Yemen Crisis

Yet another Arab nation faces a humanitarian crisis as the localised war in Yemen has snowballed into a regional crisis. After the deposed Yemeni president, Mansour Hadi  requested help, a coalition led by Sunni majority, Saudi Arabia , launched attack against Shia Houthi rebel positions in Yemen. The coalition comprises five Gulf Arab states and Jordan, Egypt, Morocco and Sudan. They allege that the Houthis are being funded by Iran. Iran, a Shia majority nation has condemned the Saudi-led intervention.

Historical Background:

Political crisis began in 2001. President Saleh tried to eliminate the term limit on the Presidential Post and was grooming his son to become his successor which did not go well with the people. Very similar to the events in the Arab spring. After he stepped down, powers were transferred to Mansour Hadi in an one-man election. But soon the Houthis rose and took over Sana'a and forced the Hadi to flee.

Who is fighting whom?

The main fight is between forces loyal to the beleaguered President, Mansour Hadi, and those allied to Shia Houthi rebels , who forced Mr Hadi to flee in February.

Yemen's security forces have split loyalties, with some units backing Mr Hadi, and others the Houthis and Mr Hadi's predecessor Ali Abdullah Saleh, who has remained politically influential.

Why is it a major concern?

• The conflict between the Houthis and the elected government is also seen as part of a regional power struggle between Shia-ruled Iran and Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia, which shares a long border with Yemen.
• Yemen is strategically important because it sits on the Bab al-Mandeb strait, a narrow waterway linking the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden, through which much of the world's oil shipments pass. 
• Expansion of ISIS is a possibility.
• India has done well to airlift its nationals and in helping other nations in evacuation under the Operation Raahat. But normalcy needs to be restored for the peace and security of the region, which seems unlikely at the moment.

   

Beef Ban

Arguments in Favour:

• Article 48 of the Constitution of India states that "The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle". The recent legislation brought by the Maharashtra government which seeks to ban beef is in line with the provisions of the constitution.
• Cow slaughter was already banned considering the religious sentiments attached with it. People involved in meat industry didn't have problem with it then. Then why are they crying afoul now over the proposal of banning trade of meat of bulls and bullocks? It is worth mentioning here that pork is banned in Muslim nations.
• Beef is essentially red meat and not a desirable ingredient in a high-protein diet as well. 

Against the move:

• Beef offers cheap protein to the poor suffering from malnutrition.
• Livelihood of lakhs of people depend on meat industry.
• The move would aggravate the distress of farmers as their alternative source of income has been done away with. Earlier farmers could sell off their aged cattle when crops failed.
• There are old animals who have given up their milk production and roam about roads causing problems to commuters. Now that the beef has been banned, they would become a liability.
• Strangely,when leather industry doesn't have any restrictions on using cow-derived products, then why ban beef?
• Restaurants would lose a lot of International tourists. Prices of other meat products would also rise up.

Conclusion: 

Apparently, the ban is religiously motivated aimed at scoring political points. It does not augur well for a democracy where minority choices ought to be respected.

Crackdown on NGOs

The licenses of NGOs who didn't file their returns even after being notified repeatedly have been revoked recently by the government under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA). It is being alleged that these NGOs received billions of funds from abroad for anti-development campaigns. Greenpeace was spearheading the movement against a power plant in Madhya Pradesh. Diversion of those funds for terror financing or money laundering cannot be ruled out. An IB report had blamed NGOs for the slump in India’s GDP. A claim that some Christian NGOs are engaging in proselytisation has also been floated.

However critics view it as yet another move by a majority government to stifle opposition and to suppress dissent. NGOs is a huge grassroots-level mechanism which help in mobilising people for awareness programmes throughout the country. As a nation, we must acknowledge the innumerable positive interventions made by NGOs, in ensuring the passage of landmark acts in Parliament like Right to Food, Right to Education, Environment related laws, tribal rights, the NREGA or the RTI. These regulatory steps focused on NGOs would potentially have chilling effects and may suppress their voices.

On the other hand, a just implementation of the due process of law must be ensured notwithstanding the social services some of these NGOs are involved in. Out of two million registered NGOs, the bad ones among them have to be tackled firmly. They should be held accountable for their actions under Indian law if any law is violated.

With Greenpeace and various non-profits under the scanner, it is time to revive the idea of a national accreditation agency for the NGOs. Accreditation is the process of certifying voluntary organisations based on a set of agreed principles. Rating agencies can be helpful. A vibrant civil society is essential for India's democratic traditions. We should not let it go without giving second thoughts.

Elections in India

India’s parliamentary elections is the largest democratic exercise in the world. A whopping 80 million people exercised their franchise during the 16^th general elections. This was for the first time that the election took place in 9 phases. Barring minor skirmishes, India’s elections have remained mostly peaceful over the last few occasions due to the strenuous efforts of  the Election Commission. Computerization of electoral rolls and strict enforcement of Model Code Of Conduct has ensured fair elections to a greater extent. Due to the persistent efforts of the commission, voting percentage has scaled newer heights. While filing nomination papers, it is now must for the candidates to declare their monetary assets including movables and immovables, educational qualifications and criminal cases pending against him/her. The move is intended to enable the voters to make an informed choice. 

Significant Features

For the first time in the electoral history, the Election Commission introduced the concept of model polling booths which provided minimum basic facilities like drinking water, toilets etc for the voters. It has been hailed as a major success as it has pushed up participation in these constituencies.

Role of social media and technology for reaching out to the masses is a new development. Media bias is another prominent feature of electioneering. In a major development ,the Commission had done away with publishing of Opinion Polls during 48 hours before the poll. SC recently ruled that images of political leaders in the advertisements of schemes in media develop “personality cult” at the cost of public money.It is sought to be curbed.

Another intriguing aspect of elections in India is the increasing instances of fractured mandate due to surge in the number of regional parties. As the polls come closer, regional parties tend to create pressure on the Central Govt by pressing for unreasonable demands. The recent demand by the TN govt to free the convicts of Rajeev Gandhi assassination case may endanger national security.

The elections in India are unique in the sense that in many constituencies women outnumber men in terms of participation in voting. Women are playing a decisive role in the electioneering as well by door to door campaigning. They have a greater appeal to the masses while raising women related issues. This might be one of the reasons for the success of stalwarts like Mamata Banerjee,Jayalalitha,Vasundhra Raje.

Challenges and Road Ahead

Flagrant violation of the Model Code of Conduct during electioneering cannot be wished away. Contestants often make provocative speeches and try to get the votes of an entire community by pitting them against  the people of the other community. This trend is quite common in those constituencies where illiteracy rate is high. Uneducated voters often fall prey to the sentiments aroused by the campaigner and subsequently vote on the grounds of caste, religion etc. MCC prohibits the use of official machinery for campaigning purposes. As the election draws near, political persons often trade charges against each other some of which are often quite personal in content. The Model Code of Conduct bars participants from making personal attacks in speeches but still it continues unabated.

The number of sitting MPs and MLAs who have criminal antecedents is still very high in the Parliament and the Legislatures. This is a testimony to the fact that money and muscle power still decide political fortunes in India. The apex court's July 10, 2013 judgment had robbed elected representatives of the benefit under Section 8(4) of Representation of People Act which allowed them to save their membership in respective Houses by merely filing an appeal within three months of the order of conviction. After ordering disqualification of MPs and MLAs immediately after conviction for heinous offences, the Supreme Court took a second big step towards cleansing the political process by directing that trial proceedings in cases of corruption and serious crimes against elected representatives must be completed within a year.

Unfortunately criminal antecedent fields are conspicuously left blank while filing nomination papers despite a number of guidelines by the apex court in the matter. The voters can request for a copy of the nomination papers filed by the participants from the constituency but seldom is that request made.Though Booth capturing has become a thing of the past, serving liquor to the poor often yields positive returns and influence outcomes, says various reports. In the absence of proper norms in place, the Election Commission is struggling to curb the menace of Paid news. Ensuring peaceful elections in the red corridor is a major challenge in front of the Election Commission.

Bringing political parties under the purview of RTI would make the funding of political parties open to public scrutiny and thereby ensure transparency in the elections. Election Commission should be given more teeth for curbing hate speeches which have a potential to fan communal violence during elections.

Deciphering Judicial Activism- A case for PILs

In 1990s,country witnessed unstable coalition governments,politicisation of crimes,high levels of corruption,policy paralysis.Legislature and Executive lost their credibility among the masses. Judiciary stepped in and assumed pro-active role in providing solutions resulting in Judicial Activism.As a result of it, Judiciary has entered into the domains of legislature and executive.The concept of Public Interest Litigation was introduced under which any person can approach judiciary as long as public interest is involved. PIL thus removed the limitation of locus standi. It has enabled justice for disadvantaged sections of society. PIL was made popular in India by P.N.Bhagwati and V.R.Krishna Iyer. It was through judicial activism that the Supreme Court in 2001 ordered States to provide mid-day meals to schoolchildren.

Critics say PIL is anything but Public Interest Litigation.They call is Profit/Publicity/Personal Interest Litigation. 

• PILs are often filed for gaining publicity.
• They are frequently used against political and business rivals.
• Judical Activism has disturbed the delicate balance of power. It has resulted in Judicial Adventurism. Difference between Judicial Activism and Judicial Adventurism is subjective i.e. depends upon perspective. Uniform Civil Code and Interlinking of rivers are policy decisions. Law making should lie in the exclusive domain of Legislature. Salwa Judum was related to the maintenance of law and order which falls in the domain of the Executive. Judiciary should stop meddling in matters lying in the jurisdiction of Legislature and Executive.
• Critics say personal opinion has been expressed in the form of judgements like :"Neoliberal policies of government is a cause of corruption"."Bhagwad Geeta should be made compulsory"."Government should be carried on the lines of Rajya Sabha."
• In the name of Judicial Activism,courts have neglected their traditional functions.4.5 million cases are pending with our judiciary and it would take 300 years to come out with judgements for them,provided no fresh cases are filed. Before reforming other institutions, Judiciary should first look into itself. There is secrecy in the functioning of judiciary.India is the only country wherein the judges appoint themselves.Hence Judiciary is itself not accountable.Critics say Judicial Activism is undemocratic in nature because Judges are not popularly elected.Ergo they cannot formulate or declare laws.

Arguments in favour:

• Through PILs, Judiciary has ensured the accountability of Legislature and Executive towards citizens, thus promoting the ideals of democracy.As long as welfare of the people is ensured,it hardly matters who is doing it.
• After all,Judiciary is forced to intervene because of the inactions of Legislature and Executive. It is natural that if any of the organs fail to do its mandated duties,then some other organ should come and fill in the vacuum.
• Judiciary has realised the abuse of PILs and the High courts have been forbidden to accept frivolous PILs. If a PIL has been filed with an ulterior motive,the person is liable to be punished with a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh.

A case has been made for supporting PILs in the post titled 'Landmark judgements that changed India'.

Landmark Judgements that changed India

Landmark Judgements of the Apex Court in response to PILs-

People's Union for Democratic Rights v/s Union of India,1982: On the deplorable working conditions of construction workers, the court observed that "Right to life under Article 21 includes the right to have a dignified existence."

S R Bommai v/s Union of India,1993: The judgement was significant for the evolving Centre-State Relations.SC ruled that Imposition of Article 356 can be reviewed by Judiciary.The misuse of Article 356, popularly known as "President's rule", to impose central authority on states, was stopped after this judgement.

Vineet Narain case,1997:The case related to Hawala scam (unaccountable money).SC struck down "Single Directive" issued by Central Government that provided that CBI must take permission from the Government to to investigate cases against any officer who ranks above Jt.Secretary.SC came out with the criteria for selecting CVC and advocated that the person so appointed must have impeccable integrity.Appointment of PJ Thomas as the CVC was quashed by the apex court on same grounds.

Vishakha v/s State of Rajasthan,1997: Under Article 141,SC issued guidelines for safeguarding women from sexual harassment at workplace.

Salwa Judum case,2011: Supreme court termed the outfit unconstitutional on the grounds that the State cannot delegate the responsiblity of maintenance of law and order to the citizens.

2G spectrum case,2008: Citing irregualarities, SC cancelled 122 awarded licenses of spectrum.

Coal Block Allocation Case: SC cancelled all but 2 coal block allocations since they are done withour fair bidding.

Supreme Court is monitoring the SIT on recovering black money stashed abroad.

Indira Sawhney Case v/s Union of India,1992 -SC held that reservation cannot exceed 50%.It ruled that "Any law included in the 9th schedule can be reviewed by Judiciary.''

SC had directed Centre to look into the the feasbility of Interlinking of rivers and to enact a Uniform Civil Code under Article 44 of the DPSP.

Goods and Service Tax

The introduction of the GST (122nd AMENDMENT BILL) would be a significant step in the field of indirect tax reforms in India.The GST Bill proposes to empower both States and the Centre to levy the GST, which will subsume the services tax, excise duties, stamp duties, entry tax,octroi,state VAT and central sales tax.It proposes that the Centre be empowered to tax sales of goods and States get to tax services. At present, the Centre can tax services but not sales and distribution of goods. States can currently tax sales and distribution of goods but not services.Further,GST would be collected at the point of consumption rather than the place of production.In principle, it is the same as the Value-added Tax (VAT) — already adopted by all Indian States — but with a wider base. While the VAT — which replaced the sales tax — was imposed only on goods, the GST will be a VAT on goods and services.

GST would be applicable on supply of goods or services as against the present concept of tax on the manufacture/sale of goods/provision of services.GST would apply to all goods and services except alcohol for human consumption. GST on petroleum products would be applicable from a date to be recommended by the GST Council.

Benefits:

• By subsuming a large number of central and state taxes into a single tax, it would mitigate cascading effect or double taxation in a major way.GST regime can boost India’s growth by up to 2.5 percentage points. Production costs would be cut,thereby making exports more competitive.
• India would become one seamless market and this would result in economic integration.Trucks won't need to wait on inter-state borders. 
• GST would simplify the indirect tax administration, broaden the tax base and result in better tax compliance.
• GST will improve ease of doing business.

Sticking Points:

The parliament may,by law, provide for compensation to states for revenue losses arising out of the implementation of the GST ,on the GST council recommendation. This would be up to a five year period.Consensus eludes the Centre and the States on the issues of compensation, petrol tax.Since the GST will be levied on consumption of goods and services, states that are net producers stand to lose revenue. States must not however lose sight of the long term gains.