14

TheIndian EXPRESS
www.indianexpress.com

SATURDAY I SEPTEMBER 29 I 2012

The Indian EXPRESS

BECAUSE THE TRUTH INVOLVES US ALL

HE BJPs National Executive and National Council meeting, held in Surajkund, Haryana, was notable in that after a long time, the partys own schisms, the not so quiet struggle for supremacy between its various leaders, were not foregrounded. Unlike at the Mumbai executive, the party presented a united front. But it took it to another extreme of unanimity, pushing through an inconsistent economic resolution with nobody offering better sense. The resolution was focused on attacking the Congress. The party was blamed for bringing the economy to the brink now and in 1991, for Coalgate and Bofors, for inflation and slowing growth. The prime ministers recent moves were appraised harshly and the BJP demanded a rollback in the diesel price hike and the LPG cap, and the decision to allow FDI in retail. In other words, it both deplored the fiscal deficit and attacked the unavoidable steps taken to contain it. And it did not put forth its own better ideas, if any, on addressing the fiscal deficit. The BJP is right to tear into the Congress, and right about the corruption, cronyism and economic mismanagement of recent years. But why does it have nothing to say for itself? Inconveniently, it

What it thinks of the Congress is clear, but not what it has to say for itself
shares most economic assumptions with Manmohan Singh and his team when in power, BJP leaders have been practitioners, even conceptualisers, of the policies they now critique. No matter how much they try to finesse their stand on retail reform now, the record shows that they had put forth an exhaustive case for 100 per cent FDI in retail, citing rationales they now seek to disprove on job creation and the setting up of cold chain and transport infrastructure. The other disturbing strand in the BJPs rhetoric is the manipulative invocation of Western powers, the casting of reform as an agenda that suits their shadowy interests. The striking feature of the Surajkund conclave was the BJPs inability or unwillingness, or both, to offer a constructive alternative. It has reacted to the Congresss missteps, shouted louder than anyone else after the CAG reports on telecom and coal allocation, made tactical alliances with whoever else was giving the government a hard time, but it has not demonstrated a compelling argument of its own. As the resolutions and speeches from Surajkund once again framed, it is possible to know what Indias main opposition party opposes, but not what it proposes.

BJP who?

Not the best medicine

HE net result of government intervention in the drug market will carry forward the same backward-looking subsidy system in food, fertiliser and oil that it is finding so difficult to shake off. Thursdays decision by the group of ministers to bring 348 more drugs into the National List of Essential Medicines could create another subsidy monster that can block the national health delivery system the government is planning to roll out. The plan for price control in medicines is, in principle, simple. Any formulation that includes even one of the 348 drugs will be subject to a price cap that will be the weighted average price of drugs, with the trigger being that the formulation should have at least one per cent share of the market. The rationale for the health ministry ringing in this restriction primarily draws upon the anticipated cost of the national health mission. A Planning Commission steering group estimate has put the cost at Rs 6,000 crore when run through government hospitals. If the plan is extended to provide the same support through all public or private phar-

Price caps are not the most efficient way to expand access to cheap drugs

macies, the cost for medicines can be 0.5 per cent of the GDP, or Rs 40,000 crore. The scale of this system will stretch the capacity of the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority. This is not surprising. In developing countries, there is greater demand for the government to support weaker sections, but its capacity to deliver the goods is hamstrung by the same weakness in the socioeconomic architecture that keeps the economy at lower levels of efficiency. While there is a considerable body of literature advocating the need for governments to intervene in the healthcare system, trying to do so through caps on prices can only worsen the problem. The drug regime can follow the same Aadhar-based solution that should ideally replace the present subsidy for food, oil and fertilisers. The states and the Centre can send their cash support to the affected individuals far more easily through a countrywide identification system. The government could then bring in systemic changes in the generic drugs market to ensure that access to health becomes a universal reality.

O whats new? Someone makes a film, Innocence of Muslims, and there is Muslim rage in the streets. In this supposed clash of civilisations, how is one to choose between one brand of madness and another? Between those out to convincetheworldthattherecanbe nosuchthingasamoderateMuslim because Islam preaches violence. And those Muslims who believe the bestwaytotelltheworldthatIslam means peace is by resorting to violence each time someone provokes them with a book, a cartoon, a film. The choice is simple. Nothing can justify violence. So the Muslim rage must be unequivocally condemnedandfreedomofexpression defended, never mind the motive behind the making of the 14minute film and its pathetic cinematic quality. That there can be no democracywithoutfundamentalfreedoms we already know. Whats novel is the reiteration now by a growing number of Muslim scholars that Islam too rests on the freedom bedrockandtheverynotionofblasphemy is un-Islamic. That this is notamainstreamMuslimpositionis evident in the demand being raised bymanyMuslimreligiousandpoliticalleadersforaglobalconsensuson limits to free speech and punishment for blasphemy. Yet there is something new and refreshingintheair.Readthestatementsofreligiousandpoliticalleadersaswellaseditorialsandlettersto the editor in Urdu newspapers. Take, for example, a letter by a Saudi Arabia-based Indian, Abdul Rehman Mohammed Yahya, published simultaneously as a boxed/lead letter in the Monday editions of three Urdu dailies in Mumbai:Inquilab,RashtriyaSahara andSahafat.Thegistofthelongletter is a rhetorical question addressed to fellow Muslims: What did Prophet Muhammad do in the face of repeated insults heaped on him during his lifetime? The answer: he forgave them.

On the other side of fear

A new, refreshing question is in the air: is the very notion of blasphemy un-Islamic?
JAVED ANAND
It is a universal Muslim belief that the prophet never retaliated to repeated insults to him, through eitherwordordeed.Infact,hetaught his followers that the wounds of wordshurtmorethanthewoundsof swords. In other words, Muslims who hurt others through word or deed do violence to the teachings of the very prophet in whose name they claim to act. Itisalsonowbeingrealisedthat mindless murder and mayhem by Muslims is counter-productive: it merelyreinforcesthepropagandaof Islam-baiters. Turn to the international pages of daily newspapers and hear voices from highly influEuropean countries but not in the land of the First Amendment. But what about the 1919 verdict of the US Supreme Court: The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing panic. Lastmonth,theCaliforniastate assembly passed a resolution asking the University of California and the California State University to take additional actions to confront anti-Semitism on its campuses. Since anti-Semitism is reported to be raising its ugly head once again, the resolution is most welcome. Nowconsiderthis:in2001,polls tionstoconfrontgrowingIslamophobia? To this writers knowledge no such resolution is even under contemplation. Meanwhile, according to Nathan Lean, author of The Islamophobia Industry: How the right manufactures fear of Muslims, 23 states have (already) presented anti-Sharia legislation of some type. You might find the very idea of Sharia rule in the US hilarious. But for very many highly influential Americans today, the danger is real. The meteoric rise of Islamophobia in the last few years, Lean argues, has little to do with what Muslims do or do not do. Rather, it is the cumulative product of the committed labour of a tight-knit and interconnected confederation of right-wing fear merchants, especially since 9/11. Engaged in Americas lucrative fear factory are individual bloggers, talk show anchors (Fox TV), experts on Islam, the evangelical Christian Right, Republican politicians, FBI officials, army generals and generous funders, many of whom are hardline supporters of right-wing Zionism and Israel. Lean is not postulating a hypothesis: his arguments are backed with meticulously researched facts and figures. Nor is he a conspiracy theorist. Not everyone who chooses to take a shot at Islam need be a paid member of some coalition. But the interconnected confederation is quick to pounce on every scrap of information, every favourable incident for its anti-Islam arsenal. The scariest part, Lean argues, is that the methods and tactics of the fear factory are no different from those once deployed in the mainstreaming of antiSemitism. You hate the enemy you fear. Are Muslims being made the new Jews in postHolocaust West? The writer is general secretary, Muslims for Secular Democracy.
express@expressindia.com

Letters to the

EDITOR Letter of the

WEEK

West and the rest

THOMAS FRIEDMANS Look in the mirror (IE, September 21) is the perfect example of how the American media continues to misunderstand and misrepresent the Islamic world. His argument rests on the rather simplistic supposition that the protests against the US are driven by the derogatory video but any serious analyst of the Muslim world can tell that the video itself was only the proverbial spark. Friedman should know that the anger is fuelled by a web of grievances against American policy. The positions taken by journalists are, to a great extent, responsible for popular perceptions of the Muslim world in the West. Good journalism must make us more sensitive to the rest of the world, not less so. Gurpreet S. Goraya Mohali

Perhaps we should look the other way too, at the phenomenon of the recurring denigration and demonisation of Islam and its prophet in recent years. Is the freedom of speech absolute? Denying the Holocaust is a serious criminal offence in many European countries but not in the land of the First Amendment. But what about the 1919 verdict of the US Supreme Court?
ential quarters that suggest an emerging consensus in the Muslim world: violence is no answer; words must be fought with words, images with images. Among other things is a proposed $350 million-dollar film on the prophets life and teachings. Early signs of a Muslim spring? Perhaps we should look the other way too, at the phenomenon of recurring denigration and demonisationofIslamanditsprophet in recent years. In the name of free speech, even hate speech is considered sacrosanct. Is the freedom of speech absolute? Denying the Holocaust is a serious criminal offence in many by the well-known Pew Research Centre two months after 9/11 showed that 59 per cent of Americans had a favourable opinion of Muslims.Butin2010,ABCandThe Washington Post reported that only 37 per cent of Americans held the same view. How is one to explain theparadoxthatpost9/11American antipathy to Muslims is growing, and at an alarming rate? The answer lies in the exponential growth of Islamophobia in the US and throughout Europe. So, how about state assemblies and the US Congress passing resolutions asking government agencies and educational institu-

PRASANA KUMAR DASH

OLITICAL parties did not find mention in our Constitution until the Constitution (52nd Amendment) Act of 1985, dealing with defection and the consequent disqualification of the elected members. However, in his last address to the Constituent Assembly, B.R. Ambedkar had cautioned that in addition to our old enemies in the form of caste and creed, we are going to have many political parties with diverse and opposing political creeds and if the political parties place creed above the country, our independence will be put in jeopardy for the second time and probably lost forever. In spite of this, there is still no comprehensive law in our country to regulate political parties. The Representation of the People Act, 1951, passed within a year of the Constitution being adopted, added a chapter, as late as 1989, to deal with the registration of political parties. Although parties can be registered by the Election Commission, there is no corresponding provision for it to deregister a political party. The apex court has held that since there is no specific provision in the law, the general clauses laws do not apply and the EC cannot assume the power to deregister a party. As a result, political parties have mushroomed and today there are more than 1,396 registered parties in India. There are instances of regis-

If political parties dont change, they must be made to by law

tered parties not carrying out any political activity. For example, the EC had referred many parties to the income tax department and in two cases it was found that they had raised substantial funds and the donors had availed of tax exemptions, but the funds had been used by such parties to purchase shares and jewellery. A large number of parties, although registered for years, have not contested in a single election. This raises serious doubts about the purpose of registration. Moreover, there is no law in our country which provides for a company, other than a government company. The amended law provided for one-time disclosure of information about donations exceeding Rs 20,000 to the EC, at the end of financial year. Income tax laws were simultaneously amended to exempt such donations from tax. The amended law incentivised donations to political parties and there were no corresponding provisions for disclosure of audited accounts, neither were there corresponding penal provisions for defaulting political parties. So the income tax returns of many that there will be arguments in the process for the search for answers, but it could never happen that in the din we lose our way forward. The EC has been demanding electoral reforms since 2004. This has been echoed by NGOs and citizens forums as well. The Confederation of Indian Industry has made similar representations, demanding more transparency in the accounts of the political parties. The law ministry and the EC jointly held regional consultations last year with citizens forums, NGOs and political parties on electoral reforms which include proposals to debar criminals from contesting polls, ensure democracy within the parties and enforce transparency and the disclosure of funds by political parties. But the proposed reforms are yet to see the light of the day. Candour, transparency and accountability are the cardinal values of a democracy, which political parties are supposed to uphold. If the parties do not exhibit these values on their own, comprehensive legislation on political parties is a credible alternative. Lack of legislation to regulate political parties will result in the public losing faith in the political system, which will be perilous for any democracy. The writer is director general, the Election Commission of India
express@expressindia.com

Party to reform

EVER since the reform on FDI in multibrand retail was introduced by the Centre, the Punjab governments position has been oscillating (Punjab may welcome retail FDI if Centre protects traders: Sukhbir, IE, September 26). Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Singh Badal did not make himself clear either. Farmers will definitely be better off selling their produce directly to retail companies at good prices. It will also generate employment, which is a major problem in Punjab at the moment. The state has already missed out on many reforms in IT and biotechnology, and suffered losses. It cannot afford to miss the bus on reform again. Ishmeet Oberoi Ludhiana INSTEAD of relying on foreign investment, we should develop our own skills in marketing and technology. There is no dearth of local entrepreneurial talent which can manage the storage of perishable goods from farms and factories and also sell them. All they need is encouragement and a conducive environment. This will reduce our dependence on foreign funds, which are a liability, not an asset. Further, in the event of litigation, local courts may not have much jurisdiction over foreign organisations. The UPA must ponder over the need to bring in FDI in retail. M.P.S. Chandrawat Baru Sahib APROPOS Courting reason (IE, September 28), the Supreme Courts opinion on the presidential reference on the 2G spectrum is that auction is not the only way to allocate natural resources for the disposal of natural resources. Of course, this restores policy-making power to the executive but it can balance a shrill debate only if this power does not end up in cronyism. Had politicians not been involved in the 2G scam and the coal allocations, we might have been spared much of the recent hue and cry. In the long run, what matters most is not the nitty-gritty of the laws but their judicious use. The apex courts advisory pronouncement should be an occasion for introspection. Hema Langeri

Pros and cons

K Prime Minister David Cameron, who is away in Brazil to inaugurate a machinery plant, is probably thanking his stars for being born a Briton. Because if he were not, and had to face an immigration test on his return to Heathrow, he would run the risk of flunking and being deported. Like he flunked the test in British history on David Lettermans show before he left for Brazil. His education at Oxford did not even permit him to hazard a guess as to what Magna Carta means in English. Letterman is noted for embarrassing prominent guests, so Camerons failure was more or less expected. But it is embarrassing because last year, in a speech on immigration the current obsession of the western hemisphere he had announced plans to revise citizenship tests and make the knowledge of British history and culture a key determinant. It had sounded

Why mock David Camerons ignorance, when its hard enough agreeing on British history?
like a backlash against the triumph of multiculturalism in Britain, where knowing about the Magna Carta could be less important than knowing what gives chicken tikka masala that vile pink tinge. British culture today is contested turf. Consider the realm of food alone, where the traditional battered cod is fighting a rearguard action against doner kebab. The British, who once thought of everything but beef as vegetarian, now treat Asian visitors to Scotland to veg haggis. At the same time, Marmiteremainscentraltothebreakfast table, along with Gentlemans Relish, a uniquely British substance. Cheese baps continue to flourish, shoulder to shoulder with Sainsburys samosas. In this varied culture, expecting the British PM to bone up on British history alone is like expecting him to live on a strict diet of full English breakfasts and boiled beef dinners.

Magna Carta etc

There are instances of registered parties not carrying out any political activity. A large number of parties, although registered for years, have not contested a single election. This raises serious doubts about the purpose of registration.
ceiling on the campaign expenditure of political parties. This sometimes makes the statutory ceiling on a candidates campaign expenditure redundant. In a sting operation by a media channel on the eve of recent Uttar Pradesh election, candidates admitted that they had spent between Rs 65 lakh and Rs 85 lakh, when the ceiling is only Rs 16 lakh. Large chunks of opaque funds are also pumped into election campaigns. In 2003, the Registration of People Act was amended to enable political parties to accept donations from any person and parties, including national level parties, show that the donors of only a minuscule portion of funds are disclosed to the EC. Yet the transparency and accountability of public institutions are indicative of the health and vitality of a democracy and citizens have a right to know what economic benefits donors have got from the political system after making the donation and how the funds are utilised by the party. In her recent farewell speech, former president Pratibha Patil had spoken of the need for electoral reform, telling law makers

Court, unquote

What happened in Benghazi

The US government is anxious not to call it a terror attack

WORDLY WISE
Henry Ford

Political parties are like poets, born, not made.

HE Obama administrations descriptions of what happened on September 11 in the Libyan city of Benghazi have evolved in a way that some including congressional Republicans find suspicious. Initially, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton described an attack in which heavily armed militants assaulted a US compound, leading to the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. Four days later, UN Ambassador Susan Rice said that extremist elements had joined a demonstration outside the US consulate against an anti-Muslim video. By the end of last week, White House spokesman Jay Carney was calling the incident a terrorist attack but adding that it was likely the result of opportunism and not planned. But then Wednesday, Clinton suggested that al-Qaedas North African branch, operating from a safe haven in Mali,

PRINTLINE

could have had a hand in the assault... Critics see in this a deliberate attempt by the administration to portray the Benghazi violence as a spontaneous response to the video, as opposed to a terrorist attack that was timed for September 11 and possibly planned by al-Qaeda... The White House was slow to place the modifier terrorist in front of the word attack, at a time when President Obama claims credit on the campaign trail for the decimation of al-Qaeda. He continued to focus on the offending video which also provoked demonstrations outside US embassies in Cairo and around the Muslim world long after it became clear that the Benghazi attack was the work of well-organised combatants. From a leader in The Washington Post