to lose at least six lakh tonnes of rice from the Central allotment annually if the National Food Security Bill, introduced in Lok Sabha on 22.12.2011, is adopted in its present form.

On an average, the Central government provides the State around 35.6 lakh tonnes of rice annually under three categories – Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY), Below Poverty Line (BPL) and Above Poverty Line (APL). It fixes a quota for each category and fixes different prices for the three categories.

As part of the Bill, two categories of people – general households (GHH) and priority households (PHH) – will be covered. Seventy five per cent of rural population and 50 per cent of urban population will be eligible for entitlements. Of them, 48 per cent of the rural population and 28 per cent of the urban population will be designated as PHHs. Adopting these yardsticks, the total allocation will be around 29 lakh tonnes a year.

Measures suggested compensating the deficit

The State government will have to address two major issues to tide over this gap – availability and cost. In the country, major rice millers are available only in three other States – Andhra Pradesh, Punjab and Chhattisgarh. A senior official says that the shortfall of six lakh tonnes cannot be bridged that easily. Even assuming that the price of rice is Rs.20 per kg, the additional cost will be Rs.1,200 crore.

But, the financial burden is going to be higher as the actual requirement of the State is 39.6 lakh tonnes. After the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam government, in June, launched the scheme of supplying 20 kg rice free, the monthly requirement has gone up. During 2010-2011, the monthly average supply of rice was 3.17 lakh tonnes. Now, it is around 3.4 lakh tonnes.

At present, the State government procures the remaining four lakh tonnes through measures such as rice purchase under the Open Market Sale Scheme of the Food Corporation of India. If the Bill becomes a law, it has to shell out additional money to procure this quantity. This will push up the cost. It is for this reason that Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, in her recent letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, pointed out that the State government would have to incur a total expenditure of Rs. 1,800 crore additionally a year, the official explains.

If one were to calculate the requirements on the basis of individual entitlement, as envisaged in the Bill, another five lakh tonnes of rice will be required. In total, the State would have to meet the gap of 15 lakh tonnes a year.

For arriving at the overall additional quantity figure, it has been assumed that apart from meeting the norms envisaged in the Bill [seven kg per person per month for PHHs and three kg per person per month for GHHs], those cardholders who will be excluded from the proposed categories of PHHs and GHHs will be given 20 kg rice per month and GHHs will get one more kg per person per month. As per the State government’s policy, four kg rice is given to every adult a month.

In the Bill, there are other areas of concern to the State government. Given the fact that one half of the State’s population lives in urban areas, the stipulation of the coverage of 50 per cent of urban population means that a quarter of the State’s population – about 1.8 crore – will straightaway be ineligible to receive the Central subsidy.

In principle, the State government is against the Targeted Public Distribution System. So, it follows the Universal PDS and supplying rice free to 1.85 crore families. Moreover, a senior official who has been handling the subject of food wonders that in the absence of data on PHHs and GHHs, how the legislation can be implemented.

Another official says that as the State government gives edible oil and pulses at subsidised rates, the determination of entitlements of beneficiaries should also be made on the basis of calorific value of such condiments, not merely that of rice. This calls for a suitable correction in the quantity of rice to be supplied to the beneficiaries

Opposition for NFSB from other quarters

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minster Maywati has termed the proposed Food Security Bill as impractical and an election stunt of the Congress, the ruling party on 22.11.2011.

The district unit of the Right to Food (RTF) campaign organised a protest on 23.12.2011 against the Centre’s National Food Security Bill, 2011, which was recently introduced in the Lok Sabha. They submitted a memorandum demanding changes in the Bill.

The All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) has called upon the Parliament to reject the National Food Security Bill introduced in the Lok Sabha on 22.12.2011.

In a statement issued on 23.12.2011, the association said the Bill was a “more dangerous and rehashed version” of the current Targeted Public Distribution System, that proved to be an “utter failure” in view of the manner in which it eroded the food security of the majority of the poor, the dalits, the tribals and women, by excluding them from its ambit.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

******

1. Anna Hazare

The face behind the Lokpal movement, Kisan Baburao better known as Anna Hazare is considered by many netas and babus as their biggest nemesis and a hindrance to their aspirations. His crusade against corruption has grabbed headlines all over and inspired the common Indian to demand for a Jan Lokpal Bill that would hold politicians accountable for their actions.

Even though his growing popularity surprised many, Anna Hazare has been a social activist for over two decades, relentlessly working towards social and political reforms in the country.

Born in 1937, Anna Hazare joined the army in 1963 and it was during one of his visits to his village of Ralegaon Siddhi that forced him to retire from the army and to dedicate his life to rooting out problems that the villagers were facing.

His biography says Anna Hazare accidently came across a book by Swami Vivekananda and as he began to read it he realised that the ultimate motive of human life should be service to humanity and thus he decided to devote his life to public service.

Always seen in white, Anna Hazare lives in a single room within the village temple compound.

This Gandhian hails the Lokpal movement as India’s second freedom struggle. Leading a frugal life with integrity and honesty, overnight he has become a role model for India’s middle class.

Anna has resorted to many hunger strikes to make his demands heard, a fact that doesn’t augur well with his critics as they have labelled him a blackmailer and an armchair fascist.

2. Mamata Banerjee

The 34-year-old regime of the Left front finally crumbled to a feisty Mamata Banerjee, making her the first woman chief minister of West Bengal when her party won the assembly elections this year.

Mamata clad in a white sari and rubber slippers managed to do what many in Bengal thought was undoable till a few years back. Her angry denunciations of the Left administration made her an instant hit with the struggling Bengali. She systematically mounted protests against forced land acquisitions in the state by the then Left-ruled government.

During her short stint as the union railway minister she showered Bengal with railway projects which in turn gave Bengalis a glimpse of what she can do for their state if given a chance.

In 2011, Mamata gifted new trains and several new projects to six districts in north Bengal and didn’t let it go unnoticed by adding, “Railways have invested more funds in the six districts than the State has done for development of north Bengal”. A smart move any time of the year.

‘Didi’, or elder sister as she is fondly called, strategised her campaign against the Communists in a manner that depicts the political scenario of India today. She stands against all that is wrong in Bengal- from wrongful land acquisitions, bad infrastructure to corruption and stagnation in the state’s economy- she has gone to the aam junta with these issues and promised to make things right.

Moreover, what has appealed to the voters this time is Mamata’s humble background and her will to succeed and to put Bengal on the world map, just like it was back in the 19^th century.

3. Jayalalithaa

During the election campaign, she foretold that the AIADMK with her allies would win over 185 seats in the Tamil Nadu assembly and how correct she was. After two consecutive defeats in the Tamil Nadu elections, Jayalalithaa made a spectacular comeback winning 199 of the state’s 234 assembly seats.

The last two defeats had taught Jayalalithaa a few bitter lessons and this time she made sure not to repeat the same mistakes. For this to happen, she had to depart from her usual mode of functioning and come down from her ivory tower and reach out to the people with her agenda.

Often described as the ‘Margaret Thatcher of Tamil Nadu’ by her followers, Jayalalithaa did the unthinkable and surprised political pundits by forging alliances with smaller parties – a move that proved to be a masterstroke.

As soon as the poll results were out, Jayalalithaa said, “Our priority is to rebuild. Over the past five years, Tamil Nadu has been totally ruined. Time and again this has happened. It is not an easy task to rebuild an entire state.”

What she did was to refer to the 2G spectrum scam repeatedly and hold rallies reminding the masses of how corrupt the DMK is and how the state’s economy is ruined by DMK.

Even though the pre-poll alliance played a major role in shaping the party’s victory, AIADMK cadres says that the win is an indication of people’s trust in Jayalalithaa and her vision of a corruption-free state.

4. Mahendra Singh Dhoni

Unlike other greats, Dhoni doesn’t have the technical efficiency or elegance or panache that makes cricket folklore but somehow he transcends all boundaries and makes himself a hero to the common man. He seldom makes batting look good but his helicopter shot makes even the connoisseur of the game make an exception and applaud.

Despite all his inadequacies, Dhoni ended India’s 28-year-long wait for a World Cup win and led the team to world’s No. 1 Test status. What makes Dhoni click seems to defy logic but what makes him a hero to millions makes more sense – he hails from a small-town with modest means and unlike other success stories, Dhoni has shown that anyone can make it big with hard work. He gives the small town enthusiasts the belief and confidence to dream big.

This year Time magazine named Dhoni in its list of 100 most influential people in the world. Time’s description of Dhoni was penned by Chetan Bhagat, saying:

“As astonishing as Dhoni’s talent is his background. Indian success stories are usually associated with pedigree, connections and power. Dhoni, from a small-town family of modest means, had none of these, but he’s shown India that you can make it with only one thing: excellence. Dhoni doesn’t just lead a cricket team; he’s also India’s captain of hope. And he didn’t just win India the World Cup; he also taught India how to win.”

So much has been said and written about his captaincy, but his biggest accolade came from teammate Sachin Tendulkar when he said that Dhoni is the best captain he played under.

5. B S Yeddyurappa

From being BJP’s first chief minister in south India to becoming Karnataka’s first chief minister to be jailed for corruption, Bookanakere Siddalingappa Yeddyurappa’s journey has been topsy turvy. A staunch Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh man, Yeddyurappa once worked as clerk in a rice mill.

Yeddyurappa shot to fame after he took up the cause of landless farmers and bonded labourers in the state and was detained during the emergency period in 1975. A powerful public speaker, Yeddyurappa is largely credited with pulling up the sagging fortunes of BJP in Karnataka.

When Yeddyurappa became chief minister in 2008, BJP hailed the day as opening the doors of south India for the party to rule. It was not a smooth journey for either Yeddyurappa or BJP as there were three rebellions and various scandals.

In January this year, Governor H.R. Bhardwaj shook BJP and Yeddyurappa by granting permission to two Bangalore advocates to launch criminal proceedings against him for illegally freeing government land in and around Bangalore for monetary gains.

The two advocates, Sirajin Basha and N.K. Balaraj filed five cases. Yeddyurappa was jailed in two of the five cases. Besides Yeddyurappa, his two sons, B.Y. Raghavendra and B.Y. Vijayendra, and son-in-law R. Sohan Kumar are also accused in all the five cases.

6. Lal Kishanchand Advani

Critics say this is veteran BJP leader Lal Kishanchand Advani’s final, desperate gambit to achieve his long-standing ambition to occupy the office of prime minister – his anti-corruption yatra. Supporters say the yatra, which will shortly enter such critical areas as Gujarat, Maharashtra and the south, is an attempt to throw light on rampant corruption and to politicize it is to trivialize the issue.

But is L.K. Advani’s anti-corruption yatra really mobilising people against the United Progressive Alliance or is it just the last hurrah of a veteran campaigner out to prove that he can still be a political game changer?

Calling for a ‘brighter India’ free of corruption, BJP leader L.K. Advani rolled out his sixth road campaign, the Jan Chetna Yatra, that will took him through 100 districts in 38 days. Hopefully this will be enough to push the BJP closer towards power in the next general election.

The man whose Rath first drove a party with just two seats in Parliament straight onto the national stage, clearly believes the yatra is still a journey to political advantage.

Advani’s yatra might have helped the party in crystallising the mood against the UPA in the wake of the 2G spectrum scam, the Commonwealth Games scandal and the cash-for-votes controversy and the government’s failure to contain price rise.

Advani, in his speeches during the yatra was unsparing in his attack on the UPA, describing it as the most corrupt government since independence and Manmohan Singh as the ‘weakest prime minister’. He also accused the UPA of ‘disarray and internal dissension’, ‘policy paralysis’ and spoke of the need for electoral and judicial reforms.

The yatra might have evoked a good response but the ‘litmus test’ will be Uttar Pradesh which will go to the polls next year.

7. Kiran Bedi

Not a stranger to controversy herself, India’s most famous IPS officer, Kiran Bedi, courted notoriety this year with her vociferous support of Anna Hazare’s Jan Lokpal movement, even resorting to gimmickry and over-the-top antics to get her point across.

India’s most decorated public services officer, a Magsaysay awardee, Bedi was quick to heap criticism on the UPA government’s inaction towards Anna’s requests of an ombudsman bill to counter corruption. Alas, after being the most outspoken in Anna’s team, she had to swallow a bitter pill when it came to light that she’d herself inflated several travel bills, a move she was quick to defend. She subsequently paid back the overcharged amount.

Bedi’s was a classic case of people-and-glass-houses.

8. Osama bin Laden

Nearly 10 years after the traumatic Sept 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon, the world’s most wanted terrorist leader Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan.

The man who wanted to recreate a seventh-century Muslim empire was gunned down by US special forces in a helicopter-borne assault on a closely guarded compound in Abbottabad.

President Obama announced that Osama bin Laden was killed in a firefight saying, “Good evening. Tonight I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who is responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women and children.”

Osama was found hiding in plain sight, in a well guarded compound in Abbottabad, just about an hour and a half outside of the Pakistan capital Islamabad, which cast a doubt on the Pakistan political-military hierarchy.

9. Sushil Kumar

This 27-year-old from Motihari in Bihar, went from oblivion to fame and wealth in a matter of 13 questions on the fifth season of the quiz show ‘Kaun Banega Crorepati’.

Sushil Kumar, a computer operator who works on contract with a government department for a monthly salary of Rs 6,000, won the biggest prize of all – Rs 5 crore, after successfully locking 13 questions posed by the Big B.

With two lifelines left, Amitabh Bachchan started reading out the final question. Sushil had to answer which foreign colonial power exited from India after selling off the Nicobar island to the British in 1868.

Sushil answered Denmark and the Big B exulted – ‘Paanch crore!’

“Our house has almost broken down and we have a lot of loans that have to be repaid,” Sushil said. “If it hadn’t been for this money, I would have gotten old before I sorted out my life.”

“I’ve been getting a lot of suggestions about what to do with the money, but right now I can only think about my dream of getting through the civil services exam,” he said.

“What a sensational day in the studios of KBC! A young man from the interiors of Bihar, earning a meagre salary of just Rs 6,000 per month, coming from the most humblest of backgrounds, reaches the hot seat and cracks the ultimate prize – Rs 5 crore! An incredible feat!” Amitabh Bachchan blogged.

10. Irom Sharmila Chanu

Even though she doesn’t strictly fulfil the newsmaker category, this iron-willed lady of Manipur has waged a long and lonely battle against an apathetic government the only way she can. Thanks to Anna Hazare’s fast, Irom received some media attention this year, starved that she was of it for the last 11 years.

Irom Sharmila Chanu has been fasting for 11 years to seek the removal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act or AFSPA from her state, Manipur.  She has the grit to try and persuade the government to repeal a law that empowers the security forces to arrest without a warrant, and shoot anyone at sight.

Dubbed as the Iron Lady of Manipur, Irom began her fast in 2000 after she witnessed the killing of 10 people by Assam Rifles jawans at a bus stop. For the past 10 years, she has not eaten a single morsel, resulting in her being force-fed by a tube through her nose.

Irom hopes one day the Indian government will recognise her and her fight against human rights violations in the north east. She has also urged Anna Hazare to visit Manipur and see what is happening there.

Although she has won international awards, Irom’s cause has never managed to strike a chord with the otherwise vocal middle class. Very few know or care about what is happening in Manipur, and how people in the state are being constantly bullied by the armed forces.

Irom’s heroic protest and her voice for a better homeland are still being ignored. Next time you attend a candlelight vigil, say a silent prayer and light a candle for this extraordinary woman.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

*****

1. Sathya Sai Baba

When Sathya Sai Baba, the Godman from Puttparthi died on April 6^th earlier this year, he left behind an empire estimated at Rs 40,000 crore, and no will. This was wealth accumulated from a lifetime being a self-proclaimed Godman and the largesse of rich benefactors.

Sai Baba had millions of followers all over the world. His devotees included some of the popular celebrities and powerful politicians like Sachin Tendulkar, Amitabh Bachchan and former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

He was worshipped as an incarnation of another saint, Shirdi Sai Baba, and believed to have God-like qualities. But he had his detractors, who claimed that all the miracles he performed, like pulling watches out of thin air, were merely cheap magic tricks. Rumors of child and sexual abuse at his ashram were also rampant, so much so that the US government had issued a warning about him to American citizens traveling to India. There was even an attempt on his life in June 6^th, 1993 in his ashram; the attack left six dead, and Puttaparthi rattled. Sai Baba dismissed the idea that the attack was an attempt on his life.

But his legacy will live past these minor negative incidents. Perhaps the biggest contribution of the seer was his philanthropic activities. He has provided many villages with clean drinking water through his organization Sri Satya Village Integrated Programme (SSVIP). He set up the Sri Sathya Sai University, which delivers high-quality education with three colleges under its belt.  His setting up of Sri Sathya Sai Baba’s Super Speciality Hospital has been very well received, where thousands of patients have been treated free of cost.

What will be important to follow would be the ability of his Trust to continue with his philanthropic activities long after he’s gone.

2. Shammi Kapoor

Shamsher Raj Kapoor, born on October 21, 1931, to Prithviraj Kapoor and Ramsharni Kapoor, was their middle son, and brother to Raj and Shashi Kapoor. He spent his childhood years in Kolkatta and Mumbai, and began his career with his father’s theatre company, Prithvi Theatres. Four years later he left to pursue a career in film. He shortened his name to Shammi Kapoor and made his debut with Jeevan Jyoti, but he was met without a blip at the box office. The next three years saw 20 films that crashed and burned. Deciding to change things around, Kapoor shaved off his pencil moustache, cut his hair and donned an Elvis Presley swagger. With films like Dil Deke Dekho and Tumsa Nahin Dekha, Kapoor cemented his image as the boyishly goodlooking playboy and stylish youth icon. His cry “Yahoo” in the film Jungleeencapsulated his image as a rebel, and the exclamation came to always be associated with him.  With successful films opposite stars like Asha Parekh, Saira Banu, and Sharmila Tagore, and his trademark dance moves, there was no looking back for Kapoor; he won his first Filmfare award in 1968 for Bramhachari.

Kapoor went through a difficult period when his wife Geeta Bali, mother to his two children Aditya Raj and Kanchan, died of small pox.  It was eight years before he remarried, this time to Neela Devi Gohil.  He soon retired from playing leading roles, taking instead to character pieces, and moving behind the camera as director. In 1995 he was given the Filmfare lifetime achievement award. Coming out of retirement for his cameo in the film Rockstarwith his nephew Ranbir Kapoor, Shammi Kapoor worked while simultaneously dealing with kidney dialysis. He eventually passed away from chronic renal failure on 14 August 2011 at Breach Candy Hospital in Mumbai. The entire Kapoor family and many of Bollywood’s biggest names came together to pay their last respects at the funeral of an actor whose legacy remains in Indian cinema.

3. Maqbool Fida Hussain

Maqbool Fida Hussain, better known to the world as MF Hussain, died on June 9^th 2011, at the age of 95. Hailed as India’s Picasso, he played a significant role in putting Indian art on the world map. Known for his use of vibrant colour and depictions of dynamic movement, frequently featuring women and horses, Husain was the first living Indian artist to command a price of $1million for his work.

Husain was born in Maharashtra on September 17^th, 1915, to an accountant father, and a mother who died when he was barely 18 months old. At the age of 19, Husain came to Mumbai and found work as a painter of Hindi film posters.  As his popularity grew, Husain also found himself increasingly in the eye of the storm with his series on Hindu divinity, portraying the goddesses Durga and Saraswati in the nude. Criminal charges that were filed against him for hurting religious sentiments were eventually quashed, but the death threats from Hindu extremists continued. In the face of such harassment, Husain was forced moved to Dubai, and the state of Qatar offered him citizenship.

The barefoot but flamboyant artist who created over 60,000 pieces of art died in exile in a hospital in London. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called his death a “national loss,” and India’s President Pratibha Patil said his death left a void in the world of art.

4. Bhupen Hazarika

Bhupen Hazarika, one of north-east India’s most important cultural figures, was a singer, lyricist, filmmaker, author and political activist, in a career that spanned 70 years. By the age of 10 he was composing music, and a year later performed for the first time on All India Radio. In 1939 at the age of 12, he catapulted into stardom after singing in the second Assamese film to be produced, Indramalati. He attributes his musical ability to his mother Shantipriya, “”Although listening to the rhythms of tribal music growing up developed my love for singing, I inherited my voice from my mother, who regularly sang lullabies to me as a child.” Hazarika was the eldest of 10 children, and his father imbibed him with a deep respect for education. Later, as he was drawn into India’s freedom movement, he would realise the connection between education and freedom, and this idea was clearly voiced in his music and writing at the time.

Hazarika schooled in Guwahati, and majored in political science at the Banaras Hindu University. He completed his PhD in mass communication at Columbia University, New York.  In New York he met singer Paul Robeson who became a great influence on his music and his politic; he joined him on many civil rights rallies, and the famous ‘Bistirno Parore’ is an Assamese version of ‘Old Man River.’

Hazarika worked for a brief while as producer for All India Radio, and even taught at Gauhati University after returning from New York before he became involved with Assamese cinema. His popularity was unmatched at the time, as his music addressed important social issues and connected with his listeners. In 1992 he was awarded the Dada Saheb Phalke for his prolific contribution to film. He was also awarded the Padmashree in 1977 and Padma Bhushan in 2001. On November 5^th 2011, he passed away after being admitted into the ICU for multi-organ failure. He is survived by his companion of many years, filmmaker Kalpana Lajmi, “I have lost my father, my brother, my lover, my husband, my friend, my mentor and guide. I had a relationship with him for 29 years, and he is gone now.”

5. Mansoor Ali Khan Pataudi

What if MAK Pataudi had the use of both his eyes? That question will dog cricket aficionados for years to come.

Blessed with immaculate talent and unparalleled leadership qualities, the Naawab of Patuadi was handed the captaincy at the tender age of 21, when the then captain Nari Contractor got injured.

“Tiger” Patuadi scored 2793 runs in Test Cricket at an average of 34.91, he was the son of a famous father, who had played for England before the Second World War and then captained India in England in 1946. He went on to Captian India in 40 Tests, and even though India won only nine of those, his greatest contribution was to ensure that the Indian team became a tight unit under him. This was acknowledged by Bishan Singh Bedi, who captained India after Pataudi did.

Devoid of fast bowling options, he helped put together India’s famous spin quartet, Bishan Singh Bedi, Bhagwat Chandrasekhar, Erapalli Prasanna, and Srinivas Venkataraghvan.

Being a fantastic fielder himself, he laid a lot emphasis on fielding.

After he retired in 1975, Pataudi dabbled in media and also as an administrator, but both of these stints dint last for long.

6. Jagjit Singh

By the time he died at age 70, Jagjit Singh, India’s ghazal king had already recorded 50 albums in his 46-year career. When Singh started his career, because of its classical form the ghazal had a niche audience. One of Singh’s biggest contributions was to simplify the ghazal, and make it accessible to a global audience by using western instruments like the saxophone and guitar, along with Indian instruments like the sitar and tablaa.

This helped transform the Ghazal, a poetic form consisting of rhyming couplets and a refrain, whose origins go back to the 12^th century. Singh’s efforts ensured that he became famous not only in India but the world over.

But that was not always the case; he struggled through most of his early days as a singer, eking out a meager living belting out jingles for advertisements.

Singh’s life changed after he met the singer Chitra Dutta, whom he married in 1969, and had a son with, Vivek. The singing duo at first had only low-level success because ghazal music was a niche genre dominated by mainly Muslim artists, and Bollywood ruled the musical mainstream. Success soon came along after the release of their first studio album and they never looked back.

Singh’s personal life was punctuated with loss, grief and depression. None more painful than the passing away of his only son Vivek, who died tragically at the age of 19, this prompted his wife Chitra to shun singing in public forever.

7. Steve Jobs

Steve Jobs, tech visionary extraordinaire and co-founder of Apple is reminiscent of Howard Roark, the protagonist of Ayn Rand’s eponymous novel ‘The Fountainhead.’ Roark’s character in the novel spends most of his life fighting the system and being uncompromising when it comes to putting the self above the collective. Jobs must have felt just like Roark after his few attempts to upend a fledgling personal computer industry.

Apple had already garnered a cult following after it introduced Apple II, the first popular mass-produced micro-computers computer in 1997 and the Macintosh, the first PC to use a mouse and a graphical user interface. First he saw bitter rivals Microsoft win the PC game with their software play. Then he faced the ignominy of being forced out of his own company by John Sculley (hired by Jobs after he fell for the famous line, “Do you want to sell sugar water for the rest of your life, or do you want to come with me and change the world?”) and the board.

Thus began his second journey and a renaissance that transformed Jobs and eventually Apple. Ousted out of his own company Jobs formed two companies: NeXt and Pixar. In an ironic twist of fate Apple bought NeXt, and Jobs’ second innings at Apple began. Pixar, meanwhile had produced the world’s first animated feature film and notched up quite a few successes with movies like ‘Finding Nemo’ and ‘Toy Story’.

Jobs’ real genius came together 4 years after he came back to Apple 2001 and he unveiled the iPod. Post which he never really looked back, and with the success of the iPhone and the iPad, he transformed a company which was on the verge of bankruptcy to the most valuable tech company in the world. Jobs might be criticized for being too autocratic and a control freak. But the legacy he has left behind will take a long time to be forgotten.

8. Dennis Ritchie

Some might say. No Dennis Ritchie. No Apple. The OS used by the world’s biggest technology company has UNIX under its hood because Jobs was a huge advocate of the programming language.

One of the tech pioneers who helped ‘shape the digital era’ Ritchie was instrumental in creating the C programming language and co-creating the UNIX operating system with his colleague Ken Thompson. Linux, the free, open variant of Unix powers servers at tech titans like Amazon and Google.

Not before he had almost every major honor in the computer science bestowed on him including the Turing Award from the ACM in 1983, the Hamming Medal from the IEEE in 1990 and the National Medal of Technology from President Clinton in 1999.

Ritchie started his career in Bell Labs, the same revered company that his father Alistair worked for earlier; his mother Jean McGee Ritchie, was a homemaker. Most of his early work was done with his colleague Thompson that paved the way for the software and tools that power most of modern computing from mobile phones to the internet.

Ritchie retired in 2007 as the head of Lucent Technologies System Software Research Department. After suffering from heart disease and prostrate cancer for some time, he passed away on October 13^th.

9. Amy Winehouse

Amy Jade Winehouse was born on September 14^th, 1983 in Southgate London to Jewish parents. Her father, Mitchell, a taxi driver, was a jazz enthusiast who often sang to Amy in her growing-up years.  Her parents divorced when she was nine, and she continued to live with her mother, although she remained close to her father.

At the young age of eight, Amy began attending stage school, including the Sylvia Young theatre school, and the Brit school in Croydon. Although she was expelled from one of them for “not applying herself,” Amy continued to write songs and sing with jazz bands and the National Youth Jazz Orchestra.  Her boyfriend of the time passed on a recording of her to a record company, who were so impressed with her sound that she landed her first contract at the age of 17.

A musical assistant who toured with Amy described her, “She has enormous talent and deep roots in jazz and blues; she didn’t suffer from the ‘lead singer syndrome’ and unlike most she knew her sharps and flats. And she knew exactly who she was and how she wanted to sound – which some singers only know when they’ve got 40 grand’s worth of equipment, but which Amy knew by standing on top of a piano in a pub.”

Her debut album ‘Frank’ released in 2003 and won her critical recognition and nominations for the Mercury Prize, going triple platinum in the UK. But it was her second album ‘Back to Black’ that propelled Amy into international stardom. Winning her accolades at the Grammy’s and the Brit Awards, the album went eight times platinum in the UK and double platinum in the US. But tragically, her rise to stardom also saw her steady decline into alcohol and drugs. Her tempestuous relationship with Blake Fielder-Civil added depression to the mix, and Amy found herself in and out of rehab, and in trouble with the law. Ironically it was her song ‘Rehab’ about her refusal to attend an alcohol rehabilitation centre that stuck the deepest chord with her fans.

Amy was found dead in her London flat on 23^rd July, at the age of 27, joining the troupe of talented but notoriously self-destructive artists who also died at that age. Her death was believed to be caused by a suspected drug overdose. She is survived by her parents, and her brother Alex.

10. Elizabeth Rosemond Taylor

Elizabeth Rosemond Taylor was born in Hampstead on February 27^th 1932, to parents Sara Sothern, a stage actress, and Francis Taylor, an art dealer. Trained in ballet from the time she could walk, she had already performed for the British royal family at the age of 3. Her parents moved to Hollywood in 1939, and young Elizabeth Taylor’s striking beauty and violet eyes began to get noticed in those early days at her father’s gallery. She did her first film at the age of ten, with ‘Lassie Come Home,’ but it was ‘National Velvet’ that really put her on the map.

From there on, her career moved forward in leaps and bounds. From ‘Giant’ with Hudson and James Dean, to ’Cat on a Hot Tin Roof,’ ‘Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?’ and ‘Cleopatra,’ Taylor’s performances earned her several nominations and three Oscars, one of which was in special recognition of her humanitarian work. Besides her work as an actress, she was also known for her astonishing beauty and grace, her many failed romances, her famous friendships, and her long love affair with jewelry. With eight high-profile marriages and divorces (two to Richard Burton, a rollercoaster relationship that was covered extensively by the media), the spotlight moved to her personal life rather than her work in the industry.  As one obit put it, she was a “star at age 12, a bride and a divorcee at 18, a superstar at 19 and a widow at 26.”

Taylor was also a fiercely loyal friend, defending gays in Hollywood at a time when they were ostracized by the industry, and standing by Michael Jackson as he faced charges of misdemeanor with minors.  She fought ill health through most of her career, beginning with a fall from horseback on ‘National Velvet.’ She went through 20 major surgeries, had replacement surgery for both hip joints, and was treated for drug and alcohol abuse.

Taylor was awarded the Legion of Honor, and titled Dame Elizabeth Taylor for her extensive charitable work, including her deep support on AIDS research, and for her work in the entertainment industry.  In her later years she worked on several books, and kept in touch with her fans through Twitter. On March 23^rd, she died of congestive heart failure at the age of 79. She is survived by her four children, ten grandchildren and four great-grandchildren.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

*****

Fears over the safety of breast implants made by a now defunct French firm spread to Australia, South America and across Europe on 22.12.2011 as French officials prepared to decide if thousands of women should have their implants surgically removed.

The silicone gel implants, made by a company called Poly Implant Prothese (PIP) that was shut down in 2010, appear to have an unusually high rupture rate and have sparked an investigation in France into possible links to cancer.

About 300,000 PIP implants, used in cosmetic surgery to enhance breast size or replace lost breast tissue, were sold worldwide before PIP went bust last year.

An investigation into PIP found it was using a type of silicone not approved by health authorities but about 10 times cheaper. The industrial-grade silicone PIP is accused of using is an ingredient in anything from computers to cookware.

“It’s not just France that’s concerned. We’re looking at 300,000 to 400,000 potential victims in the world,” said Alexandra Blachere, leader of a French PIP implant patient group.

She said women from Italy and Spain were in touch with her with worries about their implants and she had seen reports of problems in Venezuela, Brazil and elsewhere.

No one linked to the defunct company was immediately available to comment.

Britain’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said there was no reason for patients to be alarmed and there was, as yet, no scientific evidence to suggest increased health risks.

MHRA officials said they had talked to other health or regulatory experts from France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Hungary, Austria, Denmark and Malta.

“They all agreed that there was no evidence of any increase in incidents of cancer associated with PIP breast implants and no evidence of any disproportionate rupture rates other than in France,” it said in a statement.

Rupture

Founded in 1991, Poly Implant Prothese was based in southern France and for a while ranked as the world’s number three maker of implants, supplying about 100,000 a year.

About 80 percent were exported abroad. Health authorities around the world said they were watching closely for the results on Friday of an inquiry by France’s National Cancer Institute into whether the implants might be linked to cancer.

France’s Health Ministry is expected to make an announcement on Friday about the institute’s findings.

France has had reports of eight cases of cancer in women with breast implants made by PIP. Britain’s MHRA said there were also French reports of a woman with PIP implants who died from anaplastic large cell lymphoma, or ALCL, a rare form of cancer that affects cells from the immune system.

France’s drug and medical device regulator, AFSSAPS, ruled last year that the state would pay for the removal of all PIP implants but only fund replacements for victims of breast cancer, not women who used them for aesthetic purposes.

A French victims’ association is pushing for the state to pay for replacements for all women with PIP implants.

Australia’s healthcare watchdog, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), said about 8,900 of the PIP implants were used in Australian women, some of whom had complained about the devices splitting and leaking.

“The TGA has received 45 reports relating to PIP implants, 39 of which relate to rupture,” it said in a statement. It has had no reports of ALCL in Australian women with the implants.

Both the TGA and Britain’s MHRA said they would be looking carefully at the French safety statement on Friday.

Alfred Fitoussi, spokesman for the breast and cancer section of the French Association of Plastic Surgery, told Reuters he expected the report to say there was no cancer risk from the PIP implants. But he noted what he described as an “enormously” high rupture rate of about 10 percent.

“All kinds of tests have been done during many years and never showed any kind of cancer risk from silicone,” he said. “It’s obvious there is a problem with the quality.”

He said the normal rupture rate for breast implants was about 4 or 5 percent.

The MHRA said, based on reports it had so far, about 1 percent of women in Britain with PIP implants have suffered ruptures.

PIP was placed into liquidation in March 2010 with losses of 9 million euros after AFSSAPS recalled its implants when surgeons reported abnormally high rupture rates.

In Argentina, Colombia and Brazil, long a magnet for medical tourists looking for more affordable cosmetic surgery, imports of the implants were banned in April 2010, officials said.

“We know a high percentage of surgeons in Colombia and the rest of South America have used these implants,” said Celso Bohorquez, a spokesman for Colombia’s association of plastic, aesthetic and reconstructive surgery.

Brazil’s Anvisa health inspection agency said 25,000 PIP implants had been used but no complaints had been received so far. In neighboring Argentina, Roberto Lede from the state-run ANMAT drugs regulator said the evidence was “pretty weak” but advised concerned women to consult a doctor.

Legal Limits

Douglas McGeorge, a consultant cosmetic and plastic surgeon and former president of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, said he expected many patients would want to act sooner rather than wait and risk possible health problems.

A solicitor acting for at least 250 British women taking legal action over their PIP implants said the liquidation of the French company had limited the scope for lawsuits.

“We’re suing about half a dozen clinics that have been involved in implanting the PIP breast implants,” Mark Harvey, a partner at legal firm Hugh James, told Reuters.

“We would have preferred to sue PIP, obviously, but they are bankrupt so they have no money and no assets.”

Amanda Harrison, one of the British women seeking compensation, told Reuters she was disgusted by PIP’s actions.

“It’s sick that they could even think about putting this stuff into a human.” she said. “You wouldn’t even put it in an animal.”

By Kate Kelland

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

*******

Japan earthquake and tsunami of 2011, also called Great Sendai Earthquake or Great Tōhoku Earthquake,   severe earthquake that occurred on March 11, 2011, off the northeastern coast of Honshu, Japan’s main island, causing widespread damage on land and initiating a tsunami that devastated many coastal areas of the country, most notably in the Tōhoku region (northeastern Honshu). The tsunami also instigated a major nuclear accident at a power station along the coast.

The earthquake and tsunami

The magnitude-9.0 earthquake struck at 2:46 pm. (The early estimate of magnitude 8.9 was later revised upward.) The epicentre was located some 80 miles (130 km) east of the city of Sendai, Miyagi prefecture, and the focus occurred at a depth of 18.6 miles (about 30 km) below the floor of the western Pacific Ocean. The earthquake was caused by the rupture of a stretch of the subduction zone associated with the Japan Trench, which separates the Eurasian Plate from the subducting Pacific Plate. (Some geologists argue that this portion of the Eurasian Plate is actually a fragment of the North American Plate called the Okhotsk microplate.) A part of the subduction zone measuring approximately 190 miles (300 km) long by 95 miles (150 km) wide lurched about 65 feet (20 metres) to the southeast and thrusted upward by about 100–130 feet (30–40 metres). The March 11 temblor was felt as far away as Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Russia; Kao-hsiung, Taiwan; and Beijing, China. It was preceded by several foreshocks, including a magnitude-7.2 event centred approximately 25 miles (40 km) away from the epicentre of the main quake. Hundreds of aftershocks, dozens of magnitude 6.0 or greater and two of magnitude 7.0 or greater, followed in the days and weeks after the main quake. The March 11 earthquake was the strongest to strike the region since the beginning of record keeping in the late 19th century, and it is considered to be one of the most powerful earthquakes ever recorded.

The sudden horizontal and vertical thrusting of the Pacific Plate, which has been slowly advancing under the Eurasian Plate near Japan, displaced the water above and spawned a series of highly destructive tsunami waves. A wave measuring some 33 feet (10 metres) high inundated the coast and flooded parts of the city of Sendai, including its airport and the surrounding countryside. According to some reports, one wave penetrated some 6 miles (10 km) inland after causing the Natori River, which separates Sendai from the city of Natori to the south, to overflow. Damaging tsunami waves struck the coasts of Iwate prefecture, just north of Miyagi prefecture, and Fukushima, Ibaraki, and Chiba, the prefectures extending along the Pacific coast south of Miyagi. In addition to Sendai, other communities hard hit by the tsunami included Kamaishi and Miyako in Iwate; Ishinomaki, Kesennuma, and Shiogama in Miyagi; and Kitaibaraki and Hitachinaka in Ibaraki. As the floodwaters retreated back to the sea, they carried with them enormous quantities of debris, as well as thousands of victims caught in the deluge. Large stretches of land also were left submerged under seawater, particularly in lower-lying areas.

The earthquake triggered tsunami warnings throughout the Pacific basin. The tsunami raced outward from the epicentre at speeds that approached about 500 miles (800 km) per hour. It generated waves 11 to 12 feet (3.3 to 3.6 metres) high along the coasts of Kauai and Hawaii in the Hawaiian Islands chain and 5-foot (1.5-metre) waves along the island of Shemya in the Aleutian Islands chain. Several hours later 9-foot (2.7-metre) tsunami waves struck the coasts of California and Oregon in North America. Finally, some 18 hours after the quake, waves roughly 1 foot (0.3 metre) high reached the coast of Antarctica and caused a portion of the Sulzberger Ice Shelf to break off its outer edge.

Aftermath of the disaster

Casualties and property damage

Initial reports of casualties following the tsunami put the death toll in the hundreds, with hundreds more missing. That number in both categories increased dramatically in the following days as the extent of the devastation—especially in coastal areas—became known and rescue operations got under way. Within two weeks of the disaster, the official count of deaths had exceeded 10,000; more than one and a half times that number were still listed as missing and presumed dead. By then it was evident that the earthquake and tsunami had produced one of the deadliest natural disasters in Japanese history, rivaling the major earthquake and tsunami that had occurred off the coast of Iwate prefecture in June 1896. As the search for victims continued, the official count of those confirmed dead or still missing rose to about 28,500. However, as more people thought to be missing were found to be alive, that figure began to drop; by autumn it had been reduced to fewer than 20,000.

Most of those killed were victims of the tsunami waves. Coastal cities and towns as well as vast areas of farmland in the tsunami’s path were inundated by swirling waters that swept enormous quantities of houses, boats, cars, trucks, and other debris along with them. As the extent of the destruction became known, it became clear how many thousands of people were missing—including, in some cases, half or more of a locality’s population. Among those who initially were unaccounted for were people on a ship that was washed away by the tsunami and passengers on several trains reported as missing in Iwate and Miyagi prefectures. The ship was later found (and the people on board rescued), and all trains were located as well.

Although much of the destruction was caused by the tsunami waves along Japan’s Pacific coastline, the earthquake was responsible for considerable damage over a wide area. Notable were fires in several cities, including a petrochemical plant in Sendai, a portion of the city of Kesennuma in Miyagi prefecture, northeast of Sendai, and an oil refinery at Ichihara in Chiba prefecture, near Tokyo. In Fukushima, Ibaraki, and Chiba prefectures thousands of homes were completely or partially destroyed by the temblor and aftershocks. Infrastructure also was heavily affected throughout eastern Tōhoku, as roads and rail lines were damaged, electric power was knocked out, and water and sewerage systems were disrupted. In Fukushima a dam burst close to the prefectural capital of Fukushima city.

Northern Japan’s nuclear emergency

Of significant concern following the main shock and tsunami was the status of several nuclear power stations in the Tōhoku region. The reactors at the three nuclear power plants closest to the quake’s epicentre were shut down automatically following the temblor, which also cut the main power to those plants and their cooling systems. However, inundation by the tsunami waves damaged the backup generators at some of those plants, most notably at the Fukushima Daiichi (“Number One”) plant, situated along the Pacific coast in northeastern Fukushima prefecture about 60 miles (100 km) south of Sendai. With power gone, the cooling systems failed in three reactors within the first few days of the disaster, and their cores subsequently overheated, leading to partial meltdowns of the fuel rods. Melted material fell to the bottom of the containment vessels in reactors 1 and 2 and burned sizable holes through the floor of each vessel, which partially exposed the nuclear material in the cores. Explosions resulting from the buildup of pressurized hydrogen gas in the outer containment buildings enclosing reactors 1, 2, and 3, along with a fire touched off by rising temperatures in spent fuel rods stored in reactor 4, led to the release of significant levels of radiation from the facility in the days and weeks following the earthquake. Workers sought to cool and stabilize the damaged reactors by pumping seawater and boric acid into them.

Because of concerns over possible radiation exposure, Japanese officials established an 18-mile (30-km) no-fly zone around the facility, and an area of 12.5 miles (20 km) around the plant was evacuated. The evacuation zone was later extended to the 18-mile no-fly radius, within which residents were asked to leave or remain indoors. The appearance of increased levels of radiation in some local food and water supplies prompted officials in Japan and overseas to issue warnings about their consumption. At the end of March, seawater near the Daiichi facility was discovered to have been contaminated with high levels of radioactive iodine-131. The contamination stemmed from the exposure of pumped-in seawater to radiation inside the facility; this water later leaked into the ocean through cracks in water-filled trenches and tunnels between the facility and the ocean.

In mid-April Japanese nuclear regulators elevated the severity level of the nuclear emergency at the Fukushima Daiichi facility from 5 to 7—the highest level on the scale created by the International Atomic Energy Agency—placing the Fukushima accident in the same category as the Chernobyl accident, which had occurred in the Soviet Union in 1986. Several months after the Fukushima disaster, radiation levels remained high in the evacuation zone, and government officials remarked that the area may be uninhabitable for decades. However, they also announced that radiation levels had declined in five towns located just beyond the original 12.5-mile evacuation zone; these levels had become low enough that government officials felt comfortable allowing residents to return to their homes.

Relief efforts

In the first hours after the earthquake, Japanese Prime Minister Kan Naoto moved to set up an emergency command centre in Tokyo, and a large number of rescue workers and some 100,000 members of the Japanese Self-Defense Force were rapidly mobilized to deal with the crisis. In addition, the Japanese government requested that U.S. military personnel stationed in the country be available to help in relief efforts, and a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier was dispatched to the area. Several countries, including Australia, China, India, New Zealand, South Korea, and the United States, sent search-and-rescue teams, and dozens of other countries and major international relief organizations such as theRed Cross and Red Crescent pledged financial and material support to Japan. In addition, a large number of private and nongovernmental organizations within Japan and worldwide soon established relief funds to aid victims and assist with rescue and recovery efforts.

The rescue work itself was hampered initially by the difficulty in getting personnel and supplies to the devastation zone; compounding the difficulty were periods of inclement weather that curtailed air operations. Workers in the disaster zones then faced widespread seas of destruction: vast areas, even whole towns and cities, had been washed away or covered by great piles of mud and debris. Although some people were rescued from the rubble in the first several days following the main shock and tsunami, most of the relief work involved the recovery of bodies, including hundreds that began washing ashore in several areas after having been swept out to sea.

In the immediate aftermath of the disaster, several hundred thousand people were in shelters, often with limited or negligible supplies of food or water, and tens of thousands more remained stranded and isolated in the worst-hit areas as rescuers worked to reach them. Within days the number of displaced people in the Fukushima area grew as the situation with the nuclear reactors on the coast deteriorated and people left the quarantined area. Gradually many people were able to find other places to stay in the Tōhoku area, or they relocated to other parts of the country; some quarter million people were still in hundreds of shelters in the region two weeks after the quake, but in the ensuing months after the disaster that number gradually was reduced by more than two-thirds. Tens of thousands of these displaced residents were living in some 50,000 prefabricated temporary housing units that had been set up in Sendai and other tsunami-damaged locations.

In the weeks following the disaster, much of northern Honshu’s transportation and services infrastructure was at least partially restored, and repairs continued until train lines and major highways were again fully operational. However, the region’s power supply continued to be affected by the ongoing situation at the Fukushima plant, resulting in temporary power outages and rolling blackouts. The loss of businesses and factories from earthquake and tsunami damage, as well as the uncertainties surrounding the power supply, severely reduced the region’s post-disaster manufacturing output. Industries most affected included those producing semiconductors and other high-technology items and automobiles.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

*****

The accolades for Steve Jobs, who died Oct 5, are still pouring in. The Recording Academy said on 21.12.2011 it is giving the co-founder of Apple a special “Trustees Award” Grammy. The Grammys, of course, are the top honors in the U.S. music industry.

“As former CEO and co-founder of Apple, Steve Jobs helped create products and technology that transformed the way we consume music, TV, movies, and books,” the Recording Academy said in a statement.

“A creative visionary, Jobs’ innovations such as the iPod and its counterpart, the online iTunes store, revolutionized the industry and how music was distributed and purchased,” the statement added.

A formal acknowledgment of his award will be made during annual Grammy Awards ceremony on February 12 in Los Angeles.

In 2002, Apple was a recipient of a technical Grammy award for contributions of outstanding technical significance to the recording field.

Steve Jobs

Steve Jobs, in full Steven Paul Jobs (born February 24, 1955, San Francisco, California, U.S.—died October 5, 2011, Palo Alto, California), cofounder of Apple Computer, Inc. (now Apple Inc.), and a charismatic pioneer of the personal computer era.

Founding of Apple

Jobs was raised by adoptive parents in Cupertino, Calif., located in what is now known as Silicon Valley. Though he was interested in engineering, his passions of youth varied. He dropped out of Reed College, in Portland, Ore., took a job at Atari Corporation as a video game designer in early 1974, and saved enough money for a pilgrimage to India to experience Buddhism.

Back in Silicon Valley in the autumn of 1974, Jobs reconnected with Stephen Wozniak, a former high school friend who was working for the Hewlett-Packard Company. When Wozniak told Jobs of his progress in designing his own computer logic board, Jobs suggested that they go into business together, which they did after Hewlett-Packard formally turned down Wozniak’s design in 1976. The Apple I, as they called the logic board, was built in the Jobses’ family garage with money they obtained by selling Jobs’s Volkswagen minibus and Wozniak’s programmable calculator.

Jobs was one of the first entrepreneurs to understand that the personal computer would appeal to a broad audience, at least if it did not appear to belong in a junior high school science fair. With Jobs’s encouragement, Wozniak designed an improved model, the Apple II, complete with a keyboard, and they arranged to have a sleek, molded plastic case manufactured to enclose the unit.

Though Jobs had long, unkempt hair and eschewed business garb, he managed to obtain financing, distribution, and publicity for the company, Apple Computer, incorporated in 1977—the same year that the Apple II was completed. The machine was an immediate success, becoming synonymous with the boom in personal computers. In 1981 the company had a record-setting public stock offering and, in 1983, made the quickest entrance (to that time) into the Fortune 500 list of America’s top companies. In 1983 the company recruited PepsiCo, Inc., president John Sculley to be its chief executive officer (CEO) and, implicitly, Jobs’s mentor in the fine points of running a large corporation. Jobs had convinced Sculley to accept the position by challenging him: “Do you want to sell sugar water for the rest of your life?” The line was shrewdly effective, but it also revealed Jobs’s own near-messianic belief in the computer revolution.

Insanely Great

During that same period, Jobs was heading the most important project in the company’s history. In 1979 he led a small group of Apple engineers to a technology demonstration at the Xerox Corporation’s Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) to see how the graphical user interface could make computers easier to use and more efficient. Soon afterward, Jobs left the engineering team that was designing Lisa, a business computer, to head a smaller group building a lower-cost computer. Both computers were redesigned to exploit and refine the PARC ideas, but Jobs was explicit in favouring the Macintosh, or Mac, as the new computer became known. Jobs coddled his engineers and referred to them as artists, but his style was uncompromising; at one point he demanded a redesign of an internal circuit board simply because he considered it unattractive. He would later be renowned for his insistence that the Macintosh be not merely great but “insanely great.” In January 1984 Jobs himself introduced the Macintosh in a brilliantly choreographed demonstration that was the centrepiece of an extraordinary publicity campaign. It would later be pointed to as the archetype of “event marketing.”

However, the first Macs were underpowered and expensive, and they had few software applications—all of which resulted in disappointing sales. Apple steadily improved the machine, so that it eventually became the company’s lifeblood as well as the model for all subsequent computer interfaces. But Jobs’s apparent failure to correct the problem quickly led to tensions in the company, and in 1985 Sculley convinced Apple’s board of directors to remove the company’s famous cofounder.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

*******

Dr. Jane Dacre, Consultant Physician and Rheumatologist, Professor of Medical Education and Director of the UCL Medical School, London, was in Chennai recently in connection with the examination of candidates seeking MRCP certification. In an interview to Education Plus, The Hindu that was moderated by Dr. Georgi Abraham, Professor of Medicine, Pondicherry Institute of Medical Sciences and Governing Council Member – International Society of Nephrology, she highlighted some aspects of medical education that need reform in India. Excerpts.

What are the issues in medical education today, with particular reference to evaluation of students through examinations?

Some of the issues are actually about using the best available evidence in medical education and assessment practice. There is a body of evidence about medical education and exams now — the scientific underpinning of medical education has become much more professional, and we now have statistical data that show how good or bad an individual exam question is, and how good or bad a whole exam is. We have taken this into account in the design of the MRCP examination.

There is strong evidence, for example that the viva examination is unreliable. The evidence shows that if the examiner likes the look of a candidate when they come in for a viva, they think that candidate is marvellous, however well he answers the questions, and if the examiner doesn’t like the candidate, whatever the quality of his answer, the examiner is less impressed.

The way to make things fairer would be to make viva questions more standardised, and to sample a bigger proportion of the candidate’s knowledge. Also, we no longer use vivas in the MRCP clinical examination (PACES).

The practice of medicine is slightly different even though we follow the British system in India. How will that influence the new system of examination, of teaching and impact of that on patient care?

The adoption of best policy in medical education has allowed us to provide an overall structure for the examination, and the specific medical content has to be provided locally. The content of the questions, and (decisions on) what questions are appropriate for your community, are very different from ours. We were looking today at snakebites and rabies in India, while in London, we don’t get any snake bites or rabies. But the principles of asking candidates to describe what they would do in a situation, getting them to demonstrate it in a simulated situation, are common to both health systems. The scenarios we use in the examination can be very locality specific.

We do not use such scenarios in the medical examination system in India. You are directly asked, for example, what do you hear, what murmur do you hear in a patient? How big is the murmur? Some may say it is a short murmur, others may say it is a long murmur. It depends on the fancy of the examiner to decide what the murmur is and judge the candidate on that. What you said is totally different. You need to understand the student, what he knows, and ask him questions on what he knows, not on what he does not know in the common practice of medicine. Is that right?

The examiner wants the students to demonstrate their skills. Not just to tell the examiner what they know. Candidates may be very knowledgeable, and I think the trainees here do know an enormous amount, but they cannot always demonstrate that they are able to put their knowledge into practice. In our MRCP clinical exam, we observe the candidates putting their clinical examination skills into practice. Knowing how to work out what the causes of the particular condition could be, is not enough. Candidates need to be able to examine a patient correctly, identify the physical signs and diagnose the conditions. They also need to know the most common causes, and be able to discuss what to do about it. This includes how the condition should be investigated and treated, and how the doctor should communicate the diagnosis to the patient.

But that is not the system that exists here…

Yes. It is not what some of the local candidates expect, it resembles what they do in their clinical practice rather than what they expect in an examination.

As an examiner, while assessing, you should look into the local practices, conditions, and diseases that exist in that community, the investigations relevant to that, and the treatments?

Yes. Although there is less leeway for a good examiner in the MRCP PACES examination than there currently is in the traditional clinical examinations that you have in India. The good examiner, however, should have a clear idea about local practices, about what is appropriate for candidates to know, and what isn’t because that information has been given beforehand.

On admissions to medical school, what are your views?

In the U.K. now, we have highly standardised and fair methods of assessment to go into medical school and postgraduate medical courses. The old-fashioned patronage cannot happen. If my son wanted to be a doctor and had missed the grade, I would not be able to get him into medical school. It is absolutely based on merit.

Why do you need 10 examiners to assess a candidate, why can’t you have only two or three or four at the most, as in our country?

Because, if you have an examiner who either knows a candidate or likes a candidate for a particular reason, then he is more likely to favour that candidate. But if you have a number of different assessors looking at the candidate using a more objective marking schedule, then you make it fairer and minimise bias.

In our examination system we don’t have a timeline. The examiner can ask questions as long as he wants and the student must sit there according to the fancy and direction of the examiner. You have established a system, where there is a time limit and you cannot go beyond that. Which is the better system?

There is an intrinsic unfairness in allowing any variability in the time allowed per candidate. Depending on what you think of the candidate, you may take a longer or shorter time to assess them. This means the candidate will have more or less time to demonstrate what they know. The PACES exam (the MRCP Part 2 clinical examination) structure is standardised so that it gives every candidate the same opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and skills. Certainly in the U.K., and in the U.S. and lots of places internationally, that is thought to be a more appropriate system. The downside of it is that if you have a really fantastic candidate who is a just a pleasure to be with, the enjoyment for the examiner is less. We had to remind examiners when we introduced the PACES that this exam is for the candidate, and for our patients, and the enjoyment of the examiner takes a back seat.

What would you think about when you see different countries in the world, different candidates, cultures and practices? Is your system of assessment uniform? How does one avoid discrimination based on ethnic and cultural aspects?

It is a difficult question. We do have evidence that candidates overseas who take the examination in the U.K. do less well in our assessment, but we do not know why.

What we do know is that the MRCP assessment system is robust. What perhaps would be best in the long term is to introduce more locally specific conditions for candidates to be tested on. The MRCP is a U.K.-based exam, and therefore our rules are currently based on the U.K. health system. It is astounding to me how well overseas graduates do considering that they are taking an exam that wasn’t designed for their country.

At the undergraduate level, I think it would be appropriate to introduce the examination rigour that we have in the U.K., but also to make the examination locally specific to your own candidates, An exam needs to reflect the curriculum which has been taught. I assume you have your curriculum written down and therefore, you need to turn your curriculum into a blueprint which is a sampling grid of the areas where you expect your candidates to perform in. The examination could be based on that sampling grid.

Candidates taking the MRCP examination in India examine the local patients, and candidates in Britain may be seeing patients from Britain who may not be Indians or Asians for that matter. Do you think that will influence the assessment of candidates and in the long run will not be a rational way?

I think that in the long-term our objective would be to have more locally appropriate centres in India, the expense and the cultural issues such as the need to learn English or Scottish law to be able to pass an assessment in the U.K. should not be necessary for international candidates.

Do you think in two years you would have to modify your MRCP examination to suit new technologies and medications?

We have written components to the examination. We spend a lot of time ensuring that U.K. national guidelines are incorporated, as medicine is a constantly changing field. So we modify the questions all the time to make sure we are up to date.

Courtesy: The Hindu

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

******

North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, revered at home by a propaganda machine that turned him into a demi-god and vilified in the West as a temperamental tyrant with a nuclear arsenal, has died on 17.12.2012.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-il died of a heart attack while on a train trip, state media reported on Monday, sparking immediate concern over who is in control of the reclusive state and its nuclear programme. He had suffered a stroke in 2008, but appeared to have recovered. North Korea’s official KCNA news agency said he died at 8:30 a.m. on Saturday, 17.12.2011 (2330 GMT on Friday) after “an advanced acute myocardial infarction, complicated with a serious heart shock”.

Kim Jong-il who has died aged 69, was the general secretary of the Workers party of Korea, and head of the military in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). He was one of the most reclusive and widely condemned national leaders of the late 20th and early 21st century, leaving his country diplomatically isolated, economically broken, and divided from South Korea.

Unsurprisingly for a man who went into mourning for three years after the 1994 death of his own father, the legendary leader Kim Il-sung, and who in the first 30 years of his political career made no public statements, even to his own people, Kim’s career is riddled with claims, counter claims, speculation, and contradiction. There are few hard facts about his birth and early years.

The DPRK propagated an extraordinary tale of his birth occurring on Mount Baekdu, one of Korea’s most revered sites, being accompanied by shooting stars in the sky. It is more likely that he was born in a small village in the USSR, while his father was serving as a Soviet-backed general during the second world war.

Kim’s early life was spent in the shadows of a self-created legend, his father Kim Il-sung, who was to return to Korea in 1945 after independence from Japan, and establish, initially with Soviet and Chinese support, the DPRK. His brother and mother were both to die before he was eight. He was to witness the Korean War from 1950 to 1953, which saw hundreds of thousands of Koreans, Chinese, and Americans as part of a UN force battle across the country, returning almost to the point at which they had started. The armistice signed in 1953 settled the border between South and North Korea at the 38th Parallel.

With the descent of the cold war, relations between the two countries (for this is, to all intents and purposes, what they became after the end of the war) were almost completely broken off, with whole families split for the ensuing decades, some for ever. This event and its after-effects, along with the war against the Japanese in the 1940s, was to cast a long shadow over the years ahead, and led to the creation of the wholly unprecedented worship of Kim Il-sung, and his elevation to almost God-like status. It was also to create the system in which his son was to occupy almost as impossibly elevated a position.

Kim was educated at the newly founded university in Pyongyang, named after his father, graduating in 1964. The 1960s and early 1970s were the golden years for the DPRK. It undertook rapid industrialisation, economically outstripped its southern competitor, and enjoyed the support of both the People’s Republic of China, and the Soviet Union. A state ideology, mixing nationalism, and basic Marxist economics, going under the name “Juche” was constructed, and Kim Il-sung effectively silenced, disposed of and cleared away any opposition, isolating the country, and exercising an iron grip on the military, the state media, and the government and party organs.

Kim Jong-il’s early career within the party was spent dealing with propaganda. He had a life-long interest in film, and indeed wrote a treatise, On Cinema, which was to attain the status of canonical truth after his father’s death, along with all of his other utterances. In 1973 he became party secretary of the propaganda department, and, in 1974, was designated his father’s successor, creating in effect the world’s first communist family succession. In 1980 he was elevated to the Politburo, and was granted the epitaph “Dear Leader”, as opposed to “Great Leader”, which had been granted by his father to himself. In 1991, he was named Commander of the DPRK armed forces. The death of his father in 1994 led to his ultimately being appointed general secretary of the Korean Workers Party, the ultimate seat of power. His father was to maintain his position as “eternal president”, and to this day, the DPRK enjoys a head of state who has been dead since 1994.

There is great controversy over the extent of Kim’s powers and influence in the latter years of his father’s long period in power. To some historians, Kim was no more than his father’s puppet, and had no real basis for power in the party, which explains the bitter years from 1994 in which he disappeared from view, waging a long battle for legitimacy within the party and army. To others, he was a negative, malevolent influence over his father from the 1970s onwards, when North Korean began its long and tragic descent into economic depravation, isolation, starvation and poverty.

By 1980, South Korea had overtaken its northern neighbour, and was well on its way to being one of the Asian tigers – high performing economies, with democratic movements ultimately winning power in the 1990s. The withdrawal of most Soviet aid in 1991, with the fall of the Soviet empire, pushed North Korea further down. Kim Il-sung had held a genuine place on North Korean people’s affections. His son was regarded as a shadowy playboy, with rumours circulating over the years that he imported Russian and Chinese prostitutes, and lived a life of profligacy and excess.

More worrying for the international community were the clear connections between Kim and the bombing of a South Korean plane in 1987 which killed 115 people, and the murder by bombing of 17 South Korean officials while on a visit to Burma in 1983. Kim’s admissions, years later, when he met Prime Minister of Japan Junichiro Koizumi in 2002 that he also had knowledge of the abduction of over a dozen Japanese in the 1970s and 1980s only added to his image as a shadowy, evil character.

This is an oversimplification. Kim was to inherit the very worst legacy of the cold war, in a country torn apart by colonialisation and war, a bitter historical residue which lingers to this day. While he may have had influence on his father, the economic template for the country was set in the 1950s and 1960s, long before he had any say. Its unsustainability only became clear in the very final years of Kim Il-sung’s life. And Kim Jong-il finally had to deal with a complex network of interests in the army and party after his father’s death, something which, combined with the immediate impact of bad harvests, created the terrible famines that claimed up to one million North Korean lives from 1995 to 1999. The official state information agency issued a statement, after the worst of this period was over in 2001, saying that North Korea had stood “on the crossroads of life and death”.

North Korea had signed an agreement in 1993, brokered by a visit by former US President Jimmy Carter, to stop its nuclear programme in return for help in building two power-generating nuclear reactors. Disagreements on both sides meant the reactors were not built, and North Korea progressed towards its own nuclear programme in 2003. A brief thaw in relations between the US and the DPRK at the end of the Clinton presidency in 2000 saw high level visits on both sides, but the George W Bush era saw this momentarily stopped, before North Korea was encouraged back to the negotiating table as part of what were called the Six Party Talks from 2006 onwards.

The election of President Barak Obama in 2008 served to provoke a period of harsh rhetoric, nuclear testing, missile launches, and diplomatic aggression uncharacterstic even for the DPRK. Kim was rumoured to have suffered a stroke in late 2008, incapicitating him. This may have forced him to nominate his youngest son as his successor, though there is precious little firm evidence both for when, why, or even if this decision was made.

Kim Jong-il travelled little, and only ever in a train. He visited Russia and China, and had been to Indonesia. He was reputed to have some 30,000 American films in his personal library, and was one of the world’s main customers for luxury cognac. According to a Japanese chef who worked for him in the 1980s and 1990s, he had a connoisseur’s understanding of the finest cuts of raw fish. While officially married only once, he had a number of “recognised” mistresses, with whom he fathered several children. International politicians that met him were impressed by his factual memory and his quick and easy wit. But there is little dispute about his responsibility for a system which saw widespread human rights abuses and perhaps the worst record for press freedom and government transparency in the world.

He is survived by his wife, Kim Young Suk, one daughter and three officially recognised sons.

Kim Jong-il, politician, born February 16 1941; died December 2011.

“Young general” seen poised to take over North Korea dynasty.

His designated successor is believed to be his third son, Kim Jong-un, who is thought to be in his late 20s. Young and inexperienced, Kim Jong-un is seen as poised to take over North Korea with the death of his father and extend the Kim dynasty’s rule over the reclusive state for a third generation.

Not much is known about the younger Kim, not even his age, though his father, Kim Jong-il, and his autocratic regime had begun making preparations for the son’s transition to power.

Thought to be aged around 27, Kim Jong-un Had already been made a four-star general and occupied a prominent political post when he was reported to have made an important diplomatic visit to neighbouring China in May this year.

Educated in Switzerland, he is thought to speak English and German, and bears a striking resemblance to his grandfather, the North’s founder, Kim Il-sung.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

******

Vaclav Havel, an anti-Communist playwright, who became Czech President and a worldwide symbol of peace and freedom after leading the bloodless “Velvet Revolution”, died at the age of 75 on 16.12.2011.

Czechs joined their leaders and foreign politicians 16.12.2011 in paying tribute to Vaclav Havel, who led the 1989 Velvet Revolution that peacefully toppled communism in the former Czechoslovakia.

A black flag flew over Prague Castle, the presidential seat, while Czechs lit candles to remember the the dissident playwright who helped kick off the fall of the Iron Curtain and then served as president of Czechoslovakia, and later the Czech Republic.

“Mr. President, thank you for democracy,” read a note placed at the monument to the revolution in downtown Prague.

Havel, the dissident playwright who wove theater into politics to peacefully bring down communism in Czechoslovakia and become a hero of the epic struggle that ended the Cold War, died Sunday morning at his weekend house. He was 75.

He was comforted in his last moments by his wife Dagmar and several nuns, Reuters reported.

Havel was his country’s first democratically elected president after the nonviolent “Velvet Revolution” that ended four decades of repression by a regime he ridiculed as “Absurdistan.”

As president, he oversaw the country’s bumpy transition to democracy and a free-market economy, as well its peaceful 1993 breakup into the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Even out of office, the diminutive Czech remained a world figure. He was part of the “new Europe” — in the coinage of then-U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld — of ex-communist countries that stood up for the U.S. when the democracies of “old Europe” opposed the 2003 Iraq invasion.

A former chain-smoker, Havel had a history of chronic respiratory problems dating back to his years in communist jails. He was hospitalized in Prague on Jan. 12, 2009, with an unspecified inflammation, and had developed breathing difficulties after undergoing minor throat surgery.

‘Truth and love must prevail’

Havel left office in 2003, 10 years after Czechoslovakia broke up and just months before both nations joined the European Union. He was credited with laying the groundwork that brought his Czech Republic into the 27-nation bloc, and was president when it joined NATO in 1999.

Shy and bookish, with wispy mustache and unkempt hair, Havel came to symbolize the power of the people to peacefully overcome totalitarian rule.

“Truth and love must prevail over lies and hatred,” Havel famously said. It became his revolutionary motto which he said he always strove to live by.

Havel was nominated several times for the Nobel Peace Prize, and collected dozens of other accolades worldwide for his efforts as a global ambassador of conscience, defended the downtrodden from Darfur to Myanmar.

Among his many honors were Sweden’s prestigious Olof Palme Prize and the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest U.S. civilian award, bestowed on him by President George W. Bush for being “one of liberty’s great heroes.”

An avowed peacenik whose heroes included rockers such as Frank Zappa, he never quite shed his flower-child past and often signed his name with a small heart as a flourish.

In an October 2008 interview with The Associated Press, Havel rebuked Russia for invading Georgia two months earlier, and warned EU leaders against appeasing Moscow. “We should not turn a blind eye … It’s a big test for the West,” he said. Havel also said he saw the global economic crisis as a warning not to abandon basic human values in the scramble to prosper. “It’s a warning against the idea that we understand the world, that we know how everything works,” he told the AP in his office in Prague. The cramped work space was packed with his books, plays and rock memorabilia.

Underground essays

Havel first made a name for himself after the 1968 Soviet-led invasion that crushed the Prague Spring reforms of Alexander Dubcek and other liberally minded communists in what was then Czechoslovakia.

Havel’s plays were banned as hard-liners installed by Moscow snuffed out every whiff  of rebellion. But he continued to write, producing a series of underground essays that stand with the work of Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov as the most incisive and eloquent analyses of what communism did to society and the individual. One of his best-known essays, “The Power and the Powerless” written in 1978, borrowed slyly from the immortal opening line of the mid-19th century Communist Manifesto, writing: “A specter is haunting eastern Europe: the specter of what in the West is called ‘dissent.’”

In the essay, he dissected what he called the “dictatorship of ritual” — the ossified Soviet bloc system under Leonid Brezhnev — and imagined what happens when an ordinary greengrocer stops displaying communist slogans and begins “living in truth,” rediscovering “his suppressed identity and dignity.”

Born Oct. 5, 1936, in Prague, the child of a wealthy family which lost extensive property to communist nationalization in 1948, Havel was denied a formal education, eventually earning a degree at night school and starting out in theater as a stagehand.

His political activism began in earnest in January 1977, when he co-authored the human rights manifesto Charter 77, and the cause drew widening attention in the West.

Havel was detained countless times and spent four years in communist jails. His letters from prison to his wife became one of his best-known works. “Letters to Olga” blended deep philosophy with a stream of stern advice to the spouse he saw as his mentor and best friend, and who tolerated his reputed philandering and other foibles.

The events of August 1988 — the 20th anniversary of the Warsaw Pact invasion — first suggested that Havel and his friends might one day replace the faceless apparatchiks who jailed them.

Thousands of mostly young people marched through central Prague, yelling Havel’s name and that of the playwright’s hero, Tomas Garrigue Masaryk, the philosopher who was Czechoslovakia’s first president after it was founded in 1918.

Havel’s arrest in January 1989 at another street protest and his subsequent trial generated anger at home and abroad. Pressure for change was so strong that the communists released him again in May.

That fall, communism began to collapse across Eastern Europe, and in November the Berlin Wall fell. Eight days later, communist police brutally broke up a demonstration by thousands of Prague students.

It was the signal that Havel and his country had awaited. Within 48 hours, a broad new opposition movement was founded, and a day later, hundreds of thousands of Czechs and Slovaks took to the streets.

In three heady weeks, communist rule was broken. Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones arrived just as the Soviet army was leaving. Posters in Prague proclaimed: “The tanks are rolling out — the Stones are rolling in.”

On Dec. 29, 1989, Havel was elected Czechoslovakia’s president by the country’s still-communist parliament. Three days later, he told the nation in a televised New Year’s address: “Out of gifted and sovereign people, the regime made us little screws in a monstrously big, rattling and stinking machine.”

Moral voice

Although he continued to be regarded a moral voice as he decried the shortcomings of his society under democracy, he eventually bent to the dictates of convention and power. His watchwords — “what the heart thinks, the tongue speaks” — had to be modified for day-to-day politics. And post-revolutionary life contained many challenges.

In July 1992, it became clear that the Czechoslovak federation was heading for a split. Considering it a personal failure, Havel resigned as president. But he remained popular and was elected president of the new Czech Republic uncontested.

He was small, but his presence and wit could fill a room. Even late in life, he retained a certain impishness and boyish grin, shifting easily from philosophy to jokes or plain old Prague gossip.

In December 1996, just 11 months after his first wife, Olga Havlova, died of cancer, he lost a third of his right lung during surgery to remove a half-inch malignant tumor. He gave up smoking and married Dagmar Veskrnova, a dashing actress almost 20 years his junior.

Holding a post of immense prestige but little power, Havel’s image suffered in the latter years as his people discovered the difficulties of transforming their society in the post-communist era.

His attempts to reconcile rival politicians were considered by many as unconstitutional intrusions, and his pleas for political leaders to build a “civic society” based on respect, tolerance and individual responsibility went largely unanswered.

Media criticism, once unthinkable, became unrelenting. Serious newspapers questioned his political visions; tabloids focused mainly on his private life and his flashy second wife.

Havel himself acknowledged that his handling of domestic issues never matched his flair for foreign affairs. But when the Czech Republic joined NATO in March 1999, and the European Union in May 2004, his dreams came true.

Early in 2008, Havel returned to his first love: the stage. He published a new play, “Leaving,” about the struggles of a leader on his way out of office, and the work gained critical acclaim. “My return to the stage was not easy,” he said. “It’s not a common thing for someone to be involved in theater, become a president, and then go back.”

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

******

Anand B.A., B.L.,

The withdrawal of American military forces from Iraq has been a contentious issue within the United States since the beginning of the Iraq War. As the war has progressed from its initial 2003 invasion phase to a multi-year occupation, U.S. public opinion has turned in favor of troop withdrawal. As of May 2007, 55 percent of Americans believed that the Iraq war was a mistake, and 51 percent of registered voters favored troop withdrawal. In late April 2007, the U.S. Congress passed a supplementary spending bill for Iraq that sets a deadline for troop withdrawal, but President Bush vetoed this bill soon afterwards. All US Forces are mandated to withdraw from Iraqi territory by 31 December 2011 under the terms of a bilateral agreement signed in 2008.

Activities during George.W.Bush

On November 17, 2005, Representative John Murtha introduced H.J.Res. 73 , a resolution calling for U.S. forces in Iraq to be “redeployed at the earliest practicable date” to stand as a quick-reaction force in U.S. bases in neighboring countries such as Kuwait. In response, Republicans proposed a resolution that “the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately,” without any provision for redeployment, which was voted down 403-3.

On June 16, 2006, the House voted 256-153 in a non-binding resolution against establishing a deadline for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Republican then-House Majority Leader John Boehner, who argued against a deadline, stated “achieving victory is our only option”, and “we must not shy away”. On the other hand, Democratic then-House Minority Leader and current Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi argued that a deadline is necessary, and stated “’stay the course’ is not a strategy, it’s a slogan”, and “it’s time to face the facts.”

On March 27, 2007, Congress passed H.R. 1591, which called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq by March 2008. However, President Bush vetoed the bill and the House of Representatives failed to override the veto. Congress then passed H.R. 2206, which provided funding for the Iraq War through September 30, 2007 and was signed into law by President Bush on May 25, 2007. H.R. 2206 included eighteen benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet.

On May 9, 2007, Representative Jim McGovern introduced H.R. 2237 to the House: “To provide for the redeployment of United States Armed Forces and defense contractors from Iraq.” The bill failed with a vote of 255 to 171, thirteen of the Nays coming from Democrats representing districts won by John Kerry in 2004.^]

On July 12, 2007 the House passed H.R. 2956 by a vote of 223 to 201, for redeployment (or withdrawal) of U.S. armed forces out of Iraq. The resolution requires most troops to withdraw from Iraq by April 1, 2008.

On July 18, 2007, after an all-night debate, the Senate blocked the passage of a bill that would have set a troop withdrawal timetable with a vote of 52-47. The withdrawal would have started within 120 days, and would have required that all troops (except an unspecified number could be left behind to conduct a very narrow set of missions) be out of the country by April 30, 2008.

McGovern-Polk proposal

Former U.S. Senator George McGovern and William R. Polk, director of the University of Chicago Center for Middle Eastern Studies, published a detailed proposal for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq in their book, Out of Iraq: A Practical Plan for Withdrawal Now. (Simon & Schuster, 2006.) A sizable excerpt was published in the October 2006 edition of Harper’s magazine.

This plan was completely abandoned. Some of the basic features of their proposal included:

• The first soldiers to be sent home should be private security contractors.
• An international stabilization force of 15,000 soldiers to be established. Troops will be drawn from Morocco, Tunisia, and Egypt, funded by the U.S. This force would remain for two years after the departure of U.S. troops.
• Transport, communications, and light arms equipment currently used by U.S. forces should be donated to the new multinational force.
• In place of a new Iraqi army, a national reconstruction corps should be established, modeled on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
• The immediate cessation of work on U.S. military bases.
• U.S. withdrawal from the Green Zone.
• Release of all prisoners of war.

2008 U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces bilateral Agreement

In 2008, the US and Iraqi government signed the U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement which implments that all US forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009 and that All US Forces would be mandated to withdraw from Iraqi territory by December 31, 2011 under the terms of a bilateral agreement. On December 14, 2008, then-U.S. President George W. Bush signed the security pact with Iraq. In his fourth and final trip to Iraq, the president appeared with Iraq’s prime minister Nouri al-Maliki and said more work is to be done.

U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement

The U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: “Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq”) was a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States. It established that U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011. The pact required criminal charges for holding prisoners over 24 hours, and required a warrant for searches of homes and buildings that were not related to combat. U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces would have been subject to Iraqi criminal law, while contractors working for the State Department and other U.S. agencies would retain their immunity. If U.S. forces committed still undecided “major premeditated felonies” while off-duty and off-base, they would have been subjected to an undecided procedures laid out by a joint U.S.-Iraq committee if the U.S. certified the forces were off-duty.

The agreement ceased as of the 16th of December 2011, when the United States completed it final withdrawal of troops from Iraq. The symbolic ceremony in Baghdad officially “cased” (retired) the flag of US forces in Iraq, according to army tradition

The Iraqi government also approved a Strategic Framework Agreement with the U.S., aimed at ensuring international cooperation including minority ethnicity, gender, and belief interests and other constitutional rights; threat deterrence; exchange students; education; and cooperation in the areas of energy development, environmental hygiene, health care, information technology, communications, and law enforcement.

Several groups of Iraqis protested the passing of the SOFA accord as prolonging and legitimizing the occupation, and Grand Ayatollah Ali Husseini al-Sistani expressed concerns with the ratified version. Some other Iraqis expressed skepticism that the U.S. would completely end its presence by 2011. U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had predicted that after 2011 he would have expected to see “perhaps several tens of thousands of American troops” as part of a residual force in Iraq. Some Americans had discussed “loopholes” and some Iraqis had said they believed parts of the pact remained a “mystery”.

President Obama’s speech on February 27, 2009

On February 27, 2009, at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, President Barack Obama announced a deadline for the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq. According to the president, by August 31, 2010, after nearly seven and a half years of United States military engagement in Iraq, all but a “transitional force” of 35,000 to 50,000 troops would be withdrawn from the Middle Eastern nation. President Obama defined the task of the transitional force as “training, equipping, and advising Iraqi Security Forces as long as they remain non-sectarian; conducting targeted counter-terrorism missions; and protecting our ongoing civilian and military efforts within Iraq”. Under this plan, the majority of troops will be withdrawn just a month after the deadline in the signed agreement between former President George W. Bush and Prime Minister of Iraq Nouri al-Maliki where the majority of troops will be withdrawn at one point, and the entirety of troops to be out by December 31, 2011.

August 2010 partial withdrawal

On August 19, 2010, the 4th Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division was the last US combat brigade to withdraw from Iraq. About 50,000 US troops will remain in the country in an advisory capacity. According to the US, they will help to train Iraqi forces in a new mission dubbed by the US as “Operation New Dawn,” which will run until the end of 2011. The mission that ended August 19, 2010 was dubbed by the US as “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” at a projected cost of more than $900 billion and 4,415 US troops killed in action. Over 100,000 Iraqi civilians were estimated to be killed, according to the Iraq Body Count website. President Obama announced the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom in his Oval Office address on August 31, 2010.

Full withdrawal

With the collapse of the discussions about extending the stay of any U.S. troops, on October 21, 2011, President Obama announced the full withdrawal of troops from Iraq as scheduled before. The U.S. will retain an embassy in Baghdad and two consulates with around 4,000 to 5,000 defense contractors. President Obama and al-Maliki outlined a broad agenda for post-war cooperation without American troops in Iraq during a joint press conference on December 12, 2011 at the White House. This agenda includes cooperation on energy, trade and education as well as cooperation in security, counter-terrorism, economic development and strengthening Iraq’s institutions. Both leaders said their countries will maintain strong security, diplomatic and economic ties after the last U.S. combat forces withdraw at the end of 2011.

President Barack Obama paid tribute to the troops who served in Iraq on December 14, 2011, at the Fort Bragg military base in North Carolina. As the last of the American troops prepared to exit Iraq, he said the United States was leaving behind a “sovereign, stable and self-reliant” Iraq. On December 15, an American military ceremony was held in Baghdad putting a formal end to the U.S mission in Iraq. Only 4,000 U.S troops remain in Iraq and they are scheduled to leave by the end of the year, leaving behind 200 Marine Security Guards and 15,000 embassy personnel.

Key dates in the 2003-2011 Iraq war

2003

—March 20: U.S. forces attack Baghdad with missiles and bombs in a failed attempt to kill Saddam Hussein. U.S. and allied ground troops roll into Iraq.

—April 9: American troops storm Baghdad and the statue of Saddam is toppled in Firdous Square, the symbolic collapse of his regime.

—May 1: President George W. Bush declares an end to major combat operations.

—July 22: Saddam’s sons Oday and Qusay are killed in a gunfight in Mosul.

—Aug. 7: A car bomb strikes the Jordanian Embassy, the first such attack of the war. Twelve days later, a truck bomb demolishes the headquarters of the United Nations in Baghdad, killing top U.N. envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello and 21 others.

—Sept 3: U.S. announces an Iraqi administration largely made up of Iraqi exiles who opposed Saddam.

—Oct. 26: A barrage of rockets slams into the Al-Rasheed Hotel in the Green Zone, killing an American lieutenant colonel and injuring 17 other people. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, one of the architects of the war, who was visiting Baghdad, escapes injury.

—Dec. 13: Saddam is captured in an underground hideout near Tikrit.

___

2004

—Feb. 1: Two suicide bombers attack Kurdish political offices in Irbil, killing 117 people and injuring 133.

—March 2: Multiple explosions rock Baghdad and Karbala at the climax of a Shiite festival, killing nearly 200 people in the deadliest attack so far.

—March 31: Four Blackwater security contractors are ambushed and killed in Fallujah, setting off the first battle for the insurgent-dominated city west of Baghdad.

—April 4: Followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr launch attacks across southern Iraq after the U.S tries to close his newspaper. Fighting rages until the end of August.

—April 18: U.S. announces an investigation into abuses against detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison as gruesome photos emerge showing Iraqi prisoners humiliated.

—May 17: The head of the Iraqi Governing Council, Ezzedine Salim, is killed in suicide attack near the entrance to the Green Zone.

—May 19: U.S. jets mistakenly bomb a wedding party in western Iraq, killing 42 people, including women and children.

—June 28: The U.S. transfers sovereignty to the Iraqis but retains most real power. The civilian head of the occupation authority, L. Paul Bremer, leaves the country.

—July 1: Trial of Saddam begins with the ousted leader appearing at his first hearing.

—Sept. 30: A car bomb strikes American troops handing out candy to children, killing up to 35 children.

—Nov. 7: U.S. soldiers and Marines launch the biggest attack of the war to date to seize the insurgent stronghold of Fallujah.

—Dec. 21: A bomb kills 22 people, including 18 Americans, at Forward Operating Base Marez in Mosul.

___

2005

—Jan. 26: A helicopter crashes in western Iraq, killing 31 Americans.

—Jan. 30: Iraqis select a new parliament in the first elections since the fall of Saddam. Shiite and Kurdish parties take an overwhelming majority after Sunnis largely boycott.

—Feb. 28: A vehicle bomb kills 127 people in Hillah in the deadliest blast to date.

—March 4: Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena is freed by Italian intelligence but the rescuing agent is killed when U.S. troops fire on their vehicle en route to Baghdad airport.

—Aug. 28: An Iraqi commission submits a draft constitution to parliament.

—Aug. 31: Rumors of a suicide bomber panics Shiite marchers in a religious procession at a Baghdad bridge and nearly 10,000 people reportedly die in the stampede.

—Sept. 14: A series of bombings kills 160 people in Baghdad in a dramatic escalation of the insurgency.

—Oct. 15: Iraqis approve the new constitution in a referendum.

—Oct. 24: The Palestine and Sheraton hotels, favored by Western journalists, are struck by multiple truck bombs.

—Nov. 19: U.S. troops kill 24 people, including 15 noncombatants, in Haditha after an insurgent attack.

—Dec. 15: Iraqis choose a new parliament in the first election under the new constitution.

___

2006

—Feb. 22: Sunni militants bomb the Shiite Golden Dome shrine in Samarra, triggering a wave of sectarian violence that brings Iraq to the brink of civil war.

—June 7: The leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, is killed in a U.S. airstrike northeast of Baghdad.

—June 17: U.S. troops launch a battle to take control of the western city of Ramadi in a bloody conflict that persists for more than a year.

—July 9: Shiite militias kill 40 Sunnis in the Jihad neighborhood of Baghdad as sectarian war spreads to the capital.

—Nov. 23: Bombs kill more than 200 Shiites in Baghdad’s Sadr City neighborhood.

—Dec. 30: Saddam is executed by hanging.

___

2007

—Jan. 10: President Bush orders 30,000 reinforcements to Iraq in an effort to stem the sectarian war and stabilize Baghdad.

—Jan. 28: Followers of a Shiite cult launch a battle in Najaf that kills nearly 300 people.

—Feb. 3: A bomb in a Baghdad market kills 135 people.

—Feb. 27: Shiite militias besiege British bases in Basra, ultimately prompting most British forces to leave the country.

—March 23: Iranians seize 15 British navy personnel patrolling near Basra, releasing them April 4.

—March 27: A blast in Tal Afar kills 152 people, setting off a wave of Shiite reprisals that claim 70 Sunni lives.

—April 18: Bombs across Baghdad kill nearly 200 people.

—Aug. 14: A series of bombings directed against the Yazidi religious community in the north kills nearly 800 people.

—Aug. 29: Muqtada al-Sadr announces a cease-fire after a public backlash against his militia following a clash in Karbala that killed 50 people. Attacks against U.S. troops in Shiite areas begin to drop.

—Sept. 16: Blackwater security guards mistakenly believing they were under attack kill 17 civilians in Nisoor Square in Baghdad.

___

2008

—Jan. 8: U.S. and Iraqi forces launch operations in Baghdad to secure the capital.

—Jan. 23: Operations begin in Mosul against al-Qaida’s last major urban stronghold.

—Feb. 21: Turkey launches an offensive in northern Iraq against Kurdish rebels from the PKK.

—March 25: Heavy fighting breaks out in Basra as Iraqi forces try to crush Shiite militias, which launch counterattacks in Baghdad. Fighting rages for a month until the Shiites accept a cease-fire.

—Oct. 26: U.S. special operations troops strike in Syria to break up a ring smuggling weapons and fighters into Iraq.

—Nov. 27: The Iraqi parliament approves an agreement with the U.S. calling for the departure of all U.S. troops by the end of 2011.

___

2009

—May 27: The last British combat troops leave Iraq.

—Aug. 19: A massive truck bomb kills about 100 people in Baghdad.

—Oct. 25: Bombs targeting government buildings kill 127 in Baghdad.

___

2010

—March 7: Iraqi parliamentary election fails to give power to a single bloc, leading to months of political negotiations and infighting that drag on until a power-sharing deal in November.

—Aug. 18: U.S. combat operations in Iraq end as its last combat brigade departs for Kuwait. Thousands of troops remain behind in a supporting role.

___

2011

—April 8: The Iraqi army raids Camp Ashraf, home to Iranian exiles. The raid kills 34 civilians and produces calls for the Iraqi government to honor agreements for the protection of the camp.

—May 5: Car bomb in Hillah kills nearly 30 people.

—June 21: A bomb in the southern city of Diwaniyah kills 20 and injures 30.

—Oct. 21: President Barack Obama announces all troops will leave Iraq by the end of the year.

—Dec. 15: The U.S. military officially declares the end of its mission.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

******

Killing of Osama Bin Laden voted Top News Story of 2011

The killing of Osama bin Laden during a raid by Navy SEALs on his hideout in Pakistan was the top news story of 2011, followed by Japan’s earthquake/tsunami disaster, according to The Associated Press’ annual poll of U.S. editors and news directors.

The death of bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader who masterminded the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, received 128 first-place votes out of 247 ballots cast for the top 10 stories. The Japan disaster was next, with 60 first-place votes. Placing third were the Arab Spring uprisings that rocked North Africa and the Middle East, while the European Union’s financial turmoil was No. 4.

The international flavour of these top stories contrasted with last year’s voting when the Gulf of Mexico oil spill was the top story, President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul was No. 2, and the U.S. midterm elections were No. 3.

Here are 2011’s top 10 stories, in order

Osama Bin Laden’s Death: He’d been the world’s most-wanted terrorist for nearly a decade, ever since a team of his al-Qaeda followers carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In May, the long and often-frustrating manhunt ended with a night-time assault by a helicopter-borne special operations squad on his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Bin Laden was shot dead by one of the raiders, and within hours his body was buried at sea.

Japan’s Triple Disaster: A 9.0-magnitude earthquake off Japan’s northeast coast in March unleashed a tsunami that devastated scores of communities, leaving nearly 20,000 people dead or missing and wreaking an estimated $218 billion in damage. The tsunami triggered the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl after waves knocked out the cooling system at a nuclear power plant, causing it to spew radiation that turned up in local produce. About 100,000 people evacuated from the area have not returned to their homes.

Arab Spring: It began with demonstrations in Tunisia that rapidly toppled the long-time strongman. Spreading like a wildfire, the Arab Spring protests sparked a revolution in Egypt that ousted Hosni Mubarak, fuelled a civil war in Libya that climaxed with Muammar Qadhafi’s death, and fomented a bloody uprising in Syria against the Assad regime. Bahrain and Yemen also experienced major protests and unrest.

Eu Fiscal Crisis: The European Union was hit with relentless fiscal turmoil. In Greece, austerity measures triggered strikes, protests and riots, while Italy’s economic woes toppled Premier Silvio Berlusconi. France and Germany led urgent efforts to ease the debt crisis; Britain balked at proposed changes.

U.S. Economy: By some measures, the U.S. economy gained strength as the year progressed. Hiring picked up a bit, consumers were spending more, and the unemployment rate finally dipped below 9 percent. But millions of Americans remained buffeted by foreclosures, joblessness and benefit cutbacks, and investors were on edge monitoring the chain of fiscal crises in Europe.

Penn State Sex Abuse Scandal: One of America’s most storied college football programs was tarnished in a scandal that prompted the firing of Hall of Fame football coach Joe Paterno. One of his former assistants, Jerry Sandusky, was accused of sexually molesting 10 boys; two senior Penn State officials were charged with perjury; and the long-time president was ousted. Paterno wasn’t charged, but expressed regret he didn’t do more after being told there was a problem.

Qadhafi Toppled In Libya: After nearly 42 years of mercurial and often brutal rule, Muammar Qadhafi was toppled by his own people. Anti-government protests escalated into an eight-month rebellion, backed by NATO bombing, that shattered his regime, and Qadhafi finally was tracked down and killed in the fishing village where he was born.

Fiscal Showdowns In Congress: Partisan divisions in Congress led to several showdowns on fiscal issues. A fight over the debt ceiling prompted Standard & Poor’s to strip the U.S. of its AAA credit rating. Later, the so-called “super committee” failed to agree on a deficit-reduction package of at least $1.2 trillion potentially triggering automatic spending cuts of that amount starting in 2013.

Occupy Wall Street Protests: It began Sept. 17 with a protest at a New York City park near Wall Street, and within weeks spread to scores of communities across the U.S. and abroad. The movement depicted itself as leaderless and shied away from specific demands, but succeeded in airing its complaint that the richest 1 percent of Americans benefit at the expense of the rest. As winter approached, local police dismantled several of the protest encampments.

Gabrielle Giffords Shot: The popular third-term congresswoman from Arizona suffered a severe brain injury when she and 18 other people were shot by a gunman as she met with constituents outside a Tucson supermarket in January. Six people died, and Giffords’ painstaking recovery is still in progress.

Among the news events falling just short of the Top 10 were the death of Apple Inc. co-founder Steve Jobs, Hurricane Irene, the devastating series of tornados across Midwest and South-eastern U.S., and the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that barred gays from serving openly in U.S. military.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

********

Describing as discriminatory, the All India Management Association (AIMA) on 17.12.2012 has opposed the Common Management Admission Test (CMAT) announced by the Centre for admission to all management courses. The apex body of management professionals, AIMA, has been conducting the Management Aptitude Test (MAT) for the past two decades.

In a letter to the Human Resource Development Ministry, the AIMA has said MAT’s uniqueness and success lay in its inclusiveness. It is conducted in both the online and paper-based format, reaching out to a much wider audience, accommodating the mixed education background of students while staying rigorous on testing aptitude.

The proposal to introduce and conduct a common management aptitude test (CMAT) exclusively in an online format is ill-suited to a big and diverse country like India. “While such a platform might work for more elite tests like CAT, which are mainly targeted at students in metros seeking admission to Indian Institutes of Management, conducting a common test of this nature in an only online format would only widen the digital divide.”

A large number of students who would avail themselves of this test would be from tier 2 and 3 towns, where accessibility to computers is limited; add to this connectivity, bandwidth and power issues. An online format will hurt the opportunities of many students from non-metros and less-connected areas. Instead of enhancing the scope and accessibility to management degrees, it will only end up being discriminatory, the letter said.

Citing the AIEEE-2011 test, the AIMA said only 4,900 candidates had opted for computer-based test of the 11 lakh applicants which showed that though there had been a significant growth in computer literacy, the reach has not been inclusive with reference to demographic distribution.

Courtesy: The Hindu

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

*******

Shanthi Ganesan

India’s apex body for disaster management is preparing “mandatory” guidelines for hospitals that will cover fire and other emergency hazards, after a major tragedy struck a private super speciality medical centre in Kolkata killing over 90 people in December, 201.

A core group would be constituted that would decide the guidelines for hospitals that would “cover fire and all other hazards”, a National Disaster Management Authority spokesperson told.

The NDMA had in the past issued guidelines for medical preparedness and mass casualty management “but it largely dealt with preparedness of hospitals to deal with disasters outside the hospital”, the spokesperson told.

The official said a meeting of NDMA officials was held on 16.12.2011 evening and after a brain-storming session with different officers and experts it was decided to prepare guidelines for hospital safety and preparedness to deal with on-site emergencies.

The decision was taken in the wake of the recent fire accident at AMRI Hospital at Kolkata, the spokesperson said. ”We have to now address this major issue of emergencies inside the hospitals both in the government and private sectors in the country,” NDMA vice chairman M. Shashidhar Reddy said in the meeting. The meeting was convened to review the present status of hospital safety and understand the role and responsibilities of different agencies.

Members and officers of NDMA, representatives from World Health Organisation (WHO), UN agencies, AIIMS, health ministry, Armed Forces Medical Services, corporate hospitals, Delhi Fire Service, experts from IITs, IIITs and NGOs were present at the meeting.

NDMA member Muzaffar Ahmed was tasked with constituting the core group of experts and preparing the guidelines for hospital safety and preparedness after wide consultation with all stakeholders. ”The core group, besides reviewing the present status, will identify gaps and look at international best practices. It will also look at the existing codes and other legal provisions and recommend steps for better monitoring and supervision of all safety measures,” the spokesperson said.

NDMA, constituted under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and headed by the prime minister, has been tasked with spearheading and implementing a holistic and integrated approach to disaster management in the country.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

*******

Catherine Joseph

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on 15.12.2011 arrived Moscow on a three-day visit to Russia for further expanding bilateral cooperation and consolidating coordination on regional and global issues.
Singh arrived at the Sheremetyevo International Airport and was received by Russia’s deputy foreign minister A M Vadakin.

Noting that there is enormous mutual goodwill in the two countries for each other, Singh, prior to his departure, had said in New Delhi that he is “convinced that India-Russia consultation on global issues is more necessary today than ever before”. “Both countries recognise the significant mutual benefit we derive from working together. I will utilise my visit to further expand our bilateral cooperation and further consolidate our coordination on regional and global issues. “This is in our national interest and in the interest of global peace and prosperity,” the Prime Minister, who will be attending the 12th annual Indo-Russian Summit in Moscow, said in a statement.

Observing that 2011 India-Russia Annual Summit was taking place against the backdrop of a complex international environment, Singh said he was “looking forward to an indepth exchange of views with the Russian leadership on the crisis facing the global economy and the political developments in our extended neighbourhood, including West Asia, Gulf and Afghanistan and the impact of all this on peace and stability in the world.

“I am convinced that India-Russia consultation on global issues is more necessary today than ever before. Our bilateral relations with Russia are based on mutual trust, friendship and shared interests,” he had said, noting that bilateral ties encompass diverse sectors including nuclear energy, defence, space, science and technology, hydrocarbons, trade and investment and people-to-people exchanges.

Five Agreements signed

The Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, left Moscow for India on 17.12.2011 after concluding a three-day visit during which he attended the 12th annual Indo-Russian summit and witnessed inking of five agreements, including one for technical assistance in joint production of 42 more frontline Sukhoi-MKI 30 jets.

Dr Singh, who held talks with the President, Mr Dmitry Medvedev, cleared the uncertainty over the Kudankulam nuclear power project on 16.12.2011 and said the first unit of the protest-hit plant will be operationalised in a “couple of weeks” but India and Russia did not sign any agreement on construction of the third and fourth units.

The two countries signed a crucial agreement for technical assistance in joint production of 42 more frontline Sukhoi-MKI 30 jets, which was among the five pacts initialled in the presence of Dr Singh and Mr Medvedev besides a joint statement on Indo-Russian partnership.

Russia also backed India’s bid for a permanent seat in an expanded UN Security Council as well as its aspirations to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, while Dr Singh welcomed Moscow’s entry to the World Trade Organization.

Dr Singh congratulated his counterpart, Mr Vladimir Putin, on the victory of his ruling United Russia party in the December 4, 2011 parliamentary polls, during their meeting.

Russia to offer 42 upgraded Sukhois to India

An additional 42 Sukhoi frontline fighters will be provided to India by Russia under an agreement inked between the two sides during the visit of the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh. With this pact, the total number of acquired or contracted aircraft by India in various stages of manufacture of the frontline Su-30 MKI fighters would increase to 272.

The agreement for the upgraded Sukhois was signed by the Defence Secretary, Mr Shashi Kant Sharma, and the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation Director, Mr M.A. Dmitriev, in the presence of Dr Singh, and the Russian President, Mr Dmitry Medvedev, after their talks at the 12th annual Indo-Russian Summit at the Kremlin 0n 16.12.2011.

The pact, which was among the five agreements initialled between the two countries, came against the backdrop of a crash of an Indian Air Force’s Sukhoi-30 near Pune. The mishap, in which the two pilots ejected safely, raised some technical questions and also led to the grounding of the entire fleet of 120 planes pending investigations.

An Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) and a general contract were signed in 2000 for the manufacture of 140 Su-30 MKI aircraft by HAL. A 2007 protocol envisaged manufacture of a further 40 aircraft. Earlier, 50 Su-30 aircraft were purchased in phases prior to the signing of IGA and deliveries started in the late 90s. The latest version is expected to include a new cockpit, an upgraded radar and certain stealth features to avoid radar detection.

Significantly, the upgraded Sukhoi-30 MKIs will be able to carry a heavier weapons load, especially the airborne version of the Brahmos cruise missile. The first delivery of the upgraded Sukhois is expected in 2014 and the last by 2018.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

******

Impact of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on Indian Economy

Anand,  BA., B.L

Definition

Foreign direct investment (FDI) or foreign investment refers to the net inflows of investment to acquire a lasting management interest (10 percent or more of voting stock) in an enterprise operating in an economy other than that of the investor. It is the sum of equity capital,other long-term capital, and short-term capital as shown in the balance of payments. It usually involves participation in management, joint-venture, transfer of technology and expertise. There are two types of FDI: inward foreign direct investment and outward foreign direct investment, resulting in a net FDI inflow (positive or negative) and “stock of foreign direct investment”, which is the cumulative number for a given period. Direct investment excludes investment through purchase of shares. FDI is one example of international factor movement.

Types

A foreign direct investor may be classified in any sector of the economy and could be any one of the following:

• an individual;
• a group of related individuals;
• an incorporated or unincorporated entity;
• a public company or private company;
• a group of related enterprises;
• a government body;
• an estate (law), trust or other social institution; or
• any combination of the above.

The foreign direct investor may acquire voting power of an enterprise in an economy through any of the following methods:

• by incorporating a wholly owned subsidiary or company
• by acquiring shares in an associated enterprise
• through a merger or an acquisition of an unrelated enterprise
• participating in an equity joint venture with another investor or enterprise…

Foreign direct investment incentives may take the following forms:

• low corporate tax and income tax rates
• tax holidays
• other types of tax concessions
• preferential tariffs
• special economic zones
• EPZ – Export Processing Zones
• Bonded Warehouses
• Maquiladoras
• investment financial subsidies
• soft loan or loan guarantees
• free land or land subsidies
• relocation & expatriation subsidies
• job training & employment subsidies
• infrastructure subsidies
• R&D support
• derogation from regulations (usually for very large projects)

Foreign Direct Investments in India

Starting from a baseline of less than $1 billion in 1990, a recent UNCTAD survey projected India as the second most important FDI destination (after China) for transnational corporations during 2010-2012. As per the data, the sectors which attracted higher inflows were services, telecommunication, construction activities and computer software and hardware. Mauritius, Singapore, the US and the UK were among the leading sources of FDI.

FDI in 2010 was $24.2 billion, a significant decrease from both 2008 and 2009.  Foreign direct investment in August 2010 dipped by about 60% to aprox. $34 billion, the lowest in 2010 fiscal, industry department data released showed.  In the first two months of 2010-11 fiscal, FDI inflow into India was at an all-time high of $7.78 billion up 77% from $4.4 billion during the corresponding period in the previous year.

The world’s largest retailer WalMart has termed India’s decision to allow 51% FDI in multi-brand retail as a “first important step” and said it will study the finer details of the new policy to determine the impact on its ability to do business in Indi

Impact on 51% FDI on India

The decision to hold back FDI in multi-brand retail will have a strong impact on the domestic and foreign investor sentiment, another chamber, the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), said in a release. “We firmly hope that this would not be a rollback and a quick consensus is reached,” CII Director General Chandrajit Banerjee said.

Describing the volte face as a case of “missed opportunity”, Assocham Secretary General D S Rawat said, “It will send a very negative message to foreign investors.”

Rawat said FDI in multi-brand retail could have created over 10 million jobs in three years, curbed wastage of farm products and benefited farmers through better prices for their produce.

FICCI urged the government to move ahead with this progressive reform and proposed solutions like considering a maximum of 49 per cent FDI in multi-brand retail and increasing the percentage of sourcing from the small scale sector, which was proposed to be fixed at a minimum 30 per cent.

The government was forced to put its decision to allow FDI in multi-brand retail on hold in view of stiff opposition from UPA ally Trinamool Congress and other political parties.

Impact in Tamil Nadu

Chennai, Nov 27: Opposing the government policy of allowing 51 percent FDI in multi-brand retail sector in India Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa on Sunday (today) said that she would not allow multi-brand global palyer to set up hyper markets in Tamil Nadu.

Jayalalithaa further said that government should reverse its “ill advised” move as it will monopolise the market, exploit farmers and consumers.

“I am constrained to state that my government will not allow the multi brand global players as permitted under the new policy to set up their hyper markets in Tamil Nadu,” Jayalalithaa declared.

The government new FDI retail policy to allow 51% foreign direct investment (FDI) in multi-brand retail segment will permit world’s top retail giant like Walmart, Carrefour and Tesco to set up market in the country. Earlier, such retailers were not allowed to coduct retail business in India.

Current Indian Market Situation

Retailing in India is one of the pillars of its economy and accounts for about 15% of its GDP. The Indian retail market is estimated to be US$ 450 billion and one of the top five retail markets in the world by economic value.

Organised retailing, absent in most rural and small towns of India in 2010, refers to trading activities undertaken by licensed retailers, that is, those who are registered for sales tax, income tax, etc. These include the publicly-traded supermarkets, corporate-backed hypermarkets and retail chains, and also the privately owned large retail businesses. Unorganised retailing, on the other hand, refers to the traditional formats of low-cost retailing, for example, the local mom and pop store, owner manned general stores, paan/beedi shops, convenience stores, hand cart and pavement vendors, etc.

Supermarkets and similar organized retail accounted for just 4% of the market in 2008. Until recently, regulations prevented most of the foreign investment in retailing. Some retails faced complying with over thirty regulations such as “signboard licences” and “anti-hoarding measures” before they could open doors. There are taxes for moving goods to states, from states, and even within states in some cases. However, the Indian government has been opening the retail market and simplifying regulations. In November 2011, Indian central government announced major reforms paving way for giants such as Walmart, Carrefour and Tesco, as well single brand majors such as IKEA, Nike, and Apple to enter one of the fastest growing retail market of 1.2 billion people. This announcement immediately caused intense activism – both in opposition and in support – within India. On 7 December 2011, Indian government conceding to the opposition, announced it is suspending the retail reforms till it reaches a consensus.

Most Indian shopping takes place in open markets or millions of small, independent grocery and retail shops. Shoppers typically stand outside the retail shop, ask for what they want, and cannot pick or examine a product from the shelf. Access to the shelf or product storage area is limited. Once the shopper requests the food staple or household product they are looking for, the shopkeeper goes to the container or shelf or to the back of the store, brings it out and offers it for sale to the shopper. Often the shopkeeper may substitute the product, claiming that it is similar or equivalent to the product the consumer is asking for. The product typically has no price label in these small retail shops; although some products do have a manufactured suggested retail price (MSRP) pre-printed on the packaging. The shopkeeper prices the food staple and household products arbitrarily, and two consumers may pay different prices for the same product on the same day. Price is sometimes negotiated between the shopper and shopkeeper. The shoppers do not have time to examine the product label, and do not have a choice to make an informed decision between competitive products.

India’s retail and logistics industry, organized and unorganized in combination, employs about 40 million Indians (3.3% of Indian population). The typical Indian retail shops are very small. Over 14 million outlets operate in the country and only 4% of them being larger than 500 sq ft (46 m²) in size. India has about 11 shop outlets for every 1000 people. Vast majority of the unorganized retail shops in India employ family members, do not have the scale to procure or transport products at high volume wholesale level, have limited to no quality control or fake-versus-authentic product screening technology and have no training on safe and hygienic storage, packaging or logistics. The unorganized retail shops source their products from a chain of middlemen who mark up the product as it moves from farmer or producer to the consumer. The unorganized retail shops typically offer no after-sales support or service. Finally, most transactions at unorganized retail shops are done with cash, with all sales being final.

Between 2000 to 2010, consumers in select Indian cities have gradually begun to experience the quality, choice, convenience and benefits of organized retail industry.

Growth over 1997-2010

India in 1997 allowed foreign direct investment (FDI) in cash and carry wholesale. Then, it required government approval. The approval requirement was relaxed, and automatic permission was granted in 2006. Between 2000 to 2010, Indian retail attracted about $1.8 billion in foreign direct investment, representing a very small 1.5% of total investment flow into India.

Single brand retailing attracted 94 proposals between 2006 and 2010, of which 57 were approved and implemented. For a country of 1.2 billion people, this is a very small number. Some claim one of the primary restraint inhibiting better participation was that India required single brand retailers to limit their ownership in Indian outlets to 51%. China in contrast allows 100% ownership by foreign companies in both single brand and multi-brand retail presence.

Indian retail has experienced limited growth, and its spoilage of food harvest is amongst the highest in the world, because of very limited integrated cold-chain and other infrastructure. India has only 5386 stand-alone cold storages, having a total capacity of 23.6 million metric tons. However, 80 percent of this storage is used only for potatoes. The remaining infrastructure capacity is less than 1% of the annual farm output of India, and grossly inadequate during peak harvest seasons. This leads to about 30% losses in certain perishable agricultural output in India, on average, every year.

Indian laws already allow foreign direct investment in cold-chain infrastructure to the extent of 100 percent. There has been no interest in foreign direct investment in cold storage infrastructure build out. Experts claim that cold storage infrastructure will become economically viable only when there is strong and contractually-binding demand from organized retail. The risk of cold storing perishable food, without an assured way to move and sell it, puts the economic viability of expensive cold storage in doubt. In the absence of organized retail competition and with a ban on foreign direct investment in multi-brand retailers, foreign direct investments are unlikely to begin in cold storage and farm logistics infrastructure.

Until 2010, intermediaries and middlemen in India have dominated the value chain. Due to a number of intermediaries involved in the traditional Indian retail chain, norms are flouted and pricing lacks transparency. Small Indian farmers realize only 1/3rd of the total price paid by the final Indian consumer, as against 2/3rd by farmers in nations with a higher share of organized retail. The 60%+ margins for middlemen and traditional retail shops have limited growth and prevented innovation in Indian retail industry.

India has had years of debate and discussions on the risks and prudence of allowing innovation and competition within its retail industry. Numerous economists repeatedly recommended to the Government of India that legal restrictions on organized retail must be removed, and the retail industry in India must be opened to competition. For example, in an invited address to the Indian parliament in December 2010, Jagdish Bhagwati, Professor of Economics and Law at the Columbia University analysed the relationship between growth and poverty reduction, then urged the Indian parliament to extend economic reforms by freeing up of the retail sector, further liberalisation of trade in all sectors, and introducing labor market reforms. Such reforms Professor Bhagwati argued will accelerate economic growth and make a sustainable difference in the life of India’s poorest.

A 2007 report noted that an increasing number of people in India are turning to the services sector for employment due to the relative low compensation offered by the traditional agriculture and manufacturing sectors. The organized retail market is growing at 35 percent annually while growth of unorganized retail sector is pegged at 6 percent.

The Retail Business in India is currently at the point of inflection. As of 2008, rapid change with investments to the tune of US $ 25 billion were being planned by several Indian and multinational companies in the next 5 years. It is a huge industry in terms of size and according to India Brand Equity Foundation (IBEF), it is valued at about US$ 395.96 billion. Organised retail is expected to garner about 16-18 percent of the total retail market (US $ 65-75 billion) in the next 5 years.

India has topped the A.T. Kearney’s annual Global Retail Development Index (GRDI) for the third consecutive year, maintaining its position as the most attractive market for retail investment. The Indian economy has registered a growth of 8% for 2007. The predictions for 2008 is 7.9%. The enormous growth of the retail industry has created a huge demand for real estate. Property developers are creating retail real estate at an aggressive pace and by 2010, 300 malls are estimated to be operational in the country.

Growth after 2011

Before 2011, India had prevented innovation and organized competition in its consumer retail industry. Several studies claim that the lack of infrastructure and competitive retail industry is a key cause of India’s persistently high inflation. Furthermore, because of unorganized retail, in a nation where malnutrition remains a serious problem, food waste is rife. Well over 30% of food staples and perishable goods produced in India spoils because poor infrastructure and small retail outlets prevent hygienic storage and movement of the goods from the farmer to the consumer.

One report estimates the 2011 Indian retail market as generating sales of about $470 billion a year, of which a miniscule $27 billion comes from organized retail such as supermarkets, chain stores with centralized operations and shops in malls. The opening of retail industry to free market competition, some claim will enable rapid growth in retail sector of Indian economy. Others believe the growth of Indian retail industry will take time, with organized retail possibly needing a decade to grow to a 25% share. A 25% market share, given the expected growth of Indian retail industry through 2021, is estimated to be over $250 billion a year: a revenue equal to the 2009 revenue share from Japan for the world’s 250 largest retailers.

The Economist forecasts that Indian retail will nearly double in economic value, expanding by about $400 billion by 2020. The projected increase alone is equivalent to the current retail market size of France.

In 2011, food accounted for 70% of indian retail, but was under-represented by organized retail. A.T. Kearney estimates India’s organized retail had a 31% share in clothing and apparel, while the home supplies retail was growing between 20% to 30% per year. These data correspond to retail prospects prior to November announcement of the retail reform.

Indian Retail Market

Indian market has high complexities in terms of a wide geographic spread and distinct consumer preferences varying by each region necessitating a need for localization even within the geographic zones. India has highest number of outlets per person (7 per thousand) Indian retail space per capita at 2 sq ft (0.19 m²)/ person is lowest in the world Indian retail density of 6 percent is highest in the world. 1.8 million households in India have an annual income of over 45 lakh (US$91,260).

Delving further into consumer buying habits, purchase decisions can be separated into two categories: status-oriented and indulgence-oriented. CTVs/LCDs, refrigerators, washing machines, dishwashers, microwave ovens and DVD players fall in the status category. Indulgence-oriented products include plasma TVs, state-of-the-art home theatre systems, iPods, high-end digital cameras, camcorders, and gaming consoles. Consumers in the status category buy because they need to maintain a position in their social group. Indulgence-oriented buying happens with those who want to enjoy life better with products that meet their requirements. When it comes to the festival shopping season, it is primarily the status-oriented segment that contributes largely to the retailer’s cash register.

While India presents a large market opportunity given the number and increasing purchasing power of consumers, there are significant challenges as well given that over 90% of trade is conducted through independent local stores. Challenges include: Geographically dispersed population, small ticket sizes, complex distribution network, little use of IT systems, limitations of mass media and existence of counterfeit goods.

Major Indian Retailers

Indian apparel retailers are increasing their brand presence overseas, particularly in developed markets. While most have identified a gap in countries in West Asia and Africa, some majors are also looking at the US and Europe. Arvind Brands, Madura Garments, Spykar Lifestyle and Royal Classic Polo are busy chalking out foreign expansion plans through the distribution route and standalone stores as well. Another denim wear brand, Spykar, which is now moving towards becoming a casualwear lifestyle brand, has launched its store in Melbourne recently. It plans to open three stores in London by 2008-end.

The low-intensity entry of the diversified Mahindra Group into retail is unique because it plans to focus on lifestyle products. The Mahindra Group is the fourth largest Indian business group to enter the business of retail after Reliance Industries Ltd, the Aditya Birla Group, and Bharti Enterprises Ltd. The other three groups are focusing either on perishables and groceries, or a range of products, or both.

• REI AGRO LTD Retail: 6TEN and 6TEN kirana stores
• Future Groups-Formats: Big Bazaar, Food Bazaar, Pantaloons, Central, Fashion Station, Brand Factory, Depot, aLL, E-Zone etc.
• Raymond Ltd.: Textiles, The Raymond Shop, Park Avenue, Park Avenue Woman, Parx, Colourplus, Neck Ties & More, Shirts & More etc.
• Fabindia: Textiles, Home furnishings, handloom apparel, jewellery
• RP-Sanjiv Goenka Group Retail-Formats: Spencer’s Hyper, Spencer’s Daily, Music World, Au Bon Pain (Internaional bakery cafeteria), Beverly Hills Polo Club
• The Tata Group-Formats: Westside, Star India Bazaar, Steeljunction, Landmark, Titan Industries with World of Titans showrooms, Tanishq outlets, Croma.
• Reliance Retail-Formats: Reliance MART, Reliance SUPER, Reliance FRESH, Reliance Footprint, Reliance Living, Reliance Digital, Reliance Jewellery, Reliance Trends, Reliance Autozone, iStore
• Reliance ADAG Retail-Format: Reliance World
• K Raheja Corp Group-Formats: Shoppers Stop, Crossword, Hyper City, Inorbit Mall
• Nilgiri’s-Formats: Nilgiris’ supermarket chain
• Marks & Spencer: Clothing, lifestyle products, etc.
• Lifestyle International-Lifestyle, Home Centre, Max, Fun City and International Franchise brand stores.
• Pyramid Retail-Formats: Pyramid Megastore, TruMart
• Next retail India Ltd (Consumer Electronics
• Vivek Limited Retail Formats: Viveks, Jainsons, Viveks Service Centre, Viveks Safe Deposit Lockers
• PGC Retail -T-Mart India, Switcher , Respect India , Grand India Bazaar ,etc.,
• Subhiksha-Formats: Subhiksha supermarket pharmacy and telecom discount chain.
• Trinethra- Formats: Fabmall supermarket chain and Fabcity hypermarket chain
• Vishal Retail Group-Formats: Vishal Mega Mart
• BPCL-Formats: In & Out
• German Metro Cash & Carry
• Shoprite Holdings-Formats: Shoprite Hyper
• Paritala stores bazar: honey shine stores
• Aditya Birla Group – “More” Outlets
• Kapas- Cotton garment outlets
• Nmart Retails with 71 operating Stores till now and total 153 Stores in India and 1 to open in Dubai Shortly. (Expected to be 150 by the end of Aug-2012)(www.nmart.co.in)

Entry of MNC

The world’s largest retailer by sales, Wal-Mart Stores Inc and Sunil Mittal’s Bharti Enterprises have entered into a joint venture agreement and they are planning to open 10 to 15 cash-and-carry facilities over seven years. The first of the stores, which will sell groceries, consumer appliances and fruits and vegetables to retailers and small businesses, is slated to open in north India by the end of 2008.

Carrefour, the world’s second largest retailer by sales, is planning to setup two business entities in the country one for its cash-and-carry business and the other a master franchisee which will lend its banner, technical services and know how to an Indian company for direct-to-consumer retail.

The world’s fifth largest retailer by sales, Costco Wholesale Corp (Costco) known for its warehouse club model is also interested in coming to India and waiting for the right opportunity.

Opposition to the retailers’ plans have argued that livelihoods of small scale and rural vendors would be threatened. However, studies have found that only a limited number of small vendors will be affected and that the benefits of market expansion far outweigh the impact of the new stores.

Tesco Plc., plans to set up shop in India with a wholesale cash-and-carry business and will help Indian conglomerate Tata group to grow its hypermarket business

Challenges

A McKinsey study claims retail productivity in India is very low compared to international peer measures. For example, the labor productivity in Indian retail was just 6% of the labor productivity in United States in 2010. India’s labor productivity in food retailing is about 5% compared to Brazil’s 14%; while India’s labor productivity in non-food retailing is about 8% compared to Poland’s 25%.

Total retail employment in India, both organized and unorganized, account for about 6% of Indian labor work force currently – most of which is unorganized. This about a third of levels in United States and Europe; and about half of levels in other emerging economies. A complete expansion of retail sector to levels and productivity similar to other emerging economies and developed economies such as the United States would create over 50 million jobs in India. Training and development of labor and management for higher retail productivity is expected to be a challenge.

To become a truly flourishing industry, retailing in India needs to cross the following hurdles:

• Automatic approval is not allowed for foreign investment in retail.
• Regulations restricting real estate purchases, and cumbersome local laws.
• Taxation, which favours small retail businesses.
• Absence of developed supply chain and integrated IT management.
• Lack of trained work force.
• Low skill level for retailing management.
• Lack of Retailing Courses and study options
• Intrinsic complexity of retailing – rapid price changes, constant threat of product obsolescence and low margins.

In November 2011, the Indian government announced relaxation of some rules and the opening of retail market to competition.

Indian Retail Reform

Until 2011, Indian central government denied foreign direct investment (FDI) in multi-brand Indian retail, forbidding foreign groups from any ownership in supermarkets, convenience stores or any retail outlets, to sell multiple products from different brands directly to Indian consumers.

The government of Manmohan Singh, prime minister, announced on 24 November 2011 the following:

• India will allow foreign groups to own up to 51 per cent in “multi-brand retailers”, as supermarkets are known in India, in the most radical pro-liberalisation reform passed by an Indian cabinet in years;
• single brand retailers, such as Apple and Ikea, can own 100 percent of their Indian stores, up from the previous cap of 51 percent;
• both multi-brand and single brand stores in India will have to source nearly a third of their goods from small and medium-sized Indian suppliers;
• all multi-brand and single brand stores in India must confine their operations to 53-odd cities with a population over one million, out of some 7935 towns and cities in India. It is expected that these stores will now have full access to over 200 million urban consumers in India;
• multi-brand retailers must have a minimum investment of US$100 million with at least half of the amount invested in back end infrastructure, including cold chains, refrigeration, transportation, packing, sorting and processing to considerably reduce the post harvest losses and bring remunerative prices to farmers;
• the opening of retail competition will be within India’s federal structure of government. In other words, the policy is an enabling legal framework for India. The states of India have the prerogative to accept it and implement it, or they can decide to not implement it if they so choose. Actual implementation of policy will be within the parameters of state laws and regulations.

The opening of retail industry to global competition is expected to spur a retail rush to India. It has the potential to transform not only the retailing landscape but also the nation’s ailing infrastructure.

A Wall Street Journal article claims that fresh investments in Indian organized retail will generate 10 million new jobs between 2012-2014, and about five to six million of them in logistics alone; even though the retail market is being opened to just 53 cities out of about 8000 towns and cities in India.

It is expected to help tame stubbornly high inflation but is likely to be vehemently opposed by millions of small retailers, who see large foreign chains as a threat. The need to control food price inflation — averaging double-digit rises over several years — prompted the government to open the sector, analysts claim. Hitherto India’s food supplies have been controlled by tens of millions of middlemen (less than 5% of Indian population). Traders add huge mark-ups to farm prices, while offering little by way of technical support to help farmers boost their productivity, packaging technology, pushing up retail prices significantly. Analysts said allowing in big foreign retailers would provide an impetus for them to set up modern supply chains, with refrigerated vans, cold storage and more efficient logistics. “I think foreign chains can also bring in humongous logistical benefits and capital,” Chandrajit Banerjee, director-general, Confederation of Indian Industry, told Reuters. “The biggest beneficiary would be the small farmers who will be able to improve their productivity by selling directly to large organised players,” Mr Banerjee said.

Indian retail reforms on hold

According to Bloomberg, on 3 December 2011, the Chief Minister of the Indian state of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, who is against the policy and whose Trinamool Congress brings 19 votes to the ruling Congress party-led coalition, claimed that India’s government may put the FDI retail reforms on hold until it reaches consensus within the ruling coalition. Reuters reports that this risked a possible dilution of the policy rather than a change of heart.

India Today claimed that the resistance to Indian retail reforms is primarily because it has been badly sold, even though it can help fix the exploitation of Indian farmers by the decades-old “arhtiya” and “mandi” monopoly system. India Today claims the policy is good for the small Indian farmer and the Indian consumer.

Pratap Mehta, president of the Centre for Policy Research, claimed any U-turn or postponement of retail reforms will cause an immense loss of face to the Congress-led central government of Manmohan Singh. The mom-and-pop farmers of India support these reforms. The consumers of India want the reforms. The government has already annoyed those who oppose change and innovation in retail. By putting retail reforms on hold, the government will additionally alienate much larger segment of India’s population supporting FDI. So they will now have the worst of both worlds, claims Mehta.

Deepak Parekh, Ashok Ganguly and other economic policy leaders of India, on 4 December 2011, called placing investment and innovation in retail on hold for the sake of vested interests as unfair and detrimental to vast majority in India. They urged farmers, consumers and the common people to raise their voice against this false drama of apprehension against investment and modernising trade in organised retailing. They called upon Indians to come out and strongly support progressive measures and reforms with the same spirit and gusto with which we take the liberties to criticize policies or issues we do not appreciate.

Several newspapers claimed on 6 December 2011 that India parliament is expected to shelve retail reforms while the ruling Congress party seeks consensus from the opposition and the Congress party’s own coalition partners. Suspension of retail reforms on 7 December 2011 would be, the reports claimed, an embarrassing defeat for the Indian government, suggesting it is weak and ineffective in implementing its ideas.

Anand Sharma, India’s Commerce and Industry Minister, after a meeting of all political parties on 7 December 2011 said, “The decision to allow foreign direct investment in retail is suspended till consensus is reached with all stakeholders.”

Social Impact and Controversy with Retail Reforms

The November 2011 retail reforms in India have sparked intense activism, both in opposition and in support of the reforms.

Controversy over Indian retail reforms

A horticultural produce retail market in Kolkata, India; produce loss in these retail formats is very high for perishables

Critics of the Indian retail reforms announcement are making one or more of the following points:

• Independent stores will close, leading to massive job losses. Walmart employs very few people in the United States. If allowed to expand in India as much as Walmart has expanded in the United States, few thousand jobs may be created but millions will be lost.
• Walmart will lower prices to dump goods, get competition out of the way, become a monopoly, then raise prices. We have seen this in the case of the soft drinks industry. Pepsi and Coke came in and wiped out all the domestic brands.
• India doesn’t need foreign retailers, since homegrown companies and traditional markets may be able to do the job.
• Work will be done by Indians, profits will go to foreigners.
• Remember East India Company. It entered India as a trader and then took over politically.
• There will be sterile homogeneity and Indian cities will look like cities anywhere else.
• The government hasn’t built consensus.

Supporters claim none of these objections has merit. They claim:

• Organized retail will need workers. Walmart employs 1.4 million people in United States alone. With United States population of about 300 million, and India’s population of about 1200 million, if Walmart-like retail companies were to expand in India as much as their presence in the United States, and the staffing level in Indian stores kept at the same level as in the United States stores, Walmart alone would employ 5.6 million Indian citizens. Walmart has a 6.5% market share of the total United States retail. Adjusted for this market share, the expected jobs in future Indian organized retail would total over 85 million. In addition, millions of additional jobs will be created during the building of and the maintenance of retail stores, roads, cold storage centers, software industry, electronic cash registers and other retail supporting organizations. Instead of job losses, retail reforms are likely to be massive boost to Indian job availability.
• KPMG – one of the world’s largest audit companies – finds that in China, the employment in both retail and wholesale trade increased from 4% in 1992 to about 7% in 2001, post China opening its retail to foreign and domestic innovation and competition. In absolute terms, China experienced the creation of 26 million new jobs within 9 years, post China announcing FDI retail reforms. Additionally, contrary to some concerns in China, post retail reforms, the number of traditional small retailers also grew by 30% over 5 years.
• India needs trillions of dollar to build its infrastructure, hospitals, housing and schools for its growing population. Indian economy is small, with limited surplus capital. Indian government is already operating on budget deficits. It is simply not possible for Indian investors or Indian government to fund this expansion, job creation and growth at the rate India needs. Global investment capital through FDI is necessary. Beyond capital, Indian retail industry needs knowledge and global integration. Global retail leaders, some of which are partly owned by people of Indian origin, can bring this knowledge. Global integration can potentially open export markets for Indian farmers and producers. Walmart, for example, expects to source and export some $1 billion worth of goods from India every year, since it came into Indian wholesale retail market.
• Walmart, Carrefour, Tesco, Target, Metro, Coop are some of over 350 global retail companies with annual sales over $1 billion. These retail companies have operated for over 30 years in numerous countries. They have not become monopolies. Competition between Walmart-like retailers has kept food prices in check. Canada credits their very low inflation rates to Walmart-effect. Anti-trust laws and state regulations, such as those in Indian legal code, have prevented food monopolies from forming anywhere in the world. Price inflation in these countries has been 5 to 10 times lower than price inflation in India. The current consumer price inflation in Europe and the United States is less than 2%, compared to India’s double digit inflation.
• The Pepsi and Coke example is meaningless in the context of Indian beverage market. More competition is lacking because of limited demand. Indian consumer has limited interest in soft drinks. Soft drinks represent less than 5% of Indian beverage market. Indian consumer prefers milk-based, tea and coffee and these account for 90% of Indian beverage market. In these markets, Coca Cola and Pepsi have plenty of competition. The next most important market in India is bottled water, that outsells combined soft drink sales of the Pepsi and Coca Cola. Bottled water, milk, coffee and tea market in India are big markets, and have plenty of domestic brands, European brands like Nestle, as well as Pepsi and Coca Cola. Organized retail too will have numerous brands and strong competition.
• Comparing 21st century to 18th century is inappropriate. Conditions today are not same as in the 18th century. India wasn’t a democracy then, it is today. Global awareness and news media were not the same in 18th century as today. Consider China today. It has over 57 million square feet of retail space owned by foreigners, employing millions of Chinese citizens. Yet, China hasn’t become a vassal of imperialists. It enjoys respect from all global powers. Other Asian countries like Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand and Indonesia see foreign retailers as catalysts of new technology and price reduction; and they have benefitted immensely by welcoming FDI in retail. India too will benefit by integrating with the world, rather than isolating itself.
• With 51% FDI limit in multi-brand retailers, nearly half of any profits will remain in India. Any profits will be subject to taxes, and such taxes will reduce Indian government budget deficit. Many years ago, China adopted the retail reform policy India has announced; China allowed FDI in its retail sector. It has taken FDI-financed retailers in China between 5 to 10 years to post profits, in large part because of huge investments they had to make initially. Like China, it is unlikely foreign retailers will earn any profits in India for the first 5 to 10 years. Ultimately, retail companies must earn profits with hard work and by creating value.
• States have a right to say no to retail FDI within their jurisdiction. States have the right to add restrictions to the retail policy announced before they implement them. Thus, they can place limits on number, market share, style, diversity, homogeneity and other factors to suit their cultural preferences. Finally, in future, states can always introduce regulations and India can change the law to ensure the benefits of retail reforms reach the poorest and weakest segments of Indian society, free and fair retail competition does indeed lead to sharply lower inflation than current levels, small farmers get better prices, jobs created by organized retail pay well, and healthier food becomes available to more households.
• Inbuilt inefficiencies and wastage in distribution and storage account for why, according to some estimates, as much as 40% of food production doesn’t reach consumers. Fifty million children in India are malnourished. Food often rots at farms, in transit, or in antiquated state-run warehouses. Cost-conscious organized retail companies will avoid waste and loss, making food available to the weakest and poorest segment of Indian society, while increasing the income of small farmers. Walmart, for example, since its arrival in Indian wholesale retail market, has successfully introduced “Direct Farm Project” at Haider Nagar near Malerkotla in Punjab, where 110 farmers have been connected with Bharti Walmart for sourcing fresh vegetables directly, thereby reducing waste and bringing fresher produce to Indian consumers.
• Indian small shops employ workers without proper contracts, making them work long hours. Many unorganized small shops depend on child labour. A well-regulated retail sector will help curtail some of these abuses.
• Organized retail has enabled a wide range of companies to start and flourish in other countries. For example, in the United States, an organized retailer named Whole Foods has rapidly grown to annual revenues of $9 billion by working closely with farmers, delighting customers and caring about the communities it has stores in.
• The claims that there is no consensus are without merit. About 10 years ago, when opposition formed the central government, they had proposed retail reforms and suggested India consider FDI in retail. Retail reforms discussions are not new. More recently, retail reforms announced evolved after a process of intense consultations and consensus building initiative. In 2010, the Indian government circulated a discussion paper on FDI retail reforms. On July 6 2011, another version of the discussion paper was circulated by the central government of India. Comments from a wide cross-section of Indian society including farmers’ associations, industry bodies, consumer forums, academics, traders’ associations, investors, economists were analyzed in depth before the matter was discussed by the Committee of Secretaries. By early August 2011, the consensus from various segments of Indian society was overwhelming in favor of retail reforms. The reform outline was presented in India’s Rajya Sabha in August 2011. The announced reforms are the result of this consensus process. The current opposition is not helping the consensus process, since consensus is not built by threats and disruption. Those who oppose current retail reforms should help build consensus with ideas and proposals, if they have any. The opposition parties currently disrupting the Indian parliament on retail reforms have not offered even one idea or a single proposal on how India can eliminate food spoilage, reduce inflation, improve food security, feed the poor, improve the incomes of small farmers.

Opposition to retail reforms

Within a week of retail reform announcement, Indian government has faced a political backlash against its decision to allow competition and 51% ownership of multi-brand organized retail in India.

Despite the fact that Salman Khurshid, India’s law minister, claiming that many opposition parties, including the Bharatiya Janata Party, had privately encouraged the government to push through the retail reform, the intense criticism now targets Congress-led coalition government, and its decision to push through one of the biggest economic reforms in years for India. Opposition parties claim supermarket chains are ill-advised, unilateral and unwelcome.

The opposition claims the entry of organized retailers would lead to their dominance that would decimate local retailers and force millions of people out of work.

Mamata Banerjee, the chief minister of West Bengal and the leader of the Trinamool Congress, announced her opposition to retail reform, claiming “Some people might support it, but I do not support it. You see America is America … and India is India. One has to see what one’s capacity is.”

Other states whose Chief Ministers have either personally announced opposition or announced reluctance to implement the retail reforms: Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh.

Chief Ministers of many states have not made a personal statement in opposition or support of India needing retail reforms. Gujarat, Kerala, Karnataka and Rajasthan are examples of these states. Both sides have made conflicting claims about the position of chief ministers from these states.

A Wall Street Journal article reports that in Uttar Pradesh, Uma Bharti, a senior leader of the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), threatened to “set fire to the first Wal-Mart store whenever it opens;” with her colleague Sushma Swaraj busy tweeting up a storm of misinformation about how Wal-Mart allegedly ruined the U.S. economy.

On 1 December 2011, an India-wide “bandh” (close all business in protest) was called by political parties opposing the retail reform. While many organizations responded, the reach of the protest was mixed. The Times of India, a national newspaper of India, claimed people appeared divided over the bandh call and internal rivalry among trade associations led to a mixed response, leaving many stores open day-long and others opening for business as usual in the second half of the day. Even Purti Group, a network of stores owned and operated by Nitin Gadkari were open for business, ignoring the call for bandh. Gadkari is the president of BJP, the key party currently organizing opposition to retail reform.

The Hindu, another widely circulated newspaper in India, claimed the opposition’s call for a nationwide shutdown on 1 December 2011, in protest of retail reform received a mixed response. Some states had strong support, while most did not. Even in states where opposition political parties are in power, many ignored the call for the shutdown. In Gujarat, Bihar, Delhi, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab and Assam the call evoked a partial response. While a number of wholesale markets observed the shutdown, the newspaper claimed a majority of kirana stores and neighborhood small shops — for whom apparently the trade bandh had been called — remained open, ignoring the shutdown call. Conflicting claims were made by the organizers of the nationwide shutdown. Contrary to eyewitness reports, one Trader union’s secretary general claimed traders across the country participated wholeheartedly in the strike.

The political parties opposing the retail reforms physically disrupted and forced India’s parliament to adjourn again on Friday 2 December 2011. The Indian government refused to cave in, in its attempt to convince through dialogue that retail reforms are necessary to protect the farmers and consumers. Indian parliament has been dysfunctional for the entire week of November 28 2011 over the opposition to retail reforms.

Support for retail reforms

In a pan-Indian survey conducted over the weekend of 3 December 2011, overwhelming majority of consumers and farmers in and around ten major cities across the country support the retail reforms. Over 90 per cent of consumers said FDI in retail will bring down prices and offer a wider choice of goods. Nearly 78 per cent of farmers said they will get better prices for their produce from multi-format stores. Over 75 per cent of the traders claimed their marketing resources will continue to be needed to push sales through multiple channels, but they may have to accept lower margins for greater volumes.

Farmer groups

Various farmer associations in India have announced their support for the retail reforms. For example:

• Shriram Gadhve of All India Vegetable Growers Association (AIVGA) claims his organization supports retail reform. He claimed that currently, it is the middlemen commission agents who benefit at the cost of farmers. He urged that the retail reform must focus on rural areas and that farmers receive benefits. Gadhve claimed, “A better cold storage would help since this could help prevent the existing loss of 34% of fruits and vegetables due to inefficient systems in place.” AIVGA operates in nine states including Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Bihar, Chattisgarh, Punjab and Haryana with 2,200 farmer outfits as its members.
• Bharat Krishak Samaj, a farmer association with more than 75,000 members says it supports retail reform. Ajay Vir Jakhar, the chairman of Bharat Krishak Samaj, claimed a monopoly exists between the private guilds of middlemen, commission agents at the sabzi mandis (India’s wholesale markets for vegetables and farm produce) and the small shopkeepers in the unorganized retail market. Given the perishable nature of food like fruit and vegetables, without the option of safe and reliable cold storage, the farmer is compelled to sell his crop at whatever price he can get. He cannot wait for a better price and is thus exploited by the current monopoly of middlemen. Jakhar asked that the government make it mandatory for organized retailers to buy 75% of their produce directly from farmers, bypassing the middlemen monopoly and India’s sabzi mandi auction system.
• Consortium of Indian Farmers Associations (CIFA) announced its support for retail reform. Chengal Reddy, secretary general of CIFA claimed retail reform could do lots for Indian farmers. Reddy commented, “India has 600 million farmers, 1,200 million consumers and 5 million traders. I fail to understand why political parties are taking an anti-farmer stand and worried about half a million brokers and small shopkeepers.” CIFA mainly operates in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu; but has a growing members from rest of India, including Shetkari Sanghatana in Maharashtra, Rajasthan Kisan Union and Himachal Farmer Organisations.
• Prakash Thakur, the chairman of the People for Environment Horticulture & Livelihood of Himachal Pradesh, announcing his support for retail reforms claimed FDI is expected to roll out produce storage centers that will increase market access, reduce the number of middlemen and enhance returns to farmers. Highly perishable fruits like cherry, apricot, peaches and plums have a huge demand but are unable to tap the market fully because of lack of cold storage and transport infrastructure. Sales will boost with the opening up of retail. Even though India is the second-largest producer of fruits and vegetables in the world, its storage infrastructure is grossly inadequate, claimed Thakur.
• Sharad Joshi, founder of Shetkari Sangathana (farmers association), has announced his support for retail reforms. Joshi claims FDI will help the farm sector improve critical infrastructure and integrate farmer-consumer relationship. Today, the existing retail has not been able to supply fresh vegetables to the consumers because they have not invested in the backward integration. When the farmers’ produce reaches the end consumer directly, the farmers will naturally be benefited. Joshi feels retail reform is just a first step of needed agricultural reforms in India, and that the government should pursue additional reforms.

Suryamurthy, in an article in The Telegraph, claims farmer groups across India do not support status quo and seek retail reforms, because with the current retail system the farmer is being exploited. For example, the article claims:

• Indian farmers get only one third of the price consumers pay for food staples, the rest is taken as commissions and markups by middlemen and shopkeepers
• For perishable horticulture produce, average price farmers receive is barely 12 to 15% of the final price consumer pays
• Indian potato farmers sell their crop for Rs. 2 to 3 a kilogram, while the Indian consumer buys the same potato for Rs. 12 to 20 a kilogram.

Economists and entrepreneurs

Many business groups in India are welcoming the transformation of a long-protected sector that has left Indian shoppers bereft of the scale and variety of their counterparts in more developed markets.

B. Muthuraman, the president of the Confederation of Indian Industry, claimed the retail reform would open enormous opportunities and lead to much-needed investment in cold chain, warehousing and contract farming.

Organized retailers will reduce waste by improving logistics, creating cold storage to prevent food spoilage, improve hygiene and product safety, reduce counterfeit trade and tax evasion on expensive item purchases, and create dependable supply chains for secure supply of food staples, fruits and vegetables. They will increase choice and reduce India’s rampant inflation by reducing waste, spoilage and cutting out middlemen. Fresh investment in organized retail, the supporters of retail reform claim will generate 10 million new jobs by 2014, about five to six million of them in logistics alone.

Organized retail will offer the small Indian farmer more competing venues to sell his or her products, and increase income from less spoilage and waste. A Food and Agricultural Organization report claims that currently, in India, the small farmer faces significant losses post-harvest at the farm and because of poor roads, inadequate storage technologies, inefficient supply chains and farmer’s inability to bring the produce into retail markets dominated by small shopkeepers. These experts claim India’s post-harvest losses to exceed 25%, on average, every year for each farmer.

Unlike the current monopoly of middlemen buyer, retail reforms offer farmers access to more buyers from organized retail. More buyers will compete for farmers produce leading to better support for farmers and to better bids. With less spoilage of staples and agricultural produce, global retail companies can find and provide additional markets to Indian farmers. Walmart, since its arrival in India’s wholesale retail market, already sources and exports about $1 billion worth of Indian goods for its global customers.

Not only do these losses reduce food security in India, the study claims that poor farmers and others loose income because of the waste and inefficient retail. Over US$50 billion of additional income can become available to Indian farmers by preventing post-harvest farm losses, improving transport, proper storage and retail. Organized retail is also expected to initiate infrastructure development creating millions of rural and urban jobs for India’s growing population. One study claims that if these post-harvest food staple losses could be eliminated with better infrastructure and retail network in India, enough food would be saved every year to feed 70 to 100 million people over the year.

Supporters of retail reform, The Economist claims, say it will increase competition and quality while reducing prices helping to reduce India’s rampant inflation that is close to the double digits. These supporters claim that unorganized small shopkeepers will continue to exist alongside large organized supermarkets, because for many Indians they will remain the most accessible and most convenient place to shop.

Chief Ministers of Indian states

Supporters of retail reform who have voiced the need to promote organized retail include Chief Ministers of several states of India, several belonging to political parties that have no affiliation with Congress-led central government of India. The list includes the Chief Ministers of Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Gujarat. In a report submitted earlier in 2011, these Chief Ministers urged the Prime Minister to prioritize reforms to help promote organized retail, shorten the retail path from farm to consumer, allow organized retail to buy direct from farmers at remunerative produce prices, and reduce farm to retail costs. Similarly, the Chief Minister of Delhi has come out in support of the retail reform, as have the Chief Ministers of the two farming states of Haryana and Punjab in north India. The Chief Ministers of Haryana and Punjab claim that the announced retail reforms will immensely benefit farmers in their states.

The Chief Minister of the state of Maharashtra – the state with the highest GDP in India and home to its financial capital Mumbai – has also welcomed the retail reform.

Tarun Gogoi, the Chief Minister of Assam, an eastern state in India, announcing his support to the retail reform, claimed “this will go a long way in bringing about a sea change in rural economy. The decision will boost agriculture and allied sectors, manufacturing, logistics, integrated cold chains, refrigerated transportation and food processing facilities in a big way.” Criticising the BJP-organized opposition, Gogoi claimed that these parties who had just a few years ago dubbed opening up retail as good for India, are now singing a different tune.

Current supermarkets

Existing Indian retail firms such as Spencer’s, Foodworld Supermarkets Ltd, Nilgiri’s and ShopRite support retail reform and consider international competition as a blessing in disguise. They expect a flurry of joint ventures with global majors for expansion capital and opportunity to gain expertise in supply chain management. Spencer’s Retail with 200 stores in India, and with retail of fresh vegetables and fruits accounting for 55 per cent of its business claims retail reform to be a win-win situation, as they already procure the farm products directly from the growers without the involvement of middlemen or traders. Spencer’s claims that there is scope for it to expand its footprint in terms of store location as well as procuring farm products. Foodworld, which operates over 60 stores, plans to ramp up its presence to more than 200 locations. It has already tied up with Hong Kong-based Dairy Farm International. With the relaxation in international investments in Indian retail, India’s Foodworld expects its global relationship will only get stronger. Competition and investment in retail will provide more benefits to consumers through lower prices, wider availability and significant improvement in supply chain logistics

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywinl.com

*******

Prabha Sridevan

Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act that determines the order of succession in the case of a Hindu woman who dies intestate should be amended for, it reflects an entrenched system of subjugation of women.

The family that had sent a young woman back to her parents after her husband’s death, surfaced when she died. There was a contest between her mother and the husband’s sister’s sons for her property. The mother lost all the way up to the Supreme Court, which noted that it was a “hard case.”

“What women can expect from Courts… is a qualified degree of equal treatment,” wrote Professor Wendy Williams in “The Equality Crisis: Some Reflections on Culture, Courts, and Feminism,” published in 7 Women’s Rts. L. Rep. 175 (1982), adding that “women’s equality as delivered by Courts can only be an integration into a pre-existing, predominantly male world.”

This is so because, though the courts may be well meaning and earnestly intend to uphold equal rights for women, they can only reflect the shared life experience of individuals. This takes a largely male hue, not only because the judgment-deliverers are predominantly male, but also because society systemically supports male supremacy. And this systemic slant shades the thought processes that lie behind laws too, and the courts apply the laws in their judgments.

The skewed reality in which gender is positioned in the social, political, economic and cultural transactions shows up the fact that law is not gender-based — sometimes it is not even gender-neutral. Gender-neutrality will not be enough if it merely maintains the status quo — which is nothing but the perpetuation of gender discrimination. Women need, and must have, affirmation of their equality.

If enactment of laws was sufficient to protect women, then women in India are on velvet. But reality bites. The law is observed in the breach, or the law is not effectively enforced by the law-enforcement agencies, or judicial redress lies beyond the woman’s horizon, or yet, the evil is seen as an accepted practice. Or women get beaten by “hard cases.”

Look at this particular “hard case,” which is reported in (2009)15 SCC Page 66 Omprakash and Others Vs. Radhacharan and Others. In 1955, Narayani Devi married Deendayal Sharma, who died within three months. Soon she was driven out of her matrimonial home. She lived with her parents, earned a living and died on July 11, 1966. She left behind a substantial estate, but wrote no will. Both her mother and her husband’s family claimed a succession certificate. The Supreme Court considered the scope of Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act and held against the mother.

Section 15(1) says that if a Hindu woman dies without leaving a will, her property will devolve in the following order. The first in the order are her children, children of a predeceased child and her husband. If none of these persons is available, then it will go to the next in line: the heirs of the husband. Standing behind them will be the heirs of the father and the mother. Section 15(2) says that notwithstanding these provisions, if the woman is not survived by a child or the children of a predeceased child, then any property she inherited from her father or mother will go to the father’s heirs, and any property she inherited from her husband or father-in-law will go to the husband’s heirs.

The Supreme Court held that Section 15(1) lays down the ordinary rule of succession; Section 15(2)(a) only carves out an exception to Section 15(1). It observed that the law is silent on a Hindu woman’s self-acquired property, and such property cannot be considered as property inherited from her parents. The court said: “This is a hard case… But then only because a case appears to be hard would not lead us to invoke different interpretation of a statutory provision, which is otherwise impermissible. It is now a well settled principle in law that sentiment or sympathy alone would not be a guiding factor in determining the rights of the parties which are otherwise clear and unambiguous.”

In Narayani Devi’s case, the mother’s claim was not based on sympathy or sentiment, but logic and principles of fairness, equity and justice. The Supreme Court, however, found that the law was a hurdle to her claim.

Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee wrote thus in Modern Hindu Law Under Constitution: “Under the provision of Section 15(1) read with sub-section (2) in the absence of children, the order of succession in the case of a female Hindu would vary according to the source of acquisition of property.” He asked why the source of acquisition should be a determinant in the case of a Hindu woman when it is not so in the case of a Hindu man. “Unless we still want to perpetuate in a somewhat different form the old outmoded view that ownership of property cannot be full but must be somewhat limited.”

A mother shares equally with the children and the widow when a son predeceases her. But when a married daughter dies, the mother ranks after the husband’s heirs. This is the law as enacted in 1955-1956. Hindu law as it existed before the Constitution has been the subject of criticism for the glaring inequalities that it perpetuated. But we find lurking inequalities even in subsequent enactments.

Ironically, some of the ancient texts have a more pragmatic and equal approach in such cases. Stridhana, according to some texts, is categorised as technical and non-technical. Non-technical stridhana is that property which is acquired by a woman through her skill and mechanical arts (Vasishta). In the case of a woman who has no issues, the heirs to stridhana are her husband, mother, brother or father (Devala). Aprajaayaa haredbhartaa mata bhrata pitaapi va, says Devalasmrti (A.D. 600-900).

In the 21st edition of Principles of Hindu Law (Mulla), it is observed that Section 15(2) “seem to have been made on the ground that they prevent such property passing into the hands of persons to whom justice would require it should not pass and on the ground that the exceptions are in the interest of the intestate herself.” If the intention of this provision is to prevent property from devolving on persons to whom justice “would require it should not pass,” then the family that had refused to take care of Narayani should not have got anything.

In India those who own property do not always write a will. Narayani did not. She did not know the law of succession. She certainly would not have wanted her husband’s sister’s children to grab her earnings. If her spirit is floating around, it must be a very unhappy one. In India if a woman loses her husband because of death, desertion or divorce, there is a high probability that she will come to be with her parents. In the present day, many women have self-acquired property that they have earned because of their parents’ support. These are the ground realities.

Section 15 should be amended. The order of succession should be altered. In addition to “inheritance,” other modes of acquisition from parents or because of parents could be added.

Justice Bhattacharjee’s criticism of Section 15 has been referred to above. Decades after his book was written, the injustice continues. Neither biological nor social differences shall corrupt the ideal of equality or the reality of equality. In this case the law views the man’s estate and the woman’s estate through different spectacles: her autonomy over her property is less complete than his. How else can one explain the injustice? There are many more such cases. The law should not stand in the way of justice.

Whether the Supreme Court could or should have addressed the gender discrimination, and seen that the apparent “hardness” of the case was only the outer layer of an entrenched system of subjugation of women, and unpeeled the layers, are questions that need not be argued now.

Professor Williams’ article says: “But to the extent the law of the public world must be reconstructed to reflect the needs and values of both sexes change must be sought from legislatures rather than courts. And women whose separate experience has not been adequately registered… are the ones who must seek the change.” It is time that this law is made gender-balanced.

(Prabha Sridevan, a former Judge of the Madras High Court, is Chairperson, Intellectual Property Appellate Board.)

Courtesy: The Hindu

Vidya Subrahmaniam

A court judgment delivered earlier in 2011 holds important lessons for those engaged in investigating and fighting terrorism.

Questioning the methods of terror investigation is always a challenge because it is so easily seen as defending the enemies of the nation. The exercise is monumentally difficult after a benumbing bomb attack — especially if it has been judged to be the work of a home-grown Islamist organisation.

The raging anger at this time is in fact against too little, too careful policing, with voices clamouring for instant punishment to the perpetrators. And should the police, under pressure, go off beam and name a few incorrect names and round up a few misidentified suspects, the wrong is seen, not as a wrong, but, in a perverted sort of way, as a balancing act, a compensation for the injustice done to the terror victims. Even from a liberal point this can appear as unavoidable collateral damage suffered in the larger battle against terrorism.

But anguished demands for action and lashing out at imagined culprits can be horribly, embarrassingly off the mark, as the Anders Breivik shootings so chillingly demonstrated. The automatic assumption after the Oslo killings was that Islamists were behind it. Yet Breivik turned out to be insanely anti-Muslim. Imagine the decibel levels of anti-Muslim voices had Breivik not been found out as soon as he was. Within hours of the Oslo outrage, the Wall Street Journal ran a biting editorial (since revised) blaming it on Islamist terrorists: The jihadists, the leader said, had extracted a “terrible price” because of Norway’s commitment to “freedom of speech and conscience” and “every other freedom that still defines the West.” The WSJ leader went beyond the terror attack and became an ideological tirade against a faith seen to be in a classic clash against liberal Western values.

Back in India, there was the usual rush of slanted commentaries after the July 13, 2011 serial bombings in Mumbai. Even if the outrage was masterminded by the Indian Mujahideen (IM) or some other Islamist organisation — as indicated by the Union Home Minister — there was little justification for the offensive anti-Muslim tone in the post-blasts public conversation. A celebrity columnist blamed vote bank compulsions for the government’s failure to crush domestic terrorism. The sub-text: The investigating agencies needed to be ruthless in picking up Muslim suspects. On social networking sites, the language was coarser with not a few demanding saturation combing of Muslim neighbourhoods. Reporters freely identified alleged IM terrorists even as one hate-spewing newspaper article demanded disenfranchisement of Muslims for their alleged role in commissioning terror acts.

The Oslo shootings reinforced a point that was self-evident and yet seemed to require re-stating every time a bomb blast shattered the peace anywhere in India. Terror wears the mask of religion and this religion can be Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism or something else. From Nathuram Godse in 1948 to Breivik today, we have seen terrorists claiming affinity to a host of faiths and ideologies. Nonetheless, Muslims alone have been made to feel that they have somehow to answer for the perverted acts of their alleged co-religionists. When Muslim boys are picked up and shown off as terrorists, there is rarely any interrogation of the police accounts despite their dreary sameness.

Over the past many years, we have become habituated to seeing young Muslim men, their faces covered, being paraded at press conferences. Each of these has been a trophy moment for the police and a spectacular newsbreak for the press. What happens when the same men are later released because the prosecution could not produce an iota of evidence?

Indeed, the spate of acquittals in many of the terror cases ought to induce some rethinking on policing methods and the rationality of picking up suspects just to be able to show quick, dramatic results. Whether it is Godhra 2002, the Delhi blasts of 2005 and 2008, the Mumbai train attacks of 2006, Mecca Masjid cases of 2007 or men and boys routinely picked up and charged with terrorism, the evidence presented in the courts has proved over and over to be wafer thin.

Maulana Umarji was not only the key conspirator in the Godhra train burning, but, according to then media reportage, he actively incited the mob. In February 2011, he was acquitted along with 63 others. As Jyoti Punwani noted in The Hindu, the Maulana had in fact played the opposite role, expressing “regret on behalf of his community, publicly and repeatedly.”

Dozens of boys arbitrarily picked up by the Andhra Pradesh police and chargesheeted in the Mecca Masjid blasts have since been honourably acquitted and are currently fighting to be compensated for the slur cast on them. Mohammad Salman, an alleged IM operative, whom the police recently linked to the July 13, 2011 Mumbai bombings, citing his interrogation report in the 2008 Delhi blasts case, turned out to have been discharged in that case. When the case came up in court, the seizure memos of the Uttar Pradesh police and the Delhi police did not match; the police showed his age as 27 when his parents were married in 1990 and his school certificate showed his birth year as 1992.

The Hindu came across several cases of blatant falsification of evidence against alleged terrorists. The Lucknow police’s case against Kolkata  resident Aziz-ur-Rahman was that on June 22, 2007, he and four others arrived in Lucknow armed with huge amounts of RDX and other explosives. On June 23 — after the Lucknow police arrested two of them — Rahman dumped the explosives in a hollow behind the city’s Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences and returned to  Kolkata. When defence counsel Mohammad Shoaib took up the case, he came across a glaring discrepancy. On June 23, 2007, Rahman was in the custody of the Jadavpur police facing a theft charge — a fact established by his production the same day before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Alipore) J. Koley. But because Rahman was also charged under Section 399 (dacoity) in another case, Mr. Koley, in his order dated June 22, 2007, granted his custody to the West Bengal CID.

The most devastating blow to the prosecution case was dealt on February 2 this year by Delhi (Dwarka courts) Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhat. Mr. Bhat’s judgment, delivered with rapier sharp wit and sarcasm, is a testament on the functioning of the Delhi’s police’s anti-terrorism wing, and ought to be compulsory reading for all those training to be investigators. If nothing else, they would learn the art of credible fabrication.

The prosecution case: At around midnight on June 27, 2005, an elite team led by anti-terrorism officer Ravinder Tyagi (the CBI asked for his punishment in another fabricated case), staged an encounter on the Gurgaon-Delhi Road which resulted in the capture of four alleged ISI agents and Kashmiri terrorists, Saqib Rahman alias Masood, Nazir Ahmad Sofi, Gulam Moinuddin Dar and Bashir Ahmed Shah. Mr.Tyagi had secret information that preparatory to a massive bomb attack in the Capital, the terrorists, carrying huge amounts of arms and ammunition, would be reaching Delhi from Gurgaon in a Tata Indica car. The raiding party, travelling in two vehicles, a Swaraj Mazda and a Maruti Gypsy, “gave chase to the Tata Indica” and blocked it from both ends. Terrorist Masood came out of the car and fired two rounds on the police party. Mr. Tyagi and his men “overpowered the terrorists,” including terrorist Dar who was about to lob a hand grenade.

In his judgment, Mr. Bhat tore the police version to shreds. The judge found it “shocking and unbelievable” that Mr. Tyagi took his own time to act on the “secret information” and did not pass it on to his superiors. “What if the terrorists had struck?” he asked, concluding that either “there was no information” or Mr. Tyagi had “ulterior” motives. About the policemen being able to easily disarm the terrorists, he said: “Such kind of imaginary bravery is seen only in Bollywood… Why would terrorists armed with AK 56 and hand grenades surrender to the police?… The encounter should have been fierce. Nothing like this happened which shows it (encounter) is totally imaginary and conceived by the police to implicate the accused in a false case.”

The Judge pointed out a host of other errors and contradictions — the site plan was falsified, the recoveries were planted, the terrorist vehicle, claimed by the police to have been stolen in May 2003, was registered only in July 2003. The prosecution case finally collapsed after the defence obtained the log book of the two police vehicles through Right to Information applications. The log book entries showed that neither the Swaraj Mazda nor the Gypsy went to the encounter spot on the night of June 27, 2005.

In conclusion the judge, who recommended punishment to Mr. Tyagi and his team, said: “It is difficult to take it (the stage-managed encounter) out of mind. These four police officers have brought utter shame and disrepute to the whole Delhi Police Force. In my opinion, there cannot be any more serious or grave crime than a police officer framing an innocent citizen in a false criminal case … It is not only unethical but also illegal for an investigating agency to resort to concoction, padding, fabrication of evidence — all serious offences under the law even to bring a known criminal to justice.”

Wise words that must be paid heed to by every policeman and every citizen who feel that the means are unimportant when the fight is against terrorism.

Dr. Justice AR. Lakshmanan

Section 15 should be amended, so that in case a female Hindu dies intestate leaving her self-acquired property with no heirs, as mentioned in Clause ‘a’ of Section 15, the property should devolve on her husband’s heirs and also on the heirs of her paternal side.

This refers to the article “A law that thwarts justice” (The Hindu, June 27, 2011) by Ms. Prabha Sridevan, former Judge of the Madras High Court. I have analysed it and am in agreement with the views expressed by the author for my own reasons.

As Chairman of the Law Commission of India, I took up for consideration the necessity of amending Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which deals with the general rules of Succession in the case of female Hindus dying intestate — not having made a will before one dies — in view of the vast societal changes that have taken place.

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 is part of the Hindu Code which includes the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956.

The Hindu Succession Act made a revolutionary change in the law for female Hindus. For the first time, a Hindu female could become an absolute owner of property. She could inherit equally with a male counterpart and a widow was also given importance regarding the succession of her husband’s property as also to her father’s property. The Act was amended in 2005 to provide that the daughter of a co-parcener in a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara Law shall, by birth, become a co-parcener in her own right in the same manner as the son, having the same rights and liabilities in respect of the said property as that of a son.

Scheme of succession

Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act propounds a definite and uniform scheme of succession to the property of a female Hindu who dies intestate. There are also rules set out in Section 16 of the Act which provides for the order of succession and the manner of distribution among heirs of a female Hindu.

Source of acquisition

The group of heirs of the female Hindu dying intestate is described in 5 categories as ‘a’ to ‘e’ of Section 15 (1) which is illustrated as under:

In a case where she dies intestate leaving property, her property will firstly devolve upon her sons and daughters so also the husband. The children of any pre-deceased son or daughter are also included in the first category of heirs of a female Hindu;

In case she does not have any heir as referred to above, i.e., sons, daughters and husband including children of any pre-deceased sons or daughters (as per clause ‘a’) living at the time of her death, then the next heirs will be the heirs of the husband;

Thirdly, if there are no heirs of the husband, the property would devolve upon the mother and father;

Fourthly, if the mother and father are not alive, then the property would devolve upon the heirs of the father which means brother, sister, etc;

The last and the fifth category is the heirs of the mother upon whom the property of the female Hindu will devolve if in the absence of any heirs falling in the four preceding categories.

This is the general rule of succession, but the Section also provides for two exceptions which are stated in Sub-Section (2). Accordingly, if a female dies without leaving any issue, then the property inherited by her from her father or mother will not devolve according to the rules laid down in the five entries as stated earlier, but upon the heirs of father. And secondly, in respect of the property inherited by her from her husband or father-in-law, the same will devolve not according to the general rule, but upon the heirs of the husband.

The Hindu Succession Bill, 1954, as originally introduced in the Rajya Sabha, did not contain any clause corresponding to Sub-Section (2) of Section 15. It came to be incorporated on the recommendations of the Joint Committee of the two Houses of Parliament. The intent of the legislature is clear that the property, if it originally belonged to the parents of the deceased female, should go to the legal heirs of the father.

So also under Clause (b) of Sub Section (2) of Section 15, the property inherited by a female Hindu from her husband or her father-in-law shall also under similar circumstances, devolve upon the heirs of the husband. It is the source from which the property was inherited by the female, which is more important for the purpose of devolution of her property. The fact that a female Hindu originally had a limited right and after acquiring the full right, would not, in any way, alter the rules of succession given in Sub Section (2) of Section 15.

The 174{+t}{+h} Report of the Law Commission also examined the subject of “Property Rights of Women; Proposed Reforms under the Hindu Law” and had noted that the rules of devolution of the property of a female who dies intestate reflects patriarchal assumptions.

The basis of inheritance of a female Hindu’s property who dies intestate would thus be the SOURCE from which such female Hindu came into the possession of the property and the manner of inheritance which would decide the manner of devolution.

The term ‘property’ though not specified in this Section means property of the deceased heritable under the Act. It includes both movable and immovable property owned and acquired by her by inheritance or by devise or at a partition or by gift or by her skill or exertion or by purchase or prescription. This Section does not differentiate between the property inherited and self-acquired property of a Hindu female; it only prescribes that if a property is inherited from husband or father-in-law, it would go to her husband’s heirs and if the property is inherited from her father or mother, in that case, the property would not go to her husband’s, but to the heirs of the father and mother.

This is very aptly illustrated by the following illustration:- A married Hindu female dies intestate leaving the property which is her self-acquired property. She has no issue and was a widow at the time of her death. As per the present position of law, her property would devolve in the second category, i.e., to her husband’s heirs. Thus, in a case where the mother of her husband is alive, her whole property would devolve on her mother-in-law. If the mother-in-law is also not alive, it would devolve as per the rules laid down in case of a male Hindu dying intestate, i.e., if the father of her deceased husband is alive, the next to inherit will be her father-in-law and if in the third category, the father-in-law is also not alive, then her property would devolve on the brother and sister of the deceased husband.

Thus, in the case of the self-acquired property of a Hindu married female dying intestate, her property devolves on her husband’s heirs. Her paternal and material heirs do not inherit, but the distant relations of her husband would inherit as per the husband’s heirs.

The case for change

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was enacted when, in the structure of the Hindu society, women hardly went out to work. There has been a vast change in the social scene in the past few years and women have made progress in all spheres. The consequence is that women are owning property earned by their own skill. These situations were not foreseen by the legislators.

If that is so, what is the impact of these socio-economic changes? Do they warrant any change in the law of succession in relation to the property of a female Hindu dying intestate? What is the fallout of a gradual disintegration of the joint Hindu family and the emergence of nuclear families as a unit of society over the years in the context of law of succession governing the issue at hand?

A fundamental tenet of the law of succession has been the proximity of relation in which a Successor stands to the person who originally held the property that may be the subject matter of inheritance in a given case. The fact that women have been given the right to inherit from her parental side also assumes relevance in the present context. These developments and changes lead to competing arguments and approaches that may be taken in re-defining the law of succession in case of a female Hindu dying intestate. Thus, three alternative options emerge for consideration, namely:

1. Self-acquired property of a female Hindu dying intestate should devolve first upon her heirs from the natal family.

2. Self-acquired property of a female Hindu dying intestate should devolve equally upon the heirs of her husband and the heirs from her natal family.

3. Self-acquired property of a female Hindu dying intestate should devolve first upon the heirs of her husband.

The third option may be taken first as this can be disposed of summarily. The option essentially means continuation of the status quo. We have seen earlier that socio-economic changes warrant corresponding changes in the law as well.

We may now take up the first option. The protagonists of this approach contend that the general order of succession reflects a gender bias. It will be relevant to refer to a passage in Pradhan Saxena – Succession Laws and Gender Justice in Re-defining Family Law in India by Archana Parasar, Amit Dhanda, New Delhi.

The supporters of the said approach contend that the joint family system has slowly eroded and that an increasing number of nuclear and semi-nuclear families have replaced the traditional Mitakshara Hindu joint family system. Women are also becoming more economically independent. With the growth of the nuclear family, a married woman’s dependency on her natal family and continued closeness to it is much greater today even if it was not so earlier. Most married women would prefer that their parents should be the more preferred heirs to inherit her property if her children and husband are not alive. She would also prefer that her sister and brother have a better right to inherit her property than her brother-in-law and sister-in-law.

Accordingly, it is urged that Section 15(1) should be modified to ensure that the general order of succession does not place a woman’s husband’s heirs above those who belong to her natal family like her father and mother and thereafter, her brother and sister. It is contended that when a man dies intestate, his wife’s relatives do not even figure in the order of succession despite the manner in which he may have acquired the property. In view of this, parity is sought in the case of a female by applying the same rules as applicable to male’s property.

Accordingly, it is suggested that it would be better to amend Section 15(1) to specify the general rules of devolution, which will apply not only to self-acquired property by a woman, but also to other property acquired through her family, gifts, etc. The only proviso which would then be needed would be the property that a woman acquires from her husband’s family.

The second option in this regard is that the property of a female Hindu dying intestate devolves upon the heirs depending upon the source from which, the said property was acquired by her, the self-acquired property of such female be simultaneously inherited by her heirs both from the husband family as well as the natal family in equal share. The fact remains that in spite of her closeness to and dependence on her natal family, her relations with her husband’s family are not separated and uprooted in entirety. She continues to be a member of her husband’s family, getting support from it in all walks of life. One cannot afford to ignore the ground realities in this regard. The social ethos and the mores of our patriarchal system demand that the existing system should not be totally reversed as claimed by the protagonists of the first option. Lest, there may be social and family tensions which may not be in the overall interest of the family as a whole and as such, ought to be avoided. In any case, it is open to the female Hindu to bequeath her property the way she likes by executing a Will.

Conclusions

In the present scenario, when amendments are made to the effect that women have been entitled to inherit property from her parental side as well as from husband’s side, it will be quite justified if equal right is given to her parental heirs along with her husband’s heirs to inherit her property.

It is, therefore, proposed that in order to bring about a balance, Section 15 should be amended, so that in case a female Hindu dies intestate leaving her self-acquired property with no heirs, as mentioned in Clause ‘a’ of Section 15, the property should devolve on her husband’s heirs and also on the heirs of her paternal side.

If this amendment is brought about, the effect will be as under:

A married Hindu female dies intestate leaving self-acquired property at the time of her death, the only surviving relatives being her mother-in-law (L) and her mother (M).

Pre-Amendment

As per the present law, her property would devolve entirely on ‘L’ and ‘M’ will not get anything from her property.

Post Amendment

By the proposed amendment, her mother-in-law and mother should equally inherit her self-acquired property.

A married Hindu female dies intestate leaving self-acquired property and she has no heirs as per Clause ‘a’ of the Schedule, the only surviving relatives are her husband’s brother and sister (BL & SL) and her own brother and sister (B&S).

Pre-Amendment

As per the present law, her property would normally devolve upon ‘BL’ and ‘SL’. ‘B’ and ‘S’ do not inherit anything from her in this property.

Post Amendment

By the proposed amendment, her own brother and sister should equally inherit along with her brother-in-law and sister-in-law.

The above amendment, suggested by me as Chairman of 18{+t}{+h} Law Commission as early as in June 2008 in the public interest, is still pending with the Union Law Ministry.

(The writer is a former Judge of the Supreme Court of India and former Chairman, Law Commission of India. His email id is jusarlakshmanan@gmail.com)

Courtesy: The Hindu

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

******

Anjana

The legality of mercy killing or euthanasia and its ethical and moral sides have been hotly discussed and debated in the Indian media and society for the last week or so.

Mercy killing is defined as the killing of one person by another. The victim of mercy killing is normally in the vegetable state or has an injury or illness that cannot be cured, as it is usually in its last stage. The victim experiences immensely painful last days just before his or her death.

For a voluntary case of mercy killing to take place, the killer must first obtain the consent of the victim, but there have been recorded cases of mercy killing against the wishes of the victim as well. This is known as involuntary mercy killing. The victim of a mercy killing dies a painless death after suffering an incurable ailment or serious injury. The term euthanasia, which means mercy killing, is derived from the Greek word for ‘good death’. Euthanasia has been legalised in some Western countries but is still considered to be an unethical practice in the Third World.

Also known as assisted suicide and mercy death, euthanasia is the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit.

It is illegal in India and most countries of the world. Only ten odd countries have legalised the practice of mercy killing. Some social activists claim that euthanasia and assisted suicide are government mandated suffering for the terminally ill persons.

The DoctorNDTV.com survey on this issue has shown a mixed response. More than half the respondents feel that the decision should not be left to the doctors or the next of kin, while one third support the doctors / relatives right to take this decision. Two-thirds agree that euthanasia is the same as mercy killing. Though 71 per cent people feel that legal advice is necessary before taking a decision, most people (>88 per cent) feel that it may be misused in India.

The following are the pros and cons for allowing euthanasia.

Pros:

• It provides a way to relieve extreme pain
• It provides a way of relief when a person’s quality of life is low
• Frees up medical funds to help other people
• It is another case of freedom of choice

Cons:

• Euthanasia devalues human life
• Euthanasia can become a means of health care cost containment
• Physicians and other medical care people will get involved in directly causing death
• There is a ‘slippery slope’ effect that will occur.
• Stances, views and opinions on euthanasia vary greatly; it is called murderous by some and merciful by others. Such controversy arises generally from the serious social, cultural and moral issues attached to the subject.

A Matter of Life and Death – March 7^th 2011

Bringing the issue into the limelight has been the case of Aruna Shanbaug, who has been in a vegetative state of 37 years. A nurse at Mumbai’s KEM hospital in 1973, she was sexually assaulted while working and the incident left her in a vegetative state, relying on life support systems since the incident.

On Monday the 7^th of March 2011, the Indian Supreme Court ruled that passive euthanasia was legal in India and could be practiced in special circumstances, but struck down any hopes of active euthanasia in the country. The Supreme Court was responding to an appeal filed by a friend of Shanbaug. The Supreme Court stated that the plea from the friend was not a valid reason enough to grant euthanasia to the ex-nurse. The apex court also stated that if the hospital taking care of Shanbaug had filed a similar appeal, it would carry more weight and authenticity than the one currently filed. One of the reasons given by the court in rejecting the appeal was that the hospital and the nurses taking care of Aruna Shanbaug were opposed to euthanasia of the patient.

India has given the green light for passive euthanasia, a decision seen as welcome and progressive move by many doctors across the country. Passive euthanasia is administering euthanasia by removing the life support extended to a patient in vegetative condition. This is in contrast to active euthanasia, where an active chemical or agent is injected or delivered into the body of a patient in vegetative condition. The apex court observed that the country might not be ready for such radical and drastic ruling. The court stated that the only way active euthanasia could be legalised is if the Indian Parliament passed a law to that effect.

A Bench of Justices Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Misra, however, did not accept the plea of Pinky Viranai seeking permission to withdraw life support to her friend.  Writing the judgment, Justice Katju said that there was no statutory provision in our country as to the legal procedure for withdrawing life support to a person in PVS or who is otherwise incompetent to take a decision. He agreed that passive euthanasia should be permitted in our country in certain situations.

The Bench pointed out that in the absence of a law against sexual harassment at work places, the Supreme Court in the Visakha case had laid down guidelines. Similarly he claimed that he was now laying down the law in this connection which will continue to be the law until Parliament makes a law on the subject. According to him, a decision has to be taken to discontinue life support [to a patient in PVS] either by the parents or the spouse or other close relatives, or in the absence of any of them, such a decision can be taken even by a person or a body of persons acting as a next friend. It can also be taken by the doctors attending the patient. However, the decision should be taken bona fide in the best interest of the patient.

The Bench believes that if they leave it solely to the patient’s relatives or to the doctors or the next friend to decide whether to withdraw life support to an incompetent person, there is always a risk in our country that this may be misused by some unscrupulous persons who wish to inherit or otherwise grab the property of the patient. Considering the low ethical levels prevailing in our society today and the rampant commercialisation and corruption, they cannot rule out the possibility that unscrupulous persons with the help of some unscrupulous doctors may fabricate material to show that it is a terminal case with no chance of recovery.”

In the present case, the Bench declared that Aruna Shanbaug’s parents are dead and other close relatives had not been interested in her ever since she had the unfortunate assault on her. It is the KEM Hospital staff, who has been amazingly caring for her day and night for so many long years, who really are her next friends, and not Ms. Pinky Virani, who has only visited her on a few occasions and written a book on her. Hence it is for the KEM Hospital staff to take that decision. The KEM hospital staff has clearly expressed their wish that Aruna Shanbaug should be allowed to live.

The nurses and doctors at the hospital were jubilant over the Supreme Court ruling. A few nurses at the hospital remarked to the media that the ruling was the best women’s day gift the top court could have given them. The nurses even went on to question the authenticity of Ms. Pinky Virani, Shanbaug’s friend who appealed to the Supreme Court to grant euthanasia. The nurses at KEM hospital claimed that Shanbaug was like family to them. They claimed that Shanbaug was not completely vegetative and that she responded to touch and food. Nurses were of the opinion that Ms. Virani, who had not taken care of Shanbaug through the 37 years of being comatose had no right to ask for the withdrawal of life support systems.

“India is not mature enough to handle euthanasia,” senior Bangalore-based cardiologist Devi Prasad Shetty said while expressing his happiness over the verdict on a mercy killing plea on behalf of 60-year-old Aruna Shanbaug. Dr. Shetty’s view was shared by Chief Cardiologist of Bombay Hospital B.K. Goyal, who said euthanasia is an emotional issue which can be “misused.”

There was joy among Aruna’s former colleagues and nurses in local KEM hospital who have been tending to her. Nurses distributed sweets at the hospital after the Supreme Court ruling.

While comparing euthanasia with MTP, senior doctor Goyal said that in such a case they should ensure the safety of people at large because when in India, MTP is allowed, it was misused right and left. In the same way, he feels euthanasia can be misused too.

Dr. Shetty said that financial constraints and inability to look after cannot be the reason to ask someone to terminate life. This is unacceptable.

He believes that this country is not mature enough to handle this major legal issue. It is not possible.

March 9th 2011

No parent would like to see their children killed, even if disabled, but watching the nightmarish existence of their physically challenged sons has prompted a couple from Bihar to seek euthanasia from them. Mukesh Kumar, a marginal farmer from Ratwada village of Muzaffarpur district filed a mercy death plea for his sons, Nitin, 15, and Anshu, 13, both living with muscular dystrophy (MD), a terminal and degenerative condition that has crippled the two brothers.

Muscular dystrophy is not just a disability, but a genetic and inherited disorder that gradually deteriorates killing muscle cells and tissues until the patient finally dies.

According to the parents, the boys were born healthy and were like normal children till age two when they got the muscular disorder. The boys cannot talk or stand on their feet and are completely dependent on their parents. They are also paralysed below their chests and are unable to move or eat without assistance.

Although, MD has no cure, some treatments are available in US. However, these are expensive, something to the tune of over Rs. 30 lakhs which are far beyond the poor farmer means.

The financial resources of the couple have been exhausted completely. They have sold off their few valuables and ancestral land to meet the expenses for their sons’ medical treatment.

Mukesh stated that they have been pleading for their mercy killing because we cannot continue costly medical treatment, which anyway will not cure them, only prolong their unhappy lives. He believes that the state government should either grant permission or provide us help for treatment.

Watching the discomfort, torturous pain, indignity and utter helplessness of the two sons virtually turn into vegetables over the last 10 years is distressing for the parents.

With doctors giving up hope, the parents feel death is the only solution that can put an end to the tyranny of their fate.

The dignity of life and the right to live without pain and discomfort are the major issues in the limelight. If active euthanasia is implemented in India, there is a considerable chance that it could be misused, especially in areas that are rural and withdrawn from the mainstream. The Supreme Court seems to have made a sensible decision on the issue. May be, India will have to wait a few more years until the nation is ready for legal active euthanasia.

Dream Dare Win

www.jeywin.com

*****

New York becomes the sixth state where gay couples can wed, doubling the number of Americans living in a state with legal gay marriage.

After days of contentious negotiations and last-minute reversals by two Republican senators, New York became the sixth and largest state in the U.S. to legalize gay marriage, breathing life into the national gay rights movement that had stalled over a nearly identical bill two years ago.

Pending any court challenges, legal gay marriages can begin in New York by late July, 2011 after Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed his bill into law just before midnight on 24.06.2011.

At New York City’s Stonewall Inn, the Greenwich Village pub that spawned the gay rights movement on a June night in 1969, Scott Redstone watched New York sign the historic same-sex marriage law with his partner of 29 years, and popped the question.

“I said, ‘Will you marry me?’ And he said, ‘Of course!’” Redstone said he and Steven Knittweis walked home to pop open a bottle of champagne.

New York becomes the sixth state where gay couples can wed, doubling the number of Americans living in a state with legal gay marriage.

“That’s certainly going to have a ripple effect across the nation,” said Ross Levi, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda. “It’s truly a historic night for love, our families, and democracy won.”

“We made a powerful statement,” Mr. Cuomo said. “This state is at its finest when it is a beacon of social justice.”

The leading opponent, Democratic Sen. Ruben Diaz, was given only a few minutes to state his case during the Senate debate.

“God, not Albany, settled the issue of marriage a long time ago,” said Diaz, a Bronx minister. “I’m sorry you are trying to take away my right to speak,” he said. “Why are you ashamed of what I have to say?”

The Catholic Bishops of New York said the law alters “radically and forever humanity’s historic understanding of marriage.”

“We always treat our homosexual brothers and sisters with respect, dignity and love,” the bishops stated Friday, “We worry that both marriage and the family will be undermined by this tragic presumption of government in passing this legislation that attempts to redefine these cornerstones of civilization.”

Legal challenges of the law and political challenges aimed at the four Republicans who supported gay marriage in the 33-29 vote are expected. Republican senators endured several marathon sessions, combing through several standard but complex bills this week, before taking up the same-sex marriage bill 24.06.2011.

The bill came to the floor for a vote after an agreement was reached on more protections for religious groups that oppose gay marriage and feared discrimination lawsuits.

“State legislators should not decide society-shaping issues,” said the Rev. Jason McGuire of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms. He said his organization would work in next year’s elections to defeat lawmakers who voted for the measure.

The big win for gay rights advocates is expected to galvanize the movement around the country after an almost identical bill was defeated here in 2009 and similar measures failed in 2010 in New Jersey and this year in Maryland and Rhode Island.

Jerry Nathan of Albany, who married his partner in Massachusetts, called the vote “an incredible culmination of so much that’s been going on for so many years it doesn’t seem real yet.”

Ultimately, gay couples will be able to marry because of two previously undecided Republicans from upstate regions far more conservative than the New York City base of the gay rights movement.

Sen. Stephen Saland, 67, voted against a similar bill in 2009, helping kill the measure and dealing a blow to the national gay rights movement. On Friday night, gay marriage supporters wept in the Senate gallery as Mr. Saland explained how his strong, traditionally family upbringing led him to embrace legalizing gay marriage.

“While I understand that my vote will disappoint many, I also know my vote is a vote of conscience,” Mr. Saland, of Poughkeepsie, said in a statement to The Associated Press before the vote. “I am doing the right thing in voting to support marriage equality.”

Also voting for the bill was freshman Sen. Mark Grisanti, a Buffalo Republican who also had been undecided. Mr. Grisanti said he could not deny anyone what he called basic rights.

“I apologize to those I offend,” said Mr. Grisanti, a Roman Catholic. “But I believe you can be wiser today than yesterday. I believe this state needs to provide equal rights and protections for all its residents,” he said.

A huge street party erupted outside the Stonewall Inn Friday night, with celebrants waving rainbow flags and dancing after the historic vote.

Watching the festivities from across the street was Sarah Ellis, who has been in a six-year relationship with her partner, Kristen Henderson. Ellis said the measure would enable them to get married in the fall. They have twin toddlers and live in Sea Cliff on Long Island.

The noise being generated about recent incidents of rape in Uttar Pradesh might make it seem like the state is particularly bad when it comes to this most heinous of crimes against women, but official data suggests quite the contrary. In fact, UP has among the lowest rates of rape among all major states in India.
The National Crime Records Bureau’s publication Crime in India 2009 — the latest edition of that annual report — shows that with 1,759 rape victims in 2009, UP had 0.9 rape victims per lakh population. Compare that with the 1,631 victims in a much smaller state like Assam, which means a rate of 5.3 rape victims per lakh population, almost six times the rate in UP.
The five best states or UTs in 2009, among those with a population of 100 lakh or more, were Gujarat, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, UP and Bihar in that order, all of them having less than one rape victim per lakh population.
At the other end of the scale, the five worst were Assam, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Delhi and West Bengal, in descending order of the rate. Even the best among this lot, West Bengal had a rate of 2.6 rape victims per lakh population, that is about thrice as bad as in UP. The Congress raising the issue of lawlessness in UP in this context seems particularly ironic given the fact that not one of the five best states or UTs had a Congress government in 2009, although Tamil Nadu had one run by an ally. he truth is that the political colour of the government has little co-relation with rape statistics.
It is likely that social factors lead to greater under-reporting of crimes against women in a state like UP or Bihar than in, say, Delhi. However, that still does not explain why MP, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan (2.3 victims per lakh population) or Haryana (2.5 per lakh) do not have lower figures than UP or Bihar. After all, there is no reason to believe that there is any less of a stigma attached to rape victims in these states than in UP or Bihar.
Even a single case of a woman getting raped anywhere is one rape too many and deserves to be condemned. However, when crimes like these are sought to be used for political ends, those raising the bogey also deserve condemnation. If those protesting against the recent rapes in UP are seriously concerned about crimes against women in India, they would be better advised to spend their time and energy on figuring out how rapes and other such crimes can be minimised if not eliminated. That would involve, among other things, changing the gender profile of the police force as well as sensitising male policemen to the heinousness of the crime and the trauma of the victims. It is a harder job than agitating with a political motive, but a job that needs to be done.