Kill intelligence to make slaves : Silencing dissent

Fresh incidences to silence dissent and opinions, especially in South Asia are a matter of critical concern. Attempts to silence have acquired multiple faces ranging from antics of sending Dahi Misal to murder. Gruesome firing and death of Sabeen Mahmud in Pakistan followed the murder in cold blood of two bloggers in Bangladesh. In the same nation, court punishes a journalist for contempt of court for reporting and 23 others for supporting the journalist. In neighbouring Sri Lanka, poet Sharmila Seyyid is “raped and killed online” by religious fundamentalists. Back home, in India, Kamal Hassan got a reprieve from the court of law to release his film Uthama Villain, but yet to see whether the zealots will clear their censure. Perumal Murugan, a noted writer folded pen, as it was too much for him to endure the wrath of the mercenaries of faith. The number of books banned pan India and in various states since independence make an “impressive” list.

Silencing dissent is the method of the fascist and the ones with monistic worldview. History is replete with characters and movements that have attempted to quell differences. Authoritarian regimes and religious sects have always tried to control intellect and limit modes of expressions. Free expressions, opinions and thoughts are greatest enemies of religious fundamentalists and totalitarians as they set individuals free.

Every regime, be it democratic or otherwise, tries to regulate the sphere of expression and speech. The scale of control may vary according to the weightage each society accord to the value of free expression and public space. Non-governmental bodies flex their muscles to quiet voices that do not appease their programme. Governments more often stand mute spectator to violations of the rights of citizens by these thugs to carry out their agenda with impunity.

Free speech and expression is a desideratum of Indian constitution for meaningful life and an environment required for robust democracy. Having said that, Indian legal culture is replete with experiences of censor and ban. The volatile communal fault lines give the government a justification to step in at every perceived threat to communal harmony and use the tools to suit their agenda. The FIRs registered under the decommissioned Section 66A of IT Act are examples. S. 66A has been invoked for causing ‘annoyance, inconvenience etc.’ to persons like Mamata  Banerjee, Narendra Modi, Mulayam Singh, Akhilesh Yadav, Azam Khan, Karti Chidambaram to cite few.

In the judgment that annulled S. 66A of IT Act, the court discussed in detail the need of space for free speech and expression that is the foundation of a healthy democracy and a sound society.  The parochial political, sectarian and religious bigots on the other hand is turning the society into intolerant short fused mass that is self-destructive. The art of deliberation and maturity to understand others opinion, even when one might not agree to is fast loosing to our communities if not already lost.

In such communities it is easy to spread fear, distrust, make people fight someone else’s war without them realizing it. Best way to make slaves is to kill intelligence. To kill intelligence; limit thought, speech and expression. It is therefore necessary to react to provincial leaders, support voices of dissent and be the voices of difference.

Madras High Court Arbitration Centre Rules

Three Rules have been published by the Registrar-General of the Madras High Court in relation to the Madras High Court Arbitration Centre. These Rules are as follows:

• The Madras High Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC) (Internal Management) Rules, 2014
• The Madras High Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC) (Arbitration Proceedings) Rules, 2014
• The Madras High Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC) (Administrative Cost and Arbitrators’ Fees) Rules, 2014

These developments are significant to arbitration in Tamil Nadu. Probably the Madras HC would go the Delhi High Court way in referring most of the disputes to the Arbitration Centre. The development is in the right direction. Readers of this blog would recollect this blawgger's article in the Economic & Political Weekly criticising the secrecy behind the nomination by the High Courts of the arbitrators in petitions under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

This development is in the right direction since the manner of appointment of arbitrators and reference is provided in detail in these Rules. Let's hope the implementation is also transparent.

Call for Students Paper for NLSIR Symposium

Call for Student Papers from NLSIR Symposium:

Call for Student Papers: The 8th Annual NLSIR Symposium on Competition Law

The National Law School of India Review (NLSIR) is the flagship journal of the National Law School of India University, Bangalore. For more than 25 years, it has been at the forefront of legal scholarship on issues relevant to legal practitioners. As part of its increasing mandate this year, in association with Amarchand Mangaldas, it is organizing the 8^th edition of its Annual Symposium on Competition Law. The Symposium seeks to engage with legal issues that have arisen in the decade-long competition law regime, especially over the past two years, and thus hopes to fill the lacunae in current analysis.

Towards this end, the NLSIR is pleased to call for Student Papers for the 8^th Annual NLSIR Symposium on Competition Law. The students whose papers are selected will also get a chance to present them at the Symposium which is scheduled to be held on the 2-3^rd of May, 2015 in Bangalore. The selected papers will also be published as part of Vol. 27(2) of our journal which will be a special issue on competition law.

The paper may be submitted on any one of the following themes:-

Session I: Section 3 and Determining Anti-Competitive Agreements 

Session II: The Abusive Conduct of Dominant Enterprises

Session III: Mergers and Acquisitions: Clearing the CCI Hurdle and the Competition between Regulators

Session IV: The Interface of Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Law in India

For more details please refer to our concept note, attached herewith.  

The papers should be a minimum of 3500 words, inclusive of footnotes. They are preferred in Times New Roman font, double-spaced. Main text should be in font size 12 and footnotes in font size 10. All submissions must be word processed, and compatible with Microsoft Word 2003 and 2007. The NLSIR uses only footnotes (and not end-notes) as a method of citation. Submissions must conform to the Bluebook (19th edn.) system of citation.

The papers must be emailed to mail.nlsir@gmail.com indicating the session for which the paper is intended under the subject heading. All submissions should be accompanied by a cover letter containing the name of the author, educational qualification and year of study, the title of the manuscript, and contact information. The last date for submissions is April 17, 2015.  The Editorial Board looks forward to reading your submissions.

Castes that compete to tramp backward

Apparently it looks like, when the nation struggles to showcase an upward mobile index of progress in socio economic front, some sections in Indian society struggle to maintain rock-bottom statistics to prove backwardness. It busts the myth that nobody likes portray as socially backward. But when backwardness rewards, why not? I had to say this at the cost of being branded “right wing”, going through the Ram Singh judgment that dispossessed the Jat Community of its pre-election payoff. The dateline of grant of reservation and the continued support of the same by the incumbent government reveals nothing else but the redeeming points of reservation card in politics.

The judgment once again highlighted that ineligible claims reduce the share of the pie owe to the deserving. It has also boldly pointed out the need to conceptualise new methods to identify categories of backward class.

The issue in nutshell is what Advocate Mohan Parasaran has framed it into, the scope of judicial review. The Central Government has taken an action pursuant to its power under Constitution and a Statute, which so happened to be in disregard of the advice given by the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC). The advice ordinarily shall be binding upon the Central Government as per Section 9 (2) of the National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993.

When the legal issue is that of judicial review, courts enquiry is whether the decision taken is within the confines of legality, rationality, procedural propriety and proportionality. In this case courts squarely address whether the decision taken is within its competence as it has disregarded the advice tendered by NCBC. While doing so, the Government did not tender any cogent reasons except a vague statement that “ [NCBC] did not adequately take into account the ground realities”, which in no way is suffice to brush aside the detailed recommendations proffered by NCBC supported by documents and analysis. Court found that there lacked sufficient material or reasoning on which the Government could have based its decision to reverse the recommendation of NCBC and arrive at the impugned decision to secure reservation for the Jats.

While concluding the judgment, the judges do indicate to a very significant act that political parties continue to do, the manipulative use of caste card. The palliative measures envisioned in Arts. 16 (4) and 15 (4) are to reach out to the most deserving and the groups so deserving is not static as castes.  New practices, methods and yardsticks have to be continuously evolved moving away from caste centric definition of backwardness. This only will enable justice in practice.

Caste as identity remains to be clinging in Indian society partially so because of the reservation based on caste however we wish away saying that caste is never the sole criteria. I am not unmindful of the arguments of historical injustice and 60 odd years being short a period to redeem the damage of centuries. Having said that, the race to become part of backward class in the central and state lists and the methodologies adopted to identify backwardness primarily through caste as a class and relative status measure in comparison to other castes only reiterates the castsness, which we try to shed to be a progressive society where all are considered equal despite the birth status.