NEET – THE NEED OF THE HOUR

                 On 18th July, 2013, a bench headed by the then Chief Justice Altamas Kabir quashed 2 MCI notifications & held National Entrance-cum-Eligibility Test (NEET) to be unconstitutional . In a split 2:1 verdict, the said judgement deemed that conducting a common entrance test for admission into medical college was not within the ambit of Medical Council of India (MCI). On reading the parts of the judgement authored by Justice Kabir & Justice Sen, we see that the mention about various malpractices in entrance examination is almost insignificant. In contrast, Justice Kabir mentions about the need for ‘barefoot doctors’. The following is an extract from Justice Kabir’s judgement:-
              “The desire to give due recognition to merit is laudable, but the pragmatic realities on the ground relating to health care, especially in the rural and tribal areas where a large section of the Indian population resides, have also to be kept in mind when policy decisions are taken in matters such as this. While the country certainly needs brilliant doctors and surgeons and specialists and other connected with health care, who are equal to any in other parts of the world, considering ground realities, the country also has need for "barefoot doctors", who are committed and are available to provide medical services and health care facilities in different areas as part of their mission in becoming doctors.”               
             As a student, I fail to understand as to how introduction of NEET would’ve compromised with ‘committed doctors’. In fact, such an exam would’ve raised the standard of students who enter this noble profession. It is painful to see how medical education has undergone commodification. On 30th January, 2016, Times of India (TOI) reported about how an undercover 12K crore industry thrives in India which guarantees you a ‘confirm seat in MBBS’. For anyone related to medical profession, it shouldn’t come as a surprise because it is an open secret that MBBS, as well as PG seats are sold in certain medical colleges. According to MCI website, total MBBS seats in India are 52,715 & around 10 lakh students appeared for the only NEET examination held in the year 2013. This 52,715 figure also includes the private medical colleges, whose fees, only blessed souls can afford. I am sure that in a nation with 125 crore population, the number of doctors produced per year are anything but adequate. Lack of medical infrastructure in the country is leading to commercialisation & commodification of the existing medical education. A lot can be said to justify this commercialization because ultimately it’s the lack of resources which forces someone to indulge into such practices & not an inherent ulterior motive. Ultimately, as students, the only motive is to become a doctor & not to corrupt the system.           
              But I sincerely believe that NEET was a step in right direction. It would’ve curtailed the arbitrariness in admissions. The quality of students entering this profession would’ve certainly been raised. And above all, it would’ve ensured that only merit remains the sole objective criteria in admissions.                    
               Finally, the good news is that on 11th April, 2016, the Hon. Supreme Court has recalled its 2013 NEET decision. It is again going to hear all the petitions afresh. The 5-judge constitutional bench is headed by Justice Dave (the only dissenting judge in 2013 judgement). This certainly raises our hope that finally NEET will see the light of the day. As students, our only wish is that meritocracy should prevail. A noble profession like medicine can’t & should not become a purchasable commodity.

Indian Constitution: Vindicated OR Outdated?

       100, that's the precise number of time we have amended our constitution. Ever since we adopted our constitution on 26th January 1950, significant changes have been made in our constitution, including the preamble. Our Constitution is the reflection of the collective spirit of the people of India. Changes in the constitution reflect the changing thoughts & mindset of people of India. Our 1st constitutional amendment was introduced in the year 1951, that too about our treasured fundamental right, article 19, freedom of speech. So just within 15 months of adoption of our constitution, it was amended & that too a fundamental right. I can certainly say that societal mindset doesn't change within a span of 15 months. So what was it that mandated this amendment?
       Our present preamble reads out "....to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC.." The two words 'SOCIALIST' and 'SECULAR' were introduced in our preamble by the notorious 42nd amendment brought by Indira Gandhi government during emergency. Now anyone with even preliminary knowledge of our economy will realize that India is no longer a socialist nation. So is our constitution still living in the hangover of Nehruvian era? Or did Dr. Manmohan Singh violate our constitution when he presented his historic 1991 budget? Well, this proposition is laughable.
       No constitution, howsoever better articulated, is immune from systemic faults within its specific provisions. And finally any system or any constitution is as good as persons operating it. A law is as good as people who interpret it or people who legislate it. The ongoing judicial appointments case has proved the fact that constitution can be interpreted even contrary to what it means in spirit. And a liberal constitution falling in wrong hands can constitutionally subvert democracy & can create dictatorship. Weimar constitution of Germany was considered one of the most finely drafted liberal constitution but using its liberal provisions Hitler could introduce dictatorship constitutionally. Forget Germany, emergency in 1975 also documents the fact that constitution can be easily misused. So finally it is the people of India who are the true guardians & upholders of the constitution. Liberty & Rights come with its own baggage & responsibilities.
      No one can deny the fact that those who framed our constitution were people of great wisdom & foresight. And I don't use these adjectives very loosely. The fact that out of all fundamental rights only 1 fundamental right i.e. right to property has been repealed till date. Rest all of them have stood the test of time & strengthened our democracy. The directive principles of state policy have broadly laid down the governance agenda for the government of the day. But it is very sad to note that people entrusted to fulfill this agenda have only worked upon those which fit into their political calculations. Article 44 about common civil code has become victim of vote bank politics. Why can't a woman of a particular religion not get compensation in a case of divorce? Isn't that a violation of her fundamental rights? Hon. Supreme Court has time & again urged the government to enact law for establishing common civil code but then the moment you talk about common civil code it becomes a secular vs communal issue. It is very unfortunate that a sacred constitutional principle has become a vote bank issue.
     I can discuss many such issues but I have highlighted only some aberrations in our constitution. But we can't deny the fact that we are a vibrant democracy in contrast to those nations who got independence along with us, this is in itself a big tribute to our constitution. The fact that courts in India still have the courage to strike down laws is a tribute to our constitution. The fact that now influential & powerful people in lutyens' Delhi were once ordinary citizens like you & me vindicates our constitution. It is my firm conviction that ultimately it is not the constitution but we, the people of India who will decide our future & our destiny. Rights guaranteed by the constitution cease to function the moment we take it for granted. No constitution in my opinion can be so great that we can take our destiny & our future for granted. And no constitution is so ill framed that we can't defend our rights.
    I have written all this not to discuss or critique our constitution. I am not a lawyer or some constitutional expert. But I have written all this in my capacity as, an ordinary Indian, a qualification more than required to comment on our constitution. It is we, the people of India, who will decide whether we want a glorious future or sit back & abuse our constitution & our laws.
    Decision is ours!!

Judicial Appointments-Is the discourse itself misconstrued?

On 16th October 2015, Hon. SC exercising its power of judicial review struck down the 99th constitutional amendment. The 99th constitutional amendment sought to establish the National Judicial Appointment Commission(NJAC) for the purpose of appointing judges to the higher judiciary. The Hon. Supreme Court declared this constitutional amendment ultra vires.
Now let's examine the context in which this judgement was delivered. Appointment of judges to higher judiciary is governed by article 124 & article 217 of the Indian constitution. The language & the interpretation of the text is simple & lucid. Its natural interpretation implies that the judges would be appointed by the President of India in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. This procedure was followed quite effectively in the 1st two decades post-independence. But the autocratic & dictatorial mindset of the Indira Gandhi Govt in 1970s developed a sense of mistrust between the judiciary & the executive. I regard the mid 70s era as the darkest period of indian judiciary. In the emergency imposed by Mrs. Indira Gandhi, the Hon. SC literally surrendered itself to those in power at that time. But paradoxically, we owe our freedom & literally our democracy to 1973 Keshwanand Bharti Case. This case established the 'Basic Structure Doctrine' of the Indian Constitution & it effectively curtailed the absolute power of parliament to amend the constitution. That case established the supremacy of indian constitution. But a spate of dubious judicial appointments made in 1980s, awakened the conscience of indian judiciary. And in 1993 we had the 1st judges case, where the SC reinterpreted article 124 & article 217. It effectively made consultation process a binding one wherein the supremacy of Chief Justice was established over the executive in judicial appointments. And in 2nd judges case in 1998, Justice JS Verma developed the 'collegium system'. The role of the executive in judicial appointments was significantly reduced, almost nil.
The above mentioned is the brief history of how judicial appointments' procedure evolved in India. In its pristine form, article 124 & article 217 leave no iota of doubt that in the appointment of judges, supremacy of the judiciary is unquestionably the most important aspect. But how fair is the process of appointment when 5 people sitting inside closed doors decide as to who should be a judge or who shouldn't be a judge? What is the objective criteria while deciding who should be a judge? Who is accountable for non-meritorious appointments? And most importantly, can a sitting chief justice overrule the president of india? Is the power to appoint judges solely the prerogative of the judiciary?
While the NJAC sought to bring in more transparency & accountability in this entire process, it also brought along with it the dangers of the past. The fear of executive interference in judicial appointments was the main reason why NJAC was struck down by the Hon. SC. So have we reached a state where there is so much of mistrust between the two pillars of our democracy? Well, personally I feel SC struck down this provision out of fear of executive interference rather than strictly on judicial grounds.
The solution to this issue doesn't lie in introducing some other provision or legislation, but in restoring the credibility of the people at the helm both in the judiciary & the executive. Another wrong proposition in this entire debate is whether it's about the persons appointing the judges or about the criteria involved in appointing the judges. The entire debate is revolving around who will appoint the judges rather than on what basis they should be appointed. Again we must not forget the fact that finally any system is as good as the persons operating it. Some of the finest judges which indian judiciary has seen were appointed prior to 1993. Justice HR Khanna(the only dissenting judge in habeas corpus case) is an example of what fearless & independent judiciary is all about. This entire incident has exposed the open secret about immense mistrust between the two pillars of our democracy. In a healthy democracy, a sense of mutual respect is essential between these two pillars. And mutual respect doesn't imply concurrence on every issue, they must respectfully disagree with each other. Judiciary at loggerheads with executive is a sign of healthy democracy. But trust deficit between these two institutions exposes the systemic disorder in our democracy.
And as an ordinary citizen of india, I feel as long as these two institutions uphold & safeguard the rights of the individuals, everything else is secondary.
Finally, let's remember this is an emerging democracy so such agreements & disagreements are a part of it. Let's enjoy this entire evolutionary process of our indian democracy.

Prosperity to Procrastination-68 years of volatility

As we celebrate our 69th independence day tomorrow, it is imperative that we make a holistic assessment of our journey through these years. As an Indian, I refuse to accept the proposition that we were born as a nation 68 years ago. Indian civilization lives past any documented history of civilisations. As a civilization we're the oldest ones & along with greece we're rightly called as 'the cradle of civilization'. If we meticulously study the history of nations who were colonised & subsequently who attained independence, we will realise that we are the only ones who have distinctly maintained their cultural & ideological identity.
So the aforementioned facts provide us with the context in which I wish to discuss our post-independence era. Yes we were ruled by foreigners for nearly 800 years who looted the rich & wealthy indian society with all the might at their command. When we finally got independence in 1947, we were undernourished, impoverished & literally bankrupt economically. In the post-independence era, through the 60s & 70s we adopted the soviet model of governance. From purchasing a telephone to obtaining the ration practically everything was government regulated. Back then the political landscape was heavily dominated by leftist ideology. Being affluent in that era was considered a national crime. Socialism had brainwashed the minds of Indian politicians. Obsession with socialism was not without a cause. The alarming poverty levels & other social indicators had made it essential for the government to distribute freebies & subsidies. And doing these things also generated rich political harvest. So no wonder that 'Garibi Hatao' slogans dominated the 70s. Essentially Mrs. Indira Gandhi could sustain her political charm in the 70s with these catchy slogans without actually eliminating poverty. In those days, poverty had become a national obsession, the government almost fell in love with poverty that they never eliminated it. All the anti-poverty measures had a tremendous impact on the public exchequer & we were a high-tax regime. Inflation in double-digits had become a natural phenomenon. This reckless freebie culture ultimately had adverse fiscal effects which made India literally bankrupt in late 80s.
Essentially, we must thank our former PM P V Narasimha Rao who had the political will to take path-breaking policy reform in 1991. Notwithstanding the performance of Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister we owe it to Manmohan Singh, the Finance Minister a deep gratitude for literally lifting India from deep financial criss in 1991. We moved from a controlled economy to a free market regime. The work done by the succeeding Prime Ministers Gowda, I K Gujral & AB Vajpayee was in the same direction. We didn't change our policy direction. In the UPA 1 era, the work done by Dr. Singh was also more or less in the same vein.
In the last 5-6 years a sense of despondency & frustration had gripped indian minds. We became aspirational as a society. And UPA 2 was still stuck in the 80s with its own political calculations & its own poverty obsessed mind. It failed to read the mind of Indian electorate. We have progressed in the last 60 years, it's an indisputable & undeniable fact.
But now we aren't satisfied as nation who is walking towards progess. We want to run, we want to shatter past all our mediocrity & reach beyond that last blue mountain. In the last 6 years we have seen enough of degradation in public life. From allegations of corruption to brazen misue of power, we have seen it all. The verdict pronounced by the Indian electorate in 2014, was essentially a development centric & aspiration based verdict. From caste combinations to religious polarisation we have moved on to development politics. Yes we had a lag phase which I call it as a sense of procrastination but we're now ready to take off & launch ourselves assertively in the global arena.
I have no doubts that we are here to make our mark. I have no doubt that from now development politics is the way forward. Only those who toil in their 5 year regime will get rewarded with a renewed mandate. And we must remember that a nation is not created by a government, a nation is created not by its intellectuals or academicians, neither is a nation really created by its corporates, a nation is created by that last man who stands in the queue. True development is not high GDP, low inflation or low interest rates, true development is when we don't spit on the roads, when we don't honk unnecessarily, when standing in queue comes naturally in us.
A nation is finally a manifestation of the inherent traits of its citizens. Insofar as India is concerned, it's a work in lightning progess. It's not a sloganeering anymore, it's a hardcore work in progess on-ground.
And guys finally we'll make it. No matter what anyone thinks.
Wishing all my countrymen a patriotic Independence Day.

Divine Justice-A Historic Illusion

While traversing through any unknown terrain or any unknown domain our biggest fear is 'the fear of unknown'. We think & speculate more about the situations or circumstances which have never occurred in the past. Basically, our fear is lot more speculative & imaginative in nature with no substantial evidence to back our fear. Now looking at the heading of this blog, one might wonder what has fear of unknown got to do with divine justice?
As humans we always feel a sense of insecurity about what some believe , is divine' and what others believe it 'to be evil'. We consider divinity as a force to reckon with in our crises hour. Now whether divinity actually helps or not is something subjective & personalised phenomenon. But it essentially provides a mental cushion & strength to tide over some stormy winds.
If we meticulously examine the history of mankind then we'll inevitably arrive at one conclusion that we're greedy, selfish & conquering by nature. If there aren't any proper checks & balances then a small breed of selfish man can potentially destroy the entire human species. We've seen the examples of fascist dictators. It documents the fact that how pathological hatred for jews killed more than 5 million of them.
I'm sure of the fact that atleast 90% of those who were killed believed in the concept of 'divine justice'. But did it provide them with any tangible relief?
Basically injustice is the norm. If divine justice did exist in reality then the sharp divide between the rich & the poor wouldn't have existed. In my view, inequality & injustice are complementary to each other. If subsidies are given to the poor so as to achieve equality then essentially it's also injustice to the rich people. The previous statement may seem to be harsh but if we examine the concept of inequality & injustice in absolute terms then we'll definitely arrive at this conclusion.
Concept of 'Divine Justice' is essentially a self-created phenomenon without any substantial material evidence to support it. But this concept thrives among the masses because as humans we need a sense of security. We want to believe that some divine figure does exists who looks upon us in our hour of crises.
With all certainty at my command I can say that this illusion has survived until now & it'll survive eternally. Because we're fragile as species & insecure as society.

Ek Saal Modi Sarkar

All these days news channels have literally gone crazy with their surveys, polls, debates, roundtable talks, etc. All of them are reacting to this event as if for the 1st time any government has completed one year in office. Hardly anyone cares what these news channels boomerang about, In my opinion these news channels make anything but sense. Their absurd debates are really a source of envy for cartoon channels.
So before anyone judges this government, it's important to look at the premises & the context in which this government came to power. This government came to power at a critical juncture where our nation was sans any leadership & suffering from acute policy paralysis. Bureaucrats were confused whether they need to report to 7, RCR or 10, Janpath. Nation required eagle's ears to listen to their prime minister & still they weren't sure if they could listen to him or not. An environment of doom & gloom had taken over India in the last 2 years of UPA-2. It is important that we look at this government's performance in contrast to the previous UPA dispensation.
Now let's assess the present day government realistically. Though one may legitimately say that Modi had raised the bar of expectations to an unrealistic levels. So it was bound to face some flank. But the flip side is that had he not done so, Modi would've never got such a resounding mandate. The biggest achievement of Modi Government is that it has brought governance & policy as a central agenda. The national discourse has shifted from political statements to policy analysis. People are now ready to vote in & vote out any government on the basis of its economic performance. That's the biggest political change that we've seen & it is heartening to note. The dole & freebie culture can't ensure you another term but an 8 % growth does ensure it. Looking at the macroeconomic parameters, economists are of the opinion that Indian economy is getting back on track. Now the assessment of an economist often doesn't match with that of an aam aadmi. An aam aadmi doesn't look at CPI or WPI to gauge inflation or price rise. His definition of price rise is the cost at which he purchases 1 kg onion. But the trickle down effect of economy is yet to be seen. So hopefully even an aam aadmi's economic assessment will match with that of a renowned economist. As far as other economic issues are concerned, be it taxation policy, investments, trade, etc. the real assessment can be done only when the steps taken by the government culminate into tangible results on the ground. So people complaining about 'zameen pe kuch nai hora'  are right in a sense that medicine takes time to act. And giving steroids is not the permanent solution to any disease.
One thing in which Modi's harshest critics will agree is that this man works tirelessly. There can be no doubts about the efforts put in by this government. We may disagree about the effects yielded but we all will agree that there hasn't been any compromise in the efforts put in by Modi & his cabinet. Finally the proof of this government working is the fact that we're scrutinising this government endlessly.
One big change which we're seeing is that social media has become the voice of the people. Main Stream Media has by & large lost its credibility. Their integrity is highly questionable & their clout in Lutyens' Delhi has been demolished. Mr. Modi broke all the power circles & made governance a transparent process. So MSM not being happy is something quite understandable as they were the main middle-men or power brokers in Delhi.
Finally let's remember that Mr. Modi had asked for 60 months & not 12 months. So let's have the trust in him. His record in gujarat definitely points to some 'Ache Din' ahead. And my personal sense about Mr. Modi is that he's much smarter than what everyone thinks.
It's 5 saal Modi Sarkar so have patience.

Selective Freedom of Speech - Hypocrisy of Liberals

These days topics like 'Freedom of Speech & Right to expression' have gripped the national discourse. In the background of Honourable Supreme Court of India striking down section 66A of the IT Act, I would like to raise a few points. That the section was archaic & it curbed the freedom of speech, this point is beyond any doubt or neither is it a point of debate.
But the point is why are we so selective in our understanding of the concept of Freedom of Speech?
Separatists are allowed to make anti-india statements in the name of Freedom of Speech. When adultery is promoted by heroines saying 'Mah Life Mah Rules' then everyone supports it in the name of Freedom of Speech.
But when some fringe elements make obnoxious statements like 'Hindus should have 5 children' OR when someone says 'India is a Hindu Nation' then why do people go berserk in criticising it & demand judicial action?
I do not agree with such statements but then even they've the Freedom of Expression. Yes India is a secular country, but that doesn't mean only liberal left wing intellectuals have the right to expression. The laws are equal & both the sides have equal right to speech & expression. They must realise that freedom of speech & Right to expression are fundamental rights given to every indian citizen by the constitution. It's not the sole proprietary of these so called liberals. They're trying to build up a narrative as if they've sole proprietary over these rights.
We may not agree with someone but we can & we must always agree to disagree. Let's not have a nation where few TV panelists dictate the national discourse in the name of 'Freedom of Speech'. The hypocrisy of left wing liberals needs to be exposed. People must not be swayed away by the so called TV debates.
Indian polity & policies have always been dominated by the leftist thoughts. One of the biggest impediment to our development was the Nehruvian socialism. Be it the Communist party or the Congress they've always been out of sync with the aspirations of the nation. Wearing the mask of socialism, they've divided Indians economically & socially. Be it reservations or subsidies, it's nothing but any attempt to divide the society & engineer electoral victories.
Freedom of Speech is just a small hypocritical facet of these liberals but their hypocrisy transcends every aspect of their thoughts & actions.
People do think over it!!