Justice- a matter of hope

Since the times of Plato, justice has been defined as the highest virtue of a good political system. Indeed every society strives to achieve this virtue for a good society is considered to be a just society. It is an all encompassing political virtue, which is a strong temptation for every government, organization (national or international) and association. In broad sense we can understand justice as a state where no wrong doing is involved. Historically we can see how justice and law have a close connection. Law is abiding both on individuals and public authorities. Even though abiding in nature, enforcement of the same laws is relatively a difficult task. The modern nation state which gives supremacy to rule of law, is caught up between the problem of construction and implementation of laws. In a country with written constitution law acquires primacy over every organ of the state. In a society of political, social and economic inequalities, judiciary is the only system through which laws can be constructed and issues of injustice could be addressed. But why with each passing day, the system of laws is seen to be complex? Why a country like India, where the constitution was framed after adopting the finest ideologies from dissimilar constitutions, is lacking initiatives in implementing appropriate justice system.

The nucleus of every problem is corruption. So we can see how the system of justice which was traced back to the philosophy of Plato, is failing to put into effect due corruption in the political and social structures of modern nation states. Corruption is a nexus between the bureaucracy, politics, businessmen, the moneyed and the criminals. We see more of interest-oriented rather than nation-oriented attitude of policy makers. Indian constitution has laws and provisions almost for everything. Hence the institution entrusted with interpreting the constitution i.e. the supreme court of India is in the position of either damaging or preserving our constitution.

Judicial activism gave a new face to justice, giving benefit to the have-nots and disadvantaged groups. The supreme court has gained stature and legitimacy with judicial activism. It has become a weapon of empowerment. The Supreme Court has gone protecting the browbeaten socially, economically and now looking into the poor administration of the country is definitely a wave a hope. The citizens of India can still hope that justice is just not beyond reach. The common citizens have discovered that the administration has become so apathetic and non-performing and corruption and criminality so widespread that they have no recourse except to move the courts through PIL, enlarging the field for judicial intervention.

With the recent intervention of the court in the matter of food grains distribution to the poor free of cost or at low prices is an affirmative guidance given to the Congress-led UPA government. The bench comprising justices Dalveer Bhandari and Deepak Verma, while hearing public interest litigation on the right to food and public distribution system (PDS), clarified the nature of its order to the Union government on 12 August about distributing food grains free to the poor. This wasn’t just a suggestion but an order by Supreme Court. This public interest case on right to food brought before the apex court by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) seeks to clean up the PDSadministered by the Food Corporation of India and the ministry of consumer affairs, which has suffered from gross negligence, corruption and pilferage in recent years.

Judicial activism has now become a ray of hope for every citizen in India who are trying to fight corruption. It’s true that either the Supreme court flourish what we have got or can tear down what we have inherited. Corruption has become a fight for people apart from Netas (the politicians), babus(bureaucrats), lalas(the businessman) and the gundas(the criminals)and by extension the fight of the Supreme Court.

Not just keeping hopes from our state and its’ institutions we people must strive to contain corruption and keep the democratic foundation strong.

An interview with a maid

She’s a woman, a mother, a wife, and she is a maid too.

The percentage of maids working in Northern India is pretty high. The comfort they provide us, can make our lives incomplete and chaotic if they remain absent even for one single day from our homes. Housewives and sometimes husbands also complain, if their beloved maids miss work for one day. We’ve become parasites, surviving on their presence.

After so much of hard work what they get in return and what respect they get back home is a sad part of their lives. From what background they are coming? Do they live a respectable life? We often find maids very clever, who gossip, irregular at work and unreliable.

There’s a woman whom I know since the time I started walking, who has been working for her kids and family. I find life in her, the kind of hard work she does and the life she leads is a kind of inspiration for people like us and even for the people who have been blessed with good health, but choose to beg rather than working.

After interviewing her life, I felt that if you’ve courage to fight for life, then it will surely bless you. Her name is Guddi. I made her comfortable on a chair to which she was not habitual and the round of questions of the interview followed:

Interviewer: Which place you belong to?

Guddi: Saharanpur. (she sounded unsure about what all was happening)

Interviewer: what is your age?

Guddi: I don’t know the exact year in which I was born, but if I calculate my age according to my children’s age, then I’ll be almost 40 years old.

Interviewer: for how long you’ve been working and when did you start working?

Guddi: I’ve been working for almost 22 years, I started working just after my marriage and then after coming to Ghaziabad, say 19 years back in 1991, I started with work after a gap of 5-6 months.

Interviewer: Did you choose to work or you were asked to?

Guddi: I never wanted to work in the first place, I was asked to.

Interviewer: why you were asked to work?

Guddi: My husband asked me leave his house, if I refused to work. He use to drink and beat me. My kids were foodless and these conditions forced me to work. I use to work earlier as well, when I was with my mother-in-law in Nagad (Saharanpur). But that time I never knew how much I earn. I worked for my in-laws. ( a dip in her voice, at the same time recalling her life)

Interviewer: So how you earn now?

Guddi: 5000

Interviewer: If not work, then what kind of life you wanted?

Guddi: I wanted a good husband and a home, kids and no work. I never worked in my childhood. I led a peaceful now. But now I work for almost 12-13 hours at a stretch. That was not the life that I wanted.

Interviewer: why you work so hard, unlike the other maids.

Guddi: I always wanted to study when I was a kid, but couldn’t because of low income of my dad. But now when I earn , I earn for my kids so that they can lead a respectable life, and they don’t have to work like me, because of education. I don’t compare my life with other maids, I compare it to mine. I work so hard because I like working for my kids, but not for my husband. (she stared out into no where)

Interviewer: why not for your husband?

Guddi: I give him space in my home and food to eat that is enough for that rowdy. He drinks and beat me whenever he likes. Gives me disrespect and sometimes even tries to rape me. He has never given me the love of a husband.

Interviewer: So is it going to remain the same way forever or things have changed for you?

Guddi: Yes, they have changed, because my kids are grown up now. They work for themselves and earn good. They’ve studied and it’s helping them. Now for my husband tries to beat me, my son who is taller than me, stops him there. (she said with an air of confidence in her voice)

Interviewer: what you wish for yourself in life?

Guddi: I wish that my daughter gets a husband. And I remain fit so that I can work for myself and never beg in front of anyone for money. Not even in front of my husband. Mujhe apni roti apne paison se chahiye.

Interviewer: How you feel when you compare your present to your past?

Guddi: I feel happy. I’ve always worked hard and faced worst crisis. But nothing stopped me from working. And it feels good to see the changes in and around me. May god gives me strength to live this life.

Suddenly she interrupted and said “ aey bibi, mujhe jaana hai, kaam reh raha hai, tujhe bhagwaan khush rakhe.”

I broke into a small laugh and let her go.

Culture: a matter of likes and dislikes.

Many practices, norms and rules of the present day have been defended on the grounds that a particular practice is held logical, because it’s a part of culture. What is culture?

Culture is a way of life. When two or more individuals adopt same kind of likings and dislikings in respect to music, taste, dressing, eating, thought process, we come to define it as culture. It’s a shared way of living. For instance if two people think that drinking is a sin then it becomes a part of their thinking which forms a particular culture, this is given acceptance and carried on from generation to generation and becomes a tradition on the same hand.

Is there something wrong about a particular culture. Well my logic says a big NO. We can’t hold a particular culture as intelligible or unintelligible because it’s not accepted by people at large. People have different identities and there identities can’t be modified in one single way. Just because a particular culture is in majority it can’t be acceptable to everyone. Culture becomes binding when it’s being imposed on individuals even when they don’t want to be a part of it. Many evil practices are defined as culture which is surely a misinterpretation (like honor killings).

But the question that we ask if all cultures are right in their own way then how can we prevent bad practices in society. For instance- hippies consume drugs as a part of their culture which is a crime, not for them but for the society. Where should we draw lines between good and bad practices. Well following are some of the points that must be considered-

· All cultures must hold some shared understanding of good or bad as this will create cooperative society.

· People should not impose a cultural practice on others.

· Culture should be a blend of modernity and traditions.

· It should be able to transcend itself with time.

· People should make culture a matter of principle but not a matter of rule.

· Practices which are unlawful (like consuming drugs) should be not be a part of any culture.

If these things are taken into consideration then we can hope to have a society where these heterogeneous cultures live in unity to form an ideal society. Where even conflicts can be easily resolved on a shared understanding.

Gandhi and Churchill

After reading this book review in TOI on the book by Richard Toye Henry Holt named “Churchill’s Empire: The World that made him and the world he made”, I got back to Gandhi’s work Hind Swaraj. I have not read the book on Winston Churchill. But I know for sure that Winston Churchill disliked Gandhi and Gandhi never disliked anyone.

"It is alarming and also nauseating to see Mr. Gandhi, a seditious middle temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the east, striding half-naked up the steps of the vice regal palace, while he is still organizing and conducting a defiant campaign of civil disobedience, to parley on equal terms with the representative of the king-emperor."- Winston Churchill, 1930.

His views on India as highlighted in the article were-

India is a Godless land of snobs and bores-1896.

India is a geographical term it is no more a united nation that the equator-1931

I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion-1942

Nobody of us would like these comments. So let me take you back to Gandhi what he offered us from his work. Gandhi very captivatingly pointed out that if India was not united and Indians did not have the sense of belongingness then British couldn’t divide India. As only UNITY can be broken and notDISUNITY. India was united that is why British could split us. For him unity was never a political unity but unity of hearts.

Therefore religion played a positive role for him. He said that every religion would teach the people the path of friendship with others . Gandhi questions whether Hindus and Muslims were always at war with each or whether this difference evolvedwith their arrival. Only the evils of western civilization brought in the difference.

Gandhi never loathed anyone but Winston Churchill did. And that makes him different and the epitome of peace and non-violence. Respect what he offered us by giving enlightenment to our thoughts. I don’t fully agree with Gandhi on civilization but a blend of modernity and traditionalism, both can bring development while keeping our culture intact.

Murder in the name of HONOR is no HONOR.

A series of honour killings graped the country this year bringing deep insights into the civil society. Young boys and girls were brutally murdered by their family members to protect the reputation of the family or community in parts of Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and New Delhi. More then 1000 killings have been done in the name of honour killing. There are special reports on this sitehttp://www.honourkilling.in/.

Even as the civil society fails to do anything about this crime the Human Rights Commission has raised voice over this issue. The propagators of such acts, the unofficial village councils, called the Khap Panchayats condemn marrying outside caste and religion and now even within same kinship (gotra), even when there is no biological connection between the latter.

In recent times, feminist activism has been pushing the states to take steps to address the issue. In response, Khap panchayats are claiming legitimacy over honour killings in defense of “our culture”.

Can Haryanvi or Western U.P culture be protected by honour killings. If so is the case then the first the priority of every state must be to protect our pride, which has been brought down due to corruption. Why don’t people raise their voice and kill the people in return who commit female infanticide. Why on such issues our culture isn’t threatened? What a contrast we see in our culture and polity. At one instance we talk about development in every possible field and on the other we such issues where minds fail to develop.

Under pressure from Human Rights watch to frame laws against the killings, the Indian Government has proposed amendments in the Indian Penal Code to ensure that individuals issuing diktats (harsh or authoritative statements) against couples can be charged with murder.

The political class of our country must not overlook this heinous crime and must address the issue with the Khap panchayats and must ask them to address issues of more importance like lack of inheritance among women, gender equations (which is a matter of concern in both Punjab and Haryana) and female foeticide .

Media Must Appeal for Peace

Who we are? Hindu or Muslim? When there is ‘Ali’ in “diwALI” and‘Ram’ in “RAMzan” then India must stand united. The verdict on Badri Masjid vs Ramjanambhoomi case should not affect the fabric of Indian democracy which has adopted the principle of SECULARISM with much pride. Our society has always been a tolerant society. When politics and religion go hand in hand then the verdict can destroy the peaceful environment of the country. Since the dispute is of political nature Hindus and Muslims must restrain themselves from reacting against the verdict.

ROLE OF MEDIA

As media plays a crucial in every issue of national and international importance and faces lots of criticism in giving a hyper and negative direction to issues of less importance sometimes, then media must come up to prove itself that it has been the power of media which has changed the scene of Indian politics by bringing every shortcomings of our government institutions. Newspapers, news channels, news website, the internet in general, social networking sites like facebook, mobile communication, all must pave way for peace. All modes of media and communication must appeal the people to keep faith in our institutions. And the same appeal should be made to the decision takers that they must be morally committed in reaching some conclusion.

Be it today or be it tomorrow, be the decision a Muslims favouring or Hindus favouring, be the decision taken by Allahabad High Court or the Supreme Court, or be the decision taken outside the court walls, people must restrain themselves from any dispute, for if we face some bad outcome of the verdict ( which should not happen) then we have not grown as good citizens and do not respect our Constitution.

Caste Census and Identity Politics

Identity politics has come to occupy a new phase in the contemporary politics. There is a supposed link between recognition and identity. Non-recognition or misrecognition can inflict harm, can be a form of oppression, imprisoning someone in a false, distorted and reduced mode of being.

Caste identity has been central in Indian politics. Caste has been a self-enclosed unit, it limits social interaction. It carries our identity. Caste is a rule and not a principle. As rules are hard to change but principles aren’t. It’s a major impediment in the growth of the society. There are caste-based political parties and even state institutions are providing caste-quotas. This probes to be a critical problem. In 2011 India will carry out its’ first caste based census, and this will bring new political forces in the country. The political players will be more caste focused in upcoming elections. People will not only identify themselves with a particular caste but this will also bring in the opportunity for the political parties to campaign for votes on caste-basis.

The future results of the Caste Census aren’t unpredictable and it makes us wonder for the ones who are against practicing caste, that why this decision was reached. The government has to take rational decisions, not based on the responses and pressure from the political parties but actually based on the ground realities, where caste identity is a major concern for the Indian society.