[The Big Picture] Rape documentary : Attitudes and challenges

Summary:

• The documentary on December 2012 rape incident made by a British documentary maker has kicked up a huge storm in the country. The film which has had interview with one of the convicted persons in the case has been at the centre of the controversy. The convicted who has been awarded death sentence has justified his act and has put the blame on the Victim. A Delhi court has restrained the broadcast of this documentary in India. Many questions have cropped following this controversy. One is the attitude of the people who commit such heinous crimes and also attitude towards the victims and perpetrators in the society. Questions about whether such documents should be made or permitted to be made are also being discussed. The larger question is whether such documentaries help in educating the society against such heinous crimes.

• Experts say that since the case is pending in the court, the views of the convicts should not be broadcasted. Usually, either the jail authorities or the courts provide the permission to the people who wish to meet the convicts in the jail. This case is peculiar because here a reference letter was brought from the Union Home Ministry seeking the permission to meet the convict. But the filmmaker has been defending herself saying that such documentaries should be allowed since they educate the people against such heinous crimes.

• This is not the first time that anybody or any convict has spoken in such a manner. Many conservative groups, some politicians and even some religious heads have, in the past, blamed the victims in such incidents. But this case has received much attention from the public. The court has not totally banned the film but has restrained it.

• Our criminal justice system needs basic reforms. Fast track courts should be set up to deal with such kind of cases. Police reforms are needed to prevent such crimes. The defence lawyer, who has been defending the convicts, has also spoken in a negative and very harsh manner. He has completely put the blame on the victim. Hence, it can be said that Rape is not just a law and order problem, it is also a social problem.

Source: RajyaSabha TV

[The Big Picture] Budget 2015 : Implications for Social Sector

Summary:

• There is a general feeling that under the Budget the allocations made to the social sector coming under various ministries have been inadequate and even much less than the allocations made last year. The centre has however defended its move by saying that higher devolution of tax revenues to the states as suggested by the 14th finance commission would fill the gap. But, the critics say that even such higher devolution would not solve the problem. States spend 95% of their collections on salaries and other expenditures. The net additional resources transferred to the States, including States’ share of taxes and duties, non-Plan grants and loans, Central assistance to State plans, assistance for Central and Centrally-sponsored schemes, is only Rs.64,000 crore in 2015-16.

• It is also true that 95% of the budget comes with a Preset because of the commitments like salaries, defence expenditure, interest repayments etc. Hence, unless a directional change is made, the centre is left out with very little resources. The present government had some advantages created because of fall in the prices of crude oil. To some extent the government has resisted the temptation on being Populist. Some initiatives like MUDRA bank are widely welcomed.

• The Budget is strong on the social sector side as it moves from Jan Dhan to Jan Suraksha and a functional social security system for all Indians. There is a 22% reduction in allocation for Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) over last year. The trend of lower allocation is in line with the near universal enrolment achieved at primary level. However, the increased focus on enhancing quality of education to address the poor learning levels of students is not evident from the allocations.Even the Health sector has not received much attention.

Source: RajyaSabha TV

India’s World – Democratic Crisis in Maldives

Summary:

• The arrest of opposition leader and the former President has triggered a fresh crisis in the Maldives. Opposition parties together have started a movement called save the Constitution movement. The former president, Nasheed, has been arrested on the charge of terrorism for illegally ordering the detention of a Judge. If convicted, the former President has to be in Jail for up to 15 years putting pate to all his political ambitions. The capital city Male has been witnessing many night marches by the supporters of the former President. The Government has failed to control the situation politically.

• Maldives had previously denied India’s claim that it held discussions with Indian officials regarding former President, who sought refuge at the Indian High Commission here to evade arrest, saying it cannot interfere with the independence of the judiciary.

• In 2008, Nasheed, became the first democratically elected leader of the Maldives, defeating Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who had been dictator for 30 years. In January 2012, he ordered the detention of Criminal Court judge Abdulla Mohamed for allegedly obstructing the police, ordering illegal probes, and accepting bribes to release certain criminals. The arrest triggered protests, following which, in February 2012, Nasheed resigned. He claimed he was forced to step down after soldiers and police mutinied, but his successor, Mohamed Waheed, said Nasheed had left on his own.

• A political crisis in the Maldives will deepen unless parties hold emergency talks. The Maldives is a major tourist attraction, but political unrest has dented its image as a peaceful island paradise in recent years. A large number of Indian population resides in Maldives. Indians are the second largest expatriate community in the Maldives with approximate strength of around 26,000. Indian expatriate community consists of workers as well as professionals like doctors, teachers, accountants, managers, engineers, nurses and technicians etc. Hence, immediate intervention of the Indian government is being sought.

Explained : Changes that NDA wants to bring to land acquisition law 2013 (भूमि अधिग्रहण कानून 2013)

Earlier this week, a bill to amend the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act, 2013) was introduced in Parliament. This bill replaces an ordinance which was promulgated in December 2014.

A brief overview of land acquisition laws in the country, and the changes this bill makes to the LARR Act, 2013 are provided below.

What is land acquisition (भूमि अधिग्रहण)?

• Land acquisition is the forcible take-over of privately owned land by the government. This is not the same as purchase of land, in which case the land owner does not have a compulsion to part with the land.

• Currently, land may be acquired by the central or state government for government projects, public-private partnership projects, and private projects which serve a ‘public purpose’. Public purpose includes defence, national security, infrastructure (such as roads, airports, water supply pipelines, etc), housing the poor, among others.

What were the major shifts from the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to the LARR Act, 2013?

• The LARR Act, 2013 was enacted in January 2014, and replaced the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Major shifts from the 1894 Act to the LARR Act, 2013 include:

• Compensation (मुआवज़ा):The 1894 Act required that compensation of 1.3 times the price of land be given to land owners. The LARR Act, 2013 provides for compensation of 2 times the price of land for urban areas, and of 2 to 4 times the price of land in rural areas.

• Rehabilitation and resettlement (पुनर्वास और पुनर्स्थापन): While the 1894 Act provided compensation to land owners, it did not provide rehabilitation and resettlement to others who were dependent on the land for their livelihood. The LARR Act, 2013 provides for rehabilitation and resettlement for these affected families as well.

• Consent (सहमति): The 1894 Act did not require the consent of land owners when land was acquired. However, the LARR Act, 2013 mandates that the consent of 80 per cent of land owners is obtained when land is acquired for private projects and the consent of 70 per cent of land owners is obtained when land is acquired for public-private partnership projects.

• Social Impact Assessment (सामाजिक प्रभाव आकलन): Unlike the 1894 Act, the LARR Act, 2013 mandates that a Social Impact Assessment is conducted for all projects, except those exempted through the urgency provision. An SIA is meant to determine whether the project serves a public purpose, and what the social impact of the acquisition of land could be on affected families.

• Restrictions on irrigated multi-cropped land (सिंचित बहु-फसली जमीन पर प्रतिबंध): The LARR Act, 2013 imposes certain limits on the amount of irrigated multi-cropped land which may be compulsorily acquired.

What are the major changes the bill makes to the LARR Act, 2013?

• Exemption of five categories of land use from certain provisions (कुछ प्रावधानों से भूमि के उपयोग की पांच श्रेणियों की छूट): The bill exempts the five categories of land use from the requirement of obtaining the consent of land owners. Additionally, the requirement of conducting a SIA and limits on multi-cropped land may be waived by the government, for these categories of land use.

• The five categories of land use are: (i) defence, (ii) rural infrastructure including electrification, (iii) affordable housing, (iv) industrial corridors, and (v) infrastructure and social infrastructure projects.

• The opponents of the bill argue that most items defined as public purpose (that is, for which land can be compulsorily acquired) fall within these five exempted categories.

• Return of unutilised land (अप्रयुक्त भूमि की वापसी): The LARR Act, 2013 required that land which was acquired and remained unused for five years be returned. The bill changes this to the later of the following; five years, or any period specified at the time of setting up the project. This is meant to address projects which may take more than five years.

• Acquisition of land for private hospitals and educational institutions (निजी अस्पतालों और शिक्षण संस्थानों के लिए भूमि का अधिग्रहण): The LARR Act, 2013 excluded the acquisition of land for private hospitals and private educational institutions from its purview. The bill removes this restriction and allows the acquisition of land for private hospitals and private educational institutions.

• Acquisition of land for ‘private entities’ ('निजी संस्थाओं' के लिए भूमि का अधिग्रहण:): The LARR Act, 2013 was applicable when land was acquired for private companies for projects with a public purpose. The bill replaces ‘private company’ with ‘private entity’. A private entity is defined as an entity other than a government entity, and can include a proprietorship, partnership, company, corporation, non-profit organisation, or other entity. This will enable, for instance, acquisition for a private educational trust.

• Offences by government (सरकार द्वारा अपराध): The LARR Act, 2013 stated that if an offence is committed by the government, the head of the department would be deemed guilty unless he could show that the offence was committed without his knowledge, or that he had exercised due diligence to prevent the commission of the offence. The bill removes this provision. It inserts a new provision which states that if an offence is committed by a government official, he cannot be prosecuted without the prior sanction of the government.

Source: PIB