📰 Language of unity
States must be allowed to followtheir own language policy
•By rejecting the three-language formula advocated in the National Education Policy (NEP 2020), Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Edappadi K. Palaniswami has only reiterated the State’s unwavering position on an emotive and political issue. Its two-language policy, implemented decades ago after a historic agitation against the imposition of Hindi, remains non-negotiable for almost the entire political class. Opposition from the State had last year forced the Centre to amend the draft NEP and withdraw a proposal to teach Hindi as a third language in schools in non-Hindi speaking States. Yet in the NEP, approved by the Union Cabinet last week, it chose to push for the three-language formula, packaging it as a means to promote multilingualism and “national unity”. Though the policy said that no language will be imposed on any State, it has expectedly cut no ice with parties in Tamil Nadu, which have risen in near unison to oppose the proposal. In fact, Mr. Palaniswami, citing “collective sentiments” of the people, noted that the proposal was “saddening and painful” and appealed to the Prime Minister to allow States to follow their own language policy. In a State that resisted multiple attempts to impose Hindi since 1937, political parties are understandably wary of any mandate to impart an additional language in schools. They fear this would eventually pave the way for Hindi to enter the State through the back door. Since 1985, the State has even refused to allow Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas to be set up as they teach Hindi.
•The two-language policy of Tamil and English, piloted by former Chief Minister C.N. Annadurai in 1968, has thus far worked well in the State. In a liberalised world, more windows to the world are being opened up for those proficient in English, a global link language. The State’s significant human resources contribution to the ever-expanding IT sector is also attributed to the English fluency of its recruits as much as to their technical knowledge. There is this counter-argument that Tamil Nadu is depriving students of an opportunity to learn Hindi, touted as a national link language. However, its voluntary learning has never been restricted and the growth over the past decade in the number of CBSE schools, where the language is taught, would bear testimony to this. The patronage for the 102-year-old Dakshina Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha, based in Chennai, also proves this. In the Sabha’s centenary year, Tamil Nadu accounted for 73% of active Hindi pracharaks (teachers) in South India. Out of necessity, many in the State have picked up conversational Hindi to engage with the migrant population that feeds the labour needs from factories to hair salons. Only compulsion is met with resistance. India’s federal nature and diversity demand that no regional language is given supremacy over another.
Unchecked preventive detention and difficulty in accessing information are matters of grave concern
•A few human rights concerns have emerged in the Kashmir Valley over the last one year since the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution. Till the time of writing, the national portal of India website india.gov.in continued to show this Article as a part of the Constitution! What is the truth?
•Unchecked preventive detention — whether in the form of house arrest (admitted or denied) or preventive detention in jail in the Valley or outside the erstwhile State — is a matter of grave concern. So is the difficulty in accessing information whether through normal channels of communication or through electronic means such as the Internet.
Under house arrest
•The concept of house arrest is not specifically mentioned in the criminal manual but the state is empowered to declare a building or house as a sub-jail. Through such declarations, residential accommodations of some political leaders have been converted into sub-jails. The resident of a sub-jail is automatically and undeniably under detention and what is commonly known as house arrest.
•When a residential accommodation is declared a sub-jail, the state virtually acquires and takes over the property for its own purposes. The owner of the property is entitled to rent or compensation for the use and occupation of the property. So, in a sense, a person under house arrest without receiving compensation is doubly jeopardised. Compulsory takeover of property even for a limited period has been an issue of great concern in Mizoram where vast tracts of land were taken over by the armed forces to quell an insurgency. Many of these landowners have petitioned for compensation, though with little effect. Residents of the Valley will perhaps face the same problem as the Mizos.
•A variation of house arrest was employed during the Emergency when a few tourist resorts close to Delhi were declared as sub-jails and prominent political leaders incarcerated therein, without taking over their property. In a sense, therefore, some Emergency steps have now been adopted to quell dissent.
Preventive detention
•Preventive detention under the Public Safety Act (PSA) has caused immense hardship to a very large number of persons. Preventive detention is based on a prognosis of future events on the basis of past conduct. Like all preventive detention laws, the PSA is draconian but our Constitution provides important procedural safeguards that must be followed by the state or else the detention order will be quashed. Among them is the fundamental right to be communicated, as soon as may be, the grounds on which the order has been made and the earliest opportunity of making a representation against the order. Decisions of the Supreme Court hold that if there is an unexplained delay of even one or two days in dealing with the representation, the order of preventive detention is vitiated. A challenge to an order of preventive detention can be mounted on these and other procedural grounds. The law regulating the PSA is no different. Many preventive detention orders have been challenged through habeas corpus petitions but un
fortunately many of them are still pending in the concerned High Court. This did not happen even during the Emergency. What is the truth behind the delay?
•And now a new theory has been advanced by the state. In the case of one political leader, it was stated in an affidavit in the Supreme Court that he had not been preventively detained or kept under house arrest, which means that his residence was not declared a sub-jail. In other words, he was a free person. In that event why was his house swarming with policemen and why was he not free to move around? What is the truth?
•A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held in the case of A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1981) that, “Laws of preventive detention cannot, by the back-door, introduce procedural measures of a punitive kind... The normal rule has to be that the detenu will be kept in detention in a place which is within the environs of his or her ordinary place of residence. If a person ordinarily resides in Delhi to keep him in detention in a far of place like Madras or Calcutta is a punitive measure by itself which, in matters of preventive detention at any rate, is not to be encouraged... Whatever smacks of punishment must be scrupulously avoided in matters of preventive detention.” Although the PSA permits a detenu being detained outside the erstwhile State, such detention should ordinarily not be resorted to for a variety of reasons. But unfortunately the view of the Supreme Court has been followed more in the breach in the case of several PSA detenus. One gets the impression that resort to preventive detention is actually as a measure of punishment or conviction without a trial.
•There are several other reasons why the incarceration of hundreds of persons in the erstwhile State is a gross human rights violation. What makes the situation worse is that a very large number of children have had to suffer what is euphemistically called detention for their own good. The welfare and best interests of a child can hardly be decided in a police station without the involvement of the parents of the child.
Taking a step back
•Access to information might not yet be a fundamental right but it is certainly a human right. For the last one year, the residents of the Valley have been deprived of the benefit of 4G Internet. This has had an adverse impact on various aspects of daily life. For students, the joy of learning has become an imposition with 2G Internet. Medical professionals have difficulty in advising and counselling their patients. The right to health is an essential component of the right to life and this has been denied to a large number of patients. Businessman have suffered, the economy in the Valley has taken a hit and it appears that the powers that be are in no mood to relent. The Supreme Court has twice intervened but with no tangible effect. Orders concerning the Internet were required to be reviewed under the rules by a committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary. The committee has been downgraded and is now headed by the Home Secretary. In other words, rather than a step forward towards access to information, a small step back has been taken.
•While it may be that uncontrolled access to Internet could pose a security risk through misuse by terrorists and militants, today’s technology is so far advanced that it is possible to block access even in a limited way. For example, thousands of child pornography sites have been successfully blocked in different parts of the world, including India. Therefore, where there is a will to checkmate militants and terrorists through the effective use of technology, it is possible to do so, but taking a short cut by permitting download only by 2G possibly does more harm to a greater number of people than is necessary and is disproportionate.
•It is time to introspect and make the human rights of all our citizens an inclusive subject of free and frank discussion. If we keep beating about the bush, its leaves will eventually fall. What happens then?
📰 J&K and Ladakh, a year on
The government views the removal of Article 370 as a key vehicle to usher in transformational development in the region
•Though Syama Prasad Mukherjee highlighted the implications of Article 370 with the slogan “ Ek desh mein do vidhan, do pradhan, do nishan nahi chalenge (We can’t have two Constitutions, two Prime Ministers and two flags in one country)” , it was not until 1979 that the full discriminatory nature of Article 35A came to light. A single-judge Bench quashed the appointment of Dr. Ravinder Maadan as an Assistant Professor at the Government Medical College in Jammu. The court ruled that Dr. Maadan, who had married a non-state subject, was no longer a permanent resident and hence not eligible for government employment. It was only 23 years later, in 2002, that a three-member Bench of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court declared that the daughter of a permanent resident marrying a non-permanent resident will not lose her permanent residency. However, it did not wade into the discriminatory nature of Article 35A and stated it to be an “academic issue”. Article 35A was unfair not just to women. It deprived benefits to thousands of descendants of West Pakistan refugees who migrated during that period even though they are Indian citizens. It ensured that the descendants of Dalit Valmikis, brought in from Amritsar and Gurdaspur in Punjab as safai karamcharis in 1957, were ineligible for government jobs and were forced to continue in their designated occupation.
•The presence of Article 370 in the Constitution paved the way for various constitutional anomalies. For instance, while Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was struck down by the Supreme Court, it continued to exist in the Ranbir Penal Code that was followed in the erstwhile State. Similarly, critical legislation passed by the Government of India, such as the Right to Information Act, Right to Education Act and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, were not applicable to the erstwhile State.
Transformational development
•It was for these reasons, and the Prime Minister’s vision of “one nation, one Constitution”, that led the government to effectively remove Articles 370 and 35A. The largely bipartisan support received in both Houses of Parliament reinforced the fact that the entire nation spoke as one voice. It has been a year since the government’s move. Contrary to claims of “large-scale unrest” and “international ramifications”, the move has not only been peaceful but has also seen overwhelming support from all sections of society and the international community.
•The government views the effective removal of Article 370 as a key vehicle to usher in transformational development in the region. Many districts in J&K are now terror-free. Anti-terror operations are being executed in a coordinated manner and are receiving support from local residents. Residents of J&K and Ladakh can now aspire for the same opportunities that residents in other States have. The government’s commitment to holistically integrate the region is visible in the new programmes that have been launched. Under the National Saffron Mission, more than 3,500 hectares of land are being rejuvenated for saffron cultivation. Saffron grown in Kashmir now has the coveted geographical indication tag giving it prominence in the export market. The government is also incentivising farmers to introduce ultra-high density plantation of apple and other fruits. Tourism infrastructure is being upgraded in mission mode, and bijli, sadak, paani issues are being addressed on a war footing. In a bid to further boost tourism and connectivity, 11 airports in J&K and two in Ladakh are being considered under the UDAN scheme. The health sector has been transformed with the opening of two AIIMS Hospitals and five new medical colleges. The Ayushman Bharat scheme is now available for all residents of J&K. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centre provided all the necessary infrastructure and logistical support to the region.
A confidence-building measure
•The government believes that the integration of the Union Territories of J&K and Ladakh will be complete in spirit only when grassroots democracy, as envisaged by the 73rd and 74th Constitution Amendments, are firmly established. The Block Development Council elections in October 2019 saw a record turnout and were free of violence, even though there were calls for boycott and threats of violence. This is an important forerunner to more endeavours being made to strengthen democracy. While the abrogation of the Articles has served as an initial confidence-building measure, a lot more needs to be done. The government will continue to strive under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s vision of “ Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwaas ” to ensure that the people of the region get all that B.R. Ambedkar envisioned while framing our Constitution.
