CHENNAI: AIADMK would stage a protest demonstration on Thursday against the setting up of a factory by former Union minister T R Baalu to produce rectified spirit in the Vadassery village in Thanjavur district.In a statement on Wednesday, AIADMK general secretary J Jayalalithaa said the factory would pose serious environmental problems for the local people, who have already started agitations against it.The protest would be led by senior party leader O Pannerselvam at the Orathanadu Taluk office in Vadassery. She said the permission for factory, which was to provide enough spirit to produce acetic acid to his another defunct factory King Chemicals in the area, was obtained by misleading the local Panchayat.The opposition leader pointed out that the panchayat officials were helpless as they could not cancel the passed resolution allowing setting up of a factory, since only the district Collector could do so. The former chief minister said that nine big borewells were already dug up in the locality and expressed concern that the groundwater level in the area would go down drastically.She said the farming activities in the area, which has nearly 3000 hectares of agriculture land would be affected. In addition, the effluents from the factory would pollute the entire area, which will result in serious health hazards.
Archive for the ‘Crimes India’ Category
AIADMK demo against Baalu’s booze factory
November 12, 2009The Fruit of Coalition politics with the DMK
November 4, 2009A deadly dead-end!
 |
 |
|
By: T R Jawahar
|
|
Tuesday, 03 November, 2009 , 11:44 AM
In the last few days, Minister Raja has made a momentous comeback into limelight and therefore merits mention in these columns. And by some inscrutable association of thought, the Maoists too keep rising to the mind whenever the minister does. Now what earthy connection do the trigger-happy Maoists have with the tele minister? Nothing! And that’s precisely the point and problem!
But let’s rise a bit above Raja for he is no longer just an individual. This man has suddenly become a metaphor for ministerial malfeasance, a mega metaphor rather, valued at anywhere between Rs 60,000 to Rs 100,000 crores of public money. This mother of all scams at one stroke puts all other corrupt deals, jointly and severally, thus far, in the shade. And on the other end of the spectrum are the militant Maoists claiming to be fighting this very ‘entrenched’ establishment as represented by the corrupt ruling classes and their exploitation of the poor masses. At the risk of sounding sinisterly suggestive, does it not seem strange that the ‘moralistic’ Maoists have never had a tryst with such ministerial marauders and their minions yet?
We are now on dangerous terrain! But then, we all entertain dangerous thoughts, all of which do not become action, fortunately and unfortunately. The provocations of modern life are so dire to us, as individuals and as part of society. Even the primitive man had his primal fears and a resultant predatory instinct. But we are supposed to have evolved since and become ‘civilised’. We talk of such lofty things as rule of law, people’s will, freedom of expression and organised living as the touchstones of that ‘civilisation’. Modern instruments like Jurisprudence and Democracy are supposed to have insulated us from individual indignation and ire under the assurance that the higher power, State, in which they are vested instead, would take care. Indeed, the State is the modern God, protecting and preserving order. So, when such a State fails its dependent-subjects and worse, becomes itself their oppressor, will there not be righteous anger against those who personify it? And even more against those who perpetrate it personally?
Peaceful activism is the usual first response; but disillusionment sets in fast, thanks to public impotence and indifference. To such a disenchanted individual, the temptation to pick the gun and render vigilante justice to the most immediate and visible oppressor becomes pervasive. History is replete with groups that try to instituionalise this individual indignation, give it an ideological gloss and make it an organised mass movement. The Maoist label, having its roots in the Marxian stable, is one of the most popular brands in this anger-market. Classical Communist theory talks of the State ultimately ‘withering away’, after all inequalities have been levelled. By their book, that ‘red-letter day’, would be preceded by a revolution, often bloody. But even after many such revolutions and much blood, if egalitarian equality still eludes those societies, the fault clearly lies in both the mother ideology and the methods. The Marxist-Maoist ‘revolutionaries’ have only ended up converting vibrant righteous indignation aimed at deserving villains into raw anarchic violence against no one in particular.
And the contradictions have been stark too. Even in the Soviet Union, when the State actually withered away, it was not the culmination of the Communist ideolgy, but bad economics that made it happen. Or take China, the land of Mao that is also the current fatherland of the Maoists and the Marxists alike here. Chairman Mao, who is the posthumous mentor of all of these self-styled underground vigilante outfits, was in reality more of a ruler than a revolutionary. Much against the Communist moksha of withering away, the State under him was a nasty instrument of suppression. He purged his own comrades, pillaged the treasury, pulverised millions of his countrymen and put to nought all norms of governance. His personality took precedence over all professed principles. Indeed, Mao and his Leftism hardly had anything right in them. A movement born of his parentage is bound to be perverted. But even more incongruent are the targets chosen by the Maoists. These ‘Left-liberals’ who claim ‘public ownership’ as the cornerstone of their movement have no qualms in destroying public property; Their victims, running into several thousands, are rarely the classic exploiters like politicians or black-marketeers but predominantly, petty constables and poor civilians. Their ambit covers has fast Rajadhanis, not fradulent Rajas, wrought-iron bridges, not corrupt judges, the man on the street, not the street-smart babu or tout! We are not insinuating anything but only trying to highlight the Maoists’ skewed sense of justice!
There is a lesson here. The sum of all individual anger can hardly make for a mass movement, as mobilising minds is not a number game. Organised vigilantism simply does not work. The first few recruits may be highly motivated, but as the movement becomes an entity, it develops its own dynamics even as individual ire dissipates. The cadre swells not by the power of the idea, but by the accretion of lumpen, unemployable elements for whom Marx and Mao may well be distant uncles. In time, organisational challenges take precedence over goals, and as monetary interests rise, leaders get more paranoid and secretive. Comrades turn foes overnight as the fastest gun-puller becomes the undisputed despot. From Stalin to Mao to Castro to X, Y & Z, most dictators have had Marxism on their lips and revolvers at their hips. Having thus lost their script, violence for them becomes a way of life, a self-fulfilling orgasmic itch! In time, their guns are bound to backfire and the red corridor will get redder by their own blood too. But by their misplaced ‘priorities’ and misdirected violence, they would have also killed many legitimate causes that can actually do with some gunfire! For, even if I had a gun and a grouse, would I want to be dubbed a Maoist or join a band that knows not at who and why they are shooting? And that’s how the vile get their reprieve from retribution!
That really makes the world a safe place for the corrupt and the criminal. They are beyond the reach of law and the outlaw too. They dominate the ballot, can duck the bullet and easily dodge the adalat. The higher their position greater their impunity and immunity: None less than the CMs, PMs and super PMs of the land will rally around them to form a safety spectrum! So as Rajas go scot free with their bountiful booty, the prajas have no where to go: At the local police station the greasy cop may make a grab for your pocket, and if your are a woman, even grab you. At court, the judge may grab your land, given recent trends. And your elected rep, having already grabbed your vote by paying pittance, is in the grip of his own deals. Maybe some divine intervention is in order, but wonder why the Almighty is not taking our call! He had better hurry because 3G auctions are due anytime!
e-mail the writer at
trjawahar@vsnl.net
(Courtesy: Talk Media)
Raja bluffed his way to the ‘FCFS’ route
October 31, 2009Raja bluffed his way to the ‘FCFS’ route
Will Telecom Minister A Raja be forced to put his money where his mouth is? Ever since the Spectrum scam began to unfold a year ago, A Raja has been on a ballast accusing the media of playing to a disgruntled “undeclared cartel” of the telecom industry, that the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) had never suggested auctions for 2G spectrum, the fact he invented the first-come-first-served route was wrong and unfair, among other things.Raja and his party chieftain M Karunanidhi of the DMK, and a powerful ally of the UPA Government, even went on to say that the decision to sell the precious and scarce spectrum at the 2001 price of Rs 1651 crore, had the approval of Finance Minister P Chidambaram and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh — clearly an attempt to drag the two into the scandal.However, documents available with Express suggest otherwise: Raja has always insisted that he did not take the auction route because of a Cabinet decision of October 31, 2003, and that the controversial ‘First Come First Serve (FCFS)’ route was taken in keeping with the National Telecom Policy (NTP) of 1999.First, the Cabinet had only approved of the recommendations made by the Telecom Ministry in a report, ‘Guidelines for Unified Access Services Licences’, which was presented on October 27, 2003, and signed by Pradip Baijal, then Telecom Secretary. The report clearly notes on Page 30, Section 7.39, under ‘Time and Need of Introduction of more Services’, “As the existing players have to improve the efficiency of utilisation of spectrum and if Government ensures availability of additional spectrum, then in the existing Licensing Regime, they may introduce additional players through a multi-stage bidding process as was followed for fourth cellular operator.” Then, on the FCFS route, Raja is clearly caught on the wrong foot when he said no auctions were held after 1999 following the recommendations of the National Telecom Policy 1999. Unfortunately, for him, the Telecom Ministry had auctioned 22 circles, out of which major telecom companies bid and won 17 circles, all in 2001, in the fourth cellular operator scheme! Next, clearly Raja was confident in the fact that he had not broken any rules, even threatening to resign if there were any misdemeanours, by constantly referring to TRAI, saying it never suggested auctions for 2G Spectrum. In fact, he underlined it at every given opportunity that the TRAI’s recommendation is categorical: 2G Band need not be auctioned, as there will be no level playing field.Raja is right, TRAI, in its recommendations on ‘Review of License Terms and Conditions’, dated August 28, 2007, has said in Section 2.78, Page 49: “The Authority is not in favour of changing the Spectrum fee regime for a new entrant.” Then it adds in the same paragraph: “Any differential treatment to a new entrant vis-a-vis incumbents in the wireless sector will go against the principle of level playing field. This is specific and restricted to 2G bands only.” Then, clearly, then TRAI Chairman Nripendra Mishra was not going to stick his neck out for his Telecom Minister, when he sent a circular dated January 14, 2008 on the issue of placing no cap on the number of issuing licenses or access service providers, when he wrote: “As reiterated in its recommendation on ‘Unified Licensing Regime of October 27, 2003’, wherein TRAI opined that introduction of additional mobile service providers can be considered. (But) As there was no subsequent reference to the Authority on the issue, therefore, it is presumed that the Government had agreed with the above recommendations.” Mishra was referring to TRAI’s October 2003 report that clearly says there must be a multi-bidding process as followed in the last fourth cellular operator scheme. After all, there was enough of a flutter that was being caused by a letter to D S Mathur, Secretary, DoT (Dept of Telecommunications), from then Finance Secretary D Subbarao, dated November 22, 2007. In that letter, Subbarao notes: “The purpose of this letter is to confirm if proper procedure has been followed with regard to financial diligence.In particular it is not clear how the rate of Rs 1600 crore, determined as far back as in 2001, has been applied for a license in 2007, without any indexation, let alone current valuation. Moreover, in view of the financial implications, the Ministry of Finance should have been consulted in the matter before you had finalised the decision.” At that time, senior DoT officials had said it was not just new players, even old ones have received Spectrum in many circles on first-come-first-serve (FCFS) basis, which is now being opposed by certain sections which have alleged that it was not transparent and has caused loss to the exchequer.Contrary to the belief that only new entrants benefited from the spectrum for just Rs 1,658 crore ($340 million), existing majors, including Vodafone, Idea and Bharti, reaped the advantage for the same fee, they added.Now, Raja must know that two wrongs do not make a right. The bottom line is: As Telecom Minister nothing prevents A Raja from correcting an inaccuracy and a blunder in policy by law, legislation and regulation that serves the country better. What say Raja, will you accept your mistake now? vrinda_2000_in@yahoo.com
How ‘patriotic’ is the Indian Military?
July 23, 2009US defence deal: the inside story
K.P. NAYAR
Washington, July 22: The delicate negotiations that led India and the US to announce on Monday that they had “agreed on the end-use monitoring arrangements” for bilateral defence deals were as much contentious within the Indian government as they were in getting the Americans to accept New Delhi’s formula.
Defence minister A.K. Antony diluted his long-standing opposition to foreign inspection of military assets bought from America after he was shown documents where the men in uniform under his oversight had arbitrarily put in what they chose to fit into contracts with the US.
The external affairs ministry revealed at an inter-ministerial meeting that some provisions put in by India’s defence personnel into recent contracts with America were far more objectionable than anything that Washington was asking New Delhi to sign as an over-arching agreement.
External affairs officials shocked many of those who attended the inter-ministerial meeting when they further revealed that these provisions had been suo motu inserted into contracts without political clearance by the foreign office, and worse, without even their knowledge.
“It was like being more loyal to the king than the king himself,” said an official who attended the meeting. “In their desire to get American war toys, individual senior officers were willing to do what the Americans had not even asked.”
Foreign minister S.M. Krishna, who was continuously abroad for most of this month and then in Bangalore because of a bereavement, was comprehensively briefed on the history of the tortuous end-use pact negotiations on the eve of his meeting with US secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
He agreed to go along with the “arrangement” when he was convinced that a standard, agreed text would prevent individuals from taking advantage of the secrecy in arms deals and manipulating clauses on purchase agreements as they pleased.
Officers of the ministry of defence and finance or those in charge of public sector defence production enterprises have now been restrained in their freedom to craft end-use clauses while buying American equipment or technology.
Officers negotiating arms sales with the Americans will henceforth have to stick to the exact text of standard clauses of what can and cannot be allowed as end-use monitoring by the US.
This standard text has large elements of the model monitoring agreement that the US signs with other countries that buy defence equipment.
But it also borrows heavily from the end-use certification requirements that Delhi imposes on countries that acquire Indian defence equipment. “We even go to military bases in foreign countries and physically count the guns and other material long after we have sold or given them to those governments,” said one official.
He said it would have been “a double standard if India continued to tell the Americans that we can do something to other governments, but that they cannot do it to us.”
Once people in the Indian government settled their differences, the next task for South Block was to sell the “arrangement” to the Americans.
It helped that Antony had made it clear to US national security adviser James Jones last month in New Delhi that the UPA government would be unable to politically sell the idea of a comprehensive end-use pact that allowed the US access to Indian military bases for inspections and had other intrusive clauses.
Jones returned to Washington and reported what Antony had said. US sources said President Barack Obama, defence secretary Robert Gates and Clinton understood the political compulsions of the UPA government: they are in such situations themselves on almost a daily basis.
But US officials down the line were unwilling to agree to the Indian formula, complaining that New Delhi was always getting exemptions from US laws and standards as in the nuclear deal.
During an hour-long meeting at the White House on the eve of her departure for Mumbai, Clinton got Obama’s personal clearance for the “arrangement but no agreement” formula.
From multiple US accounts yesterday, Clinton told only a close circle in the state department about the “arrangement” until she was in New Delhi. As a result, her officials in Washington continued to talk about an end-use monitoring agreement to be signed between the two sides when that was actually not to be.
http://telegraphindia.com/1090723/jsp/frontpage/story_11272199.jsp
EVMs are the Congressman’s joke on Indian voters
July 23, 2009EVMs are NOT fair,
NOT transparent,
have NO voter verifiable audit trails.
‘Booth capturing and bogus voting is very much possible and very much prevalent.’: Gopalaswamy, ex-Chief Election Commissioner of India.
Three essential elements of free and fair elections available to the voter under the Paper-Ballot system are not there in the EVM — checking the accuracy of the ballot paper before marking the vote; verifying whether he/she has correctly marked it, and reconstruction of the vote for authentication in case of electoral dispute.
Chennai, July 20, 2009. …For the first time since independence, a registered party has called for a boycott, a party which has ruled a state for more than two decades is shying away from the polls and if this and the reasons, do not make headlines in the national media, it only high lightens the mockery of our democracy. http://www.chennait vnews.com/ 2009/07/evm- advance-result- scientific- tamilnadu. html
Elections must be above suspicion
MG Devasahayam, 23 July 2009
The decision of the opposition parties in Tamil Nadu to boycott the by-elections to five assembly constituencies is an expression of no-confidence in the electoral process in general and the Election Commission in particular, rather being aimed at the ruling DMK-Congress combine.
The AIADMK press note makes it manifest: ‘Looking at the way elections have been conducted in Tamil Nadu in the last three years and in particular in Thirumangalam constituency and the recent parliamentary polls, the AIADMK has doubts if the Election Commission can function in a free and fair manner’. The opposition alleges that several malpractices took place in the recent elections through use of money and muscle power to win elections and the Election Commission has been a silent spectator.
What is strange, but not surprising, is the open admission of such malpractice by three election bigwigs — N Gopalaswami, till recently chief election commissioner, S Y Quraishi, election commissioner (possibly the next CEC) and Naresh Gupta, long-serving chief electoral officer of Tamil Nadu.
A couple of weeks ego, while addressing a select gathering in Chennai in the presence of P C Alexander, former Tamil Nadu governor, Gopalaswami was candid: “Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) cannot be hacked as being alleged because these are stand-alone equipment and not connected to any operating system. We have met party muscle-power with government muscle-power by deploying armed central police force in polling booths. But we cannot counter money-power in a similar manner.”
He added that ‘In three months Election Commission cannot obliterate the massive money-power acquired by politicians in 57 months’. Gopalaswami also added that though EVMs could not be hacked or tampered with, ‘booth capturing and bogus voting is very much possible and very much prevalent’.
The statements of Quraishi and Gupta were also on the same lines, thus creating a credibility crisis about the EC and the electoral process.
In this context the ‘Caesar’s wife’ anecdote would be appropriate. In 61 BC, Julius Caesar’s second wife, Pompeia was implicated in a scandal following the annual Feast of the Great Goddess. Though men were not admitted to this religious ritual, the notorious libertine Publius Clodius allegedly disguised himself as a woman and seduced her. Caesar divorced Pompeia and an inquiry was held. However, although several members of Caesar’s family gave evidence in favour of Pompeia, Caesar himself did not and the court asked him why he had demanded a divorce when so much uncertainty surrounded the incident. “Caesar’s wife,” he replied, “must be above suspicion.”
This is applicable mutatis mutandis to the situation in Tamil Nadu’s electoral scenario. The EC, the grandmaster of India’s electoral process, described as the ‘greatest democratic exercise on earth’ is held in high esteem in the free-world and cannot afford to lose its reputation. Therefore, though these allegations of electoral malpractices are controversial in nature, the Election Commission and the electoral process must be above suspicion.
First, the EVMs. Even assuming these machines are hacker-tamper proof, three essential elements of free and fair elections available to the voter under the Paper-Ballot system are not there in the EVM — checking the accuracy of the ballot paper before marking the vote; verifying whether he/she has correctly marked it, and reconstruction of the vote for authentication in case of electoral dispute.
Therefore, its fairness is open to question and doubts have been raised that need to be dispelled. It may be too late in the day to stop the EVM juggernaut. But the Election Commission could build-in a reasonably foolproof safeguard in the form of a verification system. This can be done by a ‘voter-verifiable audit trail’. A printer attached to the voting machine, something like ATMs in banks, could permit a ‘vote verification slip’ to be printed out, giving the candidate and symbol for which the voter has voted. The voter picks up the slip, verifies that the vote has been correctly registered, and deposits it in a safe in front of the polling officer. Boxes containing these slips would be sealed and stored securely to be available for reconstruction of the vote and authentication of election results in case of any dispute. This way, while going hi-tech basic requirements of a free and fair election could be met.
Secondly, money-power. Gopalaswami is right when he said ‘party money-power’ cannot be physically countered by ‘government money-power’. But creating fear in the minds of the corrupters can certainly fight it. Countermand elections in constituencies where massive money power is being deployed — as described in Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act — because of which ‘result of the election is likely to be affected’. This will send shivers down the spine of the ‘cash-and-carry candidates’ who are destroying the credibility of the electoral process. The EC could obtain such information through the battery of observers they deploy, whose numbers can be augmented in select ‘rogue constituencies’.
As of now, such a provision under Section 59 A 2(b) of the Act is available for ‘booth capturing’ as defined in Section 135A, which covers the physical act of taking possession of polling stations, ballot-boxes/ EVM or ballot-papers because of which ‘result of the election is likely to be affected’.
Both suggestions could be implemented by the EC immediately. If necessary, the Act could be suitably amended, and that brooks no delay. What is at stake is the integrity of our democracy.
(The writer is a retired IAS officer.
E-mail: mgd@airtelmail. in) http://tinyurl. com/m9j98m
Bring awareness of EVM issues in India
Save Indian Democracy Organization is a nonpartisan and nonpolitical organization consists of individuals across the world who are primarily concerned about preserving and protecting the largest democracy of the world, India. While individuals in this organization have worked for many years on aspects of protection of democracy in India, the organization is recently formed to bring about widespread awareness on Electronic Voting Machines in India, particularly in light of many issues raised in 2009 India elections. It consults with team of professionals across the World including Dr. Subramanian Swamy upon whose initiative in 2001 the then CEC Mr. M.S. Gill arranged a demonstration by MIT Professor Sanjay Sarma, the father of RFID Software fame and his wife Dr. Gitanjali Swamy of Harvard on how unsafeguarded the chips used in EVM in India were. We are fortunate to have guidance of Stanford Professor David L. Dill (www.verifiedvotingf oundation.org) who is in the forefront in United States in bringing awareness to EVM issues in US during last 6 years and had considerable success. We are also working with other nonpartisan and non-political Organizations in India such as Voter Watch (www.voterwatch. in) to bring awareness to this issue in India. Primary contact for the Organization is S. Dosapati (www.saveindiandemoc racy.org, saveindiandemocracy .org@gmail.com ).
http://sites. google.com/ site/hindunew/ electronic- voting-machines
Missed call & missing millions
July 23, 2009By: T R Jawahar
trjawahar@vsnl.net
Saturday, 18 July, 2009 , 03:19 PM
More than a fortnight has passed since a High Court judge made a startling accusation in open court that he was being pressurised by a central minister over phone to grant bail to a father-son duo in a criminal case. And a week has passed since the explosive issue was given a quiet burial. The outrage lasted just a week. Indeed, sometimes the law takes its course rather quickly and at the highest plane when it comes to exonerating high profile ‘innocents’!
When the disclosure was made, no less than the Chief Justice of India declared indignantly that he would brook no such interference with the judiciary and wanted the Government to act. At the end of the week, however the judicial anger abated and the same Chief Justice announced that no minister had spoken directly to the judge and only a lawyer had held the phone to the judge suggesting that the minister was on the other end. The judge did not take the call, according to the CJ. The judge has fallen silent after his initial outpouring, but has recused himself from the case. So we have two loose ends: a judge who was actually spoken to by a minister and a minister who spoke without ‘actually speaking’! Thus ended the case of the mysterious ministerial missed call with the acquittal of Mr Anonymous.
The issue raises many questions. The HC judge’s spontaneous allegation is totally at variance with the CJ’s averment a week later! But even if we were to ignore the inconsistency, the question lingers as to why then should the judge withdraw from the case! Does it not mean that the judiciary can actually be intimidated, if not by ministers directly, then at least by the mere mention of their names? So what about ordinary litigants who have no ministerial connections or access to lawyers who can invoke them? Should they too follow suit and withdraw their suits? A bad precedent, indeed. But worse, is the official concealment of the minister’s identity. Does not the nation have the right to know the name of the minister? The judiciary has the cover of contempt and is also insulated from the RTI. But since when have ministers come under those shields? Surely, the Government must have received official communication from the judiciary as promised by the latter! And it is most certainly answerable to the people who elected it!
But then opposition leaders and media are not as discreet as the judiciary. They have categorically named DMK’s A Raja as the Mr Anonymous on the other end. And to back their claim, they have produced extensive, emphatic evidence linking the minister to the defendents of the case. The case itself is as murky as it comes: the father-son duo seeking anticipatory bail are under CBI investigation for fudging medical exam mark lists; the one who blew the whistle was murdered, with his relatives and friends demanding a CBI probe for that too. The matter is hence sub-judice, but our concern is the extra-judice issue of ministerial excess. Beyond a feeble denial, Raja himself has made no major effort to clear his name. Well, he need not, in a way, what with protectors in high places. Anyway, he has survived bigger scares and the current episode, even if true, is just a passing page in his encyclopaedic biography of big ticket deals !
So whether or not we believe Raja is ‘that’ minister, we can at least take the opportunity of studying the political curriculum vitae of the most prolific profiteer of a plum portfolio. He has a habit of interfering in the course of justice: He has consistently scuttled CBI probes against many of his bureaucratic cronies. But spectrum remains his flagship scam. According to some reports, the spectrum scandal of 2008-vintage is the biggest ever in free India’s financial history. Raja sold 2G bandwidth to a cherry-picked band of ‘bidders’ at between Rs 1500 to Rs1600 crores per licence, based on 2001 auction prices. He, of course, did not hold any auction but adopted a first-come-first-served basis and that too at hardly a hour’s notice on the web! Anyway, the ‘chosen’ ones were ready with their fee and walked away with the licences. Only to unload in quick time a good part of the stakes in those companies, in the absence of a compulsory lock-in as is usually mandated, for hefty premiums. Many of these beneficiaries are real-estate companies with their exposure to telecom limited to making and receiving phone calls. Even by conservative estimates of the finance ministry, along with other, the loss to the exchequer on account of Raja’s loaded dice was over Rs 50,000 cr and this was when the stock markets had fallen over 50%. The real rip-off is a staggering Rs 100,000 cr. We see so many zeroes only in GDP figures! And by the law of conservation of monetary mass, this loss must be somebody’s gain! A minister should have been asked to quit even if he had acted in good faith for causing this big a hole in the nation’s pocket. But in Raja’s case, accusation of corruption came not just from the media, telecom watchdogs and political parties, but his own current colleague himself. Yet the clean MSingh, not only winked then, but also buckled to blackmail again after polls ‘09. Well, we hear, 3G is now coming up for sale. We know who the ‘bigger bandwidth’ will benefit the most!
But the Raja-Chinese bhai bhai deal takes the cake for its sheer audacity; in monetary terms it is pittance: only Rs 35000 … crores, stupid! Now there is a clear injunction from security agencies to the telecom ministry against purchasing communication equipment from Chinese companies, because the latter are invariably owned, directly or indirectly, either by the Communist party of China or the Chinese government itself. But on 15 May, a day before the counting of votes of the LS poll, and his last day in office, and after 5 p.m., Raja’s ministry awarded a tender for the said amount for around 9.3 crore cellphone connections to two Chinese companies, Huawei and ZTE. For, that matter, the Chinese have even earlier been beneficiaries of his largesse. According to experts, the latest deals would grant the Chinese critical access to digitised maps, site surveys, classified documents, communication systems etc besides unhindered roaming for its officials in the areas they have the contract for. Indeed, security analysts dread that, given China’s penchant for Cyber Network Attacks, India has already ensured its first defeat in case of war for it would be the Chinese Government that would be running our communication set-up! Indeed, in this deal, more than the sinister speed and the sumptuous sleaze, it is the blatant brazening out of national security concerns that is most ominous.
The litany of Raja-leelas is endless .. no, no, we are not talking of those rumoured family affairs. Indeed, the minister merits intense scrutiny on many counts. Blow-by-blow accounts of his scandalous dealings and point-by-point rebuttals of his defence are widely available in the public domain. When confronted with his man’s misdeeds, K dismissed the charges as a ‘conspiracy against a humble dalit’. Now that’s a dangerous argument that can actually be used to explain why Raja has consistently dodged action, including in the current episode. And w.r.t that, we are surely not shocked. Calling up a judge for the sake of petty anticipatory bails, even if he did, is hardly a sin by his standards. So we are not asking if Raja is the one. But can the Government clarify whether he is not, now that his name has cropped up? The Curriculum Vitae needs to be updated quickly! Before the Tele-minister makes his next call!
http://newstodaynet.com/col.php?section=20&catid=30
Electronic Voting Machines are meant for tampering! Experts prove.
July 19, 2009Demo held to show EVM can be tampered with
By Express News Service
17 Jul 2009 03:58:00 AM IST
http://www.expressb uzz.com/Images/ article/2009/ 7/17/17jul_ demo.jpg NetIndia Managing Director V.Hari Prasad (left) and Jana Chaitanya Vedika member Prasad showing the EVM.
HYDERABAD: Disputing with the Election Commission’s claim that electronic voting machines (EVMs) were absolutely tamper-proof, members of Jana Chaitanya Vedika (JCV), along with technical experts, demonstrated today that the machines were tamperable. “The EVMs currently used in elections are vulnerable and tamperable. It is possible to bring a particular political party into power by tampering the machines. Hence the need for the Election Commission to use ballot papers till the EVMs are made fool-proof.
Our intention, however, is not for having ballot system in the country,’’ they said.
NetIndia managing director and technical expert Hari K Prasad, along with JCV president V Lakshmana Reddy, vice-president VV Rao and others, at a press conference here, conducted a mock, actual and modified polling and counting of votes to prove that the EVMs could be tampered with and a favourable result to a particular political party ensured. In one of the demonstrations, they made Lok Satta Party, at the request of mediapersons, gain maximum number of votes vis-avis other parties.
The EVM showed the LSP getting nine votes though it was polled only three (of the total 21 votes).
Programme of a chip could be fixed or set at the time of machine preparation or before the beginning of counting.
Only individual machines (EVMs) could be tampered with but not all the machines at a time, they explained.
They demanded implementation of e-governance policy to ensure implementation of `open standard’ mechanism relating to EVMs. Besides, they also sought development of `verification tool’ to check the programme that drives the EVM.
We are ready to prove that the EVMs are tamperable if at all we get an access (to EVMs of Election Commission).
There are instances of EVM tampering in Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and some other parts of the country in the recent elections. In fact, there was 100 percent polling recorded in some booths in Andhra Pradesh where the votes polled went in favour of one party. Several petitions were filed in various courts in the country on such instances,’’ they said.
Asked about the PIL filed in the Supreme Court, Hari Prasad said the case, which would come up for hearing next week, was filed on technology aspect.
http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=Demo+held+to+show+EVM+can+be+tampered+with&artid=J86m4YLREOA=&SectionID=e7uPP4|pSiw=&MainSectionID=e7uPP4|pSiw=&SEO=EVM,+Hari+Prasad,+V+Lakshmana+Reddy&SectionName=EH8HilNJ2uYAot5nzqumeA==
The Harakiri begins! CPI-M meeting to decide fate of Kerala leaders
July 11, 2009IANS
First Published : 11 Jul 2009 12:58:30 AM IST
NEW DELHI: The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) begins a crucial two-day central committee meeting here Saturday hoping to put an end to the bitter factional feud in its Kerala unit.
The two warring senior Kerala leaders Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan and party state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan have reached the capital to attend the meeting. Both are staying at Kerala House.
While Achuthanandan declined to speak to the media, Vijayan said he saw the rains in the national capital as “a good sign”.
Vijayan met party general secretary Prakash Karat and spent more than an hour at the party head quarters. Achuthanandan, who kept to his room, met some of his close confidants outside the party circle.
The 85-member central committee meeting is being held after the party politburo met last week to discuss the Kerala issue.
Party sources said the politburo would meet Saturday morning to finalise its decision on the Kerala issue. “The central committee meeting is expected to start in the afternoon,” sources said.
Achuthanandan has been demanding that Vijayan be removed as state secretary since he has been named an accused by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the Rs.374 crore SNC Lavalin corruption case.
The Vijayan faction, in retaliation, has demanded that disciplinary action be taken against Achuthanandan for “violating party discipline”.
“A solution will surely be found during the central committee meeting. This fight cannot go on any longer because not only has it sullied the image of the party but also that of the state government,” a CPI-M minister told IANS on condition of anonymity.
Twelve of the 85 members of the central committee are from Kerala.
Political distrust of voting machines reaches apex court
July 11, 2009New Delhi, July 10, 2009
The growing political distrust against the electronic voting machines Friday reached the Supreme Court with a lawsuit demanding formation of an expert panel to examine functioning of the machines and to ascertain whether they are tamper-proof.
Two officials of Hyderabad-based Election Watch Group and two electronic engineers jointly moved the apex court, contending that it is entirely possible to tamper with the software of the machine and rig theelection.
The lawsuit sought formation of the panel to examine trustworthiness of EVMs in the poll process and to decide if it needs to be improved or altogether abandoned in favour of the old ballot papers.
Election Watch officials V.V. Rao and engineers A. Kankipati and Y. Vasaya contended in their lawsuit that “several experts and election watch groups and individuals, who have been monitoring the electionprocess, have found that EVM could be manipulated and tampered.”
“They have analysed the results in several constituencies, which indicate that there is something drastically wrong with the EVMs,” the petitioners claimed.
The lawsuit filed through counsel Sanjay Parekh also raised the issue of secrecy of electors’ vote, saying the EVMs are not able to even protect the secrecy of voters and the votes cast by them.
Parekh is likely to apprise the court early next week of his lawsuit and seek its early hearing.
The lawsuit claimed that even the two expert panels appointed by the Election Commission in 1990 and 2005 to examine the trustworthiness of EVMs had indicated that there were several lacunae in their functioning and they need rectification.
“These factors are cumulatively creating a serious situation for sustaining a democracy based on free and fair election,” said the lawsuit.
“The Election Commission of India has a constitutional obligation to ensure that the elections are conducted in free and fair manner,” said the petition.
The petition has been filed in the wake of several political leaders belonging to rival camps raising doubts over the trustworthiness of EVMs and demanding their substitution by the good old ballot papers.
Last updated on Jul 10th, 2009 at 17:59 pm IST–IANS
India is safer than any other country: Chidambaram
June 4, 2009Such as Srilanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Tibet, Mayanmar, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, all Muslim countries, all countries in Africa and Latin America and of course China!
Chidambaram, you are a proud Congress Minister!
