FRONTLINE GIST NETAJI IAS 1-15 JANUARY 2017

Transcription

1 FRONTLINE GIST NETAJI IAS 1-15 JANUARY 2017 FRONTLINE GIST

2 Contents 1. Digital Dreams 2. State slaughter 3. Patriotism, by order NETAJI IAS 1

3 1. Digital Dreams Thee government s new goalpost of a cashless economy ignores the presence of the large unbanked population that will not gain from incentives being offered for digital transactions. PLASTIC is the new khadi is the currently popular saying transmitted across social media. Indeed, digitisation of exchange transactions seems to have become the silver bullet to deliver solutions to all problems, from fighting corruption, to ending poverty, to modernising society, even to ensuring sustainable development. These are all promises that have been made by the Prime Minister and several of his colleagues in the past weeks. Therefore, all patriotic citizens who care for their country are to join this fight against any cash-based modes of exchange. Young people are to take up this move with missionary zeal; the old must learn to change their habits; students must go out and teach others how to do digital transactions; the rich (who mostly use non-cash means anyway) are to further flaunt their ability to do so; the poor are to be forced by the sheer absence of cash to somehow find their way in the digital world, even when they lack bank accounts and stable incomes, or the basic connectivity that would enable digital transactions. Incentives for cashless transactions It is apparently not enough to use sheer coercion ensured by the physical absence of currency to nudge the population into using electronic means of payment. The people also must be incentivised, in the charming phraseology adopted by our resident court jesters, to move away from cash and adopt the newer electronic systems. So the Finance Ministry is already providing various fiscal sops, which will naturally go to the better off in the country who are already able to use cashless modes. From December 14, a discount of 0.75 per cent on petrol and diesel has been offered on fuel purchases made using card payments. Service tax is being waived on card transactions of up to Rs.2,000. Monthly and seasonal suburban railway tickets purchased through digital mode will get 0.5 per cent discount from January 1, Discounts of 10 per cent and 8 per cent will be offered respectively in case of general and life insurance for buying a NETAJI IAS 2

4 new policy or paying the premium online via the PSUs websites. All these are measures that are designed to transfer more benefits directly to the relatively rich in our society. Some of the incentives could not be dreamt up by the most wicked of satirists: they can only emerge in this weird new political environment of delirious derangement. So the NITI Aayog has developed a system of lucky draws that are bound to get citizens excited about e-transactions, since now these will not only provide the bountiful benefits of convenience but periodically offer cash prizes. There will be weekly draws of lucky numbers of transactions to reward either buyers or sellers (or perhaps both, since governmental generosity in this noble cause is unbounded). The first mega draw of Rs.1 crore will be held, on April 14, Ambedkar Jayanti. Exactly when and how digitisation became such stuff of the dreams of advancement in India is unclear. The simplistic belief in technology as the solution to all sorts of problems, rather than as a tool to assist social change, has been brewing for some time: it was clearly incipient in the expansive hopes pinned on the Unique Identification Number. But from there to the idea that cashless exchange and e- commerce would automatically root out corrupt practices and lead to a completely formal economy is another very large step. At the moment the Indian economy is certainly among the most cash-intensive in the world: prior to demonetisation, around 98 per cent of transactions were estimated to be settled in cash (compared with 90 per cent in China, 85 per cent in Brazil and 55 per cent in the United States). But even this is not all that unusual: globally, around 85 per cent of transactions are cash-based, and many very advanced countries still rely heavily on cash, driven by personal choices in a particular social environment. There is no straight line linking degree of development with degree of cashlessness, despite some small countries like Belgium and Sweden being high-profile examples of less cash use. Large unbanked population E-banking and electronic transactions have been increasing in India, but the shares are still very small, even after the coercive pressure applied by demonetisation. It could have been brought in gradually, perhaps even accompanied by the embarrassing incentives now being touted, but in a way that would be less drastic and destabilising for most people. But dangling incentives after first pushing necessity and fear as drivers may be counterproductive. NETAJI IAS 3

5 In this digital drive, the apparent unconcern for the unbanked in the country still around one-third of the adult population, by most estimates is palpable. They have been deprived of their own small holdings of cash without possibility of exchange other than through illicit means, and they are unlikely to be able to engage in e- payments without a bank account. An important reason for the limited spread of e-commerce is that the infrastructure for such a payments system is woefully lacking. It is true that there are a billion mobile phone subscriptions in India, but less than one-third of all Indians use smartphones. Only 7 per cent of low-income families have access to even one smartphone. Around one-third of the population has Internet access, but these connections are concentrated in cities and towns, which make up 70 per cent of all those with mobile Internet access. Only 27 per cent of Indians use the Internet, and 87 per cent of them live in urban areas, mostly the big metros. Only 17 per cent of Indian women use the Internet (Pew Research Centre). Connections are patchy and there is great disparity in connectivity. The average time for a page to load on a mobile phone is 5.5 seconds in India, compared with 2.6 seconds in China, 4.5 in Sri Lanka, 4.9 in Bangladesh and 5.8 in Pakistan (State of the Internet Q report, Akamai Technologies). In many rural and semi-urban areas, connectivity levels are so low as to make e-payments generally impossible. Lack of infrastructure Another huge constraint is the lack of point-of-sale machines and associated telecom equipment that enable digital transactions. As of December 5, 2016, there were an estimated 700 million debit cards and only 700,000 outlets that could accept them. With around 1.5 million point-of-sale machines, the debit card machine to population ratio in India was 1,785, compared with 119 in Europe, 60 in China and 25 in the U.S. (Incidentally, despite the high incidence of credit/debit cards and card acceptance machines in the U.S., more than half of all transactions still occur in cash in that country.) The hike in the demand of such machines from vendors post-demonetisation has been so massive that suppliers cannot cope. In addition to the physical supply of machines, the need for approval and vetting by banks has further delayed the process of acquiring machines. Significantly, a bigger bottleneck may well be the lack of associated telecom equipment to ensure the security of these transactions: without enough of these, the NETAJI IAS 4

6 increasing volumes of transactions mean that systems would simply become overloaded and collapse. Indeed, this is already evident even in the metros, as previously simple e- transactions take longer and often require many attempts before they are successful. There are reports that Ministers visiting villages to sing the praises of cashless transactions were embarrassed by their own inability to make a cashless transaction from their mobile phones in front of their audiences. Transfer of incomes But these infrastructural and connectivity concerns may be only part of the problem. Two issues that have been submerged in the enforced euphoria around cashlessness deserve to be looked at more carefully. 1. The first is that eventually this shift to e-money would make all Indians pay for all their transactions, whereas transactions in cash do not involve any cost. This amounts to a transfer of income from all consumers and producers, including the poor who really cannot afford it, to banks and a few fin tech companies engaged in e-commerce and mobile wallet services, who have already started raking in huge profits. 2. This is more than a general transfer of income from the population at large, including the poor, to banks and companies. The crony capitalism element of this measure should not be missed, since it is already clear that a few companies, such as Paytm and Reliance Jio, are disproportionate beneficiaries of this move. One company has emerged as the single biggest beneficiary in the mobile wallet market Paytm, whose subscriber base has apparently grown more than hundredfold to 160 million in this short month. The early bird had incumbency advantages, coupled with massive advertising expenditure (it celebrated the demonetisation drive in full page newspaper ads in every major newspaper as well as on television, radio and the Internet) enabled by the deep pockets of its 40 per cent owner, Alibaba of China. Cybersecurity and privacy In addition, there are huge concerns about cybersecurity and privacy all seen as critically important in the advanced countries that appear to have been all but forgotten in the current rush to move to electronic platforms. India is among the five NETAJI IAS 5

7 nations in the world considered to be the most vulnerable to cyber attacks, according to a study by two U.S. universities. It is not just privacy concerns that are important here. Possibilities of cybercrime and identity theft are even more important. A recent report noted that none of the e-wallet or mobile payment and banking applications used in India has the hardware security features necessary to make them secure. The danger from possible hackers or of other abuse of data is real. In this connection, concerns about security leaks have already been voiced with respect to the foreign ownership of Paytm. These are equally valid for foreign banks and private banks that will now have complete access to all sorts of crucial data relating to citizens. NETAJI IAS 6

8 2. Patriotism, by order The Supreme Court s interim order making it mandatory to play the national anthem and show respect to it by standing in cinema halls runs the risk of encouraging moral policing and use of force by vigilante groups to ensure compliance with it. IN an interim order delivered on November 30, the Supreme Court bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Amitava Roy observed that when the national anthem is sung, the concept of protocol associated with it has its inherent roots in national identity and integrity and constitutional patriotism. After this passing observation, without any reasoning, the bench issued several directions with regard to screening of feature films in cinema halls in India. All the cinema halls in India shall play the national anthem before the feature film starts and all present in the hall are obliged to stand up to show respect to the national anthem, the order reads. It also directed that the national flag be shown on the screen when the national anthem is played. The order further adds: Prior to the national anthem is played or sung in the cinema hall on the screen, the entry and exit doors shall remain closed so that no one can create any kind of disturbance which NETAJI IAS 7

9 will amount to disrespect to the national anthem. After the national anthem is played or sung, the doors can be opened. The only justification cited in the order is this: Love and respect for the motherland is reflected when one shows respect to the national anthem, as well as to the national flag. That apart, it would instil the feeling within one a sense [of] committed patriotism and nationalism. In order to defend this justification, the bench cited Article 51A (a), which says that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the national flag and the national anthem. The bench further reasoned: Be it stated, a time has come, the citizens of the country must realise that they live in a nation and are duty-bound to show respect to the national anthem which is the symbol of the constitutional patriotism and inherent national quality. It does not allow any different notion or the perception of individual rights that have individually thought of have no space. The idea is constitutionally impermissible. The bench s reasoning betrayed inadequate understanding of rights guaranteed under the Constitution and ignorance of how Fundamental Duties, enumerated through an amendment of the Constitution during the Emergency, have to be promoted. Also missing in this so-called reasoning of the bench was the answer to the question why cinema halls must be singled out for the observance of constitutional patriotism. On December 9, the bench modified its order, stating as follows: If a physically challenged person or physically handicapped person goes to the cinema hall to watch a film, he need not stand up, if he is incapable to stand, but must show such conduct which is commensurate with respect for the national anthem. The bench also clarified that it did not direct that the doors of the cinema shall be bolted from outside when the national anthem is played, but only said that they should be closed in order to regulate the ingress and egress during the period. Disturbing aspects MP H.C. Case Shyam Narayan Chouksey Such partial relief apart, the interim order raised serious questions about not only the procedure adopted by the bench but also substantive issues. The petitioner in this case, Shyam Narayan Chouksey, sought a bar on the commercial exploitation of the national anthem. Earlier, Chouksey had moved the NETAJI IAS 8

10 Madhya Pradesh High Court objecting to the commercial use of the national anthem in the movie Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham. He was aggrieved when the audience refused to stand up when the national anthem was played as part of the movie. The movie depicted singing of the anthem by a student in a school function held in a foreign country. The High Court bench, then headed by Justice Dipak Misra, gave a verdict in 2003 in favour of Chouksey and directed the deletion of the scene which depicts the playing of the anthem from the movie. However, on April 19, 2004, the Supreme Court s three-judge bench, in Karan Johar vs Union of India, set aside the High Court s judgment, accepting the Central government s explanation that if the national anthem was exhibited in the course of screening of the film, the audience was not expected to stand, to avoid interruption, disorder and confusion, as that would not add to the dignity of the anthem. Chouksey then filed a review petition. The Supreme Court, while hearing this petition, recalled its order except on the question of certification of the film, and stated that the questions of law arising in the case had far-reaching implications and needed to be considered by the court. However, as the review petitioner was not present during the hearing, the Supreme Court opted to determine the questions of law in an appropriate case later. Against this background, the listing of a similar petition filed by Chouksey before a bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra surprised observers. Propriety demanded that the judge who had heard a similar matter in his capacity as High Court judge did not get the chance to hear it after his or her elevation to the Supreme Court so as to avoid bias or conflict of interest. Bijoe Emmanuel vs State of Kerala On the face of it, the interim order also ignores valid precedents. In Bijoe Emmanuel vs State of Kerala, three schoolchildren belonging to Jehovah s Witnesses, a sect that worships only Jehovah the creator and none other, were before the Supreme Court as appellants. They had refused to sing the national anthem because they said singing it not its contents was against the tenets of their religious faith. They desisted from actual singing only because of their honest belief and conviction, but they used to stand up in respectful silence daily during the morning assembly in school when the national anthem was sung. The headmistress expelled them from the school for their refusal NETAJI IAS 9

11 to sing the anthem. The Kerala High Court rejected their challenge to their expulsion. On August 11, 1986, the Supreme Court allowed their appeals against the High Court judgment by holding that their fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a) and 25(1) had been infringed and that they were entitled to be protected. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court judgment and directed the school authorities to readmit the three children into the school. Criticisms Criticism 1 In Bijoe Emmanuel, the Supreme Court distinguished singing of the national anthem from standing when it is played and found the three children not guilty because they respectfully stood without singing. But the question whether the court should protect a person from standing during the playing of the national anthem, if such an act is perceived to be in conflict with one s right to profess and practice a religion or a belief that it does not, by itself, help to promote patriotism, was not before the court in the case. But the concluding words in Bijoe Emmanuel continue to have resonance in Chouksey: Criticism 2 Our tradition teaches tolerance; our philosophy preaches tolerance; our constitution practices tolerance; let us not dilute it. Curiously, the court dismissed a petition moved soon after Chouksey, seeking a direction to play the national anthem in all courts in the country before they began their work in the morning. It cited procedural infirmities in the petition. Criticism 3 Critics also posed the question whether the Supreme Court s interim order would have the force of law to justify this restriction on fundamental rights of citizens. Another question which remains unresolved is whether foreigners, who are not Indian citizens, watching a film in India are bound by this order to stand up. Criticism 4 Justice Amitava Roy quipped during the hearing on December 9 that if someone attending a film festival in India watches 40 films, he or she is expected to stand 40 times during the NETAJI IAS 10

12 singing of the national anthem before the start of every screening. Such a harsh requirement resulting from a judicial order would prove to be counterproductive, warned a senior advocate of the Supreme Court. Implication of SC order The interim order has already begun to have its toll: 12 persons, including two women, were detained by the police for not standing while the anthem was being played at the International Film Festival of Kerala in Thiruvananthapuram on December 12, while eight persons, including three women, were attacked by a group of 20 in a Chennai cinema hall, for not standing during the playing of the anthem. This vigilante group forced the police to register a case against the eight under the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act. The danger of the Supreme Court s interim order encouraging moral policing and use of force by vigilante groups to ensure compliance with it, resulting in breach of public order, appears real. NETAJI IAS 11

13 3. State slaughter Background ETHNIC cleansing of the Rohingya community is going on in Myanmar s Rakhine State despite pleas by the international community and neighbouring countries. Satellite images have provided conclusive evidence of destroyed villages and mass dislocation. There has also been incontrovertible proof of women and children being killed by rampaging soldiers. Aid workers have been refused permission to visit the affected areas. A new wave of Rohingya refugees has fled to neighbouring Bangladesh. The United Nations human rights agency has said that the abuses against the Rohingya could be classified as crimes against humanity. Timeline They first came to Myanmar in the 19th century when the whole of South Asia was under British colonial rule. Many Rohingya fought alongside the British during the Second World War while most of the Myanmarese in Rakhine State preferred to side with the occupying Japanese forces. In 1982, after the military ousted the civilian government of the day, a law was enacted removing the Rohingya from the list of 135 officially recognised ethnic groups in the country. The targeting of Rohingya Muslims started in a big way in 2012 after communal clashes broke out in the State. Near the town of Sittwe, more than 1,00,000 Rohingya live in internment camps after their houses were demolished and property was confiscated. Back then, the military was running the government in Myanmar. Aung San Sui Kyi Era Observers of the region thought that the situation would improve after Aung San Suu Kyi assumed major responsibilities in the government following the sweeping victory of her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), in the elections in Though she still has to share power with the military government, Aung San Suu Kyi is today in a position to decisively influence government policy. Earlier, when she was on the campaign trail, she tried to explain away her silence on the Rohingya issue by claiming that she did not want to rub the powerful military establishment the wrong way and jeopardise her party s chances in the election (the NLD NETAJI IAS 12

14 did not field a single Muslim candidate in the 2015 elections). She had, however, promised to look into the root causes of the Rohingya crisis. Denied citizenship The Rohingya, more than a million of whom live in western Myanmar, have been denied citizenship and other basic rights despite having lived in the country for generations. Rakhine Action Plan and refugee crisis Meanwhile, the government is pressing ahead with its Rakhine Action Plan. Under the plan, Rohingya who cannot meet the stringent requirements for naturalised citizenship being demanded by the government or refuse to be designated as Bengali will be placed in camps and will eventually be deported. The Rohingya have been denied permission to participate in the national census under legislation introduced in Myanmar Parliament in The parliament also proposes to pass a law soon that will prevent the Rohingya from voting in elections. Another proposal the parliament is seriously considering is the banning of interfaith marriages. This move is aimed at further polarising the country on a religious basis. The government is busy stoking anti-muslim sentiment in an effort to justify its treatment of the Rohingya. A spokesman for the Rakhine State government has said that the Action Plan was necessary as the Muslim birth rate posed a threat to the Buddhist majority. Last year, boatloads of Rohingya left Myanmar, seeking refuge in neighbouring countries. That exodus grabbed the attention of the international community. The last thing the West wants is another international refugee crisis. Indications are that many hapless Rohingya are preparing for another exodus, encouraged and often abetted by the authorities in Myanmar. Investigative reports have revealed that the Thai Navy also played a role in shuttling Rohingya refugees into the country s seafood industry, where they are virtually used as slave labour. NETAJI IAS 13