Tribute : MAHATMA THE PHENOMENON

Tribute     

MAHATMA THE PHENOMENON

Mahatma Gandhi was a world leader, a visionary, a Yug-Purush. As a scientist, I am tempted to attempt a definition of Yug-Purush. The American thinker Thoreau said, “ A man is wise with the wisdom of his time only, and ignorant with its ignorance”. This is true of people like me because we are ordinary people. A handful of people appear amidst us once in a while, who prove exception to this rule. At one level, these exceptional people are products of their time. But at another level they transcend their times. Their perceptions, their insights, their concerns are truly universal, in time and space; they are neither constrained by the circumstances of their birth nor are they limited by the ignorance of their time. Mahatma Gandhi is one such exceptional transcendental Yug-Purush, who belongs to all Yugas. In today’s times of turbulence and violence, his thinking, his teachings and his philosophy are even more relevant. I, therefore, appreciate this opportunity to pay my humble tributes to him.

In 2006, a bollywood movie, Lage raho munnabhai, where a member of mumbai mafia began to engage with Gandhigiri ( a term used in the movie means the tenents of Gandhian thinking) by quitting his non-violent activities sensationalised as the latest fashion in the revival of Gandhism. Anna Hazare , who has used the Gandhian method of fasting against the corrupt government , has been more recently acclaimed as a second Gandhi.

Indian society has undergone a rapid change since M.K. Gandhi passed away.So why Gandhi and why now ? The success of Munnabhai and Anna’s movement shown that people of India still recall’s Gandhi’s message and Gandhi is still relevant today.

Mahatma Gandhi is remembered in the world for four major virtues. They are non-violence, truth, love and fraternity. By applying these four virtues he brought freedom to India.He was born in Porebandar of Gujarat on 2 October 1869. On August 15, 1947 India became free. Gandhi refused to join the official ceremonies in Delhi and instead went on a fast in Calcutta, in protest against the communal violence erupting all over the newly-partitioned country. In January 1948 he went to New Delhi and began another fast for peace between Hindus and Muslims. On January 30,1948 he was shot dead by Nathuram Godse.

After passing the Entrance Examination he went to England to study law. M. K.Gandhi was not born great. He was an ordinary child like many of us. M.K.Gandhi completed his law in England and came back to India in 1893. He started his career as a lawyer. He supported the poor and truthful clients. He went to South Africa to deal with the cases of a famous merchant named Abdula Seth.

In South Africa he faced many hurdles. He discovered that the white men were ill treating the dark Indians there. He himself was tortured and insulted by the white often.  In the famous train journey when Gandhi is thrown off the train, his host Abdullah Seth wires all the Muslim merchants to meet Gandhi at each station to give him support and comfort. I interpret this as how  solidarity between religions was an essential part of Gandhi constructing a unified "Indian" diaspora. It is quite the opposite of the religious nationalism of today. But I think Gandhi's real legacy is for the entire world's downtrodden. His connection of personal integrity and self respect as something the poor can claim, so that they embrace simplicity with dignity, rather than have poverty thrust upon them, is an idea that always appeals to the downtrodden. But it does not make for violent change of the status quo.

On another occasion he wore a turban and attended the Court. But the judge who was a white man ordered him: to remove the turban because he was a coolie-lawyer. Gandhiji fought against this unjust and cruel treatment. He observed Satyagraha there and became successful.

In South Africa he built up his career as a Satyagrahi. He returned to India in 1915. In India he found similar unkind treatment by the white rulers. He started the Non-co-operation in 1930 and the Quit India Movement in 1942. During his struggle he applied no jealousy and violence against the rulers. Finally, he succeeded. The British Government granted independence to India.

Gandhi's diasporic period helped define his nationalism is an idea. The point is that it is when one is outside, feeling exiled or fragmented, that one desires unities ~ among regions, religions, philosophies in one's own land ~ one may not be looking for these formerly, at home.

The sufferings Gandhi saw inspired him, both that of the Indian labourers and that of the Zulu and other original people from the region. His writings show great sympathy with the African people and it would be fair to say that watching plantation capitalism revolutionised him. The other potentially revolutionary idea was that solidarity and action can make even the very poor strong. In this he was receptive to the protest and revolutionary thought in the Atlantic half of the world. The Haitian revolution had already taken place, where slaves overthrew the plantocracy. Latin American movements for Creole independence had taken place. Marroon communities of African slaves had established their own areas, as had other separatist peoples creating their spaces removed from colonial governments.

He always remains to my mind one of the most original thinkers of the 20th century and his non-violence continues to impress so many. Whenever we ask young people internationally, who from the past century most influences them, they still say Gandhi. 

Gandhi's style of living was very simple. He removed the caste barrier. He called the untouchables as the Harijan, the children of God. He was a reformer. He told the Indians to do manual labour. He advised the students of his time to read vocational subjects in order to be self-dependent. He also advised to introduce hand-spinning as a subject in educational institutions. He was a strong supporter of agriculture.

Gandhiji was a spiritual man. He spiritualised the politics. He was pained to find that many politicians had become greedy for power soon after independence. He earnestly appealed them to work for the development of the country. He also told the people to love and tolerate each other. He read the Gita, the Koran, the Holy Bible and all other scriptures.

Gandhi has become, in India and around the globe, a simplified version of what he was: a smiling saint who wore a white loincloth and John Lennon spectacles, who ate little and succeeded in bringing down the greatest empire the world has ever known through non-violent civil disobedience. President Obama, who kept a portrait of Gandhi hanging on the wall of his Senate office, likes to cite him.

In post-colonial India, Ram Rajya as a concept was first projected by Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhiji announced that Ram Rajya would be brought once Independence arrived. When he was asked about the ideal State, he talked about Ram Rajya. By using the Ram Rajya slogan, Gandhiji implied an ideal Rajya (without being communal) where values of justice, equality, idealism, renunciation and sacrifice are practised.

Gandhi dreamt about it.Some of our political parties has been talking about it. But Ram Rajya still remains a distant dream. But what exactly is Ram Rajya?

According to the Gandhi Ramrajya means “As he (Shri Ram) was incorruptible, people were prosperous: as he provided them complete security, they were able to engage themselves in creative and productive activities; as he offered them leadership by example, he was like a father unto them; and as in their hour of distress he was by their side to wipe their tears, he was like a son.”

The first criterion clearly shows that the prosperity of a nation as also that of an organisation is inversely proportional to the level of corruption at the top. Ram Rajya was not the complete monarchy. In this monarchy there was the full respect of public sentiments. There was no capitalism, no unemployment no castism a complete socialism.

Ram Rajya according to many scholars meant that the state (Rajya) was the sole legitimate agency wielding power (force), which imposes limits upon its exercise of power, either for the greater happiness of the people, or to evade a greater tyranny that could be caused by moral outrage or self-righteousness.

Historically, from the Ramayana, the chapter on Ayodhya gives a majestic description of Ram Rajya, where peace, prosperity and tranquility reigned, for there was no one to challenge the seat of Ayodhya, literally the land without wars. Incidentally in Hindi, "Ayodhya" means "a place where there is no war." Hence "Ram Rajya" is described as an ideal society. Is there any country that doesn’t want peace, prosperity and tranquility?

According to many authors who have researched the Indian epic (Itihaas) Ramayana have concluded that Ram Rajya is not a myth or imagination, it is an historic truth of its time and for the time to come. It is not a proletysing concept and not a dystopian relic.

 Just as an aside, though, I should point out that one could wonder whether it is completely fair to call Gandhi a revolutionary.  He didn't lead an armed rebellion, like most revolutionaries.  He and many of his followers were willing to be killed, but they weren't willing to kill.  And the term 'revolutionary' does tend to connote  the violent, rather than the peaceful overthrow of the old order.  So  I'm not sure we have a good word for exactly what Gandhi was. 

Most revolutionaries – or whatever exactly Gandhi was – are utterly and inalterably convinced that they have morality wholly on their side.  Though Gandhi was a deeply principled man who constantly strove to be on the side of morality, he wasn't big on claiming to know the moral truth.  And he actually thought that the ethical condemnation of one's opponent was itself a form of violence.  And he rejected all forms of violence.

The change has been happening gradually over the last couple of decades. Mahatma Gandhi, the man who inspired people from Nelson Mandela to Steve Jobs, somehow began losing trust amongst his fellow countrymen.

Why does He not have a hallowed space amongst the youth today. Where and why did this change begin to happen? On the occasion of Gandhi’s death anniversary, it is a pertinent and significant question indeed.

Go to any city or town today and the only way people will smile at Gandhi is if they are looking at currency notes that have been imprinted with this face. In our hour of need, Gandhi stood up to the British and forged Independence with the help of others in a most peculiar fashion – through the use of non-violence.

But even his legacy of non-violence has steadily been pushed aside in favour of aggression. We worship individuals who show dominating traits in all fields today. A Narendra Modi over Rahul Gandhi, Salman Khan over Sharukh Khan.

This has meant that the new generation, free from the qualms of having any memory associated with Independence, can view Gandhi as a man, not a phenomenon. Gandhi the man, it turned out, was full of faults. However, it is necessary to see how many of these faults are actually true.

The man who truly believed that India resided in its villages had a daily schedule that was daunting. Individuals who wish to experience Gandhi’s lifestyle should visit Sewagram near Nagpur where his disciples still follow the daily timetable set by Gandhi more than seven decades ago.

Today, we view dispassionately the way Gandhi went about achieving Independence. Some will argue we have become hungrier as a country – hungry for more success and getting a place in the sun for ourselves. Our capitalism is the best foot forward, some others will add as a rejoinder, conveniently forgetting the Swadeshi Movement.

Gandhiji's altruistic philosophy may appear to be an utopian ideal. However, if we want to find permanent solutions to life's problems, it is essential to adopt universal welfare as a central precept. Only an individual with considerable self-respect, unshakable faith in human nature and detachment can find sanity where alienation, soaring crime and unmitigated violence are ripping the society apart.

Today Mahatma Gandhi is no more a person, he has become a phenomenon. In his lifetime he fought for many causes; colonialism, racial discrimination, economic exploitation and India's Independence, but predominantly he fought for human rights which was the pivot of his existence. His weapons were Satya (truth) and Ahimsa (non-violence).

Gandhiji's entire life was a powerful message for mankind. His every breath was dedicated to the pursuit of truth (god), in its most pristine manifestations, justice and liberty for man. 

I would sorry to state that "the mind is always with fear and the head down." We are victim of insecurity, life always on threat , we camouflage our intention , we hide our conscience. A sense of guilt always hover around us.

The poet Rabindranath Tagore prays to God that Indians should be logical and progressive in thoughts and actions. They should have a power to reason out the bad thoughts and useless customs. Only God can help make India a paradise on earth.

Critically, The whole world of man must be re-integrated; narrow, parochial walls fragmenting the world are to be demolished for achieving this holistic oneness.Reason is like a 'clear stream', the transparency of which should not have been swallowed up by outdated and irrelevant customs--'the dreary desert sand of dead habit'.

The Govt. is a reflection of the citizens who vote them into power. We are an ignorant, despicable, corrupt  and divisive lot who have a long way to go.

Today we have luminaries of a different kind. We have political leaders in jail fighting to save their skin in a scam of mammoth proportions, armymen colluding in a housing scam related to the land allocated to martyrs and certain leaders coming down hard on those who are protesting for a cause – a cause to free their nation of corruption.

It is said that change is a part of evolution. So, if the times change and the people change, so must our expressions. What made sense a 100 years ago for us is history. The present should search for its own interpretation of the times that we live in.

"Where the corrupt are without fear and hypocrisy is held high
Where graft is rampant
Where the nation has been broken up into fragments
By casteist and regional walls
Where words come out from the shallowness of heart
Where tireless shielding of the debauched inches towards perfection
Where the clear stream of reason has lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of scams
Where the mind is led forward by those at the helm
Into an ever-widening chasm of disillusionment
Into that hell of discontent, my leaders, you have led my country astray" 

By forgetting Him who gave us our Independence is a grave offence.Actually it was not Godse who assasinated Gandhi , it is we who are assasinating Him each and every day by our deeds/karmas. And to mark Gandhi as a weak individual worthy of our contempt after all these years is going too far.

On this day, fellow Indians, let us pledge to act on our conscience and do our bit for the good of our beloved nation.

SIDDHARTHA SHANKAR MISHRA,

SAMBALPUR,ODISHA

Are homosexuals criminals ?SC upholds 377 IPC – A slam on the gay communities…16 - 31st Dec,2013, Just In Print

Are homosexuals criminals ?... SC upholds 377 IPC – A slam on the gay communities…

The court upheld India's 1860 colonial British homosexuality law, which says that gay sex is "against the order of nature" and is punishable by up to 10 years in prison, life time. The court ruled that changing the law would be left up to Parliament, not the courts.

"We hold that Section 377 IPC does not suffer from the vice of unconstitutionality and the declaration made by the Division Bench of the High court is legally unsustainable," the two supreme-court judges who presided,  over the case said in their 98-page judgment, released lateWednesday dated 11/12/2013.

The Supreme Court has set aside the July 2009 ruling of the Delhi High Court decriminalizing gay sex between consenting adults in private. In the world’s largest democracy and its second largest country, gay sex is illegal and the status of homosexuals has become that of criminals once again.

Rights groups say the law—known as Section 377 for its place in a 150-year-old Indian penal code—had been used for decades to harass homosexuals.

A bench of justices G.S. Singhvi and S.J. Mukopadhyaya brushed aside the contentions of Naz Foundation, an NGO which was the first to file the plea for decriminalising section 377 (unnatural offences) of IPC, that penal provision was misused by police to harass and torture persons belonging to the LGBT community.

"Respondent No.1 (Naz Foundation) attacked section 377 IPC on the ground that the same has been used to perpetrate harassment, blackmail and torture on certain persons, especially those belonging to the LGBT community.

"In our opinion, this treatment is neither mandated by the section nor condoned by it and the mere fact that the section is misused by police authorities and others is not a reflection of the vires of the section. It might be a relevant factor for the Legislature to consider while judging the desirability of amending section 377 IPC," the bench said. 

People across India were shocked by the decision. Most legal experts and activists had expected the country's highest court to uphold the landmark decision, which had been seen as a crucial first step in empowering India's gay community.

The bench said Parliament is authorized to delete section 377 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) but till the time this penal provision is there, the court cannot legalise this kind of sexual relationship.Section 377 (unnatural offences) of IPC makes gay sex a criminal offence entailing punishment up to life imprisonment.

The bench allowed the appeals filed by various social and religious organizations challenging the High Court verdict on the ground that gay sex is against the cultural and religious values of the country.

The bench, however, put the ball in Parliament’s court to take a decision on the controversial issue, saying it is for the legislature to debate and decide on them.

Section 377 is a legacy of British rule and it is disturbing that a postcolonial democratic state like India would hold on to colonial morality codes that blatantly violate human rights. India should join countries like Australia and New Zealand that have already abolished this colonial-era sodomy law that they too inherited, and take the lead on ending such discrimination.

Colonies and countries that retain versions of the British sodomy law include:

In Asia and the Pacific : Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei, Kiribati, Malaysia, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Myanmar , Nauru, Pakistan , Papua New Guinea, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Western Samoa.

In Africa : Botswana,Gambia,Ghana,Kenya,Lesotho,Malawi,Mauritius,Nigeria,Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia,Swaziland,Sudan,Tanzania,Uganda,Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

Eleven former British colonies in the Caribbean also retain sodomy laws derived from a different British model than the one imposed on India.

The United States now is enacting, by both custom and law, the Ordinances of the Amorites; therefore the nation is defiled before the holy God of Israel and faces His judgment. By promoting homosexuality, America has become like the ancient pagan Amorites and has now come under the judgment of God.

America promotes homosexuality by custom with events such as Gay Pride Day, Gay Awareness Month (June), Gay day at Disney land, Gay Day at sporting events and events like Southern Decadence in New Orleans . There are gay clubs in high school and colleges. The political parties are pandering to the homosexuals for their votes. By custom, homosexuality has woven into the fabric of America .

America is continually making ordinances to advance the homosexual agenda. Sodomites can legally marry in California and Massachusetts while many states recognize civil unions. Homosexuals are now able to adopt children and gain custody of children during a divorce. There are now numerous hate speech laws which are being used to silence opposition to the homosexual agenda. America is a long way down the road to enacting all the Ordinances of the Amorites.

The Bible warns of God judging a nation that walks in these ordinances. When the corporate attitude of a nation is friendly toward homosexuality then at this point the iniquity is full. It is apparent that “the cup” of America ’s sin is rapidly filling up. Americans hardly blush anymore at fornication and adultery. The nation kills over one million babies a year with up to 50 million killed since 1973. The legalizing of abortion was an additional Ordinance of the Amorites. Homosexuality is fast becoming a constitutional right.

The ruling means that what is in truth a question of personal liberty has once again become hostage  as it has been for decades now  to the tyranny of public and religious morality, including the beliefs and prejudices of lawmakers. A minuscule fraction of India’s parliamentarians are under 50 (which means the rest likely grew up in an environment in which homosexuality was unequivocally thought of as an aberration), and none are openly gay. This makes it unlikely they will consider the question of gay rights a specially urgent one.

The Judgment represents a victory for the alliance of Hindu, Muslim and Christian religious groups (otherwise almost never in agreement), as well as organizations seeking the codification in law of “Indian cultural values,” that had come together to challenge the 2009 judgment on Article 377. While Justice Singhvi’s decision is one that will distress many Indians who seek a society more receptive to the right of people to make choices about their own sexual lives and orientations, the reality is that it was the judgment of 2009 that was surprising in the unusual maturity of its detached consideration of homosexuality.

While speaking with “South Asian LGBTQ Groups in North America Disappointed with India's Supreme Court Ruling, Recriminalizing Homosexual Sex. According to them the Supreme Court has taken away fundamental rights that their own judicial peers convincingly argue are guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. In 2009, in a historic decision rooted in Indian jurisprudence and culture, the Indian High Court of Delhi declared 377 unconstitutional. For 150 years, 377 was used to brutally persecute sexual minorities across the country, and the Delhi Court correctly argued that the violent and foreign law contradicted the Constitution’s promise of absolute dignity and equality for all Indian citizens. Its decision effectively decriminalized homosexual sex across India for over four years—profound progress that the Supreme Court invalidated on 11^th Dec 2013.

The Indian Constitution not only empowers the judiciary but also requires it to protect minority rights. Rather than proving itself equal to the task, India’s highest court has sent the dangerous message that minority rights should be vulnerable to the whims of the majority.  Its decision is nothing short of a dereliction of their duty to uphold the Constitution.

But the fight is not over.  Activists of all stripes are determined to defeat 377.  We stand in solidarity with activists from Naz Foundation, the lead plaintiff calling for a repeal of 377; Humsafar Trust, a leading HIV/AIDS and sexual minority support and advocacy group in India; Voices Against 377, a diverse group of organizations and Indian leaders who oppose the ban; and countless other groups, writers, activists, politicians and community organizers that have worked tirelessly to construct growing spaces where LGBTQ people can live without fear of violence or discrimination in India. We are deeply inspired by their renewed determination to repeal 377.  As immigrant-based groups, we are especially concerned about the impact this setback will have on South Asians who worry that their government does not welcome them. In the days to come, we will create spaces where fair-minded South Asians can protest the Supreme Court’s decision, support each other and assist leaders of the cause.”

Where the Delhi Court’s ruling was bold and powerful, the Supreme Court’s decision is heartbreakingly timid. In overturning the Delhi decision and reinforcing 377, the Court side-stepped many questions on the merits of the case, and provided superficial and incorrect assessments of the rest.  Ignoring history altogether, it claimed that 377 does not discriminate against any group, but “merely identifies certain acts” as illegal.  The bench also implied that protecting the rights of LGBTQ persons was not their job but that of the Indian Parliament. 

"It's a black day for us," said Anjali Gopalan, the founder of the Naz Foundation, a nongovernmental organization that works on HIV/AIDS and petitioned in the original case. "I feel so exhausted right now thinking we are being set back by 100 years. . . . I think it's pathetic and sad."

Activist Sohini Ghosh called the judgment “not just a betrayal of the LGBT community but of the values enshrined in the constitution”. “Our fight will go on. We will fight till the bitter end,” she said.

Pallav Patankar from Humsafar Trust said the verdict was a big blow to the community.

“The Supreme Court has put the decision back to parliament. The reason it went to the SC was because parliament refused to discuss issues related to alternate sexuality. There is a need to address the issue,” he said.

The government had earlier told the apex court that there were an estimated 2.5 million gays in India and about seven percent of them were HIV infected.

Some papers see the verdict as a measure to "deny basic human rights" to a section of the country's population.

The Indian Express says the ruling is "sad and shameful" because Section 377 is "mostly used to harass, humiliate and deny freedom to consenting homosexual adults".

"The court, in this instance, seems to have abandoned its duty to protect fundamental rights, its capacity to lead progressive change, and left this difficult task to parliament," the paper adds.

For The Hindu, the move "has enthroned medieval prejudice and dealt a body blow to liberal values and human rights".

Newspapers also feel such a law has no place in a democratic country that aims to be a global superpower and fear for the future of the homosexual community in India.

The Hindustan Times says the decision has plunged India into "a less tolerant era".

"We cannot lose sight of the fact that fear of persecution may leave the community feeling marginalised and send it into hiding. Importantly, this may deny LGBTs [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender] access to healthcare services, thus increasing the risk of sexually transmitted diseases," it adds.

Most editorial writers are sceptical over the chances of the government moving quickly to make a fair law that honours the rights of the gay community.

The Indian Express says "preparing and bringing up the law will be difficult in the last stages of this government's tenure" but urges the MPs to "remember that the right to love whom you love, the need to stop living a lie, is more significant than other abstract political rights".

Adds The Hindu: "Barring a sudden dawning of a humane sense of fairness all around, Section 377 is here to stay in the medium term with all its horrific consequences."

The LGBT community in India has long struggled for recognition and acceptance in the country. Although some citizens in large cities like New Delhi have started to acknowledge gay rights, some homosexuals still encounter police harassment, demands for bribes, attacks and rejection from family. 

It seemed like Gay rights had been progressing in India, and gay pride parades have been taking place in the country since 1999, with larger events in big cities. A prince, Manvendra Singh Gohil, came out publicly in 2006. He has since become an advocate for LGBT issues and HIV/AIDS awareness. Plus, the country might soon legally recognize a third  gender. To many, this ruling is a huge step backwards for India.

Homosexuality and gay relationship is considered as immoral by most of our religions. But LGBTs need not be considered as criminals. They can be morally persuaded to correct themselves. They need not be inhumanly treated as criminals and punished for some aberrations in their personality which are not in their control.

Homosexuality has existed from the beginning of time and is represented in just about every species on earth. Most judgments   about this sexual orientation have been based on religious dogma, the roles of humans in society attributed to this concept of family: father, mother and children.Heterosexuality  is therefore the norm in a societal sense and thus anything else regarded as abnormal.

Homosexuality has always been normal for homosexuals,  the fact that they are in the minority, should have no bearing on how we perceive them. If you are attracted to the opposite sex, imagine someone telling you it was wrong and you had to fall in love and marry a same sex partner. 

People judge what they don’t understand and even worse what a religion tells them to. I am straight, but believe that human beings, regardless of sexual orientation, should have the same rights and opportunities to live a loving and productive life, just like the rest of us.

What’s worse is the psychological trauma that society has bestowed on homosexuals. Imagine being told you were an abomination, a Godless freak that deserved not to live. It’s hard to understand but many people believe this hateful view. And many gays, particularly young ones, can carry this burden, and lose all hope of self-worth.  In the end it is we, the straight members of our community that have created this cavernous gap between the groups. Gays get angry, and so they should, for our cruel and judgmental treatment.

In the end, peace must prevail. Surely love is more important than who is being loved. Sex is only a small part of our lives; companionship, friendship and love are lasting ideals that transcend any belief about sexual orientation.

We have no say in the circumstances and the genetic makeup of our birth. Who and what we are can only be dealt with as we live. Homosexuals are people first, human beings that have the same human aspirations as we do.

And now, the SC’s re-criminalizing homosexuality is a setback. After four and a half years of India’s living as a twenty-first century tolerant democracy that did not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference, the country has suddenly gone back to putting a 150-year-old British law above the immediate needs of today’s citizens.

Now the next government, whether progressive or illiberal, would have to deal with this issue, and decisively balance the country’s religious and cultural sentiments with its humanitarian and health needs. To take a crude example, criminalising homosexuality drives gays underground and makes it near impossible for the government to successfully carry out its HIV/AIDS programmes that hope to target about 4,00,000 ‘high risk’ gay men in India. More importantly, criminalizing consensual sex between adults drives the country back into the dark ages. But the gay movement and sexual politics has come of age in India, and this verdict cannot restrain that for long.

Crime" isnt that a very strong word? Just trying to figure out the definition of "Crime" in real sense. Wondering how ones choice of sexuality is termed crime by law?? Where are we heading to?

Society is the source of all evil. No good thing needs any endorsement, including that of a funny thing named society.

Siddhartha Shankar Mishra,

Sambalpur,Odisha

Kejriwal hits the bull’s eye , 16 - 31st Dec, 2013, Just In Print

Kejriwal hits the bull’s eye

"This is not my victory. It is a victory of people of New Delhi constituency and victory of democracy," said Kejriwal after defeating Sheela Dikshit.

 Arvind Kejriwal’s AAP debut made a massive victory across delhi and an everlasting impression in people’s mind. Arvind Kejriwal has defeated three-time chief minister Sheila Dikshit in her constituency of New Delhi by some 22,000 votes. His one-year-old Aam Aadmi Party made a spectacular electoral debut winning 28 of Delhi's 70 seats, just four behind the BJP, which is on top.

Once Robert Vadra uttered, “mango people in a banana republic".

Rajdeep Sardesai  an eminent Journo is his blog stated , “TN Seshan wasn't the first middle class 'crusader' to make an unsuccessful bid to enter politics and he won't be the last. The latest to throw his hat (or should we say Gandhi topi) in the ring is Jan Lokpal torchbearer Arvind Kejriwal. Both Seshan and Kejriwal were professional civil servants before they captured public imagination through their anti-corruption campaigns. Seshan became a symbol of growing public anger against money and muscle power in elections; Kejriwal tapped into a similar outrage against vaulting corruption by those in high offices. Will Kejriwal succeed where many others before him have failed?

If success and failure is judged by electoral performance, then few will hold out any hope for the former IRS officer and his motley crew. The party system in the country has proved remarkably resilient, ceding very little space to new entrants. The disproportionate influence of money power in elections is an enduring phenomenon. If anything, the scale has only gone up: there are instances in the recent Mumbai municipal elections where candidates spent several crores to be elected as councillors. The amounts only go up as the stakes get higher.”

But not everyone who is a hardworking man can become a household name. He has worked his way into the political consciousness in such a way that Indians - political leaders or the common man- can either admire or ridicule him but not be indifferent to him.

After around five years of government service, Kejriwal resigned from the position of Additional Commissioner of Income Tax in Delhi to devote his time fully to fighting corruption in India.

Kejriwal, who came into the limelight as one of the main spokesmen and a close lieutenant of anti-corruption campaigner Anna Hazare during his highly publicised movement in 2011, later parted ways with his mentor to start a political outfit — much against Hazare’s wishes who wanted to keep his movement non-political — in November last year.

Dismissed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Congress as political upstarts who would not be able to match their popularity or influence, the unheralded AAP was able to catch popular imagination by offering transparency in governance and people-friendly policies to the city residents hit hard by price rise, corruption and insensitive bureaucracy.

Eager to sound neutral before he plunged into politics, Kejriwal spared no one. He leveled charges against Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s son-in-law Robert Vadra and then Law Minister Salman Khurshid of illegal land deals and fund embezzlement.

He also targeted then Bharatiya Janata Party chief Nitin Gadkari, accusing him of grabbing farmers’ land and corruption in collusion with the Nationalist Congress Party’s tainted Ajit Pawar.

His ideas and promises appeared to have convinced people to give the rank outsiders a chance over established parties.

Mr Kejriwal and his party have been criticized for their economic policies and promises of reversing hikes in water and electricity prices.

Arvind Kejriwal’s storm of lethal revelations against the alleged corrupt political parties, Congress and BJP, has upset the tricky equations between the government and industry and their nexus that has been regularly facilitated by the incumbent parties.

Kejriwal’s tricky and difficult corruption questions are bringing out names that were beyond our wildest imagination, beyond suspicion, and names that were once sacrosanct. For example, Manmohan Singh – who was always given a clean chit even by his ardent critics – has been accused by Kejriwal of being overtly sympathetic and soft on Mukesh Ambani. 

Kejriwal has become a symbol of focused and cool-headed bravery, speaking each time with compelling logic and supporting evidence, and that’s where he scores. And he is using the media very intelligently indeed. Today, even getting rid of him has become a very difficult option – as then, Kejriwal’s dream of Tahrir Square in India might really come true.

One secret of Kejriwal’s success may be the stark contrast between his public and private demeanor. A firebrand before a crowd or a camera, he’s mild-mannered and introverted in person, a combination that inspires passion in audiences and confidence and respect from his close colleagues and allies. Short and compactly-built, with neatly-parted black hair and a trimmed moustache, he still looks a little boyish at 43. He has no personal story of extraordinary suffering at the hands of corruption. What led him to quit his job as a senior bureaucrat and become an activist wasn’t anger or bitterness; it was the loss of his own faith in government after a decade in its service.

 Unlike Congress and BJP, Arvind does not have a huge cadre or force or grass root level workers to penetrate every nook and corner of the country and influence the voters. Therefore, with limited, he has to depend on TV and print penetration; and this limits his impact in the country.

Kejriwal travelled to villages across north India to mobilise support for an RTI law. Drawing on his own experiences, he told people that government officials deliberately engineered delays to force the payment of bribes, and argued that a strong RTI law would expose corrupt practices.

In 2004, Kejriwal launched an experimental project in one East Delhi neighbourhood, Nand Nagri, to test ways to hold government officials accountable. Kejriwal formed a committee consisting of 10 local residents who were trained to scrutinize the activities of the member of the legislative assembly (MLA) from their constituency. The committee then demanded public consultations over everything from road paving to drainage repair.

Kejriwal had been given the Ramon Magsaysay Award, widely described as Asia’s Nobel Prize, for Eminent Leadership—“activating India’s right-to-information movement at the grassroots” and “empowering New Delhi’s poorest citizens to fight corruption by holding government answerable to the people.

AAP succeeded in the polls it  offered not only a new leader but a whole new class of politicians to govern the nation. That is the kind of change people want. So could the AAP emerge as the proverbial dark horse?

The real merit lies in the agenda-setting role his party plays in future elections. By stoking the public’s interest on the right issues and providing a contrast to the existing political establishment, Kejriwal could yet prove to be hugely influential in Indian politics.

However, the biggest challenge is still ahead of Kejriwal.

Siddhartha Shankar Mishra,

Sambalpur,Odisha

Tehelka on Tehelka : Media and Sex sells , Exclusive, 1- 15,Dec, 2013, JUST IN PRINT

Tehelka on Tehelka : Media and Sex sells

The editor-in-chief of India's leading investigative magazine is being probed over claims that he sexually assaulted a woman colleague. The case came to light after the victim complained in an email to a superior that Tarun Tejpal, founder of the award-winning weekly, Tehelka, assaulted her twice in a hotel elevator during a conference in the resort state of Goa this month.

Tarun Tejpal, who edits the weekly Tehelka, said he was "recusing" himself from his job for the next six months to "atone" for an "unfortunate incident" that involved a female colleague.

The alleged victim's unidentified confidante told the NDTV news channel that the woman had been subjected to "an act of grave sexual misconduct" and that she was "completely shattered and emotionally scarred".

The government of Goa state, where the alleged incident happened in early November, has now ordered a "preliminary inquiry" into the allegations, reports say.

Papers are urging all organizations, including media houses, to set up bodies in compliance with government guidelines to ensure women's right to work in an environment "free of sexual harassment".

"Several disturbing cases of alleged sexual harassment at the workplace have been aired recently, all of which involve senior men in positions of power making advances on vulnerable young women," says The Times of India .

The paper further adds that "sexual harassment gives rise to a workplace that is hostile to women. It amounts to sexual discrimination that is punishable by law. Only institutional checks can address such power imbalances".

The Judiciary, the legislative, the media – the Indian woman is not safe anywhere. Forget the workplace; women bear the most dastardly abuses with a smile on their face within the “safe” confines of their homes. But that is beside the point. The astute arrogance brandished by the man in question, with no sign of the remotest repentance, has sent shivers down the spine of people across the country. As a fan of this journalist, and as a former employee of this organization, it clearly makes me ashamed as a human being.

The pompous letter of atonement, the self-proclaimed recusal and the shoddy defence on part of the organizational head does not inspire confidence in people who would’ve otherwise wanted this episode to pass off as a horrific nightmare. The same magazine that has time and again given voice to the tortured women, taught them to raise their voice against Khap panchayats and moral policing was found to be lacking in action; even worse, brushing the entire narrative under carpet.

Even now, there were people – self-proclaimed women’s rights activists, who care two hoots about state-sponsored surveillance on private citizens, but are overtly eager to publicize their concern for the victim in Tehelka. Then there were those who took voyeuristic pleasure in sharing intimate details of the episode on social media. Media houses were quick to post columns and opinion pieces on sexual harassment at workplace and assume the high moral ground. Some idiots proclaimed their feminism by abusing the daughter of the perpetrator, forcing her to delete her Twitter profile. Somewhere, the victim, the sufferer lost her voice.

When glass houses lie shattered, the ensuing gush of blood is often attended to. Nobody spares a thought for the injured vein.

Reena Mukherjee , a senior journo who had an experience of decade in this field till she took a sabbatical after having a daughter. Resuming her career after 5 years , she got a job as a “ Senior Journalist” in Statesman in Kolkata. Here she had to undergo a rigorous sexual harassment by her senior. When she complaint about this matter to the higher authority in the media house rather she was advised to talk to her boss about the matter but nobody paid heed to her grievance. When she tried to minimize contact with her boss , she was terminated from her job for incompetence in October 2002. She filed a complaint in the labor court for wrongful termination. Finally, in Feb 2013, she was awarded judgment in her favor after a long tedious battles and odds of 9 years.

But what is rare are the women (or men) who actually report the harassment and file official complaints. And when those brave women actually do that, it is rarely acknowledged publicly.

Women who work in the media are generally intelligent, fairly confident and have progressive feminist views on how women should be treated. As a general rule, so do their male counterparts.

Then why is sexual harassment and the culture of sexism still rife in our industry?

Most women, including those who allowed me to quote their experiences, will not discuss this topic. It is a taboo subject because there is a fear of reprisal. Despite most media houses having policies on sexual abuse or any kind of harassment, most women are afraid to stick their necks out in the institutions in which they work.

“It is just not worth it,” said one. “I love my job and don’t want to jeopardize it. I may hate that this happened to me but I deal with it. Besides, what happens if I do complain?” More than anything, women in this industry don’t want to be seen as weak or victims because it would affect their work and how they are perceived in the newsrooms.

India’s new law meant to prevent and redress incidents of sexual harassment of women in the workplace isn’t likely to do much of either, say women’s rights activists. The Sexual Harassment at Work Place ( Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal ) Bill has been passed in parliament last February, 2013 by both the houses , this law comes at a time when Indian authorities have been facing increasing public anger over incidents of rape across the country, particularly after the death of a 23-year-old student who had been gang raped in Delhi in December.

While India already has laws against rape and sexual molestation, the recently passed law is the country’s first dedicated to sexual harassment at work. It defines such harassment broadly as unwelcome physical contact and making “sexually colored” remarks and includes any behavior that interferes with a woman’s work, creates an intimidating, offensive or hostile work environment for her.

As more and more women join the workforce in India, sexual harassment at work has become a growing problem. A 2010 survey of 600 female employees in India’s information technology and outsourcing industry found that 88% of them had faced some form of sexual harassment at work. In most cases, the perpetrator was a superior at work, according to a survey conducted by the Centre for Transforming India, a Delhi-based non-governmental organization.

The new law is meant to prevent such harassment and provide an avenue for women to have their complaints resolved, but activists say it falls short on several fronts.

It is badly drafted. What they gave is mediocrity. The law requires that all companies and employers who have more than 10 employees, constitute an “Internal Complaints Committee” to which an aggrieved woman can take her complaint. This committee, which must be headed by a senior female employee, is supposed to try initially to get the complainant and accused to reach a settlement and only launch an investigation in the case if mediation fails.

If harassment is proved, the law leaves it up to the internal committee to decide a monetary fine to be paid by the perpetrator, depending on their “the income and financial status”. But more chances of mishandling it is there.

Sexual harassment at the workplace is a universal problem. Even though the occurrence of sexual harassment at the workplace is widespread in India and elsewhere, this is the first time it has been recognized as an infringement of the fundamental rights of a woman, under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India "to practice any profession or to carry out any occupation, trade or business".

Of late, the problem of sexual harassment at the workplace has assumed serious proportions, with a meteoric rise in the number of cases. Surprisingly, however, in most cases women do not report the matter to the concerned authorities.

In India, Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Indian Constitution provide safeguards against all forms of discrimination. In recent times, the Supreme Court has given two landmark judgments -- Vishakha vs State of Rajasthan, 1997, and Apparel Export Promotion Council vs A K Chopra, 1999 -- in which it laid down certain guidelines and measures to ensure the prevention of such incidents. Despite these developments, the problem of sexual harassment is assuming alarming proportions and there is a pressing need for domestic laws on the issue.

India is rapidly advancing in its developmental goals and more and more women are joining the workforce. It is the duty of the state to provide for the wellbeing and respect of its citizens to prevent frustration, low self-esteem, insecurity and emotional disturbance, which, in turn, could affect business efficacy, leading to loss of production and loss of reputation for the organisation or the employer. In fact, the recognition of the right to protection against sexual harassment is an intrinsic component of the protection of women's human rights. It is also a step towards providing women independence, equality of opportunity and the right to work with dignity.

In the last 50 years, various international human rights organisations have been focusing on promoting and protecting women's rights. The United Nations has acknowledged that women's rights are synonymous with human rights. The same was reiterated in the Beijing Declaration.

Most international women's human rights movements have raised their voice against abuse and violence perpetrated against women in general. In 1979, the UN General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Areas where discrimination was found to be rampant include political rights, marriage, family and employment. The convention emphasised that discrimination and attacks on a woman's dignity violated the principle of equality of rights.

The ground reality is, that, the media in India needs to wake up and look inwards. It needs to see the misogynistic attitude that’s all prevailing.

The fact is that we might fight for the rights of the underdogs and do exposes on corruption etc but not many of us have the guts to speak out against our own fraternity. I mean it took me five years to even write about my experience openly, though I have discussed it with my peers.

What we also need is for the women journalists to stay united to help one another. To be able to stand up for one another and to be empowered enough so that issues are not pushed under the carpet under the garb of ‘internal matter’. In my case it was the NWMI which helped me fight back and supported me.

Ultimately we must have the ability to call spade  a spade and a zero tolerance policy within media houses and organizations for this kind of behavior. Believe me, Tarun Tejpal’s actions  are not an exclusive phenomenon. He just ended up being the face of a deeper malice plaguing the Indian media.

Time the Indian media treats this as a much needed wake up call and put in place measures to ensure such things don’t repeat. At the least provide ways for the victim to feel safe enough to complaint and give hope and support to them.

Now a new story will start, it will be no use. Although Tejpal accepted but the law will do actions accordingly. Chances are that the victim will be hostile later on and the things will be alright. It is a time taking business of medias. it is true that under the power this is now very common things. all round it is happening. Some are suffering and none are opposing. It is very common culture. All are against the act are also enjoying in somewhere in on its way and are silent. It is the cheapest way to achieve goal.

Siddhartha Shankar Mishra,

Sambalpur, Odisha