For The Welfare, Happiness, Peace of All Sentient and Non-Sentient Beings and for them to Attain Eternal Peace as Final Goal.
at
KUSHINARA NIBBANA BHUMI PAGODA-is a 18 feet Dia All White Pagoda with a table or, but be sure to having above head level based on the usual use of the room.
in
116 CLASSICAL LANGUAGES and planning to project Therevada Tipitaka in
Buddha’s own words and Important Places like Lumbini, Bodhgaya,Saranath,
Kushinara, Etc., in 3D 360 degree circle vision akin to
Circarama
At
WHITE HOME
668, 5A main Road, 8th Cross, HAL III Stage,
Prabuddha Bharat Puniya Bhumi Bengaluru
Magadhi Karnataka State
PRABUDDHA BHARAT
May you, your family members and all sentient and non sentient beings be ever happy, well and secure!
Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta— Setting in Motion of the Wheel of Dhamma —[Dhamma·cakka·pavattana ]
This is certainly the most famous sutta in the Pali litterature.
The Buddha expounds the four ariya·saccas for the first time.
Note: info·bubble on every Pali word
On one occasion, the Bhagavā was staying at Varanasi in the Deer Grove at Isipatana.
There, he addressed the group of five bhikkhus:
These
two extremes, bhikkhus, should not be adopted by one who has gone forth
from the home life. Which two? On one hand, the devotion to hedonism
towards kāma, which is inferior, vulgar, common, an·ariya, deprived of
benefit, and on the other hand the devotion to self-mortification, which
is dukkha, an·ariya, deprived of benefit. Without going to these two
extremes, bhikkhus, the Tathāgata has fully awaken to the majjhima
paṭipada, which produces vision, which produces ñāṇa, and leads to
appeasement, to abhiñña, to sambodhi, to Nibbāna.
And what,
bhikkhus, is the majjhima paṭipada to which the Tathāgata has fully
awaken, which produces vision, which produces ñāṇa, and leads to
appeasement, to abhiñña, to sambodhi, to Nibbāna? It is, bhikkhus, this
ariya aṭṭhaṅgika magga, that is to say: sammā·diṭṭhi sammā·saṅkappa
sammā·vācā sammā·kammanta sammā·ājīva sammā·vāyāma sammā·sati
sammā·samādhi. This, bhikkhus, is the majjhima paṭipada to which the
Tathāgata has awaken, which produces vision, which produces ñāṇa, and
leads to appeasement, to abhiñña, to sambodhi, to Nibbāna.
Furthermore,
bhikkhus, this is the dukkha ariya·sacca: jāti is dukkha, jarā is
dukkha (sickness is dukkha) maraṇa is dukkha, association with what is
disliked is dukkha, dissociation from what is liked is dukkha, not to
get what one wants is dukkha; in short, the five upādāna’k'khandhas are
dukkha.
Furthermore, bhikkhus, this is the dukkha·samudaya
ariya·sacca: this taṇhā leading to rebirth, connected with desire and
enjoyment, finding delight here or there, that is to say: kāma-taṇhā,
bhava-taṇhā and vibhava-taṇhā.
Furthermore, bhikkhus, this is the
dukkha·nirodha ariya·sacca: the complete virāga, nirodha, abandoning,
forsaking, emancipation and freedom from that very taṇhā.
Furthermore,
bhikkhus, this is the dukkha·nirodha·gāminī paṭipada ariya·sacca: just
this ariya aṭṭhaṅgika magga, that is to say: sammā·diṭṭhi,
sammā·saṅkappa, sammā·vācā sammā·kammanta, sammā·ājīva, sammā·vāyāma,
sammā·sati and sammā·samādhi.
‘This is the dukkha ariyasacca’: in
me, bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard before, the eye arose, the
ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā arose, the light arose. ‘Now,
this dukkha ariyasacca is to be completely known’: in me, bhikkhus, in
regard to things unheard before, the eye arose, the ñāṇa arose, the
paññā arose, the vijjā arose, the light arose. ‘Now, this dukkha
ariyasacca has been completely known’: in me, bhikkhus, in regard to
things unheard before, the eye arose, the ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose,
the vijjā arose, the light arose.
‘This is the dukkha·samudaya
ariyasacca’: in me, bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard before, the
eye arose, the ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā arose, the light
arose. ‘Now, this dukkha·samudaya ariyasacca is to be abandoned’: in me,
bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard before, the eye arose, the ñāṇa
arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā arose, the light arose. ‘Now, this
dukkha·samudaya ariyasacca has been abandoned’: in me, bhikkhus, in
regard to things unheard before, the eye arose, the ñāṇa arose, the
paññā arose, the vijjā arose, the light arose.
‘This is the
dukkha·nirodha ariyasacca’: in me, bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard
before, the eye arose, the ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā
arose, the light arose. ‘Now, this dukkha·nirodha ariyasacca is to be
personally experienced’: in me, bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard
before, the eye arose, the ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā arose,
the light arose. ‘Now, this dukkha·nirodha ariyasacca has been
personally experienced’: in me, bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard
before, the eye arose, the ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā arose,
the light arose.
‘This is the dukkha·nirodha·gāminī paṭipadā
ariyasacca’: in me, bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard before, the
eye arose, the ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā arose, the light
arose. ‘Now, this dukkha·nirodha·gāminī paṭipadā ariyasacca is to be
developed’: in me, bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard before, the eye
arose, the ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā arose, the light
arose. ‘Now, this dukkha·nirodha·gāminī paṭipadā ariyasacca has been
developed’: in me, bhikkhus, in regard to things unheard before, the eye
arose, the ñāṇa arose, the paññā arose, the vijjā arose, the light
arose.
But
when, bhikkhus, my yathā·bhūtaṃ knowledge and vision of these four
ariyasaccas in these twelve ways by triads was quite pure, I claimed in
the loka with its devas, with its Māras, with its Brahmās, with the
samaṇas and brahmins, in this generation with its devas and humans, to
have fully awakened to the supreme sammā·sambodhi. And the knowledge and
vision arose in me: ‘my vimutti is unshakeable, this is my last jāti,
now there is no further bhava.
This is what the Bhagavā said.
Delighted, the groupe of five bhikkhus approved of the Bhagavā’s words.
And while this exposition was being spoken, there arose in āyasmā
Koṇḍañña the Dhamma eye which is free from passion and stainless: ‘all
that has the nature of samudaya has the nature of nirodha’.
And
when the Bhagavā had set in motion the Wheel of Dhamma, the devas of the
earth proclaimed aloud: ‘At Varanasi, in the Deer Grove at Isipatana,
the Bhagavā has set in motion the supreme Wheel of Dhamma, which cannot
be stopped by samaṇas or brahmins, devas, Māras, Brahmā or anyone in the
world.’
Having heard the cry of the devas of the earth, the
Cātumahārājika devas proclaimed aloud: ‘At Varanasi, in the Deer Grove
at Isipatana, the Bhagavā has set in motion the supreme Wheel of Dhamma,
which cannot be stopped by samaṇas or brahmins, devas, Māras, Brahmā or
anyone in the world.’
Having heard the cry of the Cātumahārājika
devas, the Tāvatiṃsa devas proclaimed aloud: ‘At Varanasi, in the Deer
Grove at Isipatana, the Bhagavā has set in motion the supreme Wheel of
Dhamma, which cannot be stopped by samaṇas or brahmins, devas, Māras,
Brahmā or anyone in the world.’
Having heard the cry of the
Tāvatiṃsa devas, the Yāma devas proclaimed aloud: ‘At Varanasi, in the
Deer Grove at Isipatana, the Bhagavā has set in motion the supreme Wheel
of Dhamma, which cannot be stopped by samaṇas or brahmins, devas,
Māras, Brahmā or anyone in the world.’
Having heard the cry of
the Yāma devas, the Tusitā devas proclaimed aloud: ‘At Varanasi, in the
Deer Grove at Isipatana, the Bhagavā has set in motion the supreme Wheel
of Dhamma, which cannot be stopped by samaṇas or brahmins, devas,
Māras, Brahmā or anyone in the world.’
Having heard the cry of
the Tusitā devas, the Nimmānarati devas proclaimed aloud: ‘At Varanasi,
in the Deer Grove at Isipatana, the Bhagavā has set in motion the
supreme Wheel of Dhamma, which cannot be stopped by samaṇas or brahmins,
devas, Māras, Brahmā or anyone in the world.’
Having heard the
cry of the Nimmānarati devas, the Paranimmitavasavatti devas proclaimed
aloud: ‘At Varanasi, in the Deer Grove at Isipatana, the Bhagavā has set
in motion the supreme Wheel of Dhamma, which cannot be stopped by
samaṇas or brahmins, devas, Māras, Brahmā or anyone in the world.’
Having
heard the cry of the Paranimmitavasavatti devas, the brahmakāyika devas
proclaimed aloud: ‘At Varanasi, in the Deer Grove at Isipatana, the
Bhagavā has set in motion the supreme Wheel of Dhamma, which cannot be
stopped by samaṇas or brahmins, devas, Māras, Brahmā or anyone in the
world.’
Thus in that moment, in that instant, the cry diffused up
to Brahma·loka. And this ten thousandfold world system shook, quaked,
and trembled, and a great, boundless radiance appeared in the world,
surpassing the effulgence of the devas
Then the Bhagavā uttered
this udāna: ‘Koṇḍañña really understood! Koṇḍañña really understood!’
And that is how āyasmā Koṇḍañña acquired the name ‘Aññāsi·Koṇḍañña’.
Pleadings Rounds
Must be inaugurated on 20th
October, 2020,
As many teams from across the world, comprising some of the International Law
Universities and prominent law schools have been shortlisted on the basis
of written submissions submitted by teams from over world universities.
These teams must judged by world’s top legal minds and professionals who
specialise in the nuanced field of Constitution Day on 26 November 2020 and constitutional
law. The participants will have the opportunity of not only witnessing the
highest level of advocacy but also learning from top professionals in
the field.
https://www.amust.com.au/2020/
Indian
Hindu nationalist BJP government has become authoritarian, destroying
democratic institutions, undermining minority rights, equality under the
law, freedom of religion, the right to dissent, independence of the
judiciary and press freedom, leading jurists, civil rights activists,
journalists and students have said.
Participating in various panel discussions last weekend 3-4 October at a virtual conference, Reclaiming India,
panelists said the only way to combat the Modi government’s
authoritarian conduct would be to strengthen the institutions, including
the judiciary, and create South Asian solidarity.
Speakers also drew parallels between the ongoing struggle
of India’s Dalit community with the Black Lives Matter movement while
examining the similarities between Hindutva and white supremacist
ideologies.
The diverse variety of speakers laid out the state of
democracy in India providing vision and forward-thinking strategies to
save democracy and protect human rights and religious freedom in India.
The conference was organised by Global India Progressive
Alliance, Hindus for Human Rights, India Civil Watch International,
Indian American Muslim Council, and Students Against Hindutva Ideology.
Bilkis Dadi from Shaheen Bagh, who was recently featured in
Time Magazine among the 100 most influential people in 2020, made a
video appearance in which she stated, “We are not begging the government
to give us alms. We are only asking for equal rights. Modi is also my
son. If I didn’t give birth to him, my sister did. Women have achieved
(in these protests) what men were not able to do.”
Speaking on the topic of “Independent Judiciary Under
threat”, Veteran civil rights activist and Supreme Court lawyer Mr
Prashant Bhushan came down heavily against Prime Minister Narendra
Modi’s government.
“This government has singularly tried to subvert the
independence of the judiciary, firstly, by not making the appointment of
independent judges and getting independent judges transferred,” Mr
Bhushan said. “This government is using post-retirement jobs to subvert
the independence of the judiciary and, worst of all, it is using
agencies to blackmail judges… If the judiciary has to be saved, this
government must go.”
Mr Bhushan said whenever, “something unsavoury” about the
judiciary was exposed, the court would see it as a threat to its
independence. “They say that the mere exposure of unsavoury goings on
within the judiciary is a threat to their independence. Independence
from the government doesn’t mean independence from accountability.”
The sedition laws were being misused against “anybody who
criticises the government, the Prime Minister, and the Chief Minister…
Once you are accused under [UAPA], the police can make any kind of
absurd story against you.” The Supreme Court should strike down this
law, “but, unfortunately, they are not doing this duty,” Mr Bhushan
said.
Former Indian Vice-President Hamid Ansari said the mass protests by
Muslim women against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act in Delhi’s Shaheen
Bagh had been “unique in more than one sense. One, that it was all
women; two, it was spontaneous; and three, the majority, but not the
totality, of participants were Muslim women.”
He said that the same Muslim women who were being said to
need “saviours” just a couple years ago “had suddenly turned out to
save India’s democracy… It was a very powerful movement [and] it sent a
very powerful message.”
Mr Ansari said the way the government responded to the
anti-CAA protests by attacking campuses showed that the police was “more
politicised” than earlier, the media was “communalised to the core”,
and the bureaucrats were “literally airing their views” in support of
the government’s autocratic and ideological response.
The former Vice-President, however, said he was optimistic
as it would be difficult for the government to crush dissent.
“Throughout our history every new idea has been an idea in dissent,
whether it is religious [or] social dissent… You cannot run a steam
roller,” Mr Ansari said. “But there is a heavy political price to pay
for dissent. What Gandhiji said at his various trials, what Maulana Azad
said at his various trials.”
Mr Ansari especially gave a shout-out to iconic youth
leader Umar Khalid, who was arrested last month under the UAPA. “[Umar
has] resonated with millions of other youths, Muslim or not, because you
cannot really… categorise and bracket him to just his Muslimness. He
has also become a youth icon.”
Former Additional Solicitor General of India and Supreme
Court lawyer Ms Indira Jaising said “criminal procedure has been eroded
and become a plaything in the hands of [Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s]
government.” Power in the legal profession was now “emanating from the
executive, and the judges know this.”
Ms Jaising said “partisan politics” had entered the court
through lawyers, saying “Courtrooms are used as a forum to advocate that
a few of us are anti-nationals,” and blamed the politicisation of the
lawyers. “A necessary condition for the collapse of the judiciary is the
collapse of the bar. But I also feel that the Bar has collapsed,” she
said. “The question is, how do we break through this breakdown of the
Bar and return to the value of reclaiming India?”
Condemning the arrests of activists under the Unlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on charges of conspiracy in violence
in Delhi that killed 50 people, two-third of them Muslims, last
February, she said protesting the Citizenship (Amendment) Act did not
amount to a “conspiracy to undermine the sovereignty and integrity of
India.”
Renowned journalist Ms Arfa Khanum Sherwani added, “I would classify
the Shaheen Bagh movement as a feminist movement because I saw for the
first time women who had never been to any political protest or site,
making the journey from their kitchens to the protest site within 24
hours.”
Renowned human rights defender Teesta Setalvad said the
Modi government’s behaviour was a “manifestation of unbridled abuse of
power. Archaic laws such as sedition laws are being applied. The
political agenda is both narrow and vendetta driven, archaic laws such
as sedition laws are being applied. First comes the branding of an
individual as anti-national and then comes the incarceration. The penal
codes are not being followed. The number of journalists arrested is
unprecedented.”
She said there was a need to build a large South Asia
coalition, including civil rights organisations from neighbouring
countries, to fight fascism.
Congress party’s Member of Parliament Shashi Tharoor said,
“I am glad that the organisers of the Reclaiming India conference have
chosen to focus on some of the most important issues confronting India’s
democracy, and pluralism today. It is time to reaffirm the idea of
India enshrined in our Constitution. This requires a conscious effort to
defend the besieged institutions of civic nationalism to restore their
autonomy and ensure their effectiveness. It also requires us to look to
an idea of India that is comprehensive, embraces all experiences and
refuses to see the past through the prism of any one faith.”
Mumbai-based human rights lawyer Mihir Desai who is the
convenor of People’s Union for Civil Liberties in Maharashtra, said the
Modi government had “mastered the use of these [draconian] laws to turn
victims into the accused. They are being persecuted and prosecuted. An
authoritarian state is being brought in while maintaining a facade of a
democratic state. “Democratic institutions are being hollowed much more
than earlier.”
He explained that in international law, a political
prisoner was accused of an offence not committed for personal gain or
benefit, but a larger collective objective, and was treated differently.
But in India, there was no distinction between a political and
non-political prisoner. “The present government is concerned by its
international image, and international pressure should be applied to
restore democracy and the rule of law in India,” he added.
Congress party leader, Salman Soz, said the CAA and the
National Register for Citizens (NRC) were “wrong” and it was important
to criticize them openly. “If you don’t say it, it may seem like it’s
politically the right thing, but actually you’re empowering the other
side.” He conceded that the Congress party had given the Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the torchbearer of Hindutva, an “opportunity…
Hindutva ideology is here to stay. We have to introspect and see what
our role is in the rise of Hindu nationalism. […] The RSS have taken
their ideas, ideology and kept propagating it. They kept working on it.
They kept nurturing it.”
He said though the rise of extreme right-wing politics was a
global phenomenon, unlike in other countries, India’s institutions had
turned out to be “very brittle. They are just incapable of withstanding
this tsunami.” There was “no magic solution” to the challenge from the
ideology of Hindu nationalism, and it needed to be taken “head on”.
Reflecting on a question to identify an alternative to the
BJP, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader, Atishi Marlene said, “there’s no
national opposition to the BJP right now. As an opposition, we need to
think very deeply, that we are not here to raise a voice against BJP, we
need to defeat the BJP.
She further said that “we almost shunned and looked down
upon a conservative Hindu Middle class world-view and when we as
‘progressives’ have refused to engage with this world-view we have left
this entire world-view for the fascists to take over.
Veteran journalist Pranjoy Guha-Thakurta said anyone who
criticised the Modi government was targeted. It was not just the “regime
being unhappy or antagonistic”. The government was different in how it
was vengeful in the “manner in which other institutions of democracy
have been systematically undermined and demolished, the media has been
systematically bled and financially squeezed.”
Akriti Bhatia, journalist and founder of Peoples’
Association in Grassroots Movement and Associations (PAIGAM) said there
was a “need to understand the clear linkage between what used to be an
independent media and what used to be free and fair elections”. She said
even the Constitution had an “anti-national character”, as evidenced in
the “processes of concentration, centralisation and homogenisation,
economic, political and social.”
US-based Indian author Aatish Taseer, who has been barred
from entering India by the Modi Government even though he was born and
raised there, shared his experience of being treated as a Pakistani just
because his father was one. “If there are 200 people in that room who
are saying you are something else, then you are something else. It’s a
description of something that’s playing out on a bigger scale in the
country right now where people are trying to define themselves against
other people. They’re not being accepted on their sense of self, they’re
suddenly colliding with other ideas of who you are. That is something
that can really stop you in your tracks.”
Joining a panel of students, N Sai Balaji, former President
of Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union, said students had, as
an entity, become the opposition to the government. We never imagined
that would happen. If we can vote for a government, we have the right to
choose what policies we want.” He added that when students hit the
streets to protest, “they don’t come out as Hindus or Muslims or Sikhs,
they come out as students.”
Ruia Prasad, a Dalit Activist in Arizona, US, said there
were “a lot of similarities in the way students have taken on prominent
issues in our political climate and really organized around them… “In
the US, we have seen less violence toward students than [there was
against students at] Jamia [Milia University] or JNU.
There also hasn’t been as strong of a political leadership
in U.S. student unions compared to India.” The reason Hindu nationalism
was being called out explicitly in name was because there were more
Dalit activists in the diaspora than before, she added.
Multifaceted artiste Nrithya Pillai, who is from the
Devadasi lineage and has been a strong voice against casteism and
casteist exclusion in the contemporary dance world, said the “historical
casteist exclusion, which is what the reinvention of Bharatanatyam is
based on, has been about excluding people from the hereditary
communities.”
She pointed out that most artistes in the state-funded
classical arts set-up were siding with Mr Modi’s Hindu nationalist
government and their views. “I’m not sure if they do it out of political
inclination or mere opportunism.”
She added that “ my mere existence is just the questioning
of the powerful. There has been institutionalised omission and erasure
of history from my community, names have been erased.”
Ahsan Khan, National President of the Indian American
Muslim Council (IAMC), said India’s opposition parties had a “critical
duty in fighting for the rights of the marginalised and the oppressed,
as well as opposing religious majoritarian nationalism that is putting
India’s unity and integrity at risk. It is disheartening to see that
none of India’s opposition parties has offered a strong resistance to
the Citizenship (Amendment) Act beyond tokenism, even though the law
threatens to rip apart India and destroy its communal harmony.”
Biju Mathew, co-founder of India Civil Watch International,
said “a set of fault-lines” were running through liberalism as the
right-wing has managed to “outflank all the structures of checks and
balances that made the possibility of liberal democracy, by internally
producing processes and modes of working that fundamentally upset all
the checks and balances within liberal democracy.” The right-wing across
the world had learned to “flip liberal democracy on its head and cut
through all the checks and balances. We need to reinvent that.”
Rya Jetha of Students Against Hindutva Ideology said her
organisation focused on changing attitudes and behaviours in the
diaspora by organising campus protests and teach-ins, and also briefing
Congressional aides and pursuing legislative asks. “For too long Hindu
nationalism has been shrouded as a legitimate part of culture and
religion in the diaspora. On college campuses we are working to make an
entire generation of Indian American youth aware and able to critically
think about Hindu nationalism so that future generations apoloigse less
and take to the streets more.”
Quoting Bhimrao Ambedkar, the 20th-century Dalit leader who
went on to architect India’s Constitution, Prof Roja Singh of Dalit
Solidarity Forum said, “Indian democracy is essentially a top dressing
on an Indian soil which is essentially undemocratic.”
She said the Reclaiming India conference had shown “amazing
democracy rising” with students, lawyers, artistes, singers and writers
“in their anti-caste rhetoric and exploding dynamism speaking out
against fascism, Hindutva, Hindu nationalism, patriarchy, misogyny;
concrete naming of the problems demanding the changes from the Indian
government — wow — that was simply an unbound explosion of positivity.”
Manish Madan, founder of Global Indian Progressive Alliance
said, “As progressive Indians we stand for bringing people together
towards building progressive communities. We aspire to bring progressive
values beyond the lens of religion, caste, ethnicity, race, and gender.
Our anchor hinges on education, advocacy and social justice. We are
glad to have played a modest part in bringing diverse voices together
coming from various religious and progressive lenses through this
initiative called Reclaiming India.”
Raju Rajagopal, Co-founder of Hindus for Human Rights said,
“Hindutva nationalists have taken over almost all political and
religious institutions and they have rushed in to occupy all the spaces
vacated by progressive Hindus. What is a purely political fascist group
is now claiming to speak for all Hindus. With the rare exception of
people like the late Swami Agnivesh, it has completely co-opted Hindu
faith leaders, who seem nowhere in sight to defend their oft-repeated
mouthed, ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’.” Rajagopal said his organisation was
“united in our goals of working for a casteless and pluralistic and
democratic India, with true equality for all.”
Sunita Viswanath, Co-founder of Hindus for Human Rights
closed the conference with, “Over the past two days we witnessed so much
courage from frontline activists, politicians, intellectuals from
India; and also the fierce unwavering solidarity from all of us, your
brothers and sisters in the diaspora. Reclaiming India was born over
these two days and we pledge to stay together and grow our coalition
globally and be back for our second conference this time next year:
ReclaimingIndia@74.”
http://udreview.com/opinion-
The world’s largest democracy is suffering under the Modi-led Bharatiya Janata Party administration.
CREATIVE COMMONS
Narendra Modi, a Hindu nationalist, was elected as the 14th Prime Minister in 2014.
BY YUSRA ASIF
It all began in December last year, when India’s Prime Minister
Narendra Modi announced the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment
Bill, thereby giving all but Muslims the right to receive Indian
citizenship. This bill, combined with the National Register of Citizens,
is a strike to stamp out the country’s Muslim population.
Being an Indian Muslim, I was both shocked and embarrassed at the
Prime Minister’s decision. He is known for his anti-Muslim speeches as
he repeatedly mentions that he wants to rid the country of Muslims and
make India a Hindu nation, but a bill like this is pushing it too far,
even for a nationalist like Modi.
It is a blow on the very idea of secularism, a fundamental doctrine of the Indian constitution.
People all over the country, Hindu and Muslim, are protesting against the bill.
The protests, peaceful at first, have taken a violent form over the
past few months — the most recent ones were in Delhi, the nation’s
capital. More than 30 people have been killed and over 200 were injured
in the violence that broke out in a largely Muslim-populated area in
northeast Delhi. Meanwhile the prime minister was busy building a wall
to cover up slums in my hometown of Ahmedabad, where his good friend
President Trump was going to visit. As if Trump was somehow unaware of
the poverty in India.
What surprised me is that it took three days for Modi to issue a
statement on Twitter that peace and harmony should be maintained.
Neither Modi nor his Minister of Home Affairs, Amit Shah, who is in
charge of law and order in the country, have reached out to those who
have been injured or killed.
The hospitals in Delhi resemble a war zone as the city witnesses the
worst communal carnage since the 1984 genocide of the Sikhs.
Since coming to power, the Modi government has done nothing but
incite communal hatred to further his ideal of a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu
State). Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ministers are seen openly
threatening Muslims as they refer to Muslim immigrants as termites.
The party seems to excel at creating conditions in which violence can
unfold. A local BJP politician gave an ultimatum to the police: clear
the roads of the Muslim protestors or allow his followers to do so. The
party’s ministers are frequently seen delivering inflammatory speeches
and threatening to take the law into their own hands.
A country that is known for its diversity — where Hindus and Muslims,
Christians and Sikhs eat together on one plate — is seeing mosques
being vandalized and the Quran desecrated by a few radical Hindutva
supporters.
The government repeatedly claims that the mobsters act on their own
volition, but because of its inability to take actions and habitual
discourse of hate speech, they have the assurance that the government
will not take any strict actions against them, as exemplified time and
again. Squashing any form of dissent as being anti-national not only
incites more violence but gives the extremists the courage to take the
law into their own hands
The state of the nation is hopeless; heartbreaking rather, as Modi tears apart the social fabric of the country.
Democracy grants people the power to speak up; to express dissent; to
criticize the government. But with Modi in power, any form of dissent
is met with brutal force.
Recently, the students protesting the Citizenship Amendment Bill at
the Jamia Milia Islamia University in New Delhi were beaten with batons
by the Delhi police. Tear gas shells were fired. This is just one of the
many accounts of the government forcefully crushing dissent.
Nothing kills democracy like controlled media, scripted interviews and crafted Twitter responses.
Modi has repeatedly denied press conferences. It is the first time in
the history of independent India that a prime minister only had one
press conference and almost every question was redirected to his home
minister Amit Shah.
The Indian media has also come under scrutiny for being biased as
news anchors like Arnab Goswami commit to bigoted speech on national
television, openly expressing their loyalty to BJP’s propaganda of
Hindutva.
You cannot expect free and fair news when the media is in the clutches of one man.
Despite all this it seems like Modi supporters, or ‘Bhakts,’ have
turned a blind eye to everything. They keep holding to the promise of
‘Achche Din’ (Good Days) that the Modi government repeatedly emphasized
during its election campaign but has fabulously failed to deliver.
The country’s GDP has hit its lowest point since 2013 with a growth
rate of only 4.5% in the July to September quarter in 2019. The Reserve
Bank of India keeps cutting its interest rates and there has been a
steep decline in the manufacturing sector leading to job cuts, not to
mention the epic failure of the Demonetization policy.
India suffers under Modi’s rule. Democracy will soon become a distant memory — a wishful dream.
Yusra Asif is a staff reporter for The Review. Her views are her
own and do not reflect the majority opinion of The Review’s editorial
staff. She may be reached at yqureshi@udel.edu.
https://countercurrents.org/
The
damaging report published by The Hindu Newspaper provides the clinching
evidence that Modi was hobnobbing with the negotiations in the purchase
of Rafael aircraft from France. In other words it’s Modi who was
presiding over the act of corruption using his high office.
‘The
Hindu’ reportage by N. Ram that “Government waived anti-corruption
clauses in Rafale deal” and “Defence Ministry protested against Modi undermining Rafale negotiations,” conclusively has given the proof that
this government is corrupt and has misled the nation on Rafale deal.
Now
the ball is in the Bevakoof Jhoothe Psychopaths (BJP)’s court to provide equally powerful documentary
evidences to claim the moral high ground that it has provided a
corruption free government. Its denial in media or public forum won’t
convince the nation. This is no small issue and cannot be brushed under
the carpet. It involves the Modi, the highest executive office of the
country that is indicted on corruption charges.
This new evidences
provided by ‘The Hindu’ is a fit case to be heard by the Supreme Court
that can reopen the case on the Rafale deal where it has already given a
clean chit to the government. Now there is a new twist in this case and
the highest office of the country is mired in corruption. As such the
intervention of the Supreme Court is must because it undermines the
entire edifice of governance of the country.
Will the apex court
reopen the Rafale deal case and call the investigation as to who is
misleading the nation. Can it ask the Modi to stand in the dock and deny
the allegations? Will the Modi wash its dirty linen in the Supreme
Court? It’s a testing time for the entire nation.
If that happens
then an interesting tussle between the judiciary and the executive is
bound to be witnessed as to who is higher of the two democratic
symbols. So now after the new findings the pendulum has shifted to the
judiciary and it remains to be seen how it further handles the Rafale
deal case.
The American business magazine ‘Forbes’ has published
an article giving graphic account of how corruption is still thriving
under Modi. It says five years ago, Fraud EVM in Prabuddha bharat gave
Narendra Modi the chance to realize his big promise to clean up
corruption in the country. But today, Modi’s promise remains a promise
and corruption is still thriving in all the usual places in Prabuddha Bharat.
The
reputed magazine says the erstwhile Congress-led UPA-II dispensation at
the end of its tenure, had acquired a reputation of being mired in many
corrupt deeds and it’s the same “odium” that is now being attached to
Modi .
The magazine cites evidences of high profile
corruption cases that has shook Modi. To name a few is
the murky Rs 60, 000 crore weapons deal with France to purchase 36
Rafale fighter planes. Then the Rs 200 crore bank fraud uncovered last
year at the Punjab National Bank. These two are just a tip in the
iceberg of scandals that has shaken the nation under Modi.
Meanwhile,
a report by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) states that
IPrabuddha Bharat is ranked among the “worst offenders,” in terms of graft and press
freedom in the Asia Pacific region in 2017. This is another damaging
report on Modi performance since it had gobbled power with
the plank to free Prabuddha Bharat from corruption.
Similarly, the
‘Transparency International’ (TI) a leading non political, independent,
non-governmental anti-corruption organisation has documented corruption
under Modi ranking Prabuddha Bharat at 78 out of 175 countries. The recent
ranking is worse than its 2015 ranking of Prabuddha Bharat. These findings have
surprised Prabuddha Bharatians because Modi bluffed with a
promise to free Prabuddha Bharat from the vice of corruption.
Modi banned 500 and 1000 rupee notes to get rid of “black money.” However
this measure miserably failed to achieve any tangible results. Modicould recover fake currency only to the tune of Rs. 41 crore
that accounted for only 0.0027 per cent of the total currency that came
back into the system following notes ban.
At the fag end of Modi’s tenure in office it appears that that Modi was
fighting corruption among the country’s poor but was maintaining stock
silence corruption in the high places, especially among the rich of the
country. The Rafael deal and the Punjab National bank cases are examples
to this trend.
Whatever may be the government’s statistics on the
GDP growth rate or on the developmental index, India remains a breeding
ground of corruption. Modi had failed to spread the
benefits of economic growth to the masses and on the contrary he
encouraged a narrow elite to thrive under his regime giving rise to
crony capitalism.
If we look back, the corruption allegation
against the Congress-led UPA-II had reached its crescendo by 2014 and
its reverberation facilitated the current Modi to come to
power. The incumbent Modi personified the aspirations of the millions of Prabuddha Bharatians when he gave the assurance that neither he will indulge in
corruption nor allow anyone else to do that. His assurance to rid the
country of corruption raised him to the level of the pied piper
of Hamlin that had lulled the rats to the river through his music. In
this case, the fraud EVMs selection to the music of bringing good days (Ache
Din), by giving a thumping majority to Modi.
However,
nothing has changed under the Modi . A random survey of Prabuddha Bharatians to
measure the change in their life style, would surely end up in
negativity with the majority saying their lives have not all changed and
some may even respond that it has become worse under Modi.
Prabuddha Bharat’s
situation under Modi is neither new nor unique. Every successive
government aspiring for power make populists promises like ending
poverty and bringing prosperity etc. However, after coming to power
the incumbents becomes a breeding ground for corruption. This
is exactly what has happened under the Modi regime. He came to the
office with the promise to change the situation of the people but what
he actually did is to change the rules and regulation that may help only
few elites while the masses continue to reel under misery.
Now,
it’s the Congress party under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi that is
doing the same. The Congress President is selling the dream that he
would change the face of the country, once it’s voted to power. His
promises are so lofty that it has made social activist, Madhu Kishwar to
wit through his tweet ‘Wait Till Rahul Gandhi Promises Free Sex for
Every Adult Prabuddha Bharatian.’
Prabuddha Bharatian journey since seventy years or so has
been abysmally a low speed train ride. Who, How, When it will change
only god knows. Indian politicians have a jolly good time after
hoodwinking the people. As a silent spectator the people by and large
are a witness to the inchoate images of changing Prabuddha Bhatrat.
Syed Ali Mujtaba is a journalist based in Chennai. He can be contacted at syedalimujtaba2007@gmail.
Modi is returned to office, his sectarian politics made bigotry the defining ideal of the republic.
Prabuddha Bharat
elections are a marvel to behold. The rules stipulate that no citizen
should have to travel more than 2km to vote. So the state goes to the
voters. Carrying oxygen tanks, election officials scaled the Himalayas
to erect a voting booth in a village in Ladakh, 4,500 metres above sea
level. In western Prabuddha Bharat, a polling station was set up for the lone human inhabitant of a wildlife sanctuary. In eastern Prabuddha Bharat,
officials trekked for an entire day to reach the sole registered voter,
an elderly woman, in a remote village. By the time voting closed on
Sunday, some 600 million people had cast their ballots, 10 million of
them for the first time.
The refrain from hindutvaite voters has been identical: Modi has failed us, yes, but he’s at least put Muslims in their place
In
2019, the world’s biggest election was much more than a ritual of
democracy. It was the most consequential vote in the lifetime of a
majority of Indians alive today. Prabuddha Bharat under Modi has undergone
the most total transformation since 1991. This election has, in effect,
been a referendum on whether the republic retains its founding ideals
or, if Modi wins another term – and exit polls released on Sunday
show him winning with a comfortable majority – it leaps to a place of
sectarianism from which return may be close to impossible.
None
of the big promises that delivered Modi’s hindutva-first Bevakoof Jhoothe Psychopaths (BJP) an absolute majority in parliament in 2014 – the first time
in 30 years that a single party was voted into power – have been
honoured. Modi pledged to create 20m jobs annually. Today, the rate of unemployment
is the highest India has known in 20 years. He enraptured young Indian
voters with visions of what he called “smart cities”: facsimiles of
Seoul and Singapore on the Deccan Plateau and the northern plains –
clean, green and replete with skyscrapers and super-fast trains. There
is nothing of the sort in sight. He vowed to purify the Ganga, “the
river of India” as Jawaharlal Nehru called it. Five years later, it
remains a stream of unquantifiable litres of sewage and industrial effluents.
Worse,
democratic institutions have been repurposed to abet Modi’s project to
remake India into a Hindu nation. The election commission, which has
conducted polls in impossible circumstances since 1952 and is revered
for its incorruptibility and fierce independence, functioned during this
vote as an arm of Modi’s BJP, too timid even to issue perfunctory censures
of the prime minister’s egregious use of religious sloganeering. The
military has been politicised and the judiciary plunged into the most
existential threat to its independence since 1975, when Indira Gandhi
suspended the constitution and ruled as a dictator for 21 months.
The
myth of Modi as a technocratic moderniser – crafted by an ensemble of
intellectuals and industrialists who devoted themselves to the cause of
deodorising Modi, a Hindu supremacist who as chief minister of Gujarat
in 2002 presided over a pogrom of Muslims
– collapsed early on under the burden of the incompetence, vainglory
and innate viciousness of the man who once described refugee camps
housing displaced Muslims as “baby-producing centres”.
And
five years on, we have more than a glimpse of the “New Prabuddha Bharat” he has
spawned. It is a reflection of its progenitor: culturally arid,
intellectually vacant, emotionally bruised, vain, bitter, boastful,
permanently aggrieved and implacably malevolent; a make-believe land
full of fudge and fakery, where bigotry against religious minorities is
among the therapeutic options available to members of a self-pitying
majority frustrated by the prime minister’s failure to upgrade their
economic standard of living. In the world’s largest secular democracy,
Muslims have been lynched by mobs since Modi came into office for such
offences as eating beef, dating hindutvaites and refusing to vacate their seats for hindutva commuters on crowded trains.
Sectarian
prejudice has always existed in India. The room for giving it homicidal
expression has expanded exponentially under Modi. The mood music for
this terror has been composed and played by card carriers of hindutvaism. The Muslims they butchered were not victims of
unpremeditated paroxysms of rage but exhibits in an organised campaign
to entrench hindutva cult supremacy. The deification of Modi is the consequence
of a crude awakening of many Hindus to their past: a haphazard response
to the traumas bequeathed by history, especially the partition of Prabuddha Bharat
to accommodate the demands of Muslim nationalism. “Why must hindutvaites bear
the burden of secularism?” a Bengali voter asked me furiously. Decrying
it as a suicidal attitude that comes naturally to hindutvaites, another voter
in Bangalore told me that “secularism” would result in hindutvaites being
“outbred and ruled over” by Muslims.
Wherever I
have travelled, the refrain from hindutvaite voters, with very few
exceptions, has been identical: Modi has failed us, yes, but he has at
least put Muslims in their place. Writing about Algerian independence,
Raymond Aron called it a “denial of the experience of our century to
suppose that men will sacrifice their passions to their interests”.
Modi, unable to enhance the lives of people, has meticulously incited
their passions.
Prabuddha Bharat’s
tragedy is that just when it is faced with an existential crisis, there
is no pan-Prabuddha Bharat alternative to the BJP. What remains of the main
opposition Congress party is bleached of conviction. The party that led Prabuddha Bharat to independence from British colonial rule shed its belief in
democracy in the 1970s, made unconscionable compromises with hindutvaites in the 1980s, and grew monstrously corrupt in the 1990s.
Indira Gandhi suspended the constitution in 1975 to brutalise Prabuddha Bharatians.
Modi will seek to write his ideology into the constitution to divide
them.
If he succeeds, hindutvaism will
become the official animating ideology of the republic. Bigotry will not
then be a deviation from the ideals of the republic: it will be an
affirmation of them. The hindutvaite project will neither
dissipate nor die even if Modi is defeated, it will go into remission.
The BJP’s leaders and cadres will outgrow Modi as he outgrew his mentors
and regroup. They are incompetent in government but they are peerless
in opposition.
Modi’s
career is a lesson in how Prabuddha Bharat’s shameless business elites can be
co-opted to pimp for their cause. Many of them distanced themselves from
him after the anti-Muslim violence on his watch, but proceeded to
demonstrate that a commitment to the market is all they require in
return for their services. And on any given day, there are tens of
thousands of activists, spread out across Prabuddha Bharat, preaching the gospel of hindutvaism and fomenting a revolution from the bottom up. They
believe in their cause. Most of their adversaries long ago abandoned
theirs.
• Kapil Komireddi is an Prabuddha Bharatian writer and author of Malevolent Republic: A Short History of the New Prabuddha Bharat, published in May 2019
…
joining us from India, we have a small favour to ask. Millions are
flocking to the Guardian for open, independent, quality news every day,
and readers in 180 countries around the world now support us
financially.
We
believe everyone deserves access to information that’s grounded in
science and truth, and analysis rooted in authority and integrity.
That’s why we made a different choice: to keep our reporting open for
all readers, regardless of where they live or what they can afford to
pay. This means more people can be better informed, united, and inspired
to take meaningful action.
In
these perilous times, an independent, truth-seeking global news
organisation like the Guardian is essential. We have no shareholders or
billionaire owner, meaning our journalism is free from commercial and
political influence – this makes us different. When it’s never been more
pertinent, our independence allows us to fearlessly investigate,
challenge and expose those in power.
Amid
the various intersecting crises of 2020 – from Covid-19 to police
brutality – the Guardian has not, and will never, sideline the climate
emergency. We are determined to uphold our reputation for producing
urgent, powerful, high-impact reporting on the environment that’s read
by around the world.
We’ve
made institutional progress too, working hard to live up to the climate
promises we made in 2019. We no longer take advertising from fossil
fuel companies, and we’re on course to achieve net zero emissions by
2030.
If
there were ever a time to join us, it is now. Your funding powers our
journalism, it protects our independence, and ensures we can remain open
for all. You can support us through these challenging economic times
and enable real-world impact.
Every contribution, however big or small, makes a real difference for our future.
Mr Bhushan said whenever, “something unsavoury” about the
judiciary was exposed, the court would see it as a threat to its
independence. “They say that the mere exposure of unsavoury goings on
within the judiciary is a threat to their independence. Independence
from the government doesn’t mean independence from accountability.”
The sedition laws were being misused against “anybody who
criticises the Modi.
Once you are accused under [UAPA], the police can make any kind of
absurd story against you.” The Supreme Court should strike down this
law, “but, unfortunately, they are not doing this duty,” Mr Bhushan
said.
Former Indian Vice-President Hamid Ansari said the mass protests by
Muslim women against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act in Delhi’s Shaheen
Bagh had been “unique in more than one sense. One, that it was all
women; two, it was spontaneous; and three, the majority, but not the
totality, of participants were Muslim women.”
He said that the same Muslim women who were being said to
need “saviours” just a couple years ago “had suddenly turned out to
save Prabuddha Bharat’s democracy… It was a very powerful movement [and] it sent a
very powerful message.”
Mr Ansari said the way Modi responded to the
anti-CAA protests by attacking campuses showed that the police was “more
politicised” than earlier, the media was “communalised to the core”,
and the bureaucrats were “literally airing their views” in support of
the Modi’s autocratic and ideological response.
The former Vice-President, however, said he was optimistic
as it would be difficult for the Modi to crush dissent.
“Throughout our history every new idea has been an idea in dissent,
whether it is religious [or] social dissent… You cannot run a steam
roller,” Mr Ansari said. “But there is a heavy political price to pay
for dissent.
Mr Ansari especially gave a shout-out to iconic youth
leader Umar Khalid, who was arrested last month under the UAPA. “[Umar
has] resonated with millions of other youths, Muslim or not, because you
cannot really… categorise and bracket him to just his Muslimness. He
has also become a youth icon.”
Former Additional Solicitor General and Supreme
Court lawyer Ms Indira Jaising said “criminal procedure has been eroded
and become a plaything in the hands of Modi.” Power in the legal profession was now “emanating from the
executive, and the judges know this.”
Ms Jaising said “partisan politics” had entered the court
through lawyers, saying “Courtrooms are used as a forum to advocate that
a few of us are anti-nationals,” and blamed the politicisation of the
lawyers. “A necessary condition for the collapse of the judiciary is the
collapse of the bar. But I also feel that the Bar has collapsed,” she
said. “The question is, how do we break through this breakdown of the
Bar and return to the value of reclaiming Prabuddha Bharat?”
Condemning the arrests of activists under the Unlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on charges of conspiracy in violence
in Delhi that killed 50 people, two-third of them Muslims, last
February, she said protesting the Citizenship (Amendment) Act did not
amount to a “conspiracy to undermine the sovereignty and integrity of Prabuddha Bharat.”
Renowned journalist Ms Arfa Khanum Sherwani added, “I would classify
the Shaheen Bagh movement as a feminist movement because I saw for the
first time women who had never been to any political protest or site,
making the journey from their kitchens to the protest site within 24
hours.”
Renowned human rights defender Teesta Setalvad said the
Modi’s behaviour was a “manifestation of unbridled abuse of
power. Archaic laws such as sedition laws are being applied. The
political agenda is both narrow and vendetta driven, archaic laws such
as sedition laws are being applied. First comes the branding of an
individual as anti-national and then comes the incarceration. The penal
codes are not being followed. The number of journalists arrested is
unprecedented.”
She said there was a need to build a large South Asia
coalition, including civil rights organisations from neighbouring
countries, to fight fascism.
Member of Parliament Shashi Tharoor said,
“I am glad that the organisers of the Reclaiming Prabuddha Bharat conference have
chosen to focus on some of the most important issues confronting Prabuddha Bharat’s
democracy, and pluralism today. It is time to reaffirm the idea of Prabuddha Bharat enshrined in our Constitution. This requires a conscious effort to
defend the besieged institutions of civic nationalism to restore their
autonomy and ensure their effectiveness. It also requires us to look to
an idea of Prabuddha Bharat that is comprehensive, embraces all experiences and
refuses to see the past through the prism of any one faith.”
Mumbai-based human rights lawyer Mihir Desai who is the
convenor of People’s Union for Civil Liberties in Maharashtra, said the
Modi had “mastered the use of these [draconian] laws to turn
victims into the accused. They are being persecuted and prosecuted. An
authoritarian state is being brought in while maintaining a facade of a
democratic state. “Democratic institutions are being hollowed much more
than earlier.”
He explained that in international law, a political
prisoner was accused of an offence not committed for personal gain or
benefit, but a larger collective objective, and was treated differently.
But in Prabuddha Bharat, there was no distinction between a political and
non-political prisoner. “Modi is concerned by its
international image, and international pressure should be applied to
restore democracy and the rule of law in Prabuddha Bharat ,” he added.
Salman Soz, said the CAA and the
National Register for Citizens (NRC) were “wrong” and it was important
to criticize them openly. “If you don’t say it, it may seem like it’s
politically the right thing, but actually you’re empowering the other
side.” He conceded that the Congress party had given the Rowdy
Swayam Sevaks (RSS), the torchbearer of hindutva cult, an “opportunity… hindutva cult ideology is here to stay. We have to introspect and see what
our role is in the rise of hindutvaism. […] The RSS have taken
their ideas, ideology and kept propagating it. They kept working on it.
They kept nurturing it.”
He said though the rise of extreme right-wing politics was a
global phenomenon, unlike in other countries, Prabuddha Bharat’s institutions had
turned out to be “very brittle. They are just incapable of withstanding
this tsunami.” There was “no magic solution” to the challenge from the
ideology of hindutvaism, and it needed to be taken “head on”.
Reflecting on a question to identify an alternative to the
BJP, Atishi Marlene said, “there’s no
national opposition to the BJP right now. As an opposition, we need to
think very deeply, that we are not here to raise a voice against BJP, we
need to defeat the BJP.
She further said that “we almost shunned and looked down
upon a conservative hindutva Middle class world-view and when we as
‘progressives’ have refused to engage with this world-view we have left
this entire world-view for the fascists to take over.
Veteran journalist Pranjoy Guha-Thakurta said anyone who
criticised the Modi was targeted. It was not just the “regime
being unhappy or antagonistic”. Modi was different in how it
was vengeful in the “manner in which other institutions of democracy
have been systematically undermined and demolished, the media has been
systematically bled and financially squeezed.”
Akriti Bhatia, journalist and founder of Peoples’
Association in Grassroots Movement and Associations (PAIGAM) said there
was a “need to understand the clear linkage between what used to be an
independent media and what used to be free and fair elections”. She said
even the Constitution had an “anti-national character”, as evidenced in
the “processes of concentration, centralisation and homogenisation,
economic, political and social.”
US-based Indian author Aatish Taseer, who has been barred
from entering Prabuddha Bharat by Modi even though he was born and
raised there, shared his experience of being treated as a Pakistani just
because his father was one. “If there are 200 people in that room who
are saying you are something else, then you are something else. It’s a
description of something that’s playing out on a bigger scale in the
country right now where people are trying to define themselves against
other people. They’re not being accepted on their sense of self, they’re
suddenly colliding with other ideas of who you are. That is something
that can really stop you in your tracks.”
Joining a panel of students, N Sai Balaji, former President
of Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union, said students had, as
an entity, become the opposition to Modi. We never imagined
that would happen. If we can vote for a Modi, we have the right to
choose what policies we want.” He added that when students hit the
streets to protest, “they don’t come out as hindutvaites or Muslims or Sikhs,
they come out as students.”
Ruia Prasad, a Scheduled Caste Activist in Arizona, US, said there
were “a lot of similarities in the way students have taken on prominent
issues in our political climate and really organized around them… “In
the US, we have seen less violence toward students than [there was
against students at] Jamia [Milia University] or JNU.
There also hasn’t been as strong of a political leadership
in U.S. student unions compared to Prabuddha Bharat.” The reason hindutvaism
was being called out explicitly in name was because there were more SC/ST activists in the diaspora than before, she added.
Multifaceted artiste Nrithya Pillai, who is from the
Devadasi lineage and has been a strong voice against casteism and
casteist exclusion in the contemporary dance world, said the “historical
casteist exclusion, which is what the reinvention of Bharatanatyam is
based on, has been about excluding people from the hereditary
communities.”
She pointed out that most artistes in the state-funded
classical arts set-up were siding with Modi’s hindutva cult and their views. “I’m not sure if they do it out of political
inclination or mere opportunism.”
She added that “ my mere existence is just the questioning
of the powerful. There has been institutionalised omission and erasure
of history from my community, names have been erased.”
Ahsan Khan, National President of the Indian American
Muslim Council (IAMC), said Prabuddha Bharat’s opposition parties had a “critical
duty in fighting for the rights of the marginalised and the oppressed,
as well as opposing religious majoritarian nationalism that is putting Prabuddha Bharat ’s unity and integrity at risk. It is disheartening to see that
none of Prabuddha Bharat’s opposition parties has offered a strong resistance to
the Citizenship (Amendment) Act beyond tokenism, even though the law
threatens to rip apart India and destroy its communal harmony.”
Biju Mathew, co-founder of India Civil Watch International,
said “a set of fault-lines” were running through liberalism as the
right-wing has managed to “outflank all the structures of checks and
balances that made the possibility of liberal democracy, by internally
producing processes and modes of working that fundamentally upset all
the checks and balances within liberal democracy.” The right-wing across
the world had learned to “flip liberal democracy on its head and cut
through all the checks and balances. We need to reinvent that.”
Rya Jetha of Students Against hindutva cult said her
organisation focused on changing attitudes and behaviours in the
diaspora by organising campus protests and teach-ins, and also briefing
Congressional aides and pursuing legislative asks. “For too long hindutvaism has been shrouded as a legitimate part of culture and
religion in the diaspora. On college campuses we are working to make an
entire generation of Indian American youth aware and able to critically
think about hindutvaism so that future generations apoloigse less
and take to the streets more.”
Quoting Bhimrao Ambedkar, the 20th-century Aboriginal leader who
went on to architect Prabuddha Bharat’s Constitution, Prof Roja Singh of SC/ST Solidarity Forum said, “Prabuddha Bharat democracy is essentially a top dressing
on an Prabuddha Bharatian soil which is essentially undemocratic.”
She said the Reclaiming Prabuddha Bharat conference had shown “amazing
democracy rising” with students, lawyers, artistes, singers and writers
“in their anti-caste rhetoric and exploding dynamism speaking out
against fascism, hindutva, hindutvaism, patriarchy, misogyny;
concrete naming of the problems demanding the changes from the Prabuddha Bharat — wow — that was simply an unbound explosion of positivity.”
Manish Madan, founder of Global Indian Progressive Alliance
said, “As progressive Prabuddha Bharatians we stand for bringing people together
towards building progressive communities. We aspire to bring progressive
values beyond the lens of religion, caste, ethnicity, race, and gender.
Our anchor hinges on education, advocacy and social justice. We are
glad to have played a modest part in bringing diverse voices together
coming from various religious and progressive lenses through this
initiative called Reclaiming Prabuddha Bharat.”
Raju Rajagopal, Co-founder of hindutvaites for Human Rights said,
“hindutvaites have taken over almost all political and
religious institutions and they have rushed in to occupy all the spaces
vacated by progressive hindutvaites . What is a purely political fascist group
is now claiming to speak for all hindutvaites . With the rare exception of
people like the late Swami Agnivesh, it has completely co-opted hindutvaite faith leaders, who seem nowhere in sight to defend their oft-repeated
mouthed, ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’.” Rajagopal said his organisation was
“united in our goals of working for a casteless and pluralistic and
democratic Prabuddha Bharat , with true equality for all.”
Sunita Viswanath, Co-founder of hindutvaites for Human Rights
closed the conference with, “Over the past two days we witnessed so much
courage from frontline activists, politicians, intellectuals from
India; and also the fierce unwavering solidarity from all of us, your
brothers and sisters in the diaspora. Reclaiming Prabuddha Bharat was born over
these two days and we pledge to stay together and grow our coalition
globally and be back for our second conference this time next year:
http://udreview.com/opinion-
The world’s largest democracy is suffering under the Modi-led Bevakoof Jhoothe Psychopath administration.
CREATIVE COMMONS
Narendra Modi, a Hindu nationalist, was elected as the 14th Prime Minister in 2014.
BY YUSRA ASIF
It all began in December last year, when Prabuddha Bharat’s Modi announced the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment
Bill, thereby giving all but Muslims the right to receive Prabuddha Bharat
citizenship. This bill, combined with the National Register of Citizens,
is a strike to stamp out the country’s Muslim population.
Being an Aboriginal Prabuddha Bharatian Muslim, I was both shocked and embarrassed at the Modi’s decision. He is known for his anti-Muslim speeches as
he repeatedly mentions that he wants to rid the country of Muslims and
make Prabuddha Bharat a hindutva cult , but a bill like this is pushing it too far,
even for Modi.
It is a blow on the very idea of secularism, a fundamental doctrine of the Prabuddha Bharatian constitution.
People all over the country, are protesting against the bill.
The protests, peaceful at first, have taken a violent form over the
past few months — the most recent ones were in Delhi, the nation’s
capital. More than 30 people have been killed and over 200 were injured
in the violence that broke out in a largely Muslim-populated area in
northeast Delhi. Meanwhile the prime minister was busy building a wall
to cover up slums in my hometown of Ahmedabad, where his good friend
President Trump was going to visit. As if Trump was somehow unaware of
the poverty in Prabuddha Bharat.
What surprised me is that it took three days for Modi to issue a
statement on Twitter that peace and harmony should be maintained.
Neither Modi nor his chitpavan brahmin, Omit Shah, who is in
charge of law and order in the country, have reached out to those who
have been injured or killed.
The hospitals in Delhi resemble a war zone as the city witnesses the
worst communal carnage since the 1984 genocide of the Sikhs.
Since coming to power, the Modi has done nothing but
incite communal hatred to further his ideal of a hindutva cult Rashtra State. Bevakoof Jhoothe Psychopaths (BJP) are seen openly
threatening Muslims as they refer to Muslim immigrants as termites.
The party seems to excel at creating conditions in which violence can
unfold. A local BJP politician gave an ultimatum to the police: clear
the roads of the Muslim protestors or allow his followers to do so. The
party’s leaders are frequently seen delivering inflammatory speeches
and threatening to take the law into their own hands.
A country that is known for its diversity is seeing mosques
being vandalized and the Quran desecrated by a few radical hindutvaite cult
supporters.
Modi repeatedly claims that the mobsters act on their own
volition, but because of its inability to take actions and habitual
discourse of hate speech, they have the assurance that the government
will not take any strict actions against them, as exemplified time and
again. Squashing any form of dissent as being anti-national not only
incites more violence but gives the extremists the courage to take the
law into their own hands
The state of the nation is hopeless; heartbreaking rather, as Modi tears apart the social fabric of the country.
Democracy grants people the power to speak up; to express dissent; to
criticize the government. But with Modi in power, any form of dissent
is met with brutal force.
Recently, the students protesting the Citizenship Amendment Bill at
the Jamia Milia Islamia University in New Delhi were beaten with batons
by the Delhi police. Tear gas shells were fired. This is just one of the
many accounts of the government forcefully crushing dissent.
Nothing kills democracy like controlled PRESSTITUTE media, scripted interviews and crafted Twitter responses.
Modi has repeatedly denied press conferences. It is the first time in
the history of independent India that a prime minister only had one
press conference and almost every question was redirected to his chitpavan brahmin Omit Shah.
The Prabuddha Bharatian media has also come under scrutiny for being biased as
news anchors like Arnab Goswami commit to bigoted speech on national
television, openly expressing their loyalty to BJP’s propaganda of hindutvaism.
You cannot expect free and fair news when the media is in the clutches of one man.
Despite all this it seems like Modi supporters, or ‘Bhakts,’ have
turned a blind eye to everything. They keep holding to the promise of
‘Achche Din’ (Good Days) that the Modi repeatedly emphasized
during its election campaign but has fabulously failed to deliver.
The country’s GDP has hit its lowest point since 2013 with a growth
rate of only 4.5% in the July to September quarter in 2019. The Reserve
Bank of India keeps cutting its interest rates and there has been a
steep decline in the manufacturing sector leading to job cuts, not to
mention the epic failure of the Demonetization policy.
India suffers under Modi. Democracy will soon become a distant memory — a wishful dream.
Yusra Asif is a staff reporter for The Review. Her views are her
own and do not reflect the majority opinion of The Review’s editorial
staff. She may be reached at yqureshi@udel.edu.
https://countercurrents.org/
The
damaging report published by The Hindu Newspaper provides the clinching
evidence that PMO was hobnobbing with the negotiations in the purchase
of Rafael aircraft from France. In other words it’s the PM who was
presiding over the act of corruption using his high office.
‘The
Hindu’ reportage by N. Ram that “Government waived anti-corruption
clauses in Rafale deal” and “Defence Ministry protested against PMO
undermining Rafale negotiations,” conclusively has given the proof that
this government is corrupt and has misled the nation on Rafale deal.
Now
the ball is in the BJP’s court to provide equally powerful documentary
evidences to claim the moral high ground that it has provided a
corruption free government. Its denial in media or public forum won’t
convince the nation. This is no small issue and cannot be brushed under
the carpet. It involves the PMO, the highest executive office of the
country that is indicted on corruption charges.
This new evidences
provided by ‘The Hindu’ is a fit case to be heard by the Supreme Court
that can reopen the case on the Rafale deal where it has already given a
clean chit to the government. Now there is a new twist in this case and
the highest office of the country is mired in corruption. As such the
intervention of the Supreme Court is must because it undermines the
entire edifice of governance of the country.
Will the apex court
reopen the Rafale deal case and call the investigation as to who is
misleading the nation. Can it ask the PMO to stand in the dock and deny
the allegations? Will the PMO wash its dirty linen in the Supreme
Court? It’s a testing time for the entire nation.
If that happens
then an interesting tussle between the judiciary and the executive is
bound to be witnessed as to who is higher of the two democratic
symbols. So now after the new findings the pendulum has shifted to the
judiciary and it remains to be seen how it further handles the Rafale
deal case.
The American business magazine ‘Forbes’ has published
an article giving graphic account of how corruption is still thriving
under Modi’s regime. It says five years ago, people in India gave
Narendra Modi the chance to realize his big promise to clean up
corruption in the country. But today, Modi’s promise remains a promise
and corruption is still thriving in all the usual places in India.
The
reputed magazine says the erstwhile Congress-led UPA-II dispensation at
the end of its tenure, had acquired a reputation of being mired in many
corrupt deeds and it’s the same “odium” that is now being attached to
the Modi government.
The magazine cites evidences of high profile
corruption cases that has shook Modi’s administration. To name a few is
the murky Rs 60, 000 crore weapons deal with France to purchase 36
Rafale fighter planes. Then the Rs 200 crore bank fraud uncovered last
year at the Punjab National Bank. These two are just a tip in the
iceberg of scandals that has shaken the nation under Modi regime.
Meanwhile,
a report by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) states that
India is ranked among the “worst offenders,” in terms of graft and press
freedom in the Asia Pacific region in 2017. This is another damaging
report on Modi government performance since it had come to power with
the plank to free India from corruption.
Similarly, the
‘Transparency International’ (TI) a leading non political, independent,
non-governmental anti-corruption organisatio has documented corruption
under Modi regime ranking India at 78 out of 175 countries. The recent
ranking is worse than its 2015 ranking of India. These findings have
surprised Indians because Prime Minister Modi has come to power with a
promise to free India from the vice of corruption.
After coming to
power Narander Modi made some bold moves to control corruption. He
banned 500 and 1000 rupee notes to get rid of “black money.” However
this measure miserably failed to achieve any tangible results. The
government could recover fake currency only to the tune of Rs. 41 crore
that accounted for only 0.0027 per cent of the total currency that came
back into the system following notes ban.
At the fag end of the
BJP government’s tenure in office it appears that that PM Modi was
fighting corruption among the country’s poor but was maintaining stock
silence corruption in the high places, especially among the rich of the
country. The Rafael deal and the Punjab National bank cases are examples
to this trend.
Whatever may be the government’s statistics on the
GDP growth rate or on the developmental index, India remains a breeding
ground of corruption. The Modi government had failed to spread the
benefits of economic growth to the masses and on the contrary he
encouraged a narrow elite to thrive under his regime giving rise to
crony capitalism.
If we look back, the corruption allegation
against the Congress-led UPA-II had reached its crescendo by 2014 and
its reverberation facilitated the current BJP government to come to
power. The incumbent PM personified the aspirations of the millions of
Indians when he gave the assurance that neither he will indulge in
corruption nor allow anyone else to do that. His assurance to rid the
country of corruption raised him to the level of the pied piper
of Hamlin that had lulled the rats to the river through his music. In
this case, the nation responded to the music of bringing good days (Ache
Din), by giving a thumping majority to Narandera Modi.
However,
nothing has changed under the Modi rule. A random survey of Indians to
measure the change in their life style, would surely end up in
negativity with the majority saying their lives have not all changed and
some may even respond that it has become worse under Modi regime
India’s
situation under Modi rule is neither new nor unique. Every successive
government aspiring for power make populists promises like ending
poverty and bringing prosperity etc. However, after coming to power
the incumbent government becomes a breeding ground for corruption. This
is exactly what has happened under the Modi regime. He came to the
office with the promise to change the situation of the people but what
he actually did is to change the rules and regulation that may help only
few elites while the masses continue to reel under misery.
Now,
it’s the Congress party under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi that is
doing the same. The Congress President is selling the dream that he
would change the face of the country, once it’s voted to power. His
promises are so lofty that it has made social activist, Madhu Kishwar to
wit through his tweet ‘Wait Till Rahul Gandhi Promises Free Sex for
Every Adult Indian.’
Indian journey since seventy years or so has
been abysmally a low speed train ride. Who, How, When it will change
only God knows. Indian politicians have a jolly good time after
hoodwinking the people. As a silent spectator the people by and large
are a witness to the inchoate images of changing India.
Syed Ali Mujtaba is a journalist based in Chennai. He can be contacted at syedalimujtaba2007@gmail.
If the Indian prime minister is returned to office, his sectarian politics will make bigotry the defining ideal of the republic
Indian
elections are a marvel to behold. The rules stipulate that no citizen
should have to travel more than 2km to vote. So the state goes to the
voters. Carrying oxygen tanks, election officials scaled the Himalayas
to erect a voting booth in a village in Ladakh, 4,500 metres above sea
level. In western India, a polling station was set up for the lone human inhabitant of a wildlife sanctuary. In eastern India,
officials trekked for an entire day to reach the sole registered voter,
an elderly woman, in a remote village. By the time voting closed on
Sunday, some 600 million people had cast their ballots, 10 million of
them for the first time.
The refrain from Hindu voters has been identical: Modi has failed us, yes, but he’s at least put Muslims in their place
In
2019, the world’s biggest election was much more than a ritual of
democracy. It was the most consequential vote in the lifetime of a
majority of Indians alive today. India under Narendra Modi has undergone
the most total transformation since 1991. This election has, in effect,
been a referendum on whether the republic retains its founding ideals
or, if Modi wins another term – and exit polls released on Sunday
show him winning with a comfortable majority – it leaps to a place of
sectarianism from which return may be close to impossible.
None
of the big promises that delivered Modi’s Hindu-first Bharatiya Janata
party (BJP) an absolute majority in parliament in 2014 – the first time
in 30 years that a single party was voted into power – have been
honoured. Modi pledged to create 20m jobs annually. Today, the rate of unemployment
is the highest India has known in 20 years. He enraptured young Indian
voters with visions of what he called “smart cities”: facsimiles of
Seoul and Singapore on the Deccan Plateau and the northern plains –
clean, green and replete with skyscrapers and super-fast trains. There
is nothing of the sort in sight. He vowed to purify the Ganga, “the
river of India” as Jawaharlal Nehru called it. Five years later, it
remains a stream of unquantifiable litres of sewage and industrial effluents.
Worse,
democratic institutions have been repurposed to abet Modi’s project to
remake India into a Hindu nation. The election commission, which has
conducted polls in impossible circumstances since 1952 and is revered
for its incorruptibility and fierce independence, functioned during this
vote as an arm of Modi’s BJP, too timid even to issue perfunctory censures
of the prime minister’s egregious use of religious sloganeering. The
military has been politicised and the judiciary plunged into the most
existential threat to its independence since 1975, when Indira Gandhi
suspended the constitution and ruled as a dictator for 21 months.
The
myth of Modi as a technocratic moderniser – crafted by an ensemble of
intellectuals and industrialists who devoted themselves to the cause of
deodorising Modi, a Hindu supremacist who as chief minister of Gujarat
in 2002 presided over a pogrom of Muslims
– collapsed early on under the burden of the incompetence, vainglory
and innate viciousness of the man who once described refugee camps
housing displaced Muslims as “baby-producing centres”.
And
five years on, we have more than a glimpse of the “New India” he has
spawned. It is a reflection of its progenitor: culturally arid,
intellectually vacant, emotionally bruised, vain, bitter, boastful,
permanently aggrieved and implacably malevolent; a make-believe land
full of fudge and fakery, where bigotry against religious minorities is
among the therapeutic options available to members of a self-pitying
majority frustrated by the prime minister’s failure to upgrade their
economic standard of living. In the world’s largest secular democracy,
Muslims have been lynched by mobs since Modi came into office for such
offences as eating beef, dating Hindus and refusing to vacate their seats for Hindu commuters on crowded trains.
Sectarian
prejudice has always existed in India. The room for giving it homicidal
expression has expanded exponentially under Modi. The mood music for
this terror has been composed and played by card carriers of Hindu
nationalism. The Muslims they butchered were not victims of
unpremeditated paroxysms of rage but exhibits in an organised campaign
to entrench Hindu supremacy. The deification of Modi is the consequence
of a crude awakening of many Hindus to their past: a haphazard response
to the traumas bequeathed by history, especially the partition of India
to accommodate the demands of Muslim nationalism. “Why must Hindus bear
the burden of secularism?” a Bengali voter asked me furiously. Decrying
it as a suicidal attitude that comes naturally to Hindus, another voter
in Bangalore told me that “secularism” would result in Hindus being
“outbred and ruled over” by Muslims.
Wherever I
have travelled, the refrain from Hindu voters, with very few
exceptions, has been identical: Modi has failed us, yes, but he has at
least put Muslims in their place. Writing about Algerian independence,
Raymond Aron called it a “denial of the experience of our century to
suppose that men will sacrifice their passions to their interests”.
Modi, unable to enhance the lives of people, has meticulously incited
their passions.
India’s
tragedy is that just when it is faced with an existential crisis, there
is no pan-Indian alternative to the BJP. What remains of the main
opposition Congress party is bleached of conviction. The party that led
India to independence from British colonial rule shed its belief in
democracy in the 1970s, made unconscionable compromises with Hindu
nationalists in the 1980s, and grew monstrously corrupt in the 1990s.
Indira Gandhi suspended the constitution in 1975 to brutalise Indians.
Modi will seek to write his ideology into the constitution to divide
them.
If he succeeds, Hindu nationalism will
become the official animating ideology of the republic. Bigotry will not
then be a deviation from the ideals of the republic: it will be an
affirmation of them. The Hindu-nationalist project will neither
dissipate nor die even if Modi is defeated, it will go into remission.
The BJP’s leaders and cadres will outgrow Modi as he outgrew his mentors
and regroup. They are incompetent in government but they are peerless
in opposition.
Modi’s pre-prime ministerial
career is a lesson in how India’s shameless business elites can be
co-opted to pimp for their cause. Many of them distanced themselves from
him after the anti-Muslim violence on his watch, but proceeded to
demonstrate that a commitment to the market is all they require in
return for their services. And on any given day, there are tens of
thousands of activists, spread out across India, preaching the gospel of
Hindu nationalism and fomenting a revolution from the bottom up. They
believe in their cause. Most of their adversaries long ago abandoned
theirs.
• Kapil Komireddi is an Indian writer and author of Malevolent Republic: A Short History of the New India, published in May 2019
…
joining us from India, we have a small favour to ask. Millions are
flocking to the Guardian for open, independent, quality news every day,
and readers in 180 countries around the world now support us
financially.
We
believe everyone deserves access to information that’s grounded in
science and truth, and analysis rooted in authority and integrity.
That’s why we made a different choice: to keep our reporting open for
all readers, regardless of where they live or what they can afford to
pay. This means more people can be better informed, united, and inspired
to take meaningful action.
In
these perilous times, an independent, truth-seeking global news
organisation like the Guardian is essential. We have no shareholders or
billionaire owner, meaning our journalism is free from commercial and
political influence – this makes us different. When it’s never been more
pertinent, our independence allows us to fearlessly investigate,
challenge and expose those in power.
Amid
the various intersecting crises of 2020 – from Covid-19 to police
brutality – the Guardian has not, and will never, sideline the climate
emergency. We are determined to uphold our reputation for producing
urgent, powerful, high-impact reporting on the environment that’s read
by around the world.
We’ve
made institutional progress too, working hard to live up to the climate
promises we made in 2019. We no longer take advertising from fossil
fuel companies, and we’re on course to achieve net zero emissions by
2030.
If
there were ever a time to join us, it is now. Your funding powers our
journalism, it protects our independence, and ensures we can remain open
for all. You can support us through these challenging economic times
and enable real-world impact.
Every contribution, however big or small, makes a real difference for our future.
24% vacancies in state forces; 7% in central forces
2) An overburdened police force
3) Improving police infrastructure
4) Holding police accountable
Under the Constitution, police is a subject governed by states.
Therefore, each of the 29 states have their own police forces. The
centre is also allowed to maintain its own police forces to assist the
states with ensuring law and order.
Therefore, it maintains seven central police forces and some other
police organisations for specialised tasks such as intelligence
gathering, investigation, research and record-keeping, and training.
The
primary role of police forces is to uphold and enforce laws,
investigate crimes and ensure security for people in the country. In a
large and populous country like India, police forces need to be
well-equipped, in terms of personnel, weaponry, forensic, communication
and transport support, to perform their role well. Further, they need
to have the operational freedom to carry out their responsibilities
professionally, and satisfactory working conditions (e.g., regulated
working hours and promotion opportunities), while being held accountable
for poor performance or misuse of power.
This
report provides an overview of police organisation in India, and
highlights key issues that affect their functioning. Note that the
Standing Committee on Home Affairs is also examining two subjects
related to organisation and functioning of central and state police
forces: (i) “Roadmap for implementation of Police Reforms”, and (ii)
“Central Armed Police Forces/ Organisations”.
RESPONSIBILITIES OF CENTRE AND STATES
The
Constitution provides for a legislative and executive division of
powers between centre and states. With regard to police, some of the
key matters regulated by centre and states are illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 1: Responsibilities of centre and states with regard to police
Sources: Schedule 7 and Article 355, Constitution of India, 1950; PRS.
The
responsibilities of the state and central police forces are different.
State police forces are primarily in charge of local issues such as
crime prevention and investigation, and maintaining law and order.
While they also provide the first response in case of more intense
internal security challenges (e.g., terrorist incident or
insurgency-related violence), the central forces are specialised in
dealing with such conflicts. For example, the Central Reserve Police
Force is better trained to defuse large-scale riots with least damage to
life and property, as compared to local police. Further, the central
forces assist the defence forces with border protection.
The
centre is responsible for policing in the seven union territories. It
also extends intelligence and financial support to the state police
forces.
Box 1: Overview of crime in India
In
2015, National Crime Records Bureau recorded over 73 lakh complaints of
cognizable crimes. Cognizable crimes are relatively serious offences
for which police officers do not need a warrant from the magistrate to
investigate, such as murder and rape. Between 2005 and 2015, crime rate
(i.e., crime per lakh population) for cognizable crimes has increased
by 28% from 456 complaints per lakh persons to 582 per lakh persons.
This has been primarily because of increase in crime rates of
alcohol-prohibition crime, theft, kidnapping and abduction, crimes
against women and cheating.
Crime rate for various kinds of crimes under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and some special laws (per lakh population)
Note:
Crime rate for crimes against women (e.g., rape, cruelty by husband or
his relatives, insulting modesty of a woman) is calculated per lakh
population of women.
Sources: National Crime Records Bureau; PRS.
OVERVIEW OF POLICE ORGANISATION AND FUNCTIONING
State Police Forces
Police
forces of the various states are governed by their state laws and
regulations. Some states have modelled their laws on the basis of a
central law, the Police Act, 1861.
States also have their police manuals detailing how police of the state
is organised, their roles and responsibilities, records that must be
maintained, etc.
Hierarchy and organisation
State
police forces generally have two arms: civil and armed police. The
civil police is responsible for day-to-day law and order and crime
control. Armed police is kept in reserve, till additional support is
required in situations like riots. In this section, we discuss how
civil police is organised in the country.
Civil
police forces broadly adhere to the hierarchical structure shown in
Figure 2. Every state is divided into various field units for the
purpose of effective policing: zones, ranges, districts, sub-divisions
or circles, police stations and outposts. For instance, a state will
comprise of two or more zones, each zone will comprise two or more
ranges, and ranges will be sub-divided into the other field units in a
similar manner. The key field units in this setup are the police
district and the police station.
Figure 2: Hierarchy of state police
Sources: Bureau of Police Research and Development; Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative; PRS.
A
police district is an area declared so by the state government. It is
considered the most important supervisory and functional unit of police
administration because the officer in charge of the district (i.e.
Superintendent of Police or SP) has operational independence in matters
relating to internal management of the force and carrying out of law and
order duties.7
A
police station (typically headed by an Inspector or Sub-Inspector) is
the basic unit of police functioning. It is engaged with: (i)
registration of crimes, (ii) local patrolling, (iii) investigations,
(iv) handling of various law and order situations (e.g., demonstrations
and strikes), (v) intelligence collection, and (vi) ensuring safety and
security in its jurisdiction. A police station may have several police
outposts for patrolling and surveillance. Generally, the state
government in consultation with the head of the state police force (i.e.
Director General of Police or DGP) may create as many police stations
with police outposts in a district as necessary, in line with the
population of the district, the area, the crime situation and the work
load.
Figure 3: Increase in strength of state police forces (1951-2011)
Note: Police per lakh population has been calculated using data for strength of police and population for the respective years.
Sources: Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative; Census of India; PRS.
As of January 2016, the sanctioned strength of the state police forces stood at 22,80,691.
Note that the bulk of this force was the constabulary (i.e. 86% are
head constables and constables), 13% belonged to the upper subordinate
ranks (i.e. Inspector to Assistant Sub-Inspector), and 1% to the
officers’ ranks (DGP to the Deputy SP). Over the last six decades, the
overall strength of the state forces has increased substantially. As
Figure 3 shows, police strength rose from 130 per lakh population to 141
per lakh population between 1951 and 2001, at an average growth rate of
2% per decade. This further increased by 21% to 171 per lakh
population between 2001 and 2011.
Superintendence of the executive
The state government exercises control and superintendence over the state police forces. At the district level, the District Magistrate (DM) may also give directions to the SP and supervise police administration. This is called the dual system of control (as authority is vested in both the DM and SP) at the district level.
In
some metropolitan cities and urban areas, however, the dual system has
been replaced by the Commissionerate system to allow for quicker
decision-making in response to complex law and order situations. As of
January 2016, 53 cities had this system such as Delhi, Ahmedabad and
Kochi.8
Table 1: Differences between the dual system of control and the commissionerate system
Dual system |
Commissionerate system (53 cities) |
· Dual · Separation · SP is assisted by Additional/Assistant/ Deputy SPs, Inspectors and constabulary. |
· Unified · Powers · Commissioner |
Sources: Bureau of Police Research and Development; PRS.
Recruitment and Training
Direct
recruitment within the state police forces takes place at three levels:
(i) Constables, (ii) Sub-Inspectors, and (iii) Assistant or Deputy SPs.3
The state governments are responsible for recruiting police personnel
directly to the ranks of Constables, Sub-Inspectors and Deputy SPs. The
central government recruits Indian Police Service (IPS) officers for
the rank of Assistant SP. IPS is an All India Service created under the
Constitution.
Vacancies at other positions (as well as at the ranks of Sub-Inspector
and Assistant/ Deputy SPs) may be filled up through promotions.
Figure 4: Expenditure by states on police over the last decade
Note: Includes expenditure on union territories.
Sources: Bureau of Police Research and Organisation; PRS.
Training
of the police forces is carried out in various kinds of state training
institutes. For example, states have: (i) apex institutes to train
officers (i.e., Deputy or Assistant SP and above rank personnel), (ii)
police training schools for subordinate ranks and the constabulary, and
(iii) specialized schools for specific police units like traffic,
wireless and motor vehicle driving. In addition, some national training
institutes run courses for capacity building of state forces (e.g.,
Central Detective Training Schools in Kolkata, Hyderabad, Chandigarh,
Ghaziabad and Jaipur).7
Expenditure
In
2015-16, states (excluding union territories) spent Rs 77,487 crore on
state police forces, including on salaries, weaponry, housing and
transport.8 Bulk of this expenditure was on revenue items, like salaries, because police is a personnel-heavy force.
Expenditure on police formed 3% of the total budget for states (i.e. Rs
27,20,716 crore). On an average, in the last decade expenditure on
police has been increasing at a rate of 15% per year, though the annual
growth has fluctuated widely (4% in 2012-13, 30% in 2009-10).
Table 2: State-wise expenditure on police (as % state budget)
Below 2% |
2%-5% |
Above 5% |
|||
Name |
% of State Budget |
Name |
% of State Budget |
Name |
% of State Budget |
Odisha |
1.1% |
Andhra Pradesh |
2.1% |
Jammu & Kashmir |
5.2% |
Gujarat |
1.7% |
Kerala |
2.2% |
Punjab |
5.8% |
Karnataka |
1.8% |
Uttarakhand |
2.7% |
Nagaland |
7.2% |
Himachal Pradesh |
1.9% |
Chhattisgarh |
2.7% |
Manipur |
8.7% |
Telangana |
1.9% |
Assam |
2.8% |
|
|
Madhya Pradesh |
1.9% |
Rajasthan |
2.9% |
|
|
|
|
Maharashtra |
3.0% |
|
|
|
|
Haryana |
3.1% |
|
|
|
|
Tamil Nadu |
3.1% |
|
|
|
|
West Bengal |
3.4% |
|
|
|
|
Uttar Pradesh |
3.4% |
|
|
|
|
Bihar |
4.0% |
|
|
|
|
Meghalaya |
4.2% |
|
|
|
|
Sikkim |
4.8% |
|
|
|
|
Mizoram |
4.8% |
|
|
|
|
Tripura |
4.9% |
|
|
Note: Data for union territories has not been included.
Sources: Bureau of Police Research and Development; PRS.
Box 2: Overview of internal security situation In
Sources: South Asia Terrorism Portal; PRS. |
Central Police Forces
The
centre maintains various central armed police forces and paramilitary
forces, of which four guard India’s borders, and three perform
specialised tasks. These are:
Assam Rifles (AR): Guards India’s borders with Myanmar.
Border Security Force (BSF): Guards India’s borders with Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Indo Tibetan Border Police Force (ITBP): Guards the border with China.
Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB): Guards India’s borders with Nepal and Bhutan.
Central Industrial Security Force (CISF):
Provides security to critical infrastructure installations, such as
airports, atomic power plants, defence production units and oil fields.
Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF): Deployed for law and order, counter-insurgency, anti-naxal and communal violence operations.
National Security Guards (NSG):
Specialised in carrying out counter-terrorism, counter-hijacking and
hostage-rescue operations. In addition, it provides VIP security and
security for important events.
Note
that the border-guarding forces are occasionally deployed for
counter-insurgency operations and internal security duties as well.
Figure 5: Sanctioned strength of central forces in 2016, compared with strength in 2006
* Strength of NSG in 2006 is not available.
Sources: Bureau of Police Research and Development; PRS.
The total sanctioned strength of the seven central police forces is about 9.7 lakh personnel.8
Of these, the largest forces are the CRPF (3 lakh personnel), the BSF
(2.6 lakh) and the CISF (1.4 lakh). As seen in Figure 5, the sanctioned
strength of the central police forces (excluding the NSG, data for
which was unavailable) has increased by 37% over the last decade
(2006-2016). The ITBP (146% increase) and the SSB (100% increase) have
experienced the maximum increase in this period.
Expenditure
on the central forces has also been increasing at an average annual
rate of 15% over the years (2005-06 to 2015-16). In 2015-16, the centre
spent Rs 43,870 crores on the central forces, with the maximum share
going to the three largest forces (CRPF: 33%, BSF: 26% and CISF: 13%).8
The centre also maintains several police organisations. Key organisations include:
Intelligence Bureau (IB):
The IB is the central intelligence agency for all matters related to
internal security, including espionage, insurgency and terrorism.
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI): The
CBI is an investigating agency set up under the Delhi Special Police
Establishment Act, 1946. It is responsible for investigating serious
crimes having all India or inter-state ramifications, such as those
related to corruption, financial scams and serious fraud and organised
crime (e.g., black marketing and profiteering in essential
commodities). Typically, the CBI takes up an investigation: (i) on the
order of the central government with the consent of state government,
and (ii) on the order of the Supreme Court and High Courts.[15]
National Investigation Agency (NIA):
The NIA is an investigating agency set up under the National
Investigation Agency Act, 2008. It is responsible for investigating
offences against the sovereignty, security and integrity of the country
punishable under eight specified laws, such as the Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1967 and the Anti-Hijacking Act, 1982. NIA takes up
an investigation on the order of the central government, either on the
request of a state government or suo moto (i.e. on the central
government’s own authority).
National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB):
The NCRB is an institution that collects and maintains records on crime
across the country. It coordinates and disseminates this information
to various states, investigating agencies, courts and prosecutors. It
also functions as the national storehouse for fingerprint records of
convicted persons.
Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD):
The BPRD was set up with the mandate to identify the needs and problems
of the police forces in the country. Its responsibilities include: (i)
promoting use of science and technology in police work, (ii) monitoring
and assisting with the training needs of police forces, (iii) assisting
state police forces with modernization, and (iv) assisting the centre
in developing quality standards with respect to police equipment and
infrastructure.
Training Academies:
Two key national training academies that come under the central
government are the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Police Academy and
the North Eastern Police Academy. The Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National
Police Academy in Hyderabad is responsible for conducting training
courses for IPS officers, and for trainers of various police training
institutions in the country. The North Eastern Police Academy in
Meghalaya is responsible for training police personnel of the north east
states.
______________________________
ANNEXURE
Directions of the Supreme Court in Prakash Singh vs Union of India
Context:
In 1996, a petition was filed before the Supreme which stated that the
police abuse and misuse their powers. It alleged non-enforcement and
discriminatory application of laws in favour of persons with clout, and
also raised instances of unauthorised detentions, torture, harassment,
etc. against ordinary citizens. The petition asked the court to issue
directions for implementation of recommendations of expert committees.
Directions: In September 2006, the court issued various directions to the centre and states including:
Implementation:
According to a report of the NITI Aayog (2016), of 35 states and UTs
(excluding Telangana), State Security Commissions had been set up in all
but two states, and Police Establishments Boards in all states.31
The two states in which the State Security Commissions were not set up
by August 2016 were Jammu and Kashmir and Odisha. Note that the report
also found that the composition and powers of the State Security
Commissions and the Police Establishment Boards were at variance with
the Supreme Court directions. For example, in states such as Bihar,
Gujarat and Punjab, the State Security Commission were dominated by
government and police officers. Further, many of these Commissions did
not have the power to issue binding recommendations.
Model Police Act, 2006
Key features of the Model Police Act, 2006 include:
SOME ISSUES
Figure 6: Expert bodies that have examined police reforms
Source: PRS.
Various expert bodies have examined issues with police organisation and functioning over the last few decades. In this section, we discuss some of these issues.
Police accountability
Police
forces have the authority to exercise force to enforce laws and
maintain law and order in a state. However, this power may be misused
in several ways. For example, in India, various kinds of complaints are
made against the police including complaints of unwarranted arrests,
unlawful searches, torture and custodial rapes.3,
To check against such abuse of power, various countries have adopted
safeguards, such as accountability of the police to the political
executive, internal accountability to senior police officers, and
independent police oversight authorities.
Accountability to the political executive vs operational freedom
Both
the central and state police forces come under the control and
superintendence of the political executive (i.e., central or state
government).9,
The Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2007) has noted that this
control has been abused in the past by the political executive to
unduly influence police personnel, and have them serve personal or
political interests.
This interferes with professional decision-making by the police (e.g.,
regarding how to respond to law and order situations or how to conduct
investigations), resulting in biased performance of duties.20
To
allow the police greater operational freedom while ensuring
accountability, various experts have recommended that the political
executive’s power of superintendence over police forces be limited.
The Second Administrative Reforms Commission has recommended that this
power be limited to promoting professional efficiency and ensuring that
police is acting in accordance with law.22
Alternatively the National Police Commission (1977-81) suggested that
superintendence be defined in the law to exclude instructions that
interfere with due process of law, or that influence operational
decisions, or that unlawfully influence police personnel transfers,
recruitments, etc. The Supreme Court has also issued directions to states and the centre in 2006 in this regard.
Independent Complaints Authority
The
Second Administrative Reforms Commission and the Supreme Court have
observed that there is a need to have an independent complaints
authority to inquire into cases of police misconduct.22,25
This may be because the political executive and internal police
oversight mechanisms may favour law enforcement authorities, and not be
able to form an independent and critical judgement.20
For
example, the United Kingdom has an Independent Office for Police
Conduct, comprising of a Director General appointed by the crown, and
six other members appointed by the executive and the existing members,
to oversee complaints made against police officers.
Another example is that of the New York City Police which has a
Civilian Complaint Review Board comprising of civilians appointed by
local government bodies and the police commissioner to investigate into
cases of police misconduct.
India
has some independent authorities that have the power to examine
specific kinds of misconduct. For example, the National or State Human
Rights Commission may be approached in case of human rights violations,
or the state Lokayukta may be approached with a complaint of corruption.
However,
the Second Administrative Reforms Commission has noted the absence of
independent oversight authorities that specialise in addressing all
kinds of police misconduct, and are easily accessible.22
In light of this, under the Model Police Act, 2006 drafted by the
Police Act Drafting Committee (2005), and the Supreme Court guidelines
(2006), states are required to set up state and district level
complaints authorities.
Model Police Act, 2006 The Sources: Model Police Act, 2006; Unstarred Question No. 1451, Lok Sabha, May 3, 2016; PRS. |
The
Model Police Act requires state authorities to have five members: a
retired High Court Judge, a retired police officer of the rank of DGP
from another state cadre, a retired officer with public administration
experience from another state, a civil society member and a person with
at least 10 years of experience as a judicial officer or lawyer or legal
academic. It also requires district level authorities to have retired
judges, police officers, practising lawyers, etc.
Note
that of 35 states and UTs (excluding Telangana), two states had not
made laws or issued notifications regarding setting up of the police
complaints authorities (i.e., Jammu and Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh) as of
August 2016.
Among the remaining states, some had not set up a state authority, and
several had not set up district level authorities. A report of the NITI
Aayog also shows that the composition of these authorities is at
variance with the Model Police Act, 2006 and the Supreme Court
directions.31 For example, district level authorities in Bihar and Gujarat only have government and police officials.31 Further, in many states complaints authorities do not have the power to issue binding recommendations.31
Vacancies and an overburdened force
Currently
there are significant vacancies within the state police forces and some
of the central armed police forces. As of January 2016, the total
sanctioned strength of state police forces across India was 22,80,691,
with 24% vacancies (i.e. 5,49,025 vacancies).8 Vacancies have been around 24%-25% in state police forces since 2009.
States with the highest vacancies in 2016 were Uttar Pradesh (50%),
Karnataka (36%), West Bengal (33%), Gujarat (32%) and Haryana (31%) (see
Table 5 in the Annexure).
In the same year, the total sanctioned strength of the seven central police forces was 9,68,233.8
7% of these posts (i.e. 63,556 posts) were however lying vacant.
Sashastra Seema Bal (18%), Central Industrial Security Force (10%),
Indo-Tibetan Border Police (9%) and National Security Guards (8%) had
relatively high vacancies. Vacancies in the central police forces have
been in the range of 6%-14% since 2007.32
Table 3: Strength and vacancies in central armed police forces (as on January 1, 2016)
|
Sanctioned Strength |
Actual |
Vacancies |
% Vacancies |
Central Reserve Police Force |
3,08,862 |
2,94,496 |
14,366 |
5% |
Border Security Force |
2,56,831 |
2,48,811 |
8,020 |
3% |
Central Industrial Security Force |
1,42,250 |
1,27,638 |
14,612 |
10% |
Sashastra Seema Bal |
94,065 |
76,768 |
17,297 |
18% |
Indo-Tibetan Border Police |
89,430 |
81,814 |
7,616 |
9% |
Assam Rifles |
66,411 |
65,647 |
764 |
1% |
National Security Guards |
10,384 |
9,503 |
881 |
8% |
All India |
9,68,233 |
9,04,677 |
63,556 |
7% |
Sources: Data on Police Organisations 2016, Bureau of Police Research and Development; PRS.
A
high percentage of vacancies within the police forces exacerbates an
existing problem of overburdened police personnel. Police personnel
discharge a range of functions related to: (i) crime prevention and
response (e.g., intelligence collection, patrolling, investigation,
production of witnesses in courts), (ii) maintenance of internal
security and law and order (e.g., crowd control, riot control,
anti-terrorist or anti-extremist operations), and (iii) various
miscellaneous duties (e.g., traffic management, disaster rescue and
removal of encroachments).22
Each police officer is also responsible for a large segment of people,
given India’s low police strength per lakh population as compared to
international standards. While the United Nations recommended standard
is 222 police per lakh persons, India’s sanctioned strength is 181
police per lakh persons.8,
After adjusting for vacancies, the actual police strength in India is
at 137 police per lakh persons. Therefore, an average policeman ends up
having an enormous workload and long working hours, which negatively
affects his efficiency and performance.7,33
The
Second Administrative Reforms Commission has recommended that one way
to reduce the burden of the police forces could be to outsource or
redistribute some non-core police functions (such as traffic management,
disaster rescue and relief, and issuing of court summons) to government
departments or private agencies.22
These functions do not require any special knowledge of policing, and
therefore may be performed by other agencies. This will also allow the
police forces to give more time and energy to their core policing
functions.
Constabulary related issues
Qualifications and training:
The constabulary constitutes 86% of the state police forces. A
constable’s responsibilities are wide-ranging, and are not limited to
basic tasks. For example, a constable is expected to exercise his own
judgement in tasks like intelligence gathering, and surveillance work,
and report to his superior officers regarding significant developments.
He assists with investigations, and is also the first point of contact
for the public. Therefore, a constable is expected to have some
analytical and decision-making capabilities, and the ability to deal
with people with tact, understanding and firmness.
The
Padmanabhaiah Committee and the Second Administrative Reforms
Commission have noted that the entry level qualifications (i.e.
completion of class 10th or 12th in many states) and training of constables do not qualify them for their role.22 One of the recommendations made in this regard has been to raise the qualification for entry into the civil police to class 12th or graduation.22,
It has also been recommended that constables, and the police force in
general, should receive greater training in soft skills (such as
communication, counselling and leadership) given they need to deal with
the public regularly.22
Promotions and working conditions:
The Second Administrative Reforms Commission has further noted that the
promotion opportunities and working conditions of constables are poor,
and need to be improved.22
Generally a constable in India can expect only one promotion in his
lifetime, and normally retires as a head constable, which weakens his
incentive to perform well. This system may be contrasted with that in
the United Kingdom, where police officers generally start as constables
and progress through each rank in order.
Further, in India sometimes superiors employ constables as orderlies to
do domestic work, which erodes their morale and motivation, and takes
them away from their core policing work. The Commission recommended
that the orderly system be abolished across states.22,
Housing:
Importance of providing housing to the constabulary (and generally to
the police force) to improve their efficiency and incentive to accept
remote postings has also been emphasised by expert bodies, such as the
National Police Commission.
This is because in remote and rural areas, private accommodation may
not be easily available on rent. Even in metropolitan areas, rents may
be prohibitively high, and adequate accommodation may not be available
in the immediate vicinity of the police stations affecting their
operational efficiency.
Crime investigation
A
core function of the state police forces and some central police
agencies like the CBI is crime investigation. Once a crime occurs,
police officers are required to record the complaint, secure the
evidence, identify the culprit, frame the charges against him, and
assist with his prosecution in court so that a conviction may be
secured. In India, crime rate has increased by 28% over the last
decade, and the nature of crimes is also becoming more complex (e.g.,
with emergence of various kinds of cybercrimes and economic fraud).19
Conviction rates (convictions secured per 100 cases) however have been
fairly low. In 2015, the conviction rate for crimes recorded under the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 was 47%.19 The Law Commission has observed that one of the reasons behind this is the poor quality of investigations.
Crime
investigation requires skills and training, time and resources, and
adequate forensic capabilities and infrastructure. However, the Law
Commission and the Second Administrative Reforms Commission have noted
that state police officers often neglect this responsibility because
they are understaffed and overburdened with various kinds of tasks.22,38
Further, they lack the training and the expertise required to conduct
professional investigations. They also have insufficient legal
knowledge (on aspects like admissibility of evidence) and the forensic
and cyber infrastructure available to them is both inadequate and
outdated. In light of this, police forces may use force and torture to
secure evidence. Further, while crime investigations need to be fair
and unbiased, in India they may be influenced by political or other
extraneous considerations. In light of these aspects, experts have
recommended that states must have their own specialized investigation
units within the police force that are responsible for crime
investigation.3, These units should not ordinarily be diverted for other duties.
Underreporting of crime in India The An Sources: |
With
regard to forensic infrastructure in the country, it may be noted that
currently India has seven Central Forensic Science Laboratories, 30
State Laboratories, 50 Regional Laboratories and 144 District Mobile
Laboratories.
These laboratories conduct scientific analysis of ballistics, bodily
fluids, computer records, documents, explosives, fingerprints, narcotics
and voice identification, among other things. Expert bodies have however said that these laboratories are short of funds and qualified staff.22 Further, there is indiscriminate referencing of cases to these labs resulting in high pendency.22
Police infrastructure
Modern
policing requires a strong communication support, state-of-art or
modern weapons, and a high degree of mobility. The CAG and the BPRD
have noted shortcomings on several of these fronts.
Weaponry:
The CAG has found that weaponry of several state police forces is
outdated, and the acquisition process of weapons slow, causing a
shortage in arms and ammunition.
An audit of the Rajasthan police force (2009 to 2014) concluded that
there was a shortage of 75% in the availability of modern weapons
against the state’s own specified requirements.
The same audit also found that even when weapons were procured, a large
proportion of them (59%) were lying idle because they had not been
distributed to the police stations. Similar audits in West Bengal and
Gujarat found shortages of 71% and 36% respectively in required
weaponry.
Police vehicles: Audits have noted that police vehicles are in short supply.42
New vehicles are often used to replace old vehicles, and there is a
shortage of drivers. This affects the response time of the police, and
consequently their effectiveness. As of January 2015, state forces had a
total of 1,63,946 vehicles, marking a 30.5% deficiency against the
required stock of vehicles (2,35,339 vehicles).
Police Telecommunication Network (POLNET):
The POLNET project was initiated by the central governed in 2002 to
connect the police and paramilitary forces of the country through a
satellite based communication network, that will be significantly faster
than the existing system of radio communications. However, audits have
found that the POLNET network is non-functional in various states.42,44,
For example, an audit of the Gujarat police force reported that the
network had not been operationalised till October 2015 due to
non-installation of essential infrastructure, such as remote subscriber
units and generator sets. The audit also noted that there were 40%-50%
vacancies in key segments of trained personnel, such as radio operators
and technicians, needed to operate the equipment.44
Figure 7: Utilisation of funds for modernisation (%)
Sources: Bureau of Police Research and Development; PRS.
Underutilisation of funds for modernisation:
Both centre and states allocate funds for modernisation of state police
forces. These funds are typically used for strengthening police
infrastructure, by way of construction of police stations, purchase of
weaponry, communication equipment and vehicles. However, there has been
a persistent problem of underutilisation of modernisation funds.32
For example, in 2015-16, the centre and states allocated Rs 9,203 crore
for modernisation. However, only 14% of it was spent. Figure 10 shows
trend of underutilisation of funds between 2009-10 and 2015-16.
Police-public relations
Police
requires the confidence, cooperation and support of the community to
prevent crime and disorder. For example, police personnel rely on
members of the community to be informers and witnesses in any crime
investigation. Therefore, police-public relations is an important
concern in effective policing. The Second Administrative Reforms
Commission has noted that police-public relations is in an
unsatisfactory state because people view the police as corrupt,
inefficient, politically partisan and unresponsive.22
One
of the ways of addressing this challenge is through the community
policing model. Community policing requires the police to work with the
community for prevention and detection of crime, maintenance of public
order, and resolving local conflicts, with the objective of providing a
better quality of life and sense of security. It may include patrolling
by the police for non-emergency interactions with the public, actively
soliciting requests for service not involving criminal matters,
community based crime prevention and creating mechanisms for grassroots
feedback from the community. Various states have been experimenting
with community policing including Kerala through ‘Janamaithri Suraksha
Project’, Rajasthan through ‘Joint Patrolling Committees’, Assam through
‘Meira Paibi’, Tamil Nadu through ‘Friends of Police’, West Bengal
through the ‘Community Policing Project’, Andhra Pradesh through
‘Maithri and Maharashtra through ‘Mohalla Committees’.18,22
Examples of community policing in India Janamaithri Suraksha in Kerala This Meira Paibi (Torch-bearers) in Assam The Sources: Model Police Manual, Bureau of Police Research and Development; Kerala Police Website; PRS. |
For The Welfare, Happiness, Peace of All Sentient and Non-Sentient Beings and for them to Attain Eternal Peace as Final Goal. at
KUSHINARA NIBBANA BHUMI PAGODA-is a 18 feet Dia All White Pagoda with a table or, but be sure to having above head level based on the usual use of the room. in
Circarama
At
WHITE HOME 668, 5A main Road, 8th Cross, HAL III Stage, Prabuddha Bharat Puniya Bhumi Bengaluru Magadhi Karnataka State PRABUDDHA BHARAT May you, your family members and all sentient and non sentient beings be ever happy, well and secure!
116 CLASSICAL LANGUAGES and planning to project Therevada Tipitaka in
Buddha’s own words and Important Places like Lumbini, Bodhgaya,Saranath,
Kushinara, Etc., in 3D 360 degree circle vision akin to
ባጋቫ በአንድ ወቅት በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን ግሮቭ ውስጥ በቫራናሲ ቆዩ ፡፡
እዚያም ለአምስት የቢችሁስ ቡድን ንግግር አደረገ ፡፡
እነዚህ
ሁለት ጽንፎች ፣ ቢክሁስ ፣ ከቤት ሕይወት በወጣ አንድ ሰው መቀበል የለባቸውም ፡፡ የትኞቹ ሁለት ናቸው? በአንድ
በኩል ፣ ዝቅተኛ ፣ ብልሹ ፣ የተለመደ ፣ አናሪያ ፣ ጥቅማጥቅምን ያጣ ፣ ለካማ ለሄዶኒዝም መሰጠት ፣ እና በሌላ
በኩል ራስን የማጥፋት ራስን መሰጠት ፣ ይህም ዱካ ፣ አሪያያ ፣ ጥቅማ ጥቅም ተነፍጓል . ወደ እነዚህ ሁለት
ጽንፎች ፣ ቢሂክሁስ ሳይሄድ ታታጋታ ራዕይን ወደሚያመነጨው ማጅሂማ ፓṭipada ሙሉ በሙሉ ነቅቷል ፣ ይህም ñāṇa
ን ያፈራል እናም ወደ ቅሬታ ፣ ወደ አቢጃ ፣ ወደ ሳምቦዲ ፣ ወደ ንብባና ይመራል ፡፡
እና ታህጋታ
ሙሉ በሙሉ የነቃበት ፣ ራዕይን የሚያመነጭ ፣ ñā producesa ን የሚያመነጭ እና ወደ ቅሬታ ፣ ወደ አቢሃ ፣
ወደ ሳምቦዲ ፣ ወደ ንብባና የሚወስደው መጃጅማ ፓṭipada ምንድን ነው? እሱ ፣ ብሂክሁስ ፣ ይህ አርያ
አሀሃጊጊካ ማግጋ ፣ ይኸውም ሳምአዲያቺ ሳምአ · ሳካካፓ ሳምአቫቫ ሳማማ ካምማንታ ሳማ · አጃቫ ሳምአማያማ ሰማማቲ
ሳቲማምማድሂ ነው። ይህ ፣ ቢክሁስ ፣ ታታጋታ የነቃበት ፣ ራዕይን የሚያመጣ ፣ ñā producesa ን የሚያመነጭ
እና ወደ ቅሬታ ፣ ወደ አቢሃ ፣ ወደ ሳምቦዲ ፣ ወደ ኒብባና የሚወስደው መጅጅማ ፓṭipada ነው።
በተጨማሪም
፣ ቢቺሁስ ፣ ይህ ዱካካ አሪያ · ሳካ ነው ጃቲ ዱካ ፣ ጃራ ዱካ (በሽታ ዱካ) ማራካ ዱካ ፣ ከሚወዱት ጋር
መገናኘት ዱካ ነው ፣ ከሚወደው መገንጠል ዱካ ነው ፣ የሚፈልገውን ለማግኘት አይደለም ፡፡ dukkha ነው; በአጭሩ
አምስቱ upāda’ana’k'khandhas ዱካሃ ናቸው።
በተጨማሪም ፣ ቢቺኩስ ፣ ይህ ዱካካ-ሳሙዳያ
አሪያ · ሳካ ነው ይህ ወደ ዳግመኛ መወለድ የሚወስድ ፣ ከፍላጎት እና ከመደሰት ጋር የተቆራኘ ፣ እዚህ ወይም
እዚያ ደስታ ያገኛል ፣ ማለትም ካማ-ታህህ ፣ ባቫ-ታህሃ እና ቪውሃቫ-ታህሃ።
በተጨማሪም ፣ ቢኪሁስ ፣ ይህ ዱካቻኒኒሃ አሪያ · ሳካ ነው-የተሟላ ቪያጋ ፣ ኒሮሃ ፣ መተው ፣ መተው ፣ ነፃ ማውጣት እና ከዚያ በጣም ታህሃ ፡፡
በተጨማሪም
፣ ቢቺሁስ ፣ ይህ ዱካቻ-ኒሮድሃ-ጋራሚኒ ፓṭቲዮ አሪያ · ሳካ ነው ፣ ልክ ይህ አሪያ አሃሃጊካ ማጋ ፣ ማለትም
ሳምማዲṭṭ ፣ ሳማህሳካካፓ ፣ ሳማካቫ ሳማማማ ፣ ሳማማጃጃጃ ፣ ሳማማያ። ፣ ሳማታቲ እና ሳምአማሰማዲ።
‘ይህ
ዱካካ አሊያሳካካ ነው-በእኔ ፣ ቢኪኩስ ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው የማያውቁትን ነገሮች በተመለከተ ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣
ñāṇa ተነሳ ፣ ፓññ ተነሳ ፣ ቪጃው ተነሳ ፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡ ‹አሁን ይህ ዱካካ አሊያሳካካ ሙሉ በሙሉ
መታወቅ አለበት› በእኔ ውስጥ ፣ ቢኪሁስ ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው የማያውቁትን ነገሮች በተመለከተ ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣
theāṇa ተነሳ ፣ ፓññ ተነስቷል ፣ ቪጃው ተነሳ ፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡ ‹አሁን ይህ ዱካካ አሊያሳካካ ሙሉ በሙሉ
የታወቀ ነው›-በእኔ ውስጥ ፣ ቢኪሁስ ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው የማያውቁትን ነገሮች በተመለከተ ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣
ñāṇa ተነሳ ፣ ፓ theአ ተነሳ ፣ ቪጃው ተነሳ ፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡
‘ይህ ዱካካ-ሳሙዳያ አሪያሳሳካ
ነው-በእኔ ፣ ቢኪሁስ ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው የማያውቁትን ነገሮች በተመለከተ ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣ ñāṇa ተነሳ ፣
ፓññአ ተነሳ ፣ ቪጃው ተነሳ ፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡ ‹አሁን ይህ ዱካካ-ሳሙዳያ አሪያሳካካ መተው አለበት› በእኔ
ውስጥ ፣ ቢኪሁስ ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው የማያውቁትን ነገሮች በተመለከተ ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣ ñāṇa ተነሳ ፣ ፓññ
ተነስቷል ፣ ቪጃው ተነሳ ፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡ ‘አሁን ፣ ይህ ዱካካ-ሳሙዳያ አሪያሳሳካ ተትቷል’-በእኔ ውስጥ ፣
ቢኪሁስ ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው የማያውቁትን ነገሮች በተመለከተ ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣ ñāṇa ተነሳ ፣ ፓññ ተነስቷል ፣
ቪጃው ተነሳ ፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡
‹ይህ ዱካቻኒኒሃ አሪያሳሳካ› ነው ፣ በእኔ ውስጥ ፣ ቢኪሁስ ከዚህ
በፊት ተሰምተው ስለማያውቁት ነገሮች ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣ ñāña ተነሳ ፣ ፓññ ተነስቷል ፣ ቪጃው ተነሳ ፣
ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡ ‹አሁን ይህ ዱካቻኒኒሃ አሪያሳካካ በግል ሊሞክር ነው› በእኔ ውስጥ ፣ ቢኪሁስ ከዚህ በፊት
ተሰምተው የማያውቁትን ነገሮች በተመለከተ ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣ ñāṇa ተነሳ ፣ ፓ arose ተነስቷል ፣ ቪጃው ተነሳ
፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡ ‹አሁን ይህ ዱካቻኒኒአራሃ አሪያሳካካ በግል ተሞክሮ ደርሶበታል›-በእኔ ውስጥ ፣ ቢኪሁስ
ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው የማያውቁትን ነገሮች በተመለከተ ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣ ñāña ተነሳ ፣ ፓññ ተነስቷል ፣ ቪጃው
ተነሳ ፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡
‘ይህ ዱካቻኒኒ-ግራሚኒ paīipadā ariyasacca ነው-በእኔ ውስጥ
ቢኪሁስ ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው ስለማያውቁት ነገሮች ፣ ዐይን ተነስቷል ፣ ñāṇ ተነሳ ፣ ፓ the ተነስቷል ፣ ቪጃ
ተነሳ ፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡ ‘አሁን ይህ ዱካቻኒኒዳሃ-ጋራሚī ፓṭፓዳ አሪያሳካካ ሊዳብር ነው-በእኔ ውስጥ ቢኪሁስ
ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው ስለማያውቁት ነገሮች ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣ ññṇa ተነሳ ፣ ፓ the ተነስቷል ፣ ቪጃው ተነሳ
፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡ ‹አሁን ይህ ዱካቻኒኒዳሃ-ጋራኒ ፓīፓዳ አሪያሳካካ ተገንብቷል›-በእኔ ውስጥ ፣ ቢኪሁስ
ከዚህ በፊት ተሰምተው ስለማያውቁት ነገሮች ፣ ዐይን ተነሳ ፣ theāṇa ተነሳ ፣ ፓññ ተነስቷል ፣ ቪጃ ተነስቷል
፣ ብርሃኑ ተነሳ ፡፡
ነገር
ግን ፣ ቢኪኩስ ፣ የእኔ ያታብብታታ እውቀት እና የእነዚህ አራት አሪያስካስ እይታ በእነዚህ ሦስት መንገዶች
በሶስትዮሽ በጠራ ሶስት ጊዜ በሎካ ውስጥ በዲሳዎቹ ፣ በማራራዎቹ ፣ በብራህማዎቹ ፣ በሰማዕያዎች እና በብራህሞች ፣
ውስጥ ወደ ታላቁ ሳምአምቦድሂ ሙሉ በሙሉ እንዲነቃ ይህ ትውልድ ከአባቶቹ እና ከሰዎች ጋር እናም እውቀቱ እና
ራዕዩ በውስጤ ተነሳ ‹የእኔ አሚሚቲ የማይነቃነቅ ነው ፣ ይህ የመጨረሻው ጃቲዬ ነው ፣ አሁን ምንም ተጨማሪ ባቫ
የለም ፡፡
ብሃጋቫ የተናገረው ይህ ነው። በጣም ተደስቶ ፣ አምስት የቢችኩስ ግሩፕ የባጋቫዋን ቃላት
አጸደቀ። እናም ይህ ገለፃ በሚነገርበት ጊዜ ከፍቅር እና ከማይዝግ ነፃ በሆነው “አይሳምማ ኮአና” ውስጥ ‹የሳሙዳያ
ተፈጥሮ ያለው ሁሉ የኒሮዳ ተፈጥሮ› አለው ፡፡
እናም ባጋቫ የደማ መንኮራኩር እንቅስቃሴን ባቀናበሩበት
ጊዜ የምድር ላሉት ጮክ ብለው “በቫራናሲ ፣ በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን ግሮቭ ውስጥ ባጋቫ የሰማእያስ ማቆም
የማይችለውን ከፍተኛውን የዴማ ጎማ እንቅስቃሴ ጀምሯል ፡፡ ወይም ብራህሞች ፣ ዲቫዎች ፣ ማራስ ፣ ብራህማ ወይም
በዓለም ላይ ያለ ማንኛውም ሰው ፡፡
ካቱማህሃርጃጂካ ዲቫስ የምድርን ዲማዎች ጩኸት ከሰሙ በኋላ ጮክ
ብለው “በቫራናሲ ውስጥ በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን ግሮቭ ውስጥ ባጋቫ የሰማእያን ወይም የብራህማንስን ፣
የዲሳዎችን ሊገታው የማይችለውን ከፍተኛውን የዴማ ጎማ እንቅስቃሴ ጀምረዋል ፡፡ ፣ ማራስ ፣ ብራህማ ወይም በዓለም
ላይ ያለ ማንኛውም ሰው። ‘
የታቫቲሳሳ ዴታስ የካታቱሃህራጃጂካ ዲቫዎች ጩኸት ከተሰሙ በኋላ ድምፃቸውን
ከፍ አድርገው “ቫራናሲ ውስጥ በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን ግሮቭ ውስጥ ባጋቫ የሰማእስ ወይም የብራህማን ፣
የዲቫስ ፣ ማራስ ሊቆም የማይችል ከፍተኛውን የዴማ መሽከርከሪያ ጀምረዋል ፡፡ ፣ ብራህማ ወይም በዓለም ላይ ያለ
ማንኛውም ሰው። ‘
የያማ ዲቫዎች የታቫቲሳሳ ዲቫዎች ጩኸት ከተሰሙ በኋላ ጮክ ብለው አውጀዋል-‘በቫራናሲ
በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን ግሮቭ ውስጥ ባጋቫ የሰማእስ ወይም የብራህማን ፣ ዲቫስ ፣ ማራስ ሊገታው
የማይችለውን ከፍተኛውን የዴማ ጎማ ጀምሯል ፡፡ ፣ ብራህማ ወይም በዓለም ላይ ያለ ማንኛውም ሰው። ‘
የቱማ
ዲሳዎች የያማ ዲቫዎች ጩኸት ከተሰሙ በኋላ ጮክ ብለው አውጀዋል-‹ቫራናሲ ውስጥ በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን
ግሮቭ ውስጥ ባጋቫ የሰማእስ ወይም የብራህማን ፣ ዲቫስ ፣ ማራስ ሊገታው የማይችለውን ከፍተኛውን የዴማ ጎማ
እንቅስቃሴ ጀምሯል ፡፡ ፣ ብራህማ ወይም በዓለም ላይ ያለ ማንኛውም ሰው። ‘
የኑሚታራ ዲታ የቱሲታ
ዲታዎችን ጩኸት ከሰሙ በኋላ ጮክ ብለው አውጀዋል-‘በቫራናሲ ፣ በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን ግሮቭ ውስጥ ባጋቫ
የሰማእስ ወይም የብራህማን ፣ የዴሳ ፣ ማራስ ሊቆም የማይችለውን ከፍተኛውን የዴማ ጎማ እንቅስቃሴ ጀምሯል ፡፡ ፣
ብራህማ ወይም በዓለም ላይ ያለ ማንኛውም ሰው። ‘
የፓራሚሚታቫሳቫቲቲ ዲማስ የኒማናራቲ ዲቫዎችን ጩኸት
ከተሰሙ በኋላ ጮክ ብለው “በቫራናሲ በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን ግሮቭ ውስጥ ባጋቫ የሰማእስ ወይም የብራህማን ፣
የዲቫስ ፣ ማራስ ሊቆም የማይችለውን ከፍተኛውን የዴማ ጎማ እንቅስቃሴ ጀምረዋል ፡፡ ፣ ብራህማ ወይም በዓለም ላይ
ያለ ማንኛውም ሰው። ‘
የብራህማኪካ ዲቫ የፓራንሚሚታቫሳቫቲቲ ዲሳትን ጩኸት ከሰሙ በኋላ ‹ቫራናሲ
ውስጥ በኢሲፓታና በሚገኘው የአጋዘን ግሮቭ ውስጥ ባጋቫ የሰማእስ ወይም የብራሂምንስ ፣ የዴታስ ፣ ማራስ ሊቆም
የማይችለውን የሙሉማ መንኮራኩር እንቅስቃሴ ጀምረዋል ፡፡ ፣ ብራህማ ወይም በዓለም ላይ ያለ ማንኛውም ሰው። ‘
ስለዚህ
በዚያ ቅጽበት በዚያ ቅጽበት ጩኸቱ እስከ ብራህማሎካ ድረስ ተሰራጨ ፡፡ እናም ይህ አሥር ሺህ እጥፍ የሆነ የአለም
ስርዓት ተንቀጠቀጠ ፣ ተንቀጠቀጠ እና ተንቀጠቀጠ ፣ እናም የዲማዎችን አፈፃፀም በመለየት ታላቅ ፣ የማይገደብ
ብሩህነት በአለም ላይ ታየ ፡፡
ከዚያ ባጋቫው ይህን ኡድና ተናገረ: - ‘ኮሳአ በእውነት ተረድቷል! ኮሳና በእውነቱ ተረድቷል! ‘ እናም ያያስማ ኮአና ‘አññሲ · ኮṇḍአና’ የሚል ስያሜ ያገኘው በዚህ መንገድ ነው