📰 Thirty years after the 8888 uprising
Myanmar’s stability and development depend on how the issues of equality and federalism are addressed
•August 8 marks the 30th anniversary of the people’s uprising in Myanmar. The ‘8888’ uprising (or the eighth day of August 1988) is one of Myanmar’s most important historic days in the context of the pro-democracy movement (Picture shows the student flag with the ‘Fighting Peacock’ insignia, and used during the uprising).
•The anniversary organising committee is holding events (from August 6 to 8) including political discussions on topics such as ‘A 30-year journey to democracy’, ‘Towards equality for ethnic people and a federal union’ and ‘Myanmar politics and the military regime’. The committee will be submitting the results of these discussions to the government.
Still relevant
•For a few years now, the day has also been observed in different parts of the world by Burmese expatriates. Inside Myanmar too, it has been marked by pro-democracy groups in different capacities. But this year’s programme in Myanmar is significant for three reasons: it keeps alive the spirit of democracy; underscores the need for equality and federalism; and builds an awareness campaign on the role of military.
•‘8888’ was a people’s movement that challenged the then ruling Burma Socialist Programme Party’s grip on political, economic and social affairs which led the country into extreme poverty. The protests and the bloody crackdown gave rise to the National League for Democracy (NLD), a political party which paved the way for the current Myanmar State Counsellor, Aung San Suu Kyi’s entry into politics and for the pro-democracy movement to continue.
•The past 30 years have seen a change in leadership — from military dictatorship to a military-backed semi-democracy and then to a negotiated hybrid regime with power being shared between unelected military personnel and an elected civilian leadership.
•The political change paved the way for former military generals to lead the country in civilian garb during the Union Solidarity and Development Party government which was led by President Thein Sein from 2011. Then, from 2016, Ms. Suu Kyi and the NLD formed the first civilian government in over half a century.
•Interestingly, both Myanmar’s President Win Myint and Ms. Suu Kyi were political prisoners in the aftermath of the 1988 uprising.
•The objective of ‘8888’ was two-fold: to push for the transfer of power from the military to a civilian leadership and a change in the political system from an authoritarian regime to a multi-party democracy.
•But for the country’s ethnic minorities, their struggle and political demands that date back to before Mynamar’s independence in 1948 continue. The non-Burman ethnic armed groups have fought for a federal democracy that guarantees autonomy or self-determination in their respective areas and the right for control over their people and resources. The kind of federalism the ethnic minorities want, based on equality of rights to all citizens, has been denied by the military leadership and the government.
The core issues
•The ‘8888’ anniversary organising committee, which is predominantly from the Burman-majority, understands this need and has laid emphasis on the importance of equality and federalism. These issues are today the most discussed in the ongoing peace talks between the civilian government, the military and the ethnic armed groups. The success or failure of the peace talks (or the 21st Century Panglong conference) will largely depend on how these two issues are handled. On this also depends Myanmar’s peace, stability and development.
•The democratic transition in Myanmar thus far has been meticulously designed by the military. The primary objective, which is laid out in the country’s 2008 Constitution, is to give the military a dominant role in politics. In a parallel to the ‘Burmese way to socialism’ introduced by former military leader Ne Win in the 1960s, Myanmar now practices what can be called the ‘Burmese way to democracy’ as introduced by former Prime Minister Khin Nyunt in 2003 when he announced the military’s seven-step road map to a flourishing democracy.
•But now, in political discussions, the ‘8888’ leaders should look at democratic transitions in other countries. They should share their findings not only with the civilian government but also with the military leadership.
•The military may hesitate to roll back its dominant role in Myanmar’s politics but it should note that no democracy can succeed when the military holds the reins and is unaccountable to an elected civilian leadership.
•For democracy to strike deep roots in Myanmar, the role of the ‘8888’ leaders remains important. The military must note that the people of Myanmar as well as members of the international community want a democracy that respects the rights of all its people, including the minorities.
📰 Three northeastern States emerge as new HIV hotspots
Health Ministry attributes rise of incidence in Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura to injecting drug users and unsafe sexual practices
•The good news is that there has been a steady decline in the number of HIV cases in India. The bad news is that Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura have emerged as the new hotspots for HIV, according to the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
Lok Sabha reply
•In response to a question in the Lok Sabha on Friday, the Ministry attributed the reason for the rise in the incidence of HIV in the three northeastern States to the high-risk behaviour of Injecting Drug Users (IDUs), and unsafe sexual practices.
•In four sites in Mizoram and one in Tripura, HIV prevalence was higher among IDUs, which for the rest of the country is 6.3%. At least in three places at Aizwal, Champhai and Kolasib, the prevalence of HIV in IDUs was 37.44%, 33.06% and 38.14% respectively.
•HIV prevalence among female sex workers was higher at four sites — two in Tripura and one each in Mizoram and Meghlaya. At one site of Mizoram’s Aizwal district, the prevalence of HIV was as high as 24.68%, compared with 1.6% for other sites in the country.
•In the case of pregnant women visiting ante-natal clinics (ANC), six centres in Mizoram, two in Meghalaya and one in Tripura recorded HIV prevalence of more than 1%, compared with HIV prevalence of 0.28% among pregnant women visiting ANCs in other places in India surveyed in December 2017.
•The HIV Sentinel Surveillance (HSS), a biennial study conducted by the National AIDS Control Organisation (NACO), is one of the largest regular studies in the world dealing with HIV in high risk groups of the population.
•The HSS had referred that HIV prevalence in the context of ANCs in the northeastern States of Mizoram (1.19%), Nagaland (0.82%), Meghalaya (0.73%), Tripura (0.56%) and Manipur (0.47%) were among the highest.
•Samiran Panda, Director of the National AIDS Research Institute (NARI), said that the discussion on HIV prevalence has to be taken to the districts. “We need prevention and intervention strategies for the most-at-risk population in these pockets, with good coverage,” Dr. Panda said.
•In terms of persons living with HIV (PLHIV) who are on Anti-Retroviral Treatment (ART), Dr. Panda said that almost 12.28 lakh people are covered under ART. According to him, the target is to bring 90% of the 21 lakh people living with the HIV infection in India under ART.
•“Going by that target, we are still short of about 6 lakh patients. The challenge is to encourage more people to take the test and then provide them with ART,” he said.
ART’s efficacy
•Interestingly, ART leads to effectively suppressing the virus and reducing the transmission of HIV from the infected person, Dr. Panda said.
•In terms of PLHIV who are on ART, Maharashtra has the highest number (with 2.03 lakh persons) followed by A.P.(1.78 lakh ) and Karnataka (1.58 lakh persons).
📰 Rebooting the system for a skills upgrade
There needs to be a road map to rescue private Industrial Training Institutes from their weak state
•Small shops, basements, tin sheds and godowns. These are not random workplaces but places where private Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) are running in the country. Disturbing facts such as these come from the report of the Standing Committee on Labour (2017-18) headed by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Kirit Somaiya, on the “Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) and Skill Development Initiative Scheme” of the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship (MSDE). It was submitted to Parliament few months ago.
Explaining the scale-up
•The ITIs were initiated in the 1950s. In a span of 60 years, until 2007, around 1,896 public and 2,000 private ITIs were set up. However, in a 10-year period from 2007, more than 9,000 additional private ITIs were accredited.
•What explains this huge private sector scale-up? The committee says that it is not efficiency but a disregard for norms and standards. However, the ITIs are not alone. The National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) today has more than 6,000 private training centres. Since it has short-term courses and its centres open and close frequently, it is all the more prone to a dilution of standards. Private training partners have mushroomed at the rate of five a day (mostly with government support) and it is clear that the government has been unable to regulate private institutions for quality. Private sector engagement in skill development has been taken up by standalone private training partners and not employers. The latter could have made the system demand-driven. Meanwhile, the lack of a regulator for skill development, with teeth, has led to poor quality affiliation, assessment and certification.
•The Somaiya committee report is scathing in its tone and specific in details. It outlines instances of responsibility outsourcing, no oversight, connivance and an ownership tussle between the Central and State governments.
•Private-ITI accreditation troubles started when the Quality Council of India (QCI), a private body, was hired due to “high workload of affiliation and shortage of [government] staff”. The QCI did not follow accreditation norms created by the National Council for Vocational Training (NCVT) and it appears that neither scale nor standard was achieved, but only speed. ‘Speed’ now risks the future of 13.8 lakh students (on an average, 206 students per ITI) studying in these substandard ITIs, which can be closed any time.
•The ITIs have a unique functioning set-up. While they were formed under the government’s Craftsman Training Scheme scheme, their day-to-day administration, finances and admissions are with State governments. The NCVT performs an advisory role. The ITIs often run into issues with no one to take ownership. A case in point is the examination process — the question paper is prepared by the NCVT, but administered and evaluated by instructors of the State Councils for VT. The NCVT is just a stamp with no role in actually assessing quality. How can quality outcomes be expected without quality assessments?
•The parliamentary committee has shed light on the ITIs. If the same exercise were extended to other skill development schemes, the picture would be grimmer. There are 183 cases pending in High Courts on non-compliance of norms by the ITIs. However, the short-term training programmes of the Ministry evade any scrutiny and action. For example, the Standard Training Assessment and Reward scheme spent ₹850 crore in 2013-14 with no norms for quality. There were no Aadhaar checks, attendance requirements and batch size limitations. Private training operators have made a profit with no court cases.
•The report also reinforces disturbing findings of a national survey by the research institute (NILERD) of the Planning Commission in 2011 about private ITIs: they offered training in less than five trades (in government ITIs it is less than 10); had fewer classrooms and workshops for practice; and their teachers were very poorly paid.
A starting point
•So what can we do systemically? A good point to start would be the Sharda Prasad Committee recommendations.
•We need better oversight, with a national board for all skill development programmes. The core work (accreditation, assessment, certification and course standards) cannot be outsourced. Like every other education board (such as the CBSE), a board is required in vocational training that is accountable. Since we have the NCVT as a legacy, it should be used as a kernel to constitute the board. We should also have a mandatory rating system for the ITIs that is published periodically. A ranking of the ITIs on several parameters such as the one done by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council in tertiary education can be replicated.
•There should be one system, with one law and one national vocational education and training system. The silos in which vocational training happens in India is unfortunate. We need to create a unified national vocational system where the ITIs, NSDC private vocational trainers and vocational education in schools, and the other Central ministries conducting training gel seamlessly and can learn from, and work with each other. A unified legal framework can facilitate such a unification. The absence of a law has only weakened regulation and monitoring. What we need is a national vocational act that replaces all scattered regulations — recommended in the 12th Five Year Plan.
Micro-institutional reforms
•The ITIs have many internal issues such as staffing and salaries that need attention, as the NILERD nationwide survey in 2011 had found. There is also a critical need to reskill ITI teachers and maintain the student-teacher ratio. Since technology obsolescence is a continuous challenge, financial support envisaged through the NSDC should be extended to the ITIs.
•The primary reason for hiring the QCI and the mess that followed was this: “huge workload of affiliation and shortage of staff”. This is true even today. It is unlikely that without fixing this, the QCI mistake will not be repeated. There has been a tremendous push by the government for private sector talent in government; perhaps it is worth considering talent from the open market to fill up higher posts in skill development.
•Institutional reforms such as moving the office of the Directorate General of Employment (the arm that has all data on employment) from the Ministry of Labour to the MSDE would help. It would also complement the Directorate General of Training already under MSDE.
Employers and financing
•This is the last but perennial challenge. Given the scale of our demographic challenge, a belief that financing from corporate social responsibility, multilateral organisations such as the World Bank, and the government will meet the financial needs for skill development is wishful thinking.
•The only way to mobilise adequate resources the right way is to do skills training, and have equipment and tools that keep pace with changing needs and ensure that employers have skin in the game. This is possible through a reimbursable industry contribution (RIC) — a 1-2% payroll tax that will be reimbursed when employers train using public/private infrastructure and provide data. RIC, which is implemented in 62 other countries, was recommended in the 12th Plan and is an idea whose time has come. An estimate by the first author of this article indicated that such a tax would generate ₹17, 000 crore per annum for skilling in India — which is several multiples of State/Union governments’ current annual budget for skilling.
•Finally, while there is so much talk of skills for the future and the impact of artificial intelligence and automation, data show that 13.8 lakh students in the ITIs are suffering due to poor institutional accreditation. Placement in NSDC training has been less than 15%. Maybe if we take care of the present, we will be better prepared for the future.
📰 Our privacy’s worth
A response to some criticism of the Srikrishna Committee report
•In “A fundamental error” (The Hindu, August 1), Apar Gupta and Ujwala Uppaluri allege that the Srikrishna Committee has undermined and reinterpreted the legal principles in the right to privacy judgment. Neither the report nor the Bill does anything of that sort.
•Let us first understand the task that the Committee was faced with. In August 2017, the Supreme Court declared the right to privacy a fundamental right and observed that informational privacy is a key facet of this right. In the wake of the judgment, the court said that the state must create a regime for informational privacy which protects individuals from harm that originates from state and non-state actors. Though the Committee was constituted prior to the judgment, this was undoubtedly its task, as stated in its report.
Towards the collective good
•Let us now move to the two key points raised in the article. The first “provocative” claim made is that the Supreme Court has held that the individual is the beneficiary of fundamental rights. This is indeed a provocative claim. To see individuals as the primary beneficiaries of rights is a misreading of the Constitution. The Preamble of the Constitution speaks of a people who value liberty, equality, fraternity and justice. Much like other fundamental rights, the right to privacy is a means to achieve this collective goal of a free and just society. The report makes this point as succinctly as possible when it notes that the importance of a right in this account is not because of the benefit that accrues to the rights-holder but because that benefit is a public good. In other words, there is an important societal interest which is furthered by protecting the right to privacy. An impoverished account that sees rights as furthering only individual interests is perhaps reflective of the society that we currently are — a society which, as a collective, barely values rights. Despite the court’s valiant efforts every once in a while, the failure of our pursuit of liberty, equality and fraternity is there for all to see.
•Nothing in this account of rights strays from the right to privacy judgment as claimed by the authors. In fact, one of the sentences picked out by the authors from the judgment makes the same point. The authors quote Justice D.Y. Chandrachud who notes that the “individual is the focal point of the Constitution because it is in the realisation of individual rights that the collective well being of the community is determined”. Evidently this statement does not reduce rights to tools that solely further individual interests. Rather, it is a recognition of the fact that the constitutional project to realise individual rights is not aimed at the fulfilment of individual interests, but at achieving the higher objective of creating a free and equal society. It is to this effect that the Committee notes that it would be an error to view individual rights as deontological categories which protect individual interests. Privacy is a fundamental right not merely because I value it or stand to benefit from it, but because we as a society value it and stand to benefit from it.
•Now, the second claim. The authors suggest that the report endorses a view that the right to privacy dissolves in the face of amorphous claims of economic development. Instead, the report actually dismisses the notion of such a binary. The Committee specifically emphasises that protecting the autonomy of an individual is critical not simply for her own sake but because such autonomy is constitutive of the common good of a free and fair digital economy. This proposition does not make the crude argument that individual rights are subject to some notion of greater good. Rather, it expresses the view that protecting the autonomy of data principals is critical as it will encourage the flow of information. Therefore, the Committee observes that such an economy envisages a polity where the individual autonomously decides what to do with her personal data, entities responsibly share such data, and everyone uses data which have immense potential for empowerment, in a manner that promotes overall welfare.
•It is all well to say that the autonomy of an individual with respect to personal data should be protected for its own sake. But stating that the right must be protected to the fullest, as information flow will gather pace in a digital economy, does not detract from the right in the least. In fact, it gives an additional reason to pursue the right. In India, in recent years, it is considered a mark of good constitutional scholarship to view any argument which points towards economic development as disingenuous. Frankly, this is surprising for a country where many struggle to make ends meet. If the “digital economy” offers our society as a whole a chance of prosperity without compromising on our privacy, we must take it.
Debating the report and Bill
•The Srikrishna Committee report and Bill are not perfect outcomes of a perfect process. However, they are honest attempts to provide rational solutions to real problems in an incredibly complicated and contested area of policymaking. Any criticism of the report or the Bill should be wholeheartedly welcomed. However, pointing out the odd use of difficult language or of inadequate context while citing foreign authorities does not address the real issues raised in the report or the Bill.
📰 The economics of tax havens
Do crackdowns on tax havens help recover taxes?
•Tax havens, which help rich corporations and businessmen avoid paying high taxes on their income, have been vilified for supporting the illegal accumulation of wealth. Organisations like Oxfam have often characterised tax havens as “anti-poor” since they help the rich avoid paying taxes to governments. Several governments have also come together to crack down on tax havens, for only a collective effort can help.
•However, a 2018 paper by Juan Carlos Suarez Serrato, titled “Unintended consequences of eliminating tax havens”, circulated by the National Bureau of Economic Research, makes the interesting case that critics may be committing a huge mistake by attacking tax havens. The paper tries to see if eliminating tax havens is good economic policy. To this end, the authors study the economic impact of repealing Section 936 of the Internal Revenue Code, a move that made it harder for American multinational corporations to avoid paying taxes to the U.S. government. Corporations had earlier made use of Section 936 to avoid paying high taxes in the U.S. by shifting their profits to tax havens like Puerto Rico that charged them lower tax rates. Serrato found that companies affected by the repeal of Section 936 shifted their investment abroad. This caused their investment in the U.S. to drop by 38% and led to the loss of 1 million U.S. jobs. In short, the existence of tax havens allowed corporations to invest in the U.S. despite the country’s high tax rates because tax havens helped to lower the effective U.S. tax rate. But with the crackdown on tax havens, corporations could no longer serve U.S. consumers.
•Despite the crackdown on tax havens, the practice of shifting profits to avoid paying higher taxes continues unabated. According to another recent paper, “The missing profits of nations”, by Ludvig Wier and others, about 40% of the profits earned by multinationals each year continue to be shifted to tax havens. The authors argue that such profit shifting persists because tax authorities in high-tax countries have been unable to eliminate the influence of tax havens that compete against them for revenues. So these tax authorities have instead resorted to competing against other high-tax countries by allowing corporations to shift profits to their jurisdictions. In fact, according to the authors, such competition between tax authorities has caused the average global corporate tax rate to fall by more than half between 1985 and 2018.
📰 China tests hypersonic aircraft
•China on Monday announced that it has successfully tested its first hypersonic aircraft which could carry nuclear warheads and penetrate any current generation anti-missile defence systems, seen as a breakthrough in developing weapons.
•The Xingkong-2 or Starry Sky-2, was launched in a target range located in Northwest China on Friday, the state-run China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics.
•Launched by a multi-stage rocket, China’s waverider was released in the air after about 10 minutes. It flew independently, made large-angle turning manoeuvres, and landed in the targeted area as planned, the statement said. The flight vehicle reached 30 kms in altitude at Mach 5.5-6.
📰 LS passes SC/ST amendment Bill
Was brought to bypass Supreme Court ruling that ‘diluted’ provisions of law
•The Lok Sabha on Monday passed the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Bill, 2018, to bypass the recent ruling of the Supreme Court laying down procedures for arrests under the Act. The Bill will now go to the Upper House.
•The Bill inserts section 18A (1) (a) in the 1989 Act, that says a “preliminary enquiry shall not be required for registration of an FIR against any person.” The Bill also inserts Section 18A (1) (b), which says “the investigating officer shall not require approval for the arrest, if necessary, of any person against whom an accusation of having committed an offence under this Act has been made and no procedure, other than that provided under this Act or the Code, shall apply.”
•The Bill’s Statement of Objects and Reasons says that under the CrPC, the decision to arrest a person is taken by the investigating officer and there was no requirement for approval. The Bill also goes back to the original SC/ST (PoA) Bill, doing away with the provision of anticipatory bail the Supreme Court ruling had permitted.
•“The provision of section 438 of the Code shall not apply to a case under this Act, notwithstanding any judgment or order or direction of any Court,” says section 18A (2) of the Bill. Section 438 of the CrPC deals with direction for grant of bail to a person apprehending arrest.
•The Supreme Court had on March 20, 2018, introduced protective provisions in the SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989, to permit anticipatory bail —despite a section of the Act denying it — and laying down a preliminary enquiry by police before any action is taken. It had also laid down that the permission of the appointing authority would be required to arrest a public servant and that of an SSP for the arrest of a person who is not a public servant.
📰 Rajya Sabha gives nod for NCBC Bill
Legislation was passed by the Lok Sabha with over a two-thirds majority on August 2
•The Bill extending constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) was cleared unanimously by the Rajya Sabha on Monday. The Lok Sabha had passed the proposed law on August 2 with more than a two-thirds majority.
•In the Upper House, the Constitution (123rd Amendment) Bill, 2017, was adopted by all the present 156 members, incorporating certain amendments made by the Lok Sabha. Several Opposition members, however, recommended that the government should make public the caste census findings, based on which the reservation policy should be formulated.
•Replying to the debate on the Bill, Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Thaawar Chand Gehlot said the law would help the Other Backward Classes (OBC) get justice. Acceding to the recommendation of Opposition members, he said the Commission would have female representation.
•The Minister also assured the House that the NCBC would not encroach upon the rights of State governments as they would have their own backward classes commissions. He said States had their own lists of OBC castes, while the Centre had a separate one and that the NCBC would make recommendations only to the Centre. Mr. Gehlot said the government would immediately constitute the Commission.
Minority representation
•During the debate, referring to the demands of some Opposition leaders to ensure representation of minority communities in the Commission, BJP’s Bhupender Yadav said political parties should rise above vote bank politics and focus on social justice. “OBC is a religion-neutral term…there is a separate Commission for the minorities,” he said.
•Stating that the Bill was long overdue, Mr. Yadav said in several States, even 27% reservation for OBCs had not been implemented. He also accused the Congress of scuttling the attempts to strengthen the backward communities in the past, urging the party to support the proposed law.
•Congress leader B.K. Hariprasad raised the issue of caste census and minority representation and also wanted the “creamy layer” system to be dispensed with.
•Ram Gopal Yadav of the Samajwadi Party demanded reservation for OBCs in the Judiciary. D. Raja of the CPI said there was no point in having commissions if their recommendations were not binding upon the government. A. Navaneethakrishnan of the AIADMK supported the Bill.
📰 Three-judge SC Bench to hear Article 35A issue
Will study if it is violative of basic structure of Constitution
•Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on Monday orally observed that the Supreme Court will consider whether Article 35A, which gives special status to the State and people of Jammu and Kashmir, is violative of the basic structure of the Constitution.
•Basic structure is a collective term coined by a 13-judge Bench in the historic Keshavananda Bharati case to include a catena of fundamental rights, including right to equality, non-discrimination, liberty, life and dignity, enshrined and preserved in the Constitution.
Plea for adjournment
•The Centre, represented by Attorney-General K.K. Venugopal, persisted that the case should be adjourned as an interlocutor is carrying on dialogue with the State’s stakeholders.
•The State of Jammu & Kashmir, represented by Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, sought an adjournment citing the “ongoing preparations for the upcoming panchayat/urban local body and municipal elections in Jammu and Kashmir”.
•However, the Bench led by Chief Justice Misra and comprising Justice A.M. Khanwilkar was missing its third member, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, who is on leave. Chief Justice Misra explained that since the issue is being heard by a three-judge Bench and one of them is absent, the case should be adjourned.
•“The challenge to Article 35A is being heard by a three-judge Bench. The three-judge Bench will determine whether the case should be referred to a Constitution Bench. Today, as you see, the other judge is absent and so we have to hear the case another day,” Chief Justice Misra addressed the petitioner lawyers, who objected to an adjournment.
•The Bench posted the case for hearing in the week commencing August 26.
