Don't talk rubbish on garbage: SC to LG

Najeeb Jung, former LG of Delhi & above Anil Baijal, incumbent LG of Delhi

R. Balaji Jul 13, 2018 

From The Telegraph

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday tore into the "superman" lieutenant-governor of Delhi for enjoying power without accountability when the national capital was sitting on a "mountain of garbage" and chastised the Centre for failing to tackle the crisis despite repeated directions.

"You (LG Anil Baijal) say I have the power, but you do not bother to attend meetings. You think you are a superman? I am responsible but nobody can touch me and I won't do anything except blaming others?" Justice Madan B. Lokur, sitting on a bench with Justice Deepak Gupta, told additional solicitor-general Pinky Anand, appearing for the Centre.

The court had earlier directed the AAP government, the LG and the Centre to file their respective affidavits to explain who actually was accountable for the disposal of garbage in the capital.

The three filed affidavits saying the LG had the authority to pass directions to the municipal authorities in the capital.

The court had earlier taken suo motu cognisance of news reports about large number of deaths in Delhi from chikungunya, dengue and other mosquito-borne diseases in the past few years.

Although the bench sought a time frame by which the massive garbage mounds at the landfill sites in Okhla, Bhalswa and Gazipur would be cleared, Anand was unable to furnish a deadline.

Instead the additional solicitor-general tried to say that the AAP government was also responsible for the mess.

This provoked an angry reaction from the bench, which said: "Do not drag the chief minister here. He has no business is what you have said. Be responsible."

In an oblique reference to the power struggle between the AAP government and the Centre, the court referred to a hypothetical situation where the LG would have problems with a meeting convened by the Delhi health minister.

"Why would he (the LG) accept this? He will say who is the minister and the meeting was called by someone who has no authority," the court observed.

It did not agree with Anand's submission that the municipal corporations should be asked to explain the reason behind the failure to clear the garbage. "Why should the corporations be asked? You are the LG. You should have found out by now.... There have been 25 meetings in the last two years but there has been no outcome. Delhi is still under a mountain of dumps," Justice Gupta observed.

When the additional solicitor-general tried to place some documents relating to garbage-clearance in the capital and the landfill areas, Justice Lokur said: "This is completely vague. Tell us the timeline. Within how much time will you clear the garbage? Do not give us jargons. Tell us in plain simple English as to how much time will be taken."

The court adjourned the hearing to July 16 by which time the LG has to file an affidavit explaining the timeframe by which the three garbage landfills will be cleared.

AAP, Cong slam Yogendra kin tax raids

Our special correspondent Jul 13, 2018

From The Telegraph

New Delhi: The Aam Aadmi Party and the Congress have come out in support of Swaraj India president Yogendra Yadav following Wednesday's tax raids on two hospitals owned by his sisters in Rewari, Haryana.

The Congress was the first to speak out, its Rohtak MP Deepender Singh Hooda tweeting: "I condemn this act of vendetta politics on @_YogendraYadav's family in Rewari by BJP government. @_YogendraYadav has always been in different political party but no doubt I have always heard good things about his family in Rewari: this is uncalled for."

Income-tax officials claim to have seized Rs 22 lakh from the hospitals owned by Yadav's sisters, who are being probed for alleged cash payments to Nirav Modi, the bank-fraud accused diamantaire who has fled India.

Yadav had recently led a nine-day march through Rewari's villages on the issues of minimum support prices for farmers and demanding the closure of liquor vends in the villages.

He told reporters on Wednesday that during the raids, even the parents of children admitted to the ICU were kept out of the hospitals and doctors were not allowed to leave their cabins.

Congress national spokesperson and Haryana MLA Randeep Surjewala said the raids were "shameful & reprehensible" and were meant "to intimidate @_YogendraYadav's family".

AAP convener and Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, a bitter opponent of Yadav who was expelled by the party in 2015, tweeted: "We strongly condemn victimisation of Yog Yadav's family by Modi govt thro the use of agencies like IT. Modi govt shud stop such vendetta politics."

Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee tweeted: "2019 elections are coming. #BJP using the agencies to silence Opposition voices and openly doing political vendetta. Strongly condemn the IT raid on @_YogendraYadav Ji's family."

CBI protecting MLA: Unnao rape victim

Piyush Srivastava Jul 09, 2018 

From The Telegraph

Lucknow: The Unnao gang-rape complainant and her family have accused the CBI of trying to shield jailed BJP lawmaker Kuldeep Singh Sengar from charges of involvement in her father's murder despite "evidence" against him.

The Bangermau MLA, his brother Atul and four henchmen are accused of gang-raping the woman in June last year, and the brother and henchmen of beating her father severely in April this year for refusing to withdraw the case.

According to the family, the MLA then got the badly injured man arrested on false charges, leading to his death in jail from septicaemia - allegedly after a fresh round of thrashing in custody.

"The CBI chargesheet filed in a Lucknow court (on Saturday) is proof that the central agency wants to protect the politician," the woman's uncle told reporters at their home in Unnao, which falls in Bangermau, on Sunday.

The chargesheet accuses Atul and the four aides of murder but does not mention Kuldeep.

"I had personally provided them with audio footage (of a purported mobile phone conversation) in which Kuldeep told me that my brother would face dire consequences if he didn't stop pursuing the gang-rape case," the complainant's uncle said.

"Media reports have quoted certain senior police officers as admitting that Kuldeep had called or met them and forced them to arrest my brother at a time he was badly injured. I suspect the CBI has destroyed the evidence against the MLA."

The woman said: "We had demanded a CBI probe because we feared the state police would work under pressure. But we have confirmed information that the police had handed evidence to the CBI that showed the MLA was involved in the murder of my father."

A CBI source claimed that Kuldeep's role in the murder was still under investigation. "We cannot rule out a second chargesheet," he said. "In any case, his name will figure in the gang-rape chargesheet, to be filed soon."

After the police had initially refused to register a case against the MLA, the woman's father had petitioned the courts to have an FIR filed.

Atul and the Sengars' henchmen allegedly tied the father to a tree in his village and beat him mercilessly on April 3 this year. The police then arrested the father in an allegedly false Arms Act case, over which two sub-inspectors are in jail.

The woman and her mother tried to immolate themselves in front of chief minister Yogi Adityanath's residence in Lucknow on April 8, bringing the case into national spotlight. The father died in Unnao jail the next day, the post-mortem revealing old as well as fresh injuries, implying he was thrashed in jail too.

It's not clear whether the CBI is probing any custody torture. No policeman has been mentioned in the chargesheet.

'Hindu Pak' red rag for BJP

New Delhi: Congress MP Shashi Tharoor's warning that a BJP victory in the next general election would turn India into a "Hindu Pakistan" triggered attacks from the ruling party and prompted the Congress to urge leaders to choose their words carefully.

The BJP accused Tharoor of insulting both the Hindu religion and India's constitutional democracy and demanded an apology from Rahul Gandhi.

The Congress, which has been flagging a threat to the Constitution over the past four years, seemed to have come under pressure and appeared to caution Tharoor, who refused to concede any wrongdoing.

"If they (the BJP) win a repeat in the Lok Sabha, our democratic Constitution as we understand it will not survive, as they will have all the elements they need to tear apart the Constitution and write a new one," Tharoor had said on Wednesday at a discussion of "Indian democracy and secularism" in Kerala.

"That new one will be the one which enshrine the principles of Hindu Rashtra. That will remove equality for the minorities, that will create a Hindu Pakistan and that isn't what Mahatma Gandhi, (Jawaharlal) Nehru, Sardar (Vallabhbhai) Patel, Maulana Azad and the great heroes of the freedom struggle fought for."

BJP ministers and spokespersons on Thursday described the comment as a reflection of the Congress's "anti-Hindu mindset", although Tharoor has asserted he is a proud Hindu who believes in an inclusive Hinduism.

"Tharoor has lost (his) mental balance. (The) Constitution is a sacred document for the Prime Minister. The Congress changed the Constitution several times and imposed (the) Emergency," I&B minister Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore said.

BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra told a news conference: "Tharoor is the same person who called Indians 'cattle class'. He is cattle-classing Indian democracy.... If you want to love Pakistan, do so. But do not display such hatred towards Indians."

Tharoor, then junior foreign minister, had in 2009 appeared to mock a government austerity drive by tweeting he would "travel cattle class out of solidarity with all our holy cows", triggering accusations of insulting the common man and the Congress leadership.

Patra screamed in anger: "This is an insult to compare India's democracy to Pakistan's. Pakistan is terroristan. And you compare our democracy to Pakistan's?... Rahulji, you have begun hating the people of this country. What is more disheartening is that you show hatred for Hindus. It is shameful to denigrate your own country. Rahul Gandhi should apologise for this."

In response, Congress communications chief Randeep Surjewala posted a tweet accusing the Narendra Modi government of creating "an unprecedented atmosphere of division, bigotry, hatred, intolerance & polarisation" and contrasting this with the Congress values of "pluralism, diversity, compassion & harmony".

He added: "India's values and fundamentals are an unequivocal guarantee of our civilisational role & set us apart from the divisive idea of Pakistan. All Congress leaders must realise this historic responsibility bestowed upon us while choosing words & phraseology to reject BJP's hatred."

Many in the party who disapproved of Tharoor's phraseology saw this as a rap to the MP. They said that expressions like "Hindu Pakistan" create an opportunity for the BJP to give its own spin to them.

Tharoor wondered why an apology was being sought. He said he would stop saying the Sangh-BJP wanted to transform India into a Hindu Rashtra if the Prime Minister declared he disagreed with M.S. Golwalkar, V.D. Savarkar and Deendayal Upadhyaya on that count.

"The BJP can't have it both ways. They say they want to change the country and yet repose faith in the Constitution. Let the BJP repudiate the theory of Hindu Rashtra."

Tharoor later issued a statement on Facebook clarifying what he had meant by "Hindu Pakistan".

"Pakistan was created as a state with a dominant religion that discriminates against its minorities and denies them equal rights. India never accepted the logic that had partitioned the country," he wrote.

"But the BJP/RSS idea of a Hindu Rashtra is the mirror image of Pakistan - a state with a dominant majority religion that seeks to put its minorities in a subordinate place. That would be a Hindu Pakistan.... Many proud Hindus like myself cherish the inclusive nature of our faith and have no desire to live, as our Pakistani neighbours are forced to, in an intolerant theocratic state. We want to preserve India and not turn our beloved country into a Hindu version of Pakistan."

Jio jokes do the unthinkable Power, pelf & fine print can't deter derision

New Delhi: India's mightiest politician and richest industrialist have been yoked together by an unlikely glue: ridicule.

An unfamiliar backlash has erupted overnight with several social media users lampooning Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Mukesh Ambani after Reliance Foundation's proposed Jio Institute made a list of six chosen for an eventual tag of "Institute of Eminence".

Such is the sense of incredulity that those trying to point out that the rules do permit "greenfield" projects are running the risk of being branded "apologists".

If the storm of sarcasm is being seen as a measure of the mood among a section of the middle class, it also underscored the boomerang effect of Modi's penchant to shoot first and ask questions later when it comes to his pet anti-corruption plank. The fine print and nuanced explanations are no longer able to fend off biting barbs.

Parody accounts have been formed for Jio Institute and those handling them were prolific in their posts. In the process, Modi's degree in "entire political science'' - that's how Gujarat University describes it although few know what it means - was back in focus.

Historian and columnist Ramachandra Guha retweeted a photograph of Modi with Ambani, both wearing convocation gowns at the convocation ceremony of Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University in Gujarat in 2013, under the line: "In honour of his excellency the prime minister of India, Narendra Modiji, we will offer degree in entire political science course."

One cartoon borrows a popular line from Lage Raho Munna Bhai, the movie in which Circuit settles a dispute on whether Munna Bhai can see Mahatma Gandhi by saying "bhai ne bola dikhta hai, toh dikhta hai (If the boss says he can be seen, then he can be seen)."

The cartoon shows a figure resembling Modi telling a man resembling Amit Shah standing on the edge of a cactus-lined desert: "Look Circuit, Jio Institute."

A youth standing between the two interjects: "But there's nothing there."

Then the man resembling Shah whacks the youth on the head and declares: "Abey Chircut, bhai ne bola yahan Jio Institute hai, toh hai." (Hey Circuit, if the boss says Jio Institute is here, then it is here.)"

The Ambani family was not spared either. Yashwant Sinha, the former Union minister who recently quit the BJP, said: "Jio Institute has not even been set up. It is not in existence. Yet, government grants it eminence tag. That is the importance of M. Ambani."

One tweeter uploaded a video clip showing a Jio telecom ad featuring IPL stars dancing with actress Deepika Padukone with the caption: "Jubilant Reliance Jio students celebrating 'Institute of Eminence tag' bestowed by generous Modi govt ...."

The Centre was compelled to field higher education secretary R. Subramanyam in a fresh attempt to clear the air a day after the HRD ministry had already done so.

The top official iterated that the scheme had a category for greenfield institutions and that Jio Institute would only be issued a letter of intent at first to allow it to set up the institution within three years as planned. Only if Jio Institute follows the timeline it has set for itself will it get the Institute of Eminence status three years down the line, he said.

But by then, historian Guha had tweeted: "Sarkari apologists who say Jio Institute has been placed in the "Greenfield" category, a "Greenfield" university outside Chennai is being helmed by Raghuram Rajan, whose academic qualifications are in inverse proportion to those of the Ambanis. Why not choose that?"

KREA, which has former RBI governor Rajan as its adviser, were among the applicants. JMM's Hemant Soren took the sarcasm route and tweeted: "The opening lecture in the yet-to-be established JIO institute of 'national eminence' would be on morality, ethics & cooperation in Indian politics delivered by Shri Amit Shah."

Answer To Who Is India’s Finance Minister Is As Clear As The Status Of Modi’s Degree

Former Finance Minister, who is now described only as “union minister” — not even minister without portfolio, Arun Jaitley and “acting” Finance Minister Piyush Goyal are locked in a bizarre turf war. Both the ministers addressed an event yesterday (Jaitley via a video conference) and the red-faced organisers put out advertisements describing both of them as “Union ministers”. Does that mean India doesn’t have a Finance Minister now? Or does it have two of them now? It is as clear as the status of Narendra Modi’s graduation degree.

Jaitley is recuperating from his kidney transplant in the “sanitised surroundings of his home”, and is still calling himself “Union Finance Minister” in his Twitter bio while the official ministry website of the Ministry of Finance also describes him as “FM”. Yet a circular by the Cabinet Secretariat unequivocally states that “Goyal is the FM”.

Jaitley, as is his default mode, turned to his loyal band of “bureau journalists” who obligingly did plant news stories about how Goyal “did not even sit in the Jaitley Ministerial chair” – elevating it to Lord Ram’s paaduka, tended by Bharat. It included an incredible claim that Goyal “did not even allow officials to use the other chairs in the office”. The truth is that neither Goyal nor the officials are actually squatting on the floor in tribute to Jaitley! To the contrary, in a visible assertion of his ownership of the finance ministry, Goyal has installed a Ganesh statue in North Block. This has caused huge heartburn to the Jaitley groupies, but Goyal continues to revel in Jaitley’s misery.

Relentless Facebook posts on “half Maoists” and while talking about the Emergency, comparing Indira Gandhi to Hitler — forgetting that RSS luminaries have always held the Nazi leader in the highest esteem — have not quite ensured that Jaitley gets his corner office back. So a dizzying array of plants on his return to North Block with dates are now appearing in various newspapers. This has only ensured that Jaitley’s insecurity become highlighted making him a laughing stock in the Modi cabinet and BJP headquarters. Numerous stories about jokes on Jaitley’s blog posts are doing the rounds but remain unprintable. Even Jaitley’s RSS emissary Suresh Soni has not got much joy as he works hard to get Jaitley his coveted job back.

But Narendra Modi seems unmoved, he is, in fact, taking delight in humiliating Jaitley. The Prime Minister has obviously not forgotten that he once used to stay in a small one-room tenement in Jaitley’s quarters. Goyal is an instrument being used by Modi and Shah to show Jaitley his place in ‘New India.’ It fits in with the treatment meted out to the other CCS Minister, Sushma Swaraj, who has not even received a tweet of support from Modi or Shah.

So while this comical ministerial musical chair in the Finance Ministry continues, the economy reels from the lack of Modi’s much ballyhooed “good governance”. Not that Jaitley as a full-time Finance Minister for three years was not responsible for the downslide of the Indian economy. Even Goyal’s record as a minister in other ministries has been poor. The number of accidents in Jaitley’s Finance Ministership is only matched by the number of rail crashes under Goyal. After all, they are only trying to match up to the high standards of governance disasters unleashed by Modi, such as Demonetisation.

A quick recount of the downslide the Economy finds itself in today:

Indian Public sector banks are in trouble due to rising NPAs and an acute shortage of capital. The owner, the government, urgently either needs to find fresh capital or find other solutions.

Policy Holders of India’s largest life insurance are at risk as investments are being made for considerations other than generating a safe return on their hard earned money.

The Indian rupee is under pressure. This will get worse as the USA is likely to raise rates three or four times this year.

With international oil prices up and likely to remain high, India needs to carefully manage the trade deficit and resultant balance of payments problems.

India has no chief statistician or chief economic advisor. The previous chief statistician left office on 31 Jan 2018. It’s been close to five months since the post of India’s chief statistician was left vacant.

Major changes to the GDP calculation are not supported by back-series data. The government has not released back-series data on the new base year of 2011-12, making the historical comparison of growth numbers impossible. Similarly, the industrial production and employment data need serious work.

Without a chief economic advisor, Arvind Subramanium who quit with just a year to go for his term will we have a robust economic survey?

Experts say that every time Modi opens his mouth on the economy he reveals his utter lack of domain knowledge – it reeks of the kind of learning provided by the RSS Shakhas – from saying that those frying “pakodas” have gainful employment to his latest gaffe that the jobs were created but there was no data, Modi’s claims lead to widespread ridicule. It vastly helped careers of upcoming makers of memes and stand-up comics.

More seriously, the reason for the lack of Employment data is that the government did not like what the data revealed about the lack of job creation and discontinued it. It tried to fudge it through a sponsored EPFO Study and has not appointed a Chief Statistical Officer so far.

While the economy goes in a tailspin just nine months ahead of elections, it is clear that it really does not matter who the FM is. Even if Modi were to himself take charge of the Finance Ministry, the result would be equally abysmal. But just for the sake of records, Mr ‘Strong’ Prime Minister, can we officially know WHO is India’s Finance Minister today? Or are there 56 of them!

Busting the Malicious Myth that Nehru Awarded the Bharat Ratna to Himself

The legacy of Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first and longest-serving prime minister, has come under a systematic assault under the Narendra Modi government. The attack has been multi-faceted, ranging from an unsubstantiated revision of history to the spreading of disparaging myths and lies.

Sometimes, the attempt is to delete references to Nehru’s foundational contributions in the crucial years post independence, when India was at a fragile stage. For instance, in 2016, the new social science textbook for class VIII in Rajasthan – a BJP-ruled state – erased all references to Nehru, as if he had no role to play in India’s history. At other times, the strategy – especially by the troll brigade on social media – has been to spread lies invoking Nehru as the ‘fifth column’ harming the nation’s progress. In their imagination, Nehru becomes the ghost hindering the birth of a ‘new’ India.

This article seeks to bust one such lie. Social media is afloat with theories of Nehru awarding himself India’s highest civilian honour, the Bharat Ratna, during his term as the country’s prime minister by nominating himself for the same.

As a firm believer of scientific logic, Nehru urged Indians to imbibe argumentative abilities. Consistent with the invention of a new vocabulary to govern India that marked a fundamental discontinuity from the colonial rule, Nehru took a personal interest in inserting the term ‘scientific temper’ in India’s constitution. His efforts to promote critical thinking based on evidence and facts via higher secondary education testify to this pursuit of scientific temper. If we apply these values, we can see the untruth in the claim that he handed himself the Bharat Ratna.

The originating point of the controversy is the nomination process of the award. The practice of awarding the Bharat Ratna has been straightforward: The prime minister recommends the names to the president of India, who then accepts such nominations. But this process finds no mention in the official gazette notification of India dated January 2, 1954, which instituted the Bharat Ratna. An additional notification issued on January 15, 1955, to allow the honour to be awarded posthumously also did not mention its procedural aspect. Hence, the process under which the prime minister or the cabinet nominates names to the president to confer the Bharat Ratna is a convention and not the law of the land.

Before Nehru was decorated with the Bharat Ratna in July 1955, it had been awarded only on two occasions. On Independence Day in 1954, C. Rajagopalachari (India’s last governor-general, fondly called Rajaji), S. Radhakrishnan (a scholar of Indian philosophy par excellence who went on to become India’s second president) and C.V. Raman (a Nobel laureate in Physics) were awarded the Bharat Ratna whereas on the Republic Day of 1955, Bhagwan Das (an influential freedom fighter who helped to establish the Banaras Hindu University) and M. Visvesvaraya (the notable engineer and public thinker) received this honour.

On July 13, 1955, Nehru had returned from a successful tour of European countries and the Soviet Union, a tour aimed at the promotion of peace as the Cold War was rapidly escalating. Nehru’s efforts to establish India as a major player in word affairs found popular support outside India. On Nehru’s return to Delhi, the then president of India, Rajendra Prasad, went to receive him, disregarding protocol. A large crowd had gathered to celebrate Nehru’s arrival; their cheerfulness and enthusiasm forced Nehru to deliver a short speech from the tarmac of Delhi airport.

President Prasad hosted a special state banquet on July 15, 1955, at Rashtrapati Bhavan. It was at this event that Prasad announced conferring the Bharat Ratna upon Jawaharlal Nehru. This suo motu decision by the president was ‘kept a closely-guarded secret’ as a Times of India report dated July 16, 1955 notes. Prasad described Nehru as the ‘great architect of peace in our time’, the same newspaper quotes him as saying.

“In fact, the President himself confessed that he had acted unconstitutionally as he had decided to confer the honour “without any recommendation or advice from my Prime Minister” or the Cabinet”, the newspaper reported.

This should lay to rest all the malicious untruths regarding Nehru’s honouring with the Bharat Ratna

One should not forget that Prasad and Nehru had ideological differences mainly regarding the role of religion in politics; in some sense, they were political adversaries. Nehru was opposed to Prasad’s social conservatism. As chairman of the constituent assembly, Prasad had expressed reservations against the Hindu Code Bill that B.R. Ambedkar had proposed to bring about progressive reforms within the Hindu society.

When the first presidential elections were held in 1949-50, transforming India into a republican nation-state, Nehru favoured Rajaji, the then governor-general of India, to continue as the president. Nehru wanted a modern secularist like Rajaji as president to facilitate his role as the prime minister, whereas, Vallabhbhai Patel favoured Prasad for the position of president. Patel used this election as an opportunity to keep the prime minister in control by supporting a traditionalist like Prasad. Finally, Patel won the internal battle, showing his strength within the Congress party’s organisation. Later on, as the president of India, Prasad again voiced his opposition to the Hindu Code Bill, visible in a fierce exchange of letters with Nehru.

Another conflict between Prasad and Nehru arose in 1951 on the issue of the Somnath temple in Gujarat. Prasad had accepted an invitation to attend the inauguration of the restored temple much to the annoyance of Nehru. Nehru advised Prasad to not grace the occasion and to maintain a respectable distance between politics and religion. Prasad did not heed this advice and chose to remain present at the unveiling of the reconditioned temple.

These intense confrontations between Prasad and Nehru did not mean that they disrespected each other. They did not fall into the trap of understanding political opposition as personal enmity, nor did they contest each other’s commitment to the national cause which is evident in Prasad’s conferment of the Bharat Ratna on Nehru. This is an important lesson to remember when ideological differences are re-defining personal relationships and sowing the seeds of hatred in India.

The original article may be read on https://thewire.in/history/bharat-ratna-jawaharlal-nehru

Sharik Laliwala, an alumnus of King’s College London and Ahmedabad University, is an independent scholar of the history and politics of Gujarat.

'It's Like Frankenstein's Monster': The Father Of BJP's IT Cell Says Team Modi Started The Rot

"What does the BJP need that could put it ahead of other parties?" During a car ride to a campaign venue in Uttar Pradesh in 2007, BJP president Rajnath Singh tossed an unusual question at his media assistant Prodyut Bora. The 33-year-old was taken slightly by surprise. He had been a part of the party for barely three years and didn't belong to a political dynasty. But he took his chance. Remember, this was 2007, barely a year after Facebook and Twitter had been launched; the IT industry was booming and no party, Bora felt, had a narrative that could attract this new voting class of young professionals.

A few months later, the Bharatiya Janata Party's 'IT Cell' was born, with Bora as a national convenor. Eleven years later, Bora, now also an entrepreneur in clean air technologies with an office in Gurgaon, says his brainchild has mutated beyond recognition.

"It's like Frankenstein's monster," he said.
The original article can be read on https://www.huffingtonpost.in/2018/06/22/its-like-frankensteins-monster-the-father-of-the-bjps-it-cell-says-team-modi-started-the-rot_a_23464587/

How did you end up joining BJP?

I come from a middle class family where the first option was to get a job, so I had never been part of student politics or anything before. I studied literature in St Stephen's College and then did my post graduate diploma in management from IIM Ahmedabad. I worked, got married, and then finally joined politics when I turned 30.
That happened purely out of a whim.

I was a management consultant advising companies how to change. So I thought, if I can tell companies how to change, why not go and work for the change of the country — just kind of making your canvas bigger. And you're 30 and you think you can change the world and all that.

It was just around the time BJP had lost power, September 2004.

I was a great admirer of Mr Vajpayee, so I felt that this is a man who deserves to get elected again and I would definitely want to contribute. Of course we couldn't have known that his health would deteriorate so quickly. Nonetheless, with all those ideals and idealism, I joined the BJP in 2004. Then I set up the IT cell in 2007 and then I was tasked with the responsibility of running the communications office for LK Advani during 2009 general elections.

Soon after he joined, Bora was assigned to the media cell of the BJP in Delhi under Arun Jaitley. The convenor of the media cell at that time was Siddharth Nath Singh, who he directly reported to. Before Bora left to join politics, he had worked in the DT group which has cinemas in Delhi, his first job, he recounts with a hint of pride, was at Biblio, a celebrated literary magazine. In 2007, Bora was nominated from the cell to join Rajnath Singh during the state polls in UP as his media assistant and spent all of January 2007 traveling with him. Then in May-June, the party announced two new cells. One was Bora's IT cell, the other was the cow protection cell.

Why did the IT cell come to be?

One day we were going from Kanpur to Lucknow in a car, and Rajnath Singh asked randomly, "So Prodyut ji, what is that we should do in the party, that we aren't doing?"

I don't know how the light bulb of my brain got on, so I said, "Well Sir, as a management student, we were taught to always pay attention to CRM — customer relationship management. It's not just enough to sell a product, after that you got to maintain a relationship with the customer as well, so that he or she becomes a repeat customer. So if there can be CRM for the corporate sector, why not VRM -- voter relationship management — for political parties?"

He said, "That's a good idea, let's do this, but how to do it?"

I said, "Sir, there are already 25 cells in the party, let's make another cell and call it the IT cell."

After the cell was formed, some people in the party came and congratulated me, though a little confused. They said, "Congratulations on the Income Tax cell."

When you started the IT Cell, what is it that you wanted it to achieve?

This was the pre-social media age, and the first objective of the IT cell was automating the party. Before we got on to the voters and did voter relations, the party itself needed to be automated first. The second objective was to reach out to voters, the third was advising the party on IT policy matters.

What kind of policy matters did the cell advise the party on?

A lot of things, for example bandwidth. In 2007, bandwidth was a huge challenge. What should be the party's policy — BJP was the main opposition — on internet roll out? What should be our position on VOIP, it was discussed then but it has still not been rolled out in India. We set up the IT cell in about 15 states if I remember correctly. (Editor's note: In 2007, the tariffs were high enough that Internet companies offering cheap calls were a real risk to the bottom line of Airtel and Vodafone. The launch of Reliance Jio in 2016 however changed things dramatically, and today calling is close to - or even entirely - free, with data being king.)

What were the qualifiers that you looked at to induct people into the cell?

A majority of the people were basically IT enthusiasts and experts who were interested in the party. You know, it was purely about technology — it was not about cursing people and running trolls.

What were the significant achievements of IT cell during your tenure?

I think we were capitalising technology like no one else was doing. Even Congress-leaning media houses declared that BJP was way ahead of Congress when it came to technology. In terms of using IT to attract the youth — the early 2000s was considered to be the years of the IT boom — it was very successful. A lot of people who had not thought about politics had begun to think about it. Our interest in IT and using IT as a gateway, got a lot of them associated with the BJP. In terms of automating the party, we did a good job as well.

The charter of the IT cell that Bora shared with HuffPost India begins with the words -- 'Jai Vigyan (Hail Science)' -- and goes on to explain how though lawyers have dominated political parties, the party has noticed people from the IT industry gravitating towards politics.

"The second mandate of the IT Cell is to draw the best of IT talent and provide them a platform to operate in the public space. The IT Cell is inspired by the fact that the Indian independence movement was led by professionals," the document states.

It adds that the IT cells job would be to establish systems that would help party workers reach out to each other and to the public. It also invited IT professionals to join the party to discuss various issues listed as following:

How can IT be used for the greater public good, and not just for private profit?

How can it be used for providing better access to government and private services; for facilitating income-generating activities; and for bridging the urban-rural divide?"

After the BJP lost the general elections in 2009 and Rajnath Singh's tenure as the BJP President ended, Bora moved to his home state Assam as the state general secretary of the party. By then the leadership of the IT cell had changed hands and moved to Arvind Gupta, appointed by the new party president Nitin Gadkari. In 2015, Bora he quit the BJP and 2016 formed his own party, the Liberal Democratic Front in Assam. His party contested in the state elections in Assam in 14 seats and lost all of them. However, they plan to contest in the general elections again.

When you look back, what was the legacy you wanted to leave the IT Cell with?
My legacy doesn't stand. It has been turned upside down. It is like -- maybe this is a bad example -- but it is like asking Mr Vajpayee today what legacy he has left in the BJP. It's completely destroyed. Fortunately for us, we did not have social media. I mean it had just come in and in India, people had dismissed social media as something not happening...

Did you ever consider the possibility that social media will become a behemoth it is now?

Nobody thought! But we very enthusiastic about its implications. Back when we were just getting to understand it, it was all about democratisation of content, democratisation of voice, democratisation of access, multiple narratives — I mean those are the beautiful words.

We thought, until now we had media, now everyone can be media barons'. Nobody thought it would turn out to be what it is now.

When did you start feeling that the party has turned the IT cell into a polarising weapon?

I think it was the 2014 campaign. During the 2014 campaign, the IT cell was being controlled and managed completely from Gandhinagar. It was being run by the Modi team and I think the rot started there. The formal head of the IT cell was there peripherally but the entire thing was Modi's team. So Team Modi started the rot.

When you look at the IT cell today and what it allegedly does, what do you feel about it?

I mean, occasionally, its just painful to watch what they have done with it. But I try to be dispassionate about it as well. Institutions go up, go down and I look at the IT cell as a small institution that I had the privilege of setting up.

But it's no more a small thing. A few days back, there was news that in UP, BJP is looking to recruit 2 lakh people into the IT cell...
(Chuckles) When you have money, you can do anything. In those days, we didn't have money. See, I look at it this way — I was given a job. I did a good and honest job. Now somebody has driven it to the ground.

Also, you know we cannot keep talking about the IT cell in isolation. The IT cell carries out the mandate of the BJP president. Whatever directions the president kind of gives you, you do that.

During my time at the cell, we drafted out a charter, we showed it to Mr Rajnath Singh. He approved it and said, "Okay this is your job."

So today, whatever they are doing is a mandate that has come down from their president. I mean people should ask the party president what's going and not the IT cell.

Why did you quit the BJP?

I wanted to quit the day Mr Modi was made the prime ministerial candidate for the party...

Why did you feel that way?

Uncomfortable. Whatever has happened, I think I know too much. I was just uncomfortable. I think that it was not a good choice, it's a bad choice. But my colleagues said that everybody deserves a second chance, especially in public life and so does Mr Modi.

They also said, "That there are too many checks and balances in Delhi. There's a Supreme Court, the media is more intense, the Parliament... so we are sure he's going to change. Give him a second choice."

That I felt, was sane advice. So I gave him a chance, I waited. I resigned in February 2015, I gave him 10 months. Then when I saw that more of the same things were happening, I did the only honourable thing that could be done — quit.

Can you explain what you mean by 'same things'?

The same things that were happening in Gujarat — you know one man and the bureaucrats kind of running the show. The same thing is happening at the Centre. In fact, it's one man running the country and another man running the party. Just one man and his cabal running the country — the same kind of surveillance and pressure on the media, society and dissidence — what they did in Gujarat. Same thing they are doing across the country. One man taking all major policy decisions like it was in Gujarat — demonetisation, GST, this and that. In 10 months I could figure out that things will not change.

You joined the party in 2004. Before that, in 2001, the Gujarat riots happened and even before that Advani was widely acknowledged to be the architect unrest that led to the Babri Masjid demolition and the riots that followed. You said you wanted to do something for the country, so how did you overlook the party's communal history?

I didn't think there was any logic to this violence. In 2001, I was actually extremely proud of the fact that Vajpayee ji talked about 'rajdharma' and expressed his disapproval for Modi's discriminatory politics. (A letter obtained through RTI found that in a rare instance, Atal Behari Vajpayee had written to Modi after the riots reminding him what his job as a CM was and that was not to fan discrimination.)

It's another thing, that due to the intra-party politics, he could not fire Mr Modi, he wanted to. In that flight to Goa, everyone pounced upon him and he couldn't do anything. I empathised with his handicaps. Number one, he was running a 23-party coalition, his position was not one of absolute power. Within the party, I think, the control of the party was still with Advani. I felt he wanted things to change, but he couldn't change it. My attraction to the BJP was not BJP, it was not RSS, it was Mr Vajpayee.

How would you describe the trajectory of the IT cell?

The IT Cell's trajectory went a bit like SIMI's. The first president of SIMI, who was instrumental in starting it, is now a professor in United States and this is a banned organisation in India. He started SIMI with a different objective, you know, to help Muslim students who were backward. Using the power of education to help them progress, the founder later said, that was the idea behind SIMI.

Later, it became a banned organisation. The IT cell started with a very different mandate, it was not created to abuse people. I actually think, the people who joined in 2004, that wasn't even the culture of the party. The BJP used to be a cultured party, I mean there was some sense of it, some decorum within the party. Now it has crossed all limits.

Would you have advice on how to fix what the IT cell has become?

You cannot fix the IT cell until you fix the party's president.

Nirav Modi has six passports; FIR soon

Agencies probing the alleged $2-billion PNB fraud have detected that absconding diamond merchant Nirav Modi possessed at least half-a-dozen Indian passports and a fresh FIR is being mulled against him for this offence, officials said on Sunday.

Mr. Nirav Modi has been traced to Belgium by Indian intelligence agencies and his frequent travels, despite the revocation of his passport, have led the sleuths to unearth that of the six passports he held, two were active for quite some time.

The four other passports were found to be not active, sources said.

Of the two active passports, one had Mr. Nirav Modi’s full name while the other only had his first name with a 40-week UK visa issued against it and that is probably how he kept travelling to various countries, despite the government revoking his first known passport earlier this year, the sources told PTI.

The second passport was also subsequently revoked by the Indian authorities.

The sources said the government, through the Ministry of External Affairs, has informed the Interpol about the two revoked passports of Mr. Nirav Modi, but it appears that in the absence of a uniform international mechanism, the legal blocking of the documents in various countries could not be done and the fugitive diamantaire kept using those to travel through airports and possibly seaports too.

The revocation order of the passports has been appended to the application of the probe agencies (CBI and ED), seeking an Interpol arrest warrant or a “red corner notice” against Mr. Nirav Modi.

“It is a criminal offence to use a revoked passport and also to possess more than one valid passport if a person does not enjoy a special status like that of a diplomatic entity, a government employee or on a few other grounds.

“A fresh criminal FIR may be filed against Nirav Modi and he may face prosecution for the offence after the completion of an internal inquiry,” a senior official in the security establishment said.

He added that an inquiry was also being held to ascertain if Mr. Nirav Modi was using passports issued by other countries to travel.

Recently, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) again urged the Interpol to issue an arrest warrant against the fugitive diamantaire on the basis of their respective chargesheets against him and others, containing corruption and money-laundering charges.

Once the Interpol issued the notice and Mr. Nirav Modi’s latest location was ascertained, the government would move for his extradition, the sources said.

The ED will also move a special court in Mumbai to seek an official declaration to categorise Mr. Modi as a “fugitive” on the basis of the prosecution complaint (chargesheet) filed last month and for immediate confiscation of assets worth over Rs 8,000 crore, owned by him, his family and associated firms.

Mr. Nirav Modi, his uncle and jeweller Nirav Choksi and others are being probed by the agencies after the fraud came to light, following a complaint from the Punjab National Bank (PNB) that they allegedly cheated the nationalised bank to the tune of over ₹13,000 crore with the purported involvement of a few employees of the bank.

The CBI and the ED have registered two FIRs each in connection with the case. Both Mr. Nirav Modi and Mr. Choksi are said to have left the country before the criminal cases were lodged against them.

In the hot seat but 'kept out of loop'-Who is the Home Minister of India?

New Delhi: When national security adviser Ajit Doval visited BJP president Amit Shah's bungalow on Tuesday morning, Union home minister Rajnath Singh was sitting in his first-floor office in North Block.

Moments after the BJP announced its decision to pull out of the Jammu and Kashmir government, the home minister left his office and went to his official residence, two senior home ministry officials said, adding that they felt Rajnath had so far been unaware of the impending decision.

The two officials are among others in the home ministry who told The Telegraph that neither Rajnath nor the government's interlocutor for Jammu and Kashmir, Dineshwar Sharma, appeared to have known about the decision to dump Mehbooba Mufti.

When the BJP's Jammu and Kashmir minder Ram Madhav announced the pullout, senior ministry officials said they were taken aback. "Forget about us, it seems even Rajnathji was not in the loop," an official said.

Contacted after the BJP's decision to pull out, Sharma, the interlocutor, said: "I'm in Srinagar and have just learnt about it. I do not want to comment."

Such was the resentment within the home ministry that one official went to the extent of saying: "Rajnath Singh is the official second-in-command in the government, but only on paper."

The officials said Rajnath was perhaps the lone member in the Narendra Modi-Amit Shah dispensation taking a nuanced, if not divergent, stand on multiple issues.

They cited how Rajnath had pushed for the extension of the unilateral ceasefire in Kashmir but the Prime Minister decided to end it on Sunday following opposition from Doval and army chief Bipin Rawat. Sharma too was keen on a ceasefire extension.

"It has to be seen now how Sharma does his job as there is no government in the state," an official said.

Government sources said the emergence of Doval as a power centre in the Prime Minister's Office has virtually clipped Rajnath's wings. The national security adviser is learnt to be taking all the key decisions on internal security and Kashmir.

"The NSA is PM Modi's eyes and ears in the home ministry," an official said.

Around 4.30pm on Tuesday, Rajnath held a meeting at his Akbar Road residence with home secretary Rajiv Gauba, IB chief Rajiv Jain and special secretary in the home ministry Rina Mitra on the security situation in Jammu and Kashmir. Doval too was present.

Rajnath also spoke to Jammu and Kashmir governor N.N. Vohra.

Officials in the security establishment said the Centre was planning to launch an all-out operation against militants in Kashmir.

"The governor's rule in the state will ensure zero political interference in offensive operations. It is now clear that the government wants to go full steam ahead on its Hindutva and nationalism agenda before the 2019 Lok Sabha elections," a source said.

An official spokesperson said in Srinagar that after consultations with political parties, governor Vohra had forwarded his report.

The spokesperson said the governor had asked Mehbooba to continue in office till alternative arrangements were made.

Unlike other states, Jammu and Kashmir has to be placed under governor's rule for six months under Section 192 of the state constitution before President's rule can be imposed. Other states come under President's rule under Article 356 in the event of the failure of the constitutional machinery.

"The Union home ministry will forward the governor's report to the President who will send it to the Union cabinet. It will be processed by the cabinet and a decision will be taken," a home ministry official said.
 

An Update: June 23, 2018
Ministry says report is false; The Telegraph stands by its report

• Sir - This has reference to the news item titled "In the hot seat but 'kept out of loop'" published in your newspaper dated 20.6.18.

The news item read "Moments after the BJP announced its decision to pull out of the Jammu and Kashmir government, the home minister left his office and went to his official residence, two senior home ministry officials said, adding that they felt Rajnath had so far been unaware of the impending decision. The two officials are among others in the home ministry who told The Telegraph that neither Rajnath nor the government's interlocutor for Jammu and Kashmir, Dineshwar Sharma, appeared to have known about the decision to dump Mehbooba Mufti. When the BJP's Jammu and Kashmir minder Ram Madhav announced the pullout, senior ministry officials said they were taken aback. "Forget about us, it seems even Rajnathji was not in the loop," an official said."

The Ministry of Home Affairs has taken a serious note of the above mentioned news, which is completely false and motivated. It is fictitious, based on falsehood and malicious.

The correspondent in a bid to sell his story has written fiction and tried to pass it off as journalism.

To justify his imagination, the correspondent produced quotes attributed to the Ministry of Home Affairs officials, who do not exist in reality.

The intention behind publishing such false news appears to mislead the readers with an intention to create wrong impression in their minds about the functioning of the Ministry of Home Affairs and cause damage to the reputation of the Ministry and the Honourable Home Minister.

Publication of such completely, false and baseless news does not behove of a prestigious newspaper like "The Telegraph".

It is expected that a newspaper like "The Telegraph" would have a system in place to check the veracity of stories written by correspondents rigorously before they get published because media carries the onerous responsibility of informing the people accurately about various events, especially in which senior dignitaries of Government of India were involved.

It is expected that your esteemed newspaper will publish, by giving equal prominence, this rejoinder by the Ministry of Home Affairs so that the readers are informed of the correct position.

A. Bharat Bhushan Babu,
ADG (Media & Communication)

• The Telegraph report was based on conversations with officials of the ministry. The newspaper published the report only after corroborating the version with multiple officials who, contacted again on Friday, iterated the account. The Telegraph stands by the report. Editor

NCW sends team to probe gang-rape of NGO women in Jharkhand

New Delhi, Jun. 22 (PTI): The National Commission for Women is sending an inquiry team that will go to Khunti district in Jharkhand to look into the alleged gang-rape of five women, the NCW chairperson said.

Five women working with an NGO were allegedly raped at gunpoint by a group of at least five men when they had gone to Chochang village in Khunti district in Jharkhand to create awareness on migration and human trafficking, police said on Friday.

The three-member team would be led by Under-Secretary Preeti Kumar, who would travel to Khunti with a junior technical officer and a lawyer to take stock of the situation, said NCW Chairperson Rekha Sharma.

Sharma said the NCW has also written to Jharkhand’s police chief D.K. Pandey to probe the matter properly and has directed him to apprise the commission about action being taken in the matter at the earliest.

A 11-member team of a non-governmental organisation had gone to the village to perform a street play on migration and human trafficking.

A group of men arrived on the scene and took some of them to a nearby forests at gunpoint and raped them.

Glare on DeMo stash in bank linked to Shah

New Delhi: The Congress on Friday called for a thorough investigation into post-demonetisation deposits following revelations that a cooperative bank associated with BJP chief Amit Shah received Rs 745 crore in scrapped notes before these banks were barred from accepting them.

Replies by the National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development (Nabard) to queries filed under the Right to Information Act reveal that many other cooperative banks linked to senior BJP leaders had also received high deposits.

Congress communications chief Randeep Surjewala declared on Friday that Rahul Gandhi's contention - that the November 8, 2016, demonetisation drive was independent India's biggest scam - had been vindicated.

Rahul, too, lost no time in taking a dig at the BJP chief. "Congratulations Amit Shah ji, Director, Ahmedabad District Cooperative Bank, on your bank winning 1st prize in the conversion of old notes to new race. Rs 750 crore in 5 days! Millions of Indians whose lives were destroyed by demonetization, salute your achievement," the Congress chief tweeted in the morning.

The Congress released the list of banks linked to BJP leaders that got the deposits, according to the May 7 RTI reply to queries filed by Manoranjan S. Roy, a Mumbai-based information activist.

The Ahmedabad District Cooperative Bank, whose directors include Shah and his close associates, had received Rs 745.58 crore in scrapped notes - the highest among all 370 district cooperative banks in the country - in the first five days after conversions began on November 10, 2016.

District cooperative banks were banned from accepting the scrapped notes after November 14 on the ground that black money would be laundered through this route.

Shah had been the bank's chairman earlier, and his party colleague and aide Ajay Patel now heads it. Another close associate Yashpal Chudasma, whose name had appeared in the controversy related to his son Jay Shah, is another director.

No other bank among the 370 district co-operative banks across the country had received such a big sum in five days.

"Whose money was this?" Surjewala asked. "We had asked the government to bring out a list of all those who deposited more than Rs 25 lakh just before demonetisation or soon after that. Why was that not done?"

QUESTION IN M.D. EXAM ASKS ABOUT VIOLENCE AGAINST DOCTORS AND ITS SOLUTIONS – WILL THE ANSWER INCLUDE LACK OF PUBLIC TRUST AND FAILURE OF MEDICAL COUNCILS TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST NEGLIGENT DOCTORS?

In the written exam held earlier this month at the King George’s Medical University in Lucknow for doctors in the program for obtaining post-graduate degree in medicine (M.D.), a question simply asked, “Write briefly on violence against doctors: Causes, effects and solution“. 

A valid point may be raised whether this question at all belongs in the examination for would be medicine specialists but more importantly, having been involved with the unequal fight for justice for the victims of medical negligence, we wonder what would be the standard for the examiners to judge the “correct” answer to this unusual question for M.D. examinees? 

Apart from the debatable answers for the “causes” or “effects” of violence against doctors, what is the right “solutions” to solve the crisis of wide-spread medical negligence and sporadic attacks on doctors?

PBT never supports the idea of doctor bashing or hospital vandalism under any condition, even in the event of death from genuine incidence of “medical negligence” because two wrongs can never make a right. But there is no argument that most cases of violence against doctors happen due to deep erosion of public trust on the medical community. 

When a loved person dies in front of your eyes from apparent act of gross medical negligence, friends and family of the victim want medical justice. Unfortunately, it is a common knowledge today that, unlike in the West, doctor-members of the medical council primarily work to shield their errant medical colleagues without caring for the loss of life of an ordinary citizen. 

The idea of violence against doctors is simply unimaginable in the Western Countries including USA and UK because medical councils in these countries (composed of doctor and non-doctor members) investigate complaints against doctors in an impartial and transparent manner and routinely suspend/cancel license of the negligent doctors. There is no need for the ordinary citizens in these countries to take law into their own hands in a futile attempt to find medical justice by physical violence against doctors/hospitals as in India. 

No new law to put the victim’s friends/families in jail for their momentary lose of control under acute grief and lack of hope for justice in the medical council after losing their loved one from gross medical negligence cannot be an effective solution to prevent attacks on doctors. 
Compassion and proper understanding from victim’s perspectives are necessary to eradicate the social evils of medical negligence and violence against doctors. 
But will the examiners in Lucknow give appropriate credit for this answer to the M.D. candidates?