Anna The Fastist

By Manuwant Choudhary

I am getting many, many calls from Anna's supporters who now say they don't want the Jan Lokpal Bill passed.

But I ask them why? Isn't this why your Anna has been fasting for the past 11 days?

And they inform that some actress has offered to go nude if the Jan Lokpal Bill is not passed.

But there is a split in the camp especially those who sing Vande Mataram because another model has already gone topless and that too has bodypainted the Indian tri-colour?

Whatever happened to the flag code?

And even the Thackeray's are not protesting.

After all Anna is a Marathi manoos.

But the Thackeray's don't like him when he says he is an Indian.

Aaah how great would it have been to see Anna fast under a large photo of Balasaheb.

Apart from Anna's supporters I am also getting calls from Arundhati Roys haters after she wrote, I AM NOT ANNA.

They are more angry this time because she has written both Anna and the Maoists are out to destroy the State.

They ask me how can Anna - a Gandhian be compared to Maoists who kill by the dozen.

Look at Anna he sits on the dias fasting for 11 full days.

And the entire country has started wearing the Gandhi cap with `I AM ANNA' written on it.

But if everyone was Anna then why is Anna fasting alone?

Or is it because Anna knows how to fast and you and I don't.

I recall meeting Anna Hazare way back in 1994.

Like today, Anna was on his 11th day of fast at his village in Ralegan Siddhi, fasting against corruption in the Shiv Sena government.

We travelled by bus and truck to his village to meet Anna Hazare.

I sat with him in his one room in the temple.

He smiled at me.

I am not sure how many journalists would see him then but I was given a tour of his village.

Several projects had been undertaken to improve agriculture and irrigation in the village.

But there was no alcohol available.

Anna and his supporters had forcibly closed the last shop.

Congressmen today want to paint Anna as a fascist - someone out to destroy democracy.

The fact is the Congress Party has already destroyed both our democracy and constitution.

Liberals are not allowed to form a political party in India.

Anna is not a Gandhi either.

I would say Anna is just an activist who has perfected the art of fasting.

Even in 1994 when there was no Right To Information Anna ran a residential camp at his village where the youth from different parts of the country would come and he would personally impart training on how to get information from the different government departments, how to go to court, how to expose a minister.

So when I see him `centre stage' today I am not surprised.

Anna is an honest man so it hurts to see an honest man in prison for even a day.

But I do not support the Lok Pal idea.

We must address the root causes of corruption rather than trying to police it.

We are already a Police State.

Do we need another policeman?

What will our judges do?

Do we need a police to police the Lok Pal?

But yes fasting is a weapon and Anna has proved this many a time.

Even in 1994 he had a loudspeaker on the temple room where the government owned All India Radio News would be broadcast.

I recall Anna's fast entering its 11th day was the headline, the Maharashtra chief minister Manohar Joshi going to Singapore was the second news item.

Anna is still making headlines.

He does not have solutions.

All I want is an honest and hardworking India.

Border Crossings After 25 Years !

By Manuwant Choudhary

Its nearly 25 years since I finished school from St. Joseph's College, North Point, Darjeeling and so when an old friend Sanjay Sharma calls saying he is visiting my district in Bihar and that too will come by train (for the first time in his life) if I agreed to receive him is a sure surprise.

Sanjay and I studied together since class 2 and by some coincidence our parents always and I mean always stayed at the same hotel `New Elgin', owned and run by a great hotelier Diamond Oberoi.

Sanjay's father Mr. Tansen Sharma, a prominent businessman from Kathmandu, would come to Darjeeling in a very large white Ford, while our white amby would be parked just behind his Ford.

His father and my father got on pretty well. They would sit in a bar late into the evening. His father would order a Limca for my father (as my father did not take alcohol).

It was here that my father met many underground Nepali Congressmen many of whom became Prime Ministers of Nepal in an unstable democracy.

Sanjay I remember was good at studies and sports and for us at boarding he sure had the most amazing taste for music and at our library reading post dinner sessions he played us the classics on a Sonodyne.

So I did receive him at the train station. He was here on a personal visit but he stayed at my place too but Bihar is not an easy place to visit and he was lucky enough that he only caught a `flu'.

But how does one really mark an event like meeting an old friend after 25 years?

Sanjay is `Global' having lived in most parts of the world as his father owned an export-import business so it was really interesting to know about his vast experiences.

I had my own share.

We had just too much to catch up on.

So I offered to drive him to Birganj, a border town in Nepal.

But I decided not to take the normal Muzaffarpur-Raxaul route instead try a new one - The East West Express Corridor.

So early 4 am we were on the road through Muzaffarpur-Darbhanga. But we were surprised that the Super Highway is still incomplete at many places so we had to take diversions and sometimes even a detour through Bihar villages.

We were told that a company owned by the son of India's former Prime Minister Narasimha Rao was given the road contract but because they did not pay local mafia work had been stalled. `But now locals have been taken care off.'

This was like driving halfway across the Bihar-Nepal border, then entering Nepal, and then driving again halfway across the Nepal border.

At Phulparas Sanjay's relative was ready with some home cooked parathas and medicines and then we took a left turn near Bhotaha Chowk (The Ghost Crossing) towards Kunauli border.

The road from then on was unmetalled so we could drive only in first gear.

I wanted this journey for long because I wanted to discover a new route, to drive through better roads and have to deal with lesser traffic.

But the road to the border was just too long.

And there was no traffic !

No fences either.

Suddenly we see armed Gurkhas under a tent and we ask if we were in Nepal and they confirmed, Yo Nepal Hunchha....

Sanjay asked them where we could take the permit for the car (bhansar) and they informed the office was on the left side road a kilometre away but that our car could not go there. We could only take it upto a point.

So we took the left side but suddenly we came across a culvert and I knew my Sonata would definitely fail here. Sanjay believed it would make it. I tried. And failed. So we decided to leave the car there and walk to the office.

Sanjay took my car papers and I followed him a little behind.

There was another culvert I was sure my car would not have manouvered.

Then suddenly I noticed Sanjay moving into the paddy fields. I thought my friend had truly lost it !

Until I came to that very spot I realised why - there was no road - water flowed across.

I too removed my shoes, pulled up my trousers and wade across.

When we arrived at the office we found the office was also marooned.

Water all around and so we carefully went across.

Inside a Nepali officer wearing just a vest was sweating it out. There was no electricity.

He seemed surprised that we took this route.

And asked us that he wanted to see the car.

We told him it cannot come here and was parked a kilometre away (He would need binoculors to see the number plate)

He just gave us the papers.

So very soon we were happy to be driving on the Nepal side on the border on the King Mahindar Highway.

Sanjay's fever was better after walking into the warm flood waters but the drive was too long so he was getting impatient.

Also we would have to drive across dense forests.

It was beautiful.

Forests on both sides and a straight road running into the sunset.

During the royal rule for every tree cut three would be replanted but now deforestation was severe and the rules mostly ignored

And we spoke about everything in our lives - our successes and failures - and about the one girl we really liked.

Sanjay said he was without news for a few days now and it would be great to watch television at the hotel.

Nearing Birganj we met up with a hail storm.

And the ice stones were large.

We inched our way into Birganj, could barely see the road.

At Birganj we stayed a hotel.

Dinner and brandy and some TV news.

Not much had happened.

Nepal's politicians were still quarelling over how to write a new Constitution.

The next morning Sanjay looked better and we drove him to the aiport before returning via Raxaul-Motihari-Muzaffarpur highway.

I smiled told him that now he will definitely remember me.

He threatened, ` Wait till you come to Kathmandu I will make you climb a mountain called `Manokamna'.

But my return journey was not so pleasant.

There were literally no roads from Raxaul to Motihari.

The photo you see above is taken at the Motihari bypass.

Trucks were stuck trying to jump across lake-size potholes or as they say `Sadak mein gaddha yaa gaddhe mein sadak'.

Its when you see this that you will truly understand that India is a very corrupt country and we need not one but a thousand Anna Hazare's.

And surely one Lokpal is just too little.

Hackings, Lies & Shaving Foam

By Manuwant Choudhary

As a News of the World editor would say the story doesn't have enough sex, I would say the the questioning of Media Moghul Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch were drab and contrived at best.

The only statement of Mr. Murdoch senior worth it was when he said he had been betrayed by those whom he trusted and they in turn had been betrayed by those whom they trusted.

It runs deeper.

But he also said categorically that it is wrong to hack phones of ordinary people who are victims and also that it is wrong to pay money to the police for a story.

It is understandable that a founder of an empire cannot keep track of 55,000 employees but it is still his job to take action against those found guilty.

Instead, Mr. James Murdoch went to lengths to explain why they paid compensation and legal aid money to someone guilty and convicted of hackings. He said it was as per `outside legal advice' and huge sums were paid because the corporation would lose the legthy case for illegal dismissal of the employee.

The Murdochs it seemed knew about their employees only when outside agencies like the police and courts found some evidence. They never found anything themselves.

When it came to giving names of people who let them down they again said nothing and took the alibi that they would not like to prejudice an ongoing police investigations into the charges.

The rot runs deeper.

In fact Rebecca Brooks openly admits having hired private investigators and said it was a common `practice' at Fleet Street,but again she feigned ignorance about those private investigators already convicted.

The impression she gave was that at the News Of The World no one was really in-charge.

In all this, I watched a lady sitting behind Mr. Rupert Murdoch. A mauve sweater, silky hair and a black skirt , Wendi Deng is Mr. Murdoch's wife.

And she sat gracefully and intelligently listening in without distracting. Sometimes she played with her fingers until there were shouts and we saw her leap and hit the man who attacked Mr. Murdoch with shaving foam. It was British commedian Jonnie Marbles.

Wish the Murdoch's employed only people as beautiful and trusted as Wendi Deng.

And its a shame on the British parliament that anyone could enter a highly secure zone...when you question someone for propriety you must first have your own house in order.

Rupert Murdoch's Crumbling Empire

By Manuwant Choudhary

I would have perhaps never got a job in any of Rupert Murdoch's newspapers not because I am not qualified but because I simply do not know how to hack.

Techinically incompetent.

The Rupert Murdoch story seems to be getting worse by the day ..now that we hear the whistleblowing journalist Sean Hoare dies in his home at Hertfordshire under mysterious circumstances.

Hoare had been a celebrity correspondent with the now shut News of the World tabloid and it was he who first told the world that it was routine for News of the World to hack phones.

Earlier he had been dismissed by News of the World on drink and drug charges.

Whats most damaging about his revelations in that the editor Andy Caulson was not only aware of the hacking by his staff but that he actively encouraged it.

The details get murkier with allegations that you simply had to ask the news desk about the location of a person and they would use police technology to detect a person's location and come back with the information. They called this `pinging'.

Isn't this the scary world George Orwell imagined in his book `1984', a book he wrote in 1948.

But the line between a journalist and his police sources would blur so quick is hard to understand.

Even as the senior Murdoch faces the MPs panel today, I wonder how the veteran lost control of his empire?

Or is he simply being hounded for being a rich successful media baron?

How much did Murdoch know about all this?

And the tragedy is that not just Murdoch..even Britains Prime Minister David Cameron hired the services of Andy Coulson.

Its interesting reading the sequence of events into all this available at CNN and one does sees a pattern emerge...it looks like News International had kind of gotten into a habit of paying compensations periodically.

Whatever happened to the good old ethics about journalism?

Do you pay a policeman money to get information?

The senior Murdoch has been apologising frequently now but the real question is how involved is he personally in the news gathering mechanism or is he just involved in the business of news, where his company is a huge success.

It would also be relevant to fix responsibilities. When did Mr. Murdoch come to know about the hackings and what action did he take against those involved?

I think this could clear the air.

News is simply not just another business.

News is news.

In India too if you see unedited tapes of news being gathered by the zillions of stringers some of them could horrify you, just as it horrifies the British audience today.

But yes I would anyday prefer the noise over `a silent airwave'. We owe it to Rupert Murdoch for having invaded India through his sattelites. Recen'tly the Indian government made this huge announcement that they would now allow All India Radio news (owned by the government) to be re-broadcast on private FM stations. But AIR is all gas.

I still think governments and the police are worse than Murdoch but when they all become one I do feel insecure.

Its not really Murdoch's empire that I am worried about - it is journalism itself.

Bombay Bombers Roam Free

By Manuwant Choudhary

Bombay bombers roam free and the Congress Circus continues day after day....

First the union home minister P.Chidambaram arrives in the city only to say that there is no intelligence failure as there was no intelligence input.

Mr. C...may I ask you if there was no intelligence input then isn't that an intelligence failure?

Surely, the intelligence's job is to know.

Or simply you have no intelligence or you think the people in India have no intelligence?

Then you have the routine visit by our Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress President Sonia Gandhi, only to be overshadowed by scion Rahul Gandhi's remark that the government can only prevent 99 per cent attacks but that one per cent will get through.

Surely, we don't elect you to allow us to be attacked...even once.

Can you at least foil the bigger attacks if not all?

To set records straight India has always been attacked right through her history. Mongols on horseback would raid our temples and return with the booty.

Now they just carry the bombs in tiffins and walk into our crowded bazars and leave them there.

But are we really prepared to foil such terror? Especially, since the police are themselves corrupt busy finding out ways and means to earn money underhand.

We have one former chief minister Vilas Rao Deshmukh taking over a cricket board defeating a veteran cricketer Dilip Vengsarkar.

While we have the Maharashtra chief minister passing the buck and saying that the Home department is with the NCP - their ally, so the delay in taking action against terror.

Then they say they still not have CCTVs because of the slow government procedures in procurement.

And in all this we don't see or hear the junior Milind Deora (MP) although we see Meera Sanyal, the defeated candidate, still talk for Bombay's security concerns.

Why do we elect such fools?

And in Pakistan a banned terror group chief Mallik Ishaq of the Lashkare-Janghvi gets a government stipend while in jail and now he even gets a bail.

And a few days later we are going to be talking to the same Pakistan government.

Sharad Joshi's Freedom Bill Negated

India is not a democracy as only socialists and communists and those who are willing to swear false allegiance and compromise their conscience are allowed to contest elections so a very brave attempt was made by a lone liberal MP in India's parliament Shri Sharad Joshi who moved a private members bill to remove this discrepancy and the word `socialist' from India's preamble but his bill was negated.

This shows that there is no justice in the Indian parliament.

A case by the Swatantra Party is still pending in the Bombay High Court for nearly 17 years challenging the Peoples Representative Act which forces political parties to swear allegiance to a socialist constitution. Another PIL by an NGO failed in the Supreme Court.

Excerts of the Parliament Debate

SHRI SHARAD ANANTRAO JOSHI: By 15th August, 1947, socialism was not even a significant thought in the Indian polity. In 1977 an amendment was made to the Preamble. By the Forty-Second (Amendment) Act, 1976, three words, ‘Socialist’, Secular’, ‘Integrity’ were introduced in the Preamble to the Constitution.

There are some problems, which are because of addition of the word ‘Socialist’ and therefore, my Bill demands that the word ‘socialist’ be deleted from the Act.

While socialism may be perfectly good, may be perfectly ideal thing to have but I must have the right to dissent. I am not taking any anti-socialist position. I am not taking a position that the preamble is wrong but I should have the right to change the preamble, if necessary. We decided to form a political party. We got a reply from the Election Commission saying that you will have to sign a register, or, have a clause in your memorandum of Association that you subscribe to the tenet of ‘socialism.’

Now, this is something which is alright for those with a pliable conscience. The problem is for the honest people who do not want to make a false statement. There is no provision for any verification of the truth of the memoranda or regulations. It is only used according to the convenience and both the parties play the game. It compels an association to swear allegiance to the principle of socialism without any attempt to define or even indicate the meaning of the term ‘socialism‘. The sub-section is, therefore, illegal, unconstitutional and being arbitrary violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The term ‘socialism’ has not been defined in the Constitution of India or in the Representation of the People Act. This term has been applied to a large spectrum of theories over the last two centuries. Now, which particular meaning you have, is not clarified either in the Constitution or in the People’s Representation Act.

…To bear allegiance to the principles of socialism as a precondition, goes against the freedom of expression and thought..

The historic fall of the Soviet Union has put a question mark on all nations practicing socialism. Socialistic economics have been found to be not good not only in theory but also in practice. In most of the countries of the world, the socialist systems are collapsing under the weight of their own non-viability. Even the Government of India admitted in 1991, the errors of its socialist past and professed to be pursuing the path of market-oriented economies. I am not trying to override socialism.

…That socialists have the possibility of organising themselves as political parties while those having problems of conscience in declaring adherence to socialism should be stopped from organising themselves in to a political party is wholly discriminatory, and hence, clearly in breach of the fundamental right of association.

…without going into the question of the precise definition of the term “socialism” the right of a non-socialist citizen to hold his personal views and be entitled to all the privileges enjoyed by the socialist fellow-citizens cannot be denied.

Firstly, the dispensation of section 29(A) does not serve any particular purpose. Secondly, you are asking the people to swear by a word “socialism” which has not been defined…I am only demanding that the legislation should be modified to remove this kind of a contradictory position.

SHRI MOOL CHAND MEENA: “Socialism” is one of our basic concept which had been incorporated in our Constitution after independence but Shri Joshi ji has not understood the basic concept in its true spirit and, therefore, purposes an amendment to it. I do not support the amendment moved by Shri Joshi but I will rather request him to understand the basic concept of ‘Socialism’ and not temper such basic concept.

…Today, we are talking of socialism but the poor is getting poorer and the rich is becoming more rich. This needs to be stopped because it is a great threat to the democracy. If this is not stopped, the people would capture Assemblies and Parliament on the basis of money power. Not only our Constitution, but our Independence and our Democracy has been attacked and are being attacked. Strict Action must be taken against those political parties which do not respect the basic spirit of the Constitution. Therefore, I request Shri Joshi not to stress upon removing the word socialism, rather, he should emphasize for its implementation.

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: To oppose socialism is a very unpopular thing. The strongest point that Mr. Joshi, has made is that socialism is one of the many economic doctrines that have arisen in this world throughout the core world’s economic history. To say that you are bound down to a particular economic doctrine, is to curtail the liberty of a speech, and which is inconsistent with democracy. Therefore, Mr. Sharad Joshi is absolutely right that democracy and socialism cannot be equated, because democracy itself means you are right to say things which others do not accept. In spite of all things, he has no chance of getting this Bill passed through this Parliament. But, certainly, in the Supreme Court of India, he is bound to succeed on the constitutionality of the provision. As regards his current speech here,with a little expansion and with a little deletion here and there, it should be published in the form of a book which must be made available to every student and every teacher of political science throughout the country. Today, socialism and supporters of socialism are becoming unpopular. There are some political parties which bravely say that they do not believe in socialism. It is their right to say it and they should be allowed to exist. It is not a practical wisdom to pursue this Bill here.

SHRI RAASHID ALVI: Thebiggest evidence of this country’s democracy is that despite this preamble of the Constitution, Mr. Joshi is a Member of this House and with all his vigour , he has every right to oppose the word socialism. India is country having population of 100 crore people. Who follow different religions, languages and ideologies etc. But, this is not possible that the Constitution should have 100 crore ideologies. When we attained Independence, our country chose to be a democratice country inspite of the fact that Pakistan declared itself to be a Muslim country and that 90 per cent of the Members of Constituent Assembly were Hindu.

I do not say that everyone in the country is working for secularism. There are political parties, the leaders of which claim to be the followers of great socialist leaders like Dr. Lohia and others, but they are in politics having connection with the richest persons in India. Mr. Joshi said that taking oath in the name of constitution is wrong, because, we do not follow the basic spirit enshrined is its pre-amble. It is provided in the Constitution that you can bring amendment in it and even you can amend the whole of the Constitution. Therefore, it is not proper to state that the word socialism should be removed from the preamble. I strongly oppose this amendment Bill.

SHRI E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN: ShriJoshiji is proposing this Bill despite the fact that the evolution of Indian democracy and Independence is over-based on socialism. In almost every proposal adopted by the general conferences of Congress before India got independence, a stress was laid that India would follow the path of socialistic pattern of democracy. Therefore, we cannot say that the socialist word is borrowed from some other literature and, therefore, it may be a thing we need to hate.

…Socialism is for the distribution of economic produce which is meant for the society. We have the Panchayati System in which any person who has crossed the age of 18 can become a person to decide about the property of the community. This right has been given by Panchayati Raj system. It is the unity of the people at the grass-root level and they decide their own economic welfare. We cannot depend on the FDI alone; we cannot depend on the WTO alone; We cannot depend on the system where we pray that foreigners come here. No doubt, we need better infrastructure, better roads, lot of trains, and more agricultural produce. We need employment for our unemployed people. One day, India will be a Super Power.

Supreme Court says that the word ‘socialist’ should not be removed. That is the judgement of the Supreme Court. The same Supreme Court says that the word ‘secular’ should not be removed. India is a secular country, it is a socialist country. That is the verdict of the Supreme Court. The ‘Socialist, Democratic Republic’, these words will give spirit to the future of India.

SHRI JAIRAM RAMESH : I think the most important charge that has been levelled was that before 1991 the Indian Economic Policy was based on socialism which was an imported ideology. It is a gross misreading of the economic policy that this country adopted after 1947 on which there was a consensus. I would like to request Mr. Joshi to be sensitive.

Our basic political commitment was to parliamentary form of democracy. We did not adopt the Soviet model lock, stock and barrel. India remained a country in which farms were owned by individuals but we did not introduce collectivisation of agriculture, of the type that was introduced in the Soviet Union and China with disastrous consequences. Socialism in the India context meant equality of opportunity. Today, we are still fighting the battle of extending the benefits of education and health to a large sections of our people. After all, even the Avadi Resolution of 1955 commits the Government to a socialistic pattern of society. And a socialistic pattern of society means equality of opportunity, brotherhood, and education, etc. The Green Revolution was possible because of investments in irrigation and investment in Agricultural Universities.

You might argue that today that system requires reform. But to say that the entire Green Revolution in India was ‘market force’ is, a totally wrong view. If there was no Government, there would have been no Green Revolution. I would request Mr.Sharad Joshi to withdraw the Bill.

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (SHRI K. VENKATAPATHY) intervening in the debate, said: I am extremely happy that the attention of this august House has been drawn to one of the cardinal principles embodied in our Constitution by Shri Sharad Anantrao Joshi by way of the Representation of the People (Amendment) Bill, 2004. The hon. Member has sought omission on the word’ socialism’ from sub-section (5) of Section 29A of the Representation of the People’s Act,1951.

The hon. Member has singled out the word ‘socialism’ possibly in the background of globalisation of the national economy. It may be stated that in view of the widespread poverty and economic disparity, socialism will always remain relevant to the Indian social condition. Any Government or political party cannot administer this country remaining oblivious to the plight of the general public. In the Indian context, there is no role or scope for a political party, which does not have faith in socialism as reflected in the Directive Principles of State Policy. The fact that you could make a speech against socialism is itself evidence that this right has been conferred by the Constitution.

Our Directive Principles of State Policy also insist that socialistic pattern should be adopted. Therefore, in adherence to that Policy, we have to follow the principle of socialism. Hence, it may be very difficult to subscribe to the view of the hon. Member that the word ‘socialism’ should be removed from sub-section (5) of Section 29A of the Representation of the People’s Act, 1951. Hence, it is not possible to accept the Bill in its present form or with any modifications. In the circumstance, I appeal to the hon. Member to withdraw the Bill.

SHRI SHARAD ANANTRAO JOSHI replying to the debate, said: I thank all the Members who have participated in the debate. Shri Meenaji said that at the time of Independence the general sentiment and the consensus of the people in India, was in favour of socialism that is something which was partly repeated by Mr. Natchiappan and Mr. Jairam Ramesh also. I stoutly deny that. Pt. Nehru himself had admitted that this was not the majority view in the Congress. That was only his personal view. So, to say that in 1947 the general sentiment in India was for having a socialist country is incorrect.

At that time, the entire freedom movement was fought under Gandhian ideals. Pt. Nehru is on record, as saying that he does not subscribe to the economic policies of Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhiji necessarily stood for predominance of the primordial importance of villages, agriculture, farmer and the individual. After Independence and after Gandhiji was gone, Pt. Nehru tried to turn to a socialistic pattern in which not the villages but the cities became important, not the agriculture but the heavy industries became important, and not the individual and the freedom but the public sector became paramount. This was change the which happened without debate. I never said that Pt. Nehru’s taking the country to socialism was wrong. At a given point of time, there were decisions that had to be taken, and that were taken. But, to say that the socialism was the general consensus and sentiment at the time of Independence, is wrong.

I have never objected to the concept of a democratic and secular India. As a liberal, I stand for democracy and secularism. All that I am saying is that as you are being pluralistic in the matter of secularism, religion and faith, why are you not becoming pluralistic even about the economic doctrine? Socialism may be right, and probably, what you are doing is right. But, do I have not the right to say that I do not believe in socialism? Therefore, what I am saying is, consistent with the glorious history of the Congress Party, which is essentially pluralistic, you may believe in socialism, you carry out your socialist programme, but, permit me the right to not to be socialist. That is all that my Bill was about. Who would have believed that by 1980 we would have come to a time where socialism would be considered a ridiculous doctrine world over. The important thing is my time is still to come. I said that the word ‘socialism’ does not have any meaning and if that is so, then, asking anybody to swear by it is wrong. If you are socialist remain socialist. But please give me my right not to be a socialist.

The Motion moved by Shri Sharad Anantrao Joshi was negatived.

Why Is India's Supreme Court Angry?

By Manuwant Choudhary

India's Supreme Court is very angry ...at least thats what the Times of India would like us to believe and over what..over land acquistitions in Uttar Pradesh where Rahul baba sits in the sweltering sun hearing out farmer woes on live TV.

But while our judges say how can the government extend `public purpose' to malls and hotels and how can they acquire land from the poor and give it to the rich they forget that it is they too who are party to this peculiar situation in India.

When fundamental rights were disregarded by our parliament and politicians and not considered sacrosanct like the US Bill of Rights, the courts remained silent.

When property rights were removed from our fundamental rights our courts kept silent.

When land belonging to the landlords were taken and given to the poor the same courts said that this is socialism and must be done to bring about equality.

But what they forgot is when you write a constitution its not for the rich or for the poor - it is for all its people - rich or poor and from whatever caste of creed you belong to - for all Indians.

A constitution is supposed to unite all its people not divide.

Robbing Paul to pay Peter is no constitution.

Unfortunately, India's constitution is not what we the people gave to ourselves on November 26 1949.

Either, we go back to the old constitution or we write a new one.

I fear India has already become like Nepal..where they are struggling to even write a constitution...they even have a constitution God.

The situation in India is......