India's problem was never her politicians

Since my childhood, I regularly hear one theme in conversations about India, everyone talks about India's potential. Everyone says that India has a lot of talent, rich history, diversity, and whatnot, but somehow can't live up to its true potential. Most Indians also keep on repeating the same lines again and again without realizing that it is they who need to help their country realize its potential, not some outsiders. However, most are happy just debating these issues, blaming each other or their political opponents, and complaining about politicians and bureaucrats. However, most Indians are okay with corruption and corrupt politicians regularly get elected in various elections. It is a common perception that politics is a dirty game and that politicians are dishonest. To be fair, India is not the only country that has this perception about politicians, but it is definitely one of those countries that blame its politicians for all problems, for example, the problems of corruption, communalism, poor infrastructure, poverty, unemployment, brain drain, and whatnot is blamed to dirty politics. However, India's problem is not its politicians, but the people who elect these politicians, again and again, from different political parties. These people not only support such corrupt, many times, with criminal background people, but idolize them, worship them, and even after that, expect their society to be just and fair. Also, in India, it is very common to change political parties, unbelievable, but people thirsty for your blood can become your die-hard supporter once you switch to the party they support. Unbelievable, but true.

Once elected people with a criminal background become lawmakers, no matter how many laws exist in the law book, how many courts function, or how many police personnel work, it is impossible to have proper law and order. This is because no elected person will allow to law to take its proper course unless it hurts their opponents. When people of any country start reacting to crime based on who has committed it, not what is the nature of the crime, that country is sure to get doomed today or tomorrow. Once people see crimes through political, racial, religious, or any other bias, they are not looking at the crime, but at the criminal's identity and react based on that. That means the reactions are not based on the nature or gravity of the committed crime but on the identity of the accused. The same crime based on who has committed it generated drastically different reactions, people either try their best to downplay or justify the crime or try to demand the harshest possible punishment possible. Politicians make very good use of this, they instigate polarized emotions within society and benefit from dormant hate that many organizations silently brew within the society. Hate is a very potent social weapon, politicians, religious fanatics, and terrorists all use it very well. People knowingly fall into this trap so regularly that one can hardly blame anyone but the people themselves for being a toy in the hands of antisocial elements. This is the point of today's post, India's problem is not its politicians but people who support these politicians and don't dare to speak when a politician or the party they elected does something wrong. Things don't change overnight, but to start any change people first should start from themselves, only complaining about the system hardly initiates any change. Once people change their attitude and demand accountability from the politicians they elect, things will start changing. Until then, the evergreen argument of India has potential, this is how things are done in India would continue for many more decades.

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

Conflict of interest

Indian external affairs minister Mrs. Sushma Swaraj issued a no-objection statement to clear the travel documents of Mr. Lalit Modi, who is considered a fugitive in a financial irregularities case. This has created a lot of controversy and political turmoil. Now the name of the current chief minister of Rajasthan Vasundhara Raje Scindia also surfaced in this controversy as it seems that she wrote a confidential letter in support of the immigration application of Lalit Modi. Both these people occupied some constitutional posts, Mrs. Swaraj wrote that note as an external affairs minister and Mrs. Scindia was the leader of the opposition of the Rajasthan state assembly when she wrote that letter. This whole controversy is because of the legal troubles of Mr. Lalit Modi in India, he is supposed to face an inquiry about some money laundering scam related to the cash-rich cricket tournament IPL, but instead of that, he escaped from the country and now living in London. Both Mrs. Swaraj and Scindia have very close ties with Mr. Lalit Modi, they both personally know him, and some of their close family members are directly or indirectly associated with him in a professional capacity. Mrs. Swaraj is claiming that she helped him on humanitarian grounds. It seems that Lalit needed those travel documents so that he could be with his wife who was undergoing some treatment related to cancer in Portugal. Whereas Mrs. Scindia still has not clarified whether she issued any such letter or not. Both these cases are ideal examples of conflict of interest. Conflict of interest is a big deal in all developed countries where one has to disclose any conflict of interest as part of a compliance requirement. Even in research, I remember that we need to sign a conflict of interest form declaring that we don't have any interests which can create any conflict in our research work, if there is any such thing, then we have to declare it so that concerned authorities know about it in advance, failure to do so can have some serious professional and legal consequences. 

So, what is this conflict of interest that is given so much importance? Actually, it is a very simple thing to understand, if there is anything (especially any financial or personal interest) that can affect your professional behavior, then it should be properly disclosed before engaging in that professional activity. I can cite some examples based on my personal experience; for example, if I am acting as a judge in my city's school science fair and there are projects from the same school or same grade in which my kids study or projects by kids who I know personally (like my friend's or neighbor's kids), then I have to disclose this, so the organizers know about it. Most probably, they might want me not to judge those projects as there is a conflict of interest from my side. But even after this disclosure, if they want me to judge those projects then I must impartially judge them, but I need to disclose the conflict first. If I don't do that, then no matter how much I claim to be impartial, people will question my intentions as I didn't disclose my conflict before proceeding with my actions. If I fail to disclose the conflict for whatever reason and it gets discovered after I finish my duty as science fair judge, then I give others the opportunity to question the impartiality of my actions, that is why it is better to disclose it beforehand. It is not only required because I might show some favoritism but because it can have a negative effect also, I might be extra strict with those students just because I might have unreasonably high expectations from students I know personally. This is why disclosure of conflict of interest becomes a very important matter.

When you put tobacco business people on a committee that is supposed to decide tobacco's impact on human health, how can you expect an impartial and unbiased opinion from them? At the same time, you cannot put an openly anti-tobacco activist for the same reason, both cannot be impartial due to their conflicts with the issue under discussion. These types of things will keep on happening in India unless people understand and follow the policy of declaring conflicts of interest. If these two political figures had followed some simple steps of declaring their relationship with Lalit Modi and stayed away from issues related to him, then there would not have been question marks on their intentions. Hope that people learn from these incidents and take care not to engage in similar activities in the future.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Verdict against Jayalalithaa - justice delayed, denied or just misplaced?

Tamil Nadu chief minister and AIADMK (All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam) leader Jayalalithaa was finally convicted in a disproportionate asset case. It was an 18-year-long battle. The FIR was filed in 1996 for the financial irregularities she and her aids committed during her first stint as CM of Tamilnadu (1991-96). For the last few decades, misuse of public money has become a norm in the Indian political class. Corruption is very rampant at all levels in every state and at the center, no matter which government is in power. Therefore, these recent judgments especially this one and the one about the former Bihar CM Laloo Prasad Yadav can be considered landmark judgments in the political history of India, if this trend continues. I am sure that no one can deny the importance and need of strict vigilance and robust mechanisms to catch and punish corrupt politicians and other administrators. This can help to tame the rampant corruption which has become a norm in India.

The judgment which was delivered a few days back took almost 18 years to come, and this is a session court, now the convict can appeal to the High Court and then to the Supreme Court. It took 18 years for one court to deliver the judgment so imagine how much time it will take for this case to go through all three courts. Such a long delay in delivering judgments is a serious problem of the Indian judiciary system. Jayalalithaa was doing a very good job as a Tamil Nadu CM when this judgment came. If one takes a look at central government data her state is a leading state based on many indicators that measure the progress of Indian states. The hysterical reaction of her supporters after her arrest was also a real shocker for me, some of them even took the extreme step of taking their own life as they could not tolerate the news of their beloved leader's arrest. Such delayed delivery of justice does create unique situations like this and at the same time raises some serious questions. What is the real purpose of punishing any convict? Is it just to hurt them? Is it to make them realize their mistake and then give them an opportunity to reform themselves by correcting those mistakes? Is it to set an example for others so that they don't dare to commit the same mistake? Is it to eliminate them from society (in the case of capital punishment)?

It all comes down to what is the purpose of punishment and does such delayed delivery of justice serve that purpose? Are we punishing the same corrupt Jayalalithaa who committed this crime? Was she already a reformed person when she finally got punished? If she has already realized her mistake and is a reformed person then what purpose does this delayed punishment will serve? Due to the nature of the legal structure in India, she will now apply to a higher court and then come out of jail on bail so there is a doubt if this example will act as a deterrent to other politicians? She was relatively new to politics when she made this mistake and that's why it might have been easy to convict her. Otherwise, these politicians and corrupt bureaucrats are so clever that they rarely leave any evidence of their corruption, which is why it is difficult to convict them in any criminal case as there is no direct evidence to prove their crime. There is no doubt that it is good to see that such judgments are finally coming, but the judiciary has to make these decisions fast. Justice delivered in time can have the desired impact on the perpetrator and victims. If it is not timely, then one wonders if delayed justice is justice at all. I have no sympathy for Jayalalithaa for the crimes she did but I feel bad for the people of Tamil Nadu who were getting good governance and now feel cheated by this judgment as they feel that the system unfairly targeted only their leader. The judiciary needs to remove this doubt from people's minds by delivering verdicts promptly. Also, targeting politicians only from certain political parties is a political prosecution as you are at risk only when you are not with the ruling party, either in the state or in the center. There are thousands of people waiting in jails for their trials and this is a very serious problem. Government and judiciary should work together to resolve this problem.

So in this case, it is not clear whether justice is delayed, denied, or misplaced (delivered at the wrong time). I don't think it is denied as she got punished for her crimes but the other two scenarios are also equally disturbing. I ask this question because I am really concerned about the delay in delivering justice. I think that it defeats the whole purpose behind it. These types of incidents remind me of a poem in Marathi, I can’t recall the exact poem as it is, don't remember its poet but I think it was something like this,

A lawyer meets a 65-year-old lady outside the court after the judgment was delivered in her favor punishing all 10 people involved in a gang rape against her. He congratulates her and says that she must be happy that finally justice is delivered, she won the case, and all culprits are finally punished. She says, "Son, I am happy if you say so. But really I don’t know whether to be happy or sad, this gang rape was done on a 16-year-old girl, 5 of the guilty lived a normal life and are already dead, 3 of them are so old that they can’t do anything on their own, this punishment doesn't mean anything to them, remaining two are doting grandfathers for their grandkids, now I am feeling bad that they will go to jail and those kids will miss them, and as far as that girl is concerned she already suffered enough because of this crime, lived her adolescent life in guilt, shame, and trauma, she waited for this justice too long but she is now a grown-up woman who learned to live her life with this scar, but if you say so I am happy as I won this case and finally justice is delivered"

Justice delayed is justice denied. Only time will tell if this is a new beginning to end corruption or just an arbitrary incident that will be only used as a tool to intimidate political opponents.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Links:

1. Jayalalithaa sentenced to four years in jail, fined Rs. 100 crore

2. Jayalalithaa conviction: 16 persons commitsuicide

Was Manjunath stupid to sacrifice his life?

I recently watched the movie "Manjunath" which is based on events in the life of Shanmughan Manjunath, who was a marketing manager of Indian Oil Corporation (IOC). He was murdered in November 2005 for sealing one petrol station in UP which was selling adulterated fuel. The movie specifically deals with this particular incident in Manjunath's life. Two years before (in November 2003) this incident there was another shocking murder of Satyendra Dubey which shocked the nation. Both these young professionals were murdered for opposing the corrupt practices which are very rampant all over India (especially in the public sector). They paid with their life for their desire to do their job with honesty and sincerity. The movie is very well made, it is not like other regular entertaining movies as it is not supposed to entertain you. The movie is supposed to disturb, shock, and force its audience to think and I think movie makers are reasonably successful in this. I especially liked the conversations between the dead Manjunath and his killer Monu Mittal. The dialogue between both of them when Monu is locked in jail is the highlight of the movie according to me. During these conversations, Monu tries to make fun of Manjunath's values and his courage to stand for them by teasing him for his stupidity to risking his life for his principles. He also tells him that everyone wants to have someone to change this rotten system, but they do not want this person from their own home, they want in their neighbor's house. People want the change but not at the cost of their own comfort. Many of us don't want to sacrifice our own lives or risk our own jobs to eradicate corruption from the system. We want the system to be fixed but don't want to make our own hands dirty. Because of this attitude, the corrupt system has become so strong and robust that it ruthlessly crushes anyone who even by mistake tries to challenge it. People who dare to challenge this are so few in number compared to people who meekly surrender to it that it is easy to crush these challengers without even getting into much trouble. It is not easy to be a parent of a rebel or a martyr, it takes a lot of emotional toll on the family. Manjunath's family must have faced a lot of pain and trauma after his death. They must have felt the disgusting feeling that the killers of their son might get away with their crime because of the corrupt system in India. They must be wondering why their son risked his life to stand for the principles he believed in? Fortunately, some better sense prevailed in this case, maybe because of tremendous pressure created by people, justice was delivered and perpetrators got punished. But not every case is resolved in this manure, at the end of the movie watch the names of people who were murdered or tortured just for trying to do their job honestly.

Actually, many of us see wrong things happening around us, but most of us choose to ignore them or tolerate these things. Forget about risking our lives to stop them we don't even register a protest. Social evils like discrimination, sexual harassment, and bullying keep on happening right in front of people's eyes and many choose to ignore them rather than at least register a protest. Slowly these things become systematic and very few dare to oppose them. Manjunath exactly faced the same dilemma, whatever he learned in class and whatever values he believed in were different than the ground reality he saw after starting his job. He was shocked to see such a blatant and shameless act of corruption, he was shocked that even after several warnings there was no effect. Many people surrender after witnessing systematic corruption, they accept current norms and think that one person cannot change things but Manjunath didn't and that's why we are talking about him. During one of their conversations, Monu calls him 'stupid' for risking his life for such a small thing. Was Manjunath stupid? Or was he the only sane person in the insane environment around him? Are we as a society taking any steps towards creating an environment where Manjunaths don't feel suffocated and murdered? What do murders of people like Dr. Dabholkar tell us? The movie raises many questions like this. Recent support to movements like India Against Corruption (IAC) or Aam Adami Party (AAP) showed us how serious is the problem of corruption in India. But the progress in the direction of eradicating this social menace or even controlling it is very slow, there is a lack of political will from all political parties and it seems for voters corruption is not an election issue. So it seems our society is only interested in candle marches or protests after each incident like this but they are not yet ready to force political parties to reform the entire system. I really don't know how many Manjunaths or Satyendras have to sacrifice their lives to open our eyes to see the monster of corruption. Political parties are not going to do anything on their own until people force them to do it. I hope this movie and the story of people like Manjunath inspire many young people who can at least dare to ask some tough questions to the current establishment. Initiating some change toward controlling widespread corruption will be the biggest tribute to these people who sacrificed their lives to clean this system.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Mr. Nandi, now prove what you said or back off

It seems it is a season of making controversial statements and offering unsolicited advice in India (especially to females about what they should or shouldn't do). In the middle of all other events like fatwas and protests, noted author Mr. Ashis Nandi made a very strange statement at the Jaipur Literature Festival. He suggested that the ranks of the corrupt in India were made up entirely of those from the Other Backward Classes, the Scheduled Castes,  and the Schedule Tribes. As expected, this statement generated an array of reactions from different sections of society some supporting Mr. Nandy and many ridiculing his statement. All these reactions are as expected but I want to point the attention of readers to the statement which he made. I wonder what data and logic he used to come to this conclusion. It sounds very ridiculous and rather than protesting against it or trying to get him arrested, people should prove him wrong and force him to take his statement back.

There is no question that Mr. Nandy has the right to express his opinion and I am not in favor of arresting him or making his life difficult just for making this remark. Any statement like this gets condemned in India, and different sections of society register their reactions differently, but these things never get discussed properly, and freely in an open environment. I think we need to do this. Rather than threatening people, or attacking movie theaters, people should debate over these issues. If it is wrong then prove it wrong, ask for an apology, and make that person accept their mistake, not by force or threats but by logic and rational arguments.

Corruption is very rampant in all sections of public life in India. One can not generalize that people belonging to any particular caste or religion are more involved in corruption compared to others. Outlook magazine published one table (see reference 1) where they listed the caste or religion of people involved in different corruption scandals that were reported in the last decade or so. One can see that there is a lot of variety there, people from all sections of society are part of this great crime. This chart itself is enough to prove Mr. Nandy wrong and if he is a sensible guy he will accept his mistake. There is nothing wrong with making mistakes. We all do it. We all mess up some things at some stage in our lives, but after realizing the mistake, not correcting it is an even bigger mistake. I hope Mr. Nandy won't make this second mistake which will be worse than his first one.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)

References:
1. Data by Outlok

Why corruption is not such a big issue in India?

India Against Corruption has been in the news recently. Arvind Kejriwal is trying to make corruption a big issue for the next general election. Every day new scams are discovered at the state and national level, and still same governments with tainted ministers are running, Jailed ministers are getting released and also receiving grand receptions from their party and supporters. One can ask, why Indian bureaucracy is so corrupt? Why do most people visiting any government office need to pay bribes to get any small work done? Why even common people are not scared of breaking traffic laws? Why do people think or believe that nothing is going to happen to the rich or politicians even if they break the law? There are many questions like this and most people will point their fingers towards the corrupt political, legal, and bureaucratic system as the root cause for all this. We common people are a very important part of this system because this system runs because of us and for us. We are the reason why this system exists. We help the system to run and we have the power to change it in any direction we want. So, the question is how come the system became so corrupt in the first place, and why no one is doing anything to correct it? One of my friends forwarded me a very interesting email that dealt with a similar subject (Why India is so corrupt?). Though I don't agree with the subject of this email that India is totally corrupt because according to me it's not right to label the whole country as corrupt because of its corrupt political system and bureaucracy. There are many honest bureaucrats and politicians in India, but they are exceptions and not the rule. That email mentioned some very interesting points that I want to share with my blog readers along with some of my own points.

The author of the email thought that corruption in India is a cultural aspect and Indians don't mind corruption as it's everywhere (including their culture). We have a tendency to tolerate corrupt people rather than correct them. The author blames our culture and traditions for this attitude. The author goes on to say that religion is transactional in India. Many Indians give God cash, gold, or whatever they can offer and anticipate an out-of-turn reward and he is absolutely right about this. This type of action acknowledges that favors are needed to get things done. In the world outside the temple, such a transaction is called a “bribe.” Many wealthy Indians give many gifts in various forms to temples and other religious organizations, the main intention of these gifts is not to help the poor and needy but this is their payoff to God. They think that such a donation to a temple or God can bring more wealth or good luck and it will be wasted if it goes directly to a needy person. One very recent example of this is when Karnataka minister G. Janardhan Reddy (famous Reddy brothers) gifted a crown of gold and diamonds worth approximately Rs 45 crore (~ 10 million USD) to Tirupati. It is also true that many temples in India collect so much that they don't know what to do with it.

Now the reason why this donation to God (or bribe to God) is related to our tolerance towards corruption is that Indians believe that if God can accept money for his favors, then nothing is wrong in doing the same thing in their real life. This is why many Indians are so easily corruptible because they don't see anything wrong with it. It seems that Indian culture accommodates such transactions morally. There is no real stigma, guilt, or fear associated with it. One can accept bribes or donations and then go to the temple donate part of that to that temple, feel happy about it, and get rid of any guilt or fear, it's that easy. That is why many corrupt politicians with very serious charges of corruption against them can make a comeback in Indian politics and serve as elected members repeatedly. This may not be possible in many other countries. This is the amazing paradox of Indian society for me, on one side we project ourselves self so religious and pious people that nowadays people even buy their homes or apartments after consultation with so-called 'Vastu experts', take pooja (worships) and fasts so seriously and on the other hand in our daily lives we pay bribes, take bribes, don't even care whom we vote. People claim to be God-loving but in reality, they are God-fearing people. 

This whole mindset which is the result of our social and cultural conditioning leads us to think that there is a way out for every crime and mistake. Even many rituals, fasts, poojas, etc. are recommended to correct dosh (defects or faults) or to get rid of bad omens or sins. No matter what you do there is a way to correct it or erase it by pleading, begging for forgiveness, or even bribing God. The moral obligation to follow the right path is very weak or almost nonexistent. Some people believe that no matter what you do in your life if you take God's name while dying, then your all sins and mistakes are forgiven and you go straight to heaven. I am sure they must be joking, but many people believe in all this nonsense and the result is a morally corrupt society.

We need to get rid of all these outdated ideas, the current state of society is clear proof that all these ethical or moral ideas are not working in the way they were supposed to work. All these moral and ethical concepts are relative and everyone derives their own meaning from them. We need to have something more robust and responsible system that can put a check on corruption and this has to start with common people. People like you and me. We need to make ourselves corruption-free then only we can expect our politicians and bureaucrats to be the same. So, it's in our hands to prove this theory wrong that in India corruption is accepted as a part of life and culture.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)