📰 GST inflows top ₹1 lakh cr for second month in a row
The collection in November 2020 is 1.4 % higher than in November 2019 when the GST mop-up was ₹1,03,491 crore
•Gross revenues from the Goods and Services Tax (GST) crossed the ₹1 lakh crore mark for the second month in a row, with ₹1,04,963 crore collected in November 2020. This was 1.4% higher than a year ago but a tad lower than October’s collections.
•The pick-up in GST revenues over the last two months could reduce the shortfall in GST compensation dues to States, but economists urged caution till December to assess if the economy is truly out of the woods after the festive demand factor has played out.
•Cumulatively, the GST revenues from the first eight months of 2020-21 add up to ₹6,64,709 crore, reflecting a 17.4% dip from the ₹8,05,164 crore collected in the same period of 2019-20.
•“In line with the recent trend of recovery, the revenues for November 2020 are 1.4% higher than the GST revenues in the same month last year. During the month, revenues from imports was 4.9% higher and revenues from domestic transaction (including import of services) are 0.5% higher than the revenues from these sources during the same month last year,” the Finance Ministry said in a statement.
•November’s GST collections, boosted by festive spending, were just ₹192 crore lower than October, which had recorded the highest revenue from indirect taxes since February 2020. GST revenues had collapsed to just ₹32,172 crore in April this year as economic activity was crippled following the national lockdown.
•“The average pace of growth in GST collections in October-November 2020 stood at a moderately healthy 6%. The trends regarding the sustainability of demand will be clearer in the data on the GST collections for December 2020, which will be for the transactions that took place in the month of November 2020,” said Aditi Nayar, principal economist at ICRA Ltd.
•Among the major States, Andhra Pradesh (12%), Gujarat and Jharkhand (11%), followed by Tamil Nadu (10%), were the only ones to record double-digit growth in November’s GST revenues compared to a year ago.
•Abhishek Jain, tax partner at EY termed the second straight month of ₹1 lakh crore-plus GST collections encouraging and said this should help in containing the shortfall of GST collections caused due to the pandemic.
•In November, ₹8,242 crore was collected in the form of cess, which is used to compensate States for implementing the GST. This was higher than the ₹8,011 crore collected as cess in October.
•Ms. Nayar termed the mild month-on-month dip in the GST collections in November 2020 as discouraging, but said the festival calendar had an impact.
•“In our view, the sharp moderation in growth in the generation of GST e-way bills in November 2020 relative to the previous month, signals the impact of the change in working days related to the shift in the festive calendar,” she said.
Survey-based index pegs sector’s expansion at 3-month low; job shedding apace, confidence fades
•The Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) for India’s manufacturing touched 56.3 in November, signaling that even as an improvement in wider industrial activity continued, the sector’s expansion as well as the pace of of new orders slowed down while employment declined further as business optimism faded during the month.
•After hitting 58.9 in October, the highest in over a decade, November’s manufacturing PMI marked a three-month low, IHS Markit, which compiles the index, said on Tuesday.
•“Growth in the Indian manufacturing sector lost momentum in November, but the latest PMI reading was still consistent with a sharp rate of expansion,” the firm said in a release. “There were slower increases in factory orders, exports, buying levels and output. Meanwhile, COVID-19 restrictions caused a further drop in payroll numbers,” it added.
•Though aggregate new orders rose at the slowest pace in three months, their growth was “stronger than any seen for eight years prior to September”, IHS Markit noted and said export orders had also picked up last month, as per the purchasing managers of 400 manufacturers it had surveyed.
•“Employment... decreased again as companies observed social distancing guidelines. The rate of job shedding was solid and little-changed from October,” the firm pointed out.
‘Safety stocks’
•“For now, firms are projecting sustained demand growth in the near-term and responded to this by lifting input buying to increase their safety stocks,” said Pollyanna De Lima, Economics associate director at IHS Markit.
•Interestingly, firms increased their purchases of inputs even as inventories of finished goods dwindled. Also, input costs saw a sharp increase “with the overall rate of inflation the joint-strongest in two years”, with firms reporting higher prices for raw materials such as chemicals, metals, plastics and textiles, it said.
•While India’s manufacturing sector remained on the recovery track, Ms. De Lima stressed that a spike in COVID-19 cases and the possibility of associated restrictions could undermine the recovery and constituted a key uncertainty that was weighing down business confidence.
•“Business optimism faded slightly in November. Output growth is still predicted for the year ahead, but concerns about public policies, rupee depreciation and the COVID-19 pandemic dampened overall confidence,” the business intelligence firm said.
📰 Slow progress: On WHO's assurance to uncover origin of COVID-19
WHO must work alongside China in quickly uncovering the origins of the virus
•In 2003, a WHO team was able to identify the animal source of SARS coronavirus within weeks despite its arrival in China nearly three months after the initial outbreak. In the case of MERS coronavirus, the intermediate host was identified more than a year after the first human case was reported. However, in the case of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), its source is still unknown even 11 months after WHO reported the first case. Knowing the natural reservoirs and intermediate hosts and the events that allowed the virus to jump across the species barrier are important in prevention. Soon after the virus spread around the world, there was heightened demand to identify its origin in China’s Wuhan where the first case cluster was reported. Even as the global focus shifted to therapeutics and vaccine trials, it is reassuring that the global health body is still determined to find the virus’s origin. But the pace of investigation leaves much to be desired. Efforts began in February but it was only in early August that WHO completed the mission to lay the groundwork for joint efforts to identify the origin; its two-member team did not visit Wuhan, the epicentre of the outbreak. It was only in late October that China began early studies for the two-phase investigation. In the first phase, short-term studies will be undertaken to better understand how the virus might have begun circulating in Wuhan. Longer-term studies will follow based on these results. It is only then that a WHO-led team can operate in China to collaborate with Chinese scientists.
•If China failed to alert WHO immediately after a Wuhan cluster was reported, its reluctance to quickly and earnestly investigate the source can partly be explained by U.S. President Donald Trump’s attempt to politicise the issue. The reluctance has only increased after mounting international ire over its reporting the outbreak and the huge economic cost of the pandemic globally. There is strong evidence that the virus originated in bats and probably spread to humans through an intermediate species. One way to find this out is to know the susceptibility of different animal species. Already, many animals including cats have been found susceptible to the virus in the lab and outside. With the virus spread so wide, zeroing in on the intermediate host becomes more difficult as the possibility of humans having spread the virus to animals cannot be ruled out. Hence, a multi-pronged approach with an emphasis on investigating China’s wildlife farms becomes crucial. This highlights the importance of working alongside China to uncover the virus’s origin.
📰 Regional priorities: On the SCO summit
The SCO serves India’s quest for geopolitical balance and regional engagement
•Three years after joining the eight-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), India hosted the SCO heads of governments (HoG) meeting for the first time on Monday. The focus of the 66-point joint communiqué at the end of the virtual conference was in developing a “Plan of Priority Practical Measures for 2021-2022 to overcome the socio-economic, financial and food consequences of COVID-19 in the region”. Members committed to strengthening multilateralism and the UN charter while welcoming the fact that the grouping is now being seen as an “influential and responsible participant in the modern system of international relations”. The meeting also showed up persisting differences. Although the HoG Council consists of the Prime Ministers of all SCO countries, neither Prime Minister Narendra Modi nor Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan attended the meet, ostensibly due to a protocol mismatch between the position of PMs in parliamentary democracies versus those in the former Soviet bloc and China. Mr. Modi was represented by Vice-President Venkaiah Naidu, who made strong observations on cross-border terrorism; he called it the SCO region’s “biggest challenge”, in comments aimed at Pakistan. Pakistan’s representative too spoke of the need to combat what she called “state terrorism” in disputed areas, in a reference to Jammu and Kashmir. The SCO is a rare forum where India-Pakistan troops take part in joint exercises under the Regional Anti-Terror Structure, although it would seem the two countries have come no closer on the issue. Neither statement on terrorism was reflected in the final joint statement, which focused on trade and economic issues. India also marked its differences with China over the BRI by not joining other SCO members in a paragraph endorsing the BRI. Mr. Naidu made a pitch for “transparent and trustworthy” trade practices, seen as a sidebar aimed at China.
•Regardless of the differences, the Modi government has consistently maintained the importance of the SCO grouping, referred to as the “Asian NATO” although it does not mandate security alliances. The SCO is one of the few regional structures India is a part of now, given a decline in its engagement with SAARC, BBIN and the RCEP. The SCO provides India a convenient channel for its outreach — trade and strategic ties — to Central Asian countries. It has afforded a platform, when needed, for bilateral discussions with the two countries India has the most tense ties with: China and Pakistan. While the government has eschewed meetings with Pakistan for the last five years, it has used the SCO for talks with China, including this year amidst the LAC stand-off, when Rajnath Singh and S. Jaishankar met their counterparts on the sidelines of SCO meets. Above all, the SCO has been seen as a grouping worth pursuing as it retains India’s geopolitical balance, a useful counterpoint to New Delhi’s otherwise much more robust relations with the western world, and hosting the SCO meeting was one more step towards developing that engagement.
📰 The pernicious idea of exclusive belonging
It erases the multiplicity and fluidity necessary for self-development and cultural growth
•The idea that each human being belongs to only one religious or linguistic community, a single culture or a unique civilization appears to be ubiquitous. Many have begun to believe that our identity is defined by membership to only mutually exclusive groups. If we are Bengali, then we cannot be Odia or Assamese; if Hindu, then not Muslim or Christian.
•This idea of exclusive belonging is relatively recent. Indeed, even today, a substantial number of humans appear not to have it. Or if they do, only very faintly. Multiple belonging is common because we imbibe from other cultures when we go to them. And because ideas and values, energetic and nimble-footed, come to us as they seek uncharted territories. This fluidity in understanding who we are is ineradicable, infinitely better than a condition in which we are confined to a fixed, categorical idea of identity.
Identity is multi-layered
•That we belong exclusively to one culture, religion or language is undesirable and unfeasible. It is not feasible because our overall identity is far more complex and multi-layered than what we articulate or others believe. To take the manifest part of ourselves as our only identity is to accept a truncated, impoverished self. It is undesirable because it forces us to rely exclusively on one tradition when in fact we can be nourished by many. We live much better when we are open to multiple influences, enriched by varied currents of thought and value.
Intersecting cultures
•Take any one of us living in say in Delhi. We are heirs to myriad streams of Hindi/Urdu/Punjabi. Local dialects apart, these are shaped by old Sanskrit and old Persian, close cousins in an ancient family of languages — consider words such as asura/ahura or yajna/yasna). Those who speak them do not realise that several words on their tongue are of Arabic origin (Aadmi, Maalik). Since languages are not simply a means of communication but constitute multiple worlds, the criss-crossing and overlapping worlds they inhabit are infinitely more complex and expansive than is recognised. Monuments and public spaces that surround us (Humayun’s Tomb, the Ramlila Maidan, Parliament building) and the varied cuisines that shape our taste and sensibility are also creations of intersecting cultures. And so are the identities they shape.
•The same is true of moral frameworks that ground our commitments and convictions — structures of values that have developed over 5,000 years. I doubt if there is any Indian who has not been shaped by multiple ancient strands that compose Hinduism, the precepts of Buddha and Mahavir, the partly homegrown Islamic and Christian traditions, the teachings of Nanak and Kabir, not to forget the enormous impact that western values have had since Vasco Da Gama stepped ashore, all the way to the globalised world we now inhabit. The idea of exclusive allegiance to any one of these flies in the face of evidence and is based on ignorance or deliberate denial. Why should we, instead of embracing all of them, insist on exclusive belonging and loyalty to just one?
A serious objection
•At this point it might be objected that a person’s identity is defined not by everything that has influenced her but by those elements she has evaluated to be of greater importance. Someone can say that her fundamental commitments flow from a single framework — and this alone defines her identity. Identity is defined by what is publicly affirmed because of judgement of its real significance. It announces where we truly belong, to what we owe our overriding allegiance.
•A person’s identity, the argument goes, is defined by his orientation to an incomparably higher good. It underlines the quest to be a certain kind of person, to give oneself a direction. Does this often not require removing all ‘alien or bad features’? Is not this movement towards something higher often a battle between the good and the evil within? Why cannot this be seen as a certain kind of purification? A shuddhikaran for a Hindu or for that matter, a jihad for a Muslim. If so, does it not follow that one is a Hindu because of one’s aspiration to realise what is most valuable in Hinduism rather than in any other ethical tradition? To tell such a person that there is a Muslim ingredient in his self is irrelevant because the whole point of his existence is to become a good Hindu and remove extraneous, non- or anti-Hindu elements. This seems like a forceful rebuttal. But it overlooks two stronger challenges.
•First, the encounter between two different ethical traditions results in mutual transformation of what is truly worthwhile in these traditions. Arguably, the ethics of Vedic people originally comprised three ends of life: kama, artha and dharma. It needed the teachings of the Buddha to add a fourth value, Moksha. Similarly, the Arya Samaj challenged idol worship as a perverse substitution of original Vedic fire rituals, but can one deny that it was also influenced by the Islamic conception of a formless god? Religions have frequently shaped each other’s conception of the ultimate good, even as they conceal or stigmatise the source.
•Second, and equally important, most of us are powered by multiple moral sources. We acknowledge within us the presence of different even incompatible normative orientations. Consider the French philosopher, Paul Ricoeur’s disclosure that the private reading of the Bible was central to the pietistic Protestant milieu in which he was born. This part of his upbringing, leaning on prayer and the undogmatic examination of conscience, had little intellectual content about it. But Ricouer was equally impacted by another milieu wherein critical thinking and public standards of rationality were essential. He says: ‘I always moved back and forth between these two poles: a biblical pole and a rational, critical pole. A duality that has lasted through my entire life. I remained faithful to this double allegiance.’ I believe this self-description captures the life of many intellectuals. Many scientists take their Hindu outlook seriously; many philosophers are at home in their Jewish, Islamic or Catholic spiritualities. Loyal to both, they feel that something terribly important would be lost if either was snatched away from them.
Multiple allegiances
•Indeed, I will not be surprised if there are many Muslims today who are inspired by both the Ramayana and the Koran. This was something commonplace till the mid-20th century in large parts of Haryana’s Meo community. It is still common to find some of our greatest singers, musicians and poets moved equally and simultaneously by Hindu and Muslim mysticism. I recently saw a film on Bismillah Khan in which he tells viewers how blessed he was to live in Benaras. “… I can step down the ghats, bathe in the Ganga, walk up to the masjid for namaz, and then head straight to the Balaji temple for riyaz…”. The fact is that large numbers of people in the past embraced not just dual but multiple allegiances and this is unlikely to disappear in future. The demand for a single, exclusive allegiance makes for a sorry, desiccated self.
•The idea of exclusive belonging or allegiance is a pernicious intrusion into world cultures. Equally dangerous is a political project that foists a singularity or homogeneity and calls for the obliteration of multiplicity and fluidity – so that we become purely one or the other. The demand to ‘purify’ ourselves, rid ourselves of anything ‘foreign’ that contaminates is not only hard to meet but, if we are to lead better, richer lives, not worth compliance.
📰 The last straw is being further disabled
Denying a prisoner with disabilities his recognised rights is a legal wrong and a display of a lack of compassion
•There has been much outrage expressed over the denial of a sipper and straw to Father Stan Swamy. Father Swamy, the 83-year-old activist who suffers from Parkinson’s disease, was arrested by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in October for his alleged involvement in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence and charged under the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Lodged in Mumbai’s Taloja prison, Father Swamy reportedly made an application to be provided with a sipper and straw, as he was unable to hold a glass, a request which was inexplicably deferred for 20 days, only for the NIA to inform the court that it did not have a straw and sipper to give to the incarcerated octogenarian.
•The court has now posted the matter on December 4, seeking a report from the jail authorities on allowing Father Swamy to receive a straw and sipper at his own cost. However, there are subsequent reports that have emerged that Father Swamy has been provided with a sipper and straw by the jail authorities. Nevertheless, given Father Swamy’s allegations, a fuller examination is merited by the court.
•If Father Swamy’s allegations are true, the above events, apart from demonstrating the insensitivity of legal procedure, outline another fundamental issue — that of the rights of prisoners with disabilities. While incarceration itself is not easy, it is significantly more difficult for persons with disabilities.
•Given the nature of overcrowded and underfunded prison environments, the difficulties persons with disabilities face in society are exacerbated in prison. It is precisely for this reason that both international and domestic laws recognise and protect the rights of disabled prisoners.
Rights upheld by laws
•Under international law, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which applies to all persons with disabilities including detainees and prisoners (https://bit.ly/3fVuNdY), and to which India is a signatory (https://bit.ly/37ln5pH), imposes a positive obligation on authorities, including prison staff, to ensure that prisoners with disabilities are on an “equal basis with others, entitled to guarantees in accordance with international human rights law” and are “treated in compliance with the objectives and principles of the convention, including by provision of reasonable accommodation”.
•The obligation encompasses the provision of auxiliary aids relevant to the disability to secure the inherent dignity of the prisoner to enable them to live independently and participate in all aspects of their daily lives. In cases where such provision is not made by prison authorities, it may amount to a breach of a state’s obligation to “prevent persons with disabilities... from being subjected to torture, cruel or inhuman degrading treatment or punishment”.
•These obligations under the CRPD are complemented by the provision of Article 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, or ICCPR (https://bit.ly/33yQDyR). The Nelson Mandela Rules (https://bit.ly/37mZUex), approved by the UN General Assembly through a resolution in 2015, on the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners, also requires that the prison administration “make all reasonable accommodation and adjustments to ensure that prisoners with physical, mental or other disabilities have full and effective access to prison life on equitable basis” (https://bit.ly/3qrqMmu).
•Apart from the constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution available to persons with disabilities, there is specific Indian legislation on the subject.
•The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (https://bit.ly/3muVI2S) enacted with the object of giving effect to the CRPD, also requires that persons with disabilities enjoy the right to equality, life with dignity and respect for integrity equally with others; they are not to be discriminated against on the ground of disability, unless to achieve a legitimate aim. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act also enjoins the state to take necessary steps to protect persons with disabilities from being subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; and take necessary steps to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities.
•While the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act does not specifically provide for persons with disabilities who are incarcerated, given the object of the legislation to give effect to the CRPD, it would even encompass prisoners. It is important to note that the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act explicitly recognises Parkinson’s disease as specified disability in its Schedule.
Injustice magnified
•The denial of aids such as a sipper and straw to Father Swamy in prison to deal with his neurological disability is arguably inconsistent with both domestic and international law. (There are reports of lawyers having arranged for sippers and straws for him.) The injustice in Father Swamy’s case is magnified by the fact that he still awaits trial. The fundamental tenet on which Indian criminal law operates is that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. In the event the prosecution is unable to prove its case, the damage to Father Swamy’s health will be irreparable. While his guilt or innocence is ultimately a matter for the court to decide, the denial of his rights by the justice system not only constitutes a legal wrong but also displays an absence of compassion. It is the absence of compassion that ultimately corrupts the decency of any society.
Forgotten ideal
•In his excellent memoir, Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption, Bryan Stevenson writes that the true measure of a society’s commitment to justice, the rule of law, fairness and equality, cannot be measured by how it treats the rich, the powerful, the privileged and the respected. But that the true measure of a society’s character is how it treats the poor, the disfavoured, the accused, the incarcerated and the condemned. It is time for the Indian justice system to stand up to this ideal.
