All you need to know about key battles in Phase 2 of elections 2019. Watch more to know.

India Election Watch: Big battles in Phase 2 of elections 2019; All you need to know

Almost a day after Samajwadi Party senior leader Azam Khan was slapped with a campaign ban by the Election Commission and an FIR by the Uttar Pradesh Police against his derogatory speech on BJP leader Jaya Prada. Watch this video to know more.

India Election Watch: Azam Khan's son plays Muslim card

The electoral battle in Jaipur Rural constituency in Rajasthan can easily be billed as a clash of the titans as two former Olympians - the BJP's Rajyavardhan Rathore and Congress's Krishna Poonia - are pitted against each other from here for the Lok Sabha polls.

Rathore, a former Colonel in the Indian Army, started his political innings by joining the BJP in September 2013 after taking voluntary retirement.

In 2014, he was elected as Member of Parliament (MP) in Lok Sabha from Jaipur Rural seat and was sworn in as the Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting.

In 2017, the Padma Shree awardee was given independent charge of the Ministry of Sports and Youth Affairs.

Krishna Poonia, who is the first Indian woman track-and-field athlete to win an individual gold in the 2010 Commonwealth Games, represents Churu district's Sadulpur assembly seat. She was named the Congress candidate from Jaipur Rural Lok Sabha seat on April 1.

She joined Congress party at an election rally in Churu in 2013 and believes that Congress was the natural choice for her as her family has traditionally supported the party.

The Jaipur Rural Lok Sabha seat, which has 19.33 lakh electorates, 9.12 lakh of them female, is dominated by the Jat community, followed by Brahmin, Yadav and Scheduled Caste voters. The caste equation is favourable for Poonia who belongs to the Jat community.

Of the eight assembly segments in the Lok Sabha constituency, the ruling Congress has five seats, two are with the BJP and one is with an Independent MLA. During the 2014 Lok Sabha election, the BJP had five seats while the Congress had two assembly seats falling under the Jaipur Rural constituency.

The 25 parliamentary constituencies of Rajasthan will go to polls in two phases.

Polling will be held in 13 constituencies in the fourth phase on April 29.

The rest of the 12 seats including Jaipur Rural will vote in the fifth phase on May 6.

(With inputs from agencies)

The electoral battle in Jaipur Rural constituency in Rajasthan can easily be billed as a clash of the titans as two former Olympians - the BJP's Rajyavardhan Rathore and Congress's Krishna Poonia - are pitted against each other from here for the Lok Sabha polls.

The electoral battle in Jaipur Rural constituency in Rajasthan can easily be billed as a clash of the titans as two former Olympians - the BJP's Rajyavardhan Rathore and Congress's Krishna Poonia - are pitted against each other from here for the Lok Sabha polls. Rathore, a former Colonel in the Indian Army, started his political innings by joining the BJP in September 2013 after taking voluntary retirement. In 2014, he was elected as Member of Parliament (MP) in Lok Sabha from Jaipur Rural seat and was sworn in as the Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting. In 2017, the Padma Shree awardee was given independent charge of the Ministry of Sports and Youth Affairs. Krishna Poonia, who is the first Indian woman track-and-field athlete to win an individual gold in the 2010 Commonwealth Games, represents Churu district's Sadulpur assembly seat. She was named the Congress candidate from Jaipur Rural Lok Sabha seat on April 1. She joined Congress party at an election rally in Churu in 2013 and believes that Congress was the natural choice for her as her family has traditionally supported the party. The Jaipur Rural Lok Sabha seat, which has 19.33 lakh electorates, 9.12 lakh of them female, is dominated by the Jat community, followed by Brahmin, Yadav and Scheduled Caste voters. The caste equation is favourable for Poonia who belongs to the Jat community. Of the eight assembly segments in the Lok Sabha constituency, the ruling Congress has five seats, two are with the BJP and one is with an Independent MLA. During the 2014 Lok Sabha election, the BJP had five seats while the Congress had two assembly seats falling under the Jaipur Rural constituency. The 25 parliamentary constituencies of Rajasthan will go to polls in two phases. Polling will be held in 13 constituencies in the fourth phase on April 29. The rest of the 12 seats including Jaipur Rural will vote in the fifth phase on May 6. (With inputs from agencies)

Lok Sabha elections 2019: Two Olympians slug it out in Rajasthan’s Jaipur Rural

What exactly is good governance that every political leader claims to bestow on the people, best enshrined in their 2019 election manifestos?&nbsp;

If voters are not acquainted with what constitutes good governance during election time, when else will people know? Never mind the claims and counter-claims, citizens need to know about good governance, so that it does not merely remain a poll time rhetoric.

Governance is not same as the “Government”. It is much more. For example, can a government provide governance without the involvement of civil society?&nbsp;

Governance includes developments in communities, academics, businesses, the unorganised sector and self-promoted enterprises.&nbsp;

For most political leaders today, governance is what the government does or how well it controls and commands or offers doles in the name of welfare.&nbsp;

Governance is an outcome and sum total of what and how different pillars of the state perform and function. The distinguishing feature of governance include how actively involved and participative citizens are.&nbsp;

Good governance is not the result of a one-time initiative of a political party that has been in power for one term. It encompasses long term concerns and consequences.&nbsp;

A certain collective spirit between an elected government and civil society should be evident in the functioning and implementation of development programmes.&nbsp;

Some chief ministers claim good governance as dictated by their intentions and some others talk about Ram Rajya, while still others, it is Swarajya.&nbsp;

Prime Minister Narendra Modi talked of Su Raj from the Red Fort on the eve of the 70th anniversary of independence. In 1929, Mahatma Gandhi said that Swaraj means peace to people and prosperity and happiness for everyone. But for most leaders today, it is an index of personal popularity.&nbsp;

Popularity today is a managed affair, not necessarily based on fulfilling promises or sustaining development. Political leaders talk of good governance as “achievements” of their government. Governance cannot be an outcome of popularity of any government’s flagship schemes.&nbsp;

Two years ago in Switzerland, a referendum was held on guaranteed basic income by the government for every family in the country. It was rejected by an overwhelming percentage of people. After considerable debate, the Swiss people viewed the proposal as “unsustainable”.

They felt that such a dole makes them dependent on the government and does not promote human dignity. Finland, Netherlands and Singapore too toyed with such an idea, but gave up for the same reasons.&nbsp;

Can such a referendum take place in India? Political parties, when in power, are only too anxious to dole out sops. Good governance implies luring people in the name of welfare, making them dependent and as unproductive as possible.

Clarity and understanding about good governance is needed not just among political leaders, but also in the news media and civil society.

In the ultimate analysis, good governance in a parliamentary democracy is not possible without good politics; good politics is not feasible without good political parties and political parties cannot be good without concerned and responsible leaders.&nbsp;

All of this is not possible without an active citizenry, who do not fall prey to populistic or temporal lures. Our political parties have become more powerful than “We the People”, as they endeavour for centralisation.

Governance has to go beyond an election-centric view. If the government and the pillars of the state are not sensitive to increasing election costs, then it makes entry into electoral politics prohibitive.&nbsp;

With significant sections of the news media coming under the sway of politicians, a rise in motivated poll surveys and spurt in fake and paid messages, it is unrealistic to expect elections to be free, fair and inclusive.&nbsp;

Two national studies conducted by the Centre of Media Studies (CMS) in 2005 and 2007 had pointed out that the 'note for vote' phenomena was not confined to any state or section, but spread across.&nbsp;

An Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) analysis of Election Commission data brings out that in the last 15 years, the percentage of criminals, billionaires and those with conflict of interest, is on the increase.&nbsp;

The much-hyped economic reforms of the last 25 years had not improved level playing opportunities in the country. A number of studies have brought out how centralisation is on the increase, despite measures for decentralisation.&nbsp;

Despite anti-defection laws, defections continue to destabilise elected governments. And political parties are not willing to come under the Right to Information Act (RTI) even when it could help to revive themselves. These are trends enough to demonstrate that India is not on the path of good governance.&nbsp;

This 2019 poll campaign has many firsts to its 'credit'. Never before have armed forces been dragged into poll rhetoric. Neither have communalism and nationalism been raked up as they are being done today.&nbsp;

 
No political party has referred to corruption involving citizens in availing public services, raised environmental issues or acknowledged a languishing primary education without a policy and direction.&nbsp;

As the actor turned politician Kamal Haasan said, this election is all about “buying, bidding and luring”. I have been an active observer of election campaigns for the last 50 years, but have never seen a poll scene as gloomy as 2019. 
 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-sops-and-welfare-state-2739624">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

What exactly is good governance that every political leader claims to bestow on the people, best enshrined in their 2019 election manifestos? If voters are not acquainted with what constitutes good governance during election time, when else will people know?

What exactly is good governance that every political leader claims to bestow on the people, best enshrined in their 2019 election manifestos? If voters are not acquainted with what constitutes good governance during election time, when else will people know? Never mind the claims and counter-claims, citizens need to know about good governance, so that it does not merely remain a poll time rhetoric. Governance is not same as the “Government”. It is much more. For example, can a government provide governance without the involvement of civil society? Governance includes developments in communities, academics, businesses, the unorganised sector and self-promoted enterprises. For most political leaders today, governance is what the government does or how well it controls and commands or offers doles in the name of welfare. Governance is an outcome and sum total of what and how different pillars of the state perform and function. The distinguishing feature of governance include how actively involved and participative citizens are. Good governance is not the result of a one-time initiative of a political party that has been in power for one term. It encompasses long term concerns and consequences. A certain collective spirit between an elected government and civil society should be evident in the functioning and implementation of development programmes. Some chief ministers claim good governance as dictated by their intentions and some others talk about Ram Rajya, while still others, it is Swarajya. Prime Minister Narendra Modi talked of Su Raj from the Red Fort on the eve of the 70th anniversary of independence. In 1929, Mahatma Gandhi said that Swaraj means peace to people and prosperity and happiness for everyone. But for most leaders today, it is an index of personal popularity. Popularity today is a managed affair, not necessarily based on fulfilling promises or sustaining development. Political leaders talk of good governance as “achievements” of their government. Governance cannot be an outcome of popularity of any government’s flagship schemes. Two years ago in Switzerland, a referendum was held on guaranteed basic income by the government for every family in the country. It was rejected by an overwhelming percentage of people. After considerable debate, the Swiss people viewed the proposal as “unsustainable”. They felt that such a dole makes them dependent on the government and does not promote human dignity. Finland, Netherlands and Singapore too toyed with such an idea, but gave up for the same reasons. Can such a referendum take place in India? Political parties, when in power, are only too anxious to dole out sops. Good governance implies luring people in the name of welfare, making them dependent and as unproductive as possible. Clarity and understanding about good governance is needed not just among political leaders, but also in the news media and civil society. In the ultimate analysis, good governance in a parliamentary democracy is not possible without good politics; good politics is not feasible without good political parties and political parties cannot be good without concerned and responsible leaders. All of this is not possible without an active citizenry, who do not fall prey to populistic or temporal lures. Our political parties have become more powerful than “We the People”, as they endeavour for centralisation. Governance has to go beyond an election-centric view. If the government and the pillars of the state are not sensitive to increasing election costs, then it makes entry into electoral politics prohibitive. With significant sections of the news media coming under the sway of politicians, a rise in motivated poll surveys and spurt in fake and paid messages, it is unrealistic to expect elections to be free, fair and inclusive. Two national studies conducted by the Centre of Media Studies (CMS) in 2005 and 2007 had pointed out that the 'note for vote' phenomena was not confined to any state or section, but spread across. An Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) analysis of Election Commission data brings out that in the last 15 years, the percentage of criminals, billionaires and those with conflict of interest, is on the increase. The much-hyped economic reforms of the last 25 years had not improved level playing opportunities in the country. A number of studies have brought out how centralisation is on the increase, despite measures for decentralisation. Despite anti-defection laws, defections continue to destabilise elected governments. And political parties are not willing to come under the Right to Information Act (RTI) even when it could help to revive themselves. These are trends enough to demonstrate that India is not on the path of good governance. This 2019 poll campaign has many firsts to its 'credit'. Never before have armed forces been dragged into poll rhetoric. Neither have communalism and nationalism been raked up as they are being done today. No political party has referred to corruption involving citizens in availing public services, raised environmental issues or acknowledged a languishing primary education without a policy and direction. As the actor turned politician Kamal Haasan said, this election is all about “buying, bidding and luring”. I have been an active observer of election campaigns for the last 50 years, but have never seen a poll scene as gloomy as 2019. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

In a democracy, good governance is not possible without good politics

Narendra Modi’s first big challenge on becoming the prime minister was the big farmers’ crisis in March 2015. Unseasonal rains damaged crops in Punjab and Haryana and many committed suicide.&nbsp;

Modi instantly ensured that affected farmers got a higher compensation and that all the grain they produced was procured at the minimum support price (MSP).&nbsp;

Prime Minister Modi was flustered by the criticism that he personally did not visit the affected families, but Modi was clear in his thoughts: He was the PM and his job was to take decisions and get the machinery to act. Modi knew perception matters first, but actions last forever.

The NDA – despite the Congress blitzkrieg – has done plenty to alleviate the plight of farmers. It has prepared soil health cards for 170 million individual farm holdings to improve productivity, provided water through completing irrigation projects, ensured power for pumps and neem-coated fertilisers to prevent adulteration.&nbsp;

The Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, an insurance scheme, now compensates the farmers for crops lost to natural calamities. He raised the MSP for grains and pulses.&nbsp;

Modinomics at work was at its best. Remember, when he had taken the oath, he had inherited an economy derisively scorned by both domestic and global investors.&nbsp;

India was a part of the ‘fragile five’ and there was the sword of Damocles of a credit rating downgrade to ‘Junk’ status. It was a precariously perched economy, akin to a poisoned chalice. But Modinomics has triggered a sturdy ballast to help India emerge as the world’s fifth largest (in GDP terms) and fastest growing economy.&nbsp;

So what has helped Modinomics’ work even as rivals stepped up their hate campaign? It was all about the nation and its economic growth. The most important trigger of Modinomics was the goods and services tax (GST) - the biggest indirect tax reform since Independence - which is now demolishing trade barriers, fuelling aggregate demand, compelling tax compliance, reworking logistics and manufacturing architecture.&nbsp;

It has done away with sub-scale operational outposts. What is in place is efficient, scalable and closer-to-consumer operational hubs, which are harmonising rates across states by demolishing trade barriers.&nbsp;

So who’s in trouble? Tax evading entities and unorganised brokers. The GST, in short, is giving a leg-up to aggregate demand by IBC regime for creating a transparent and legally-sound mechanism for resurrecting financially-distressed entities into viable, productive entities.&nbsp;

The World Bank says resolutions in &nbsp;Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) era is now taking 270 days, as compared to the pre-IBC era and its five-year period. In short, Modinomics is working.&nbsp;

Demonetisation - loudly criticised by the opposition - has been a brilliant force multiplier for the economy’s financialisation. It was like an assault on tax cheats, terror financiers and illicit carpetbaggers.&nbsp;

It helped the billion-plus nation to emerge out of its excessive reliance on a cash ecosystem that for generations, fuelled a dirty, dark, parallel economy, depriving India of legitimate taxes and posing tough challenges to law enforcement and security agencies.&nbsp;

It was Modinomics’ bold assault on tax cheats and cash hoarders, asking Indians to follow the rule of the law and not avoid taxes.&nbsp;

Indians realised increased tax means increased government expenditure on its people. The move also helped the mutual fund and insurance market, because a large chunk of cash in bank deposits moved through these intermediaries into the equity market.

Modinomics also did wonders when the government signed the Monetary Policy Framework Agreement with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on the maximum tolerable consumer inflation rate that RBI should target to achieve price stability.&nbsp;

In one shot, Prime Minister Modi made the RBI responsible through the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) for containing consumer inflation at 4 per cent -- with a standard deviation of 2 per cent -- in the medium term.&nbsp;

Hence, Modinomics tackled the issue of high inflation impacting the poor and - at the same time - encouraged long-term capital investments by businesses.&nbsp;

Realising that the previous government messed up natural resources, getting embroiled in big buck corruption scams like the Coal and 2G scandal, Modi turned auctioning of natural resources into a crystal clear, competitive and price optimising allotment of natural resources like coal, minerals, spectrum and land.

This is growth and power for a billion-plus nation.

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-modinomics-has-played-big-role-in-india-s-growth-narrative-2739620">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

Narendra Modi’s first big challenge on becoming the prime minister was the big farmers’ crisis in March 2015. Unseasonal rains damaged crops in Punjab and Haryana and many committed suicide.

Narendra Modi’s first big challenge on becoming the prime minister was the big farmers’ crisis in March 2015. Unseasonal rains damaged crops in Punjab and Haryana and many committed suicide. Modi instantly ensured that affected farmers got a higher compensation and that all the grain they produced was procured at the minimum support price (MSP). Prime Minister Modi was flustered by the criticism that he personally did not visit the affected families, but Modi was clear in his thoughts: He was the PM and his job was to take decisions and get the machinery to act. Modi knew perception matters first, but actions last forever. The NDA – despite the Congress blitzkrieg – has done plenty to alleviate the plight of farmers. It has prepared soil health cards for 170 million individual farm holdings to improve productivity, provided water through completing irrigation projects, ensured power for pumps and neem-coated fertilisers to prevent adulteration. The Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, an insurance scheme, now compensates the farmers for crops lost to natural calamities. He raised the MSP for grains and pulses. Modinomics at work was at its best. Remember, when he had taken the oath, he had inherited an economy derisively scorned by both domestic and global investors. India was a part of the ‘fragile five’ and there was the sword of Damocles of a credit rating downgrade to ‘Junk’ status. It was a precariously perched economy, akin to a poisoned chalice. But Modinomics has triggered a sturdy ballast to help India emerge as the world’s fifth largest (in GDP terms) and fastest growing economy. So what has helped Modinomics’ work even as rivals stepped up their hate campaign? It was all about the nation and its economic growth. The most important trigger of Modinomics was the goods and services tax (GST) - the biggest indirect tax reform since Independence - which is now demolishing trade barriers, fuelling aggregate demand, compelling tax compliance, reworking logistics and manufacturing architecture. It has done away with sub-scale operational outposts. What is in place is efficient, scalable and closer-to-consumer operational hubs, which are harmonising rates across states by demolishing trade barriers. So who’s in trouble? Tax evading entities and unorganised brokers. The GST, in short, is giving a leg-up to aggregate demand by IBC regime for creating a transparent and legally-sound mechanism for resurrecting financially-distressed entities into viable, productive entities. The World Bank says resolutions in Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) era is now taking 270 days, as compared to the pre-IBC era and its five-year period. In short, Modinomics is working. Demonetisation - loudly criticised by the opposition - has been a brilliant force multiplier for the economy’s financialisation. It was like an assault on tax cheats, terror financiers and illicit carpetbaggers. It helped the billion-plus nation to emerge out of its excessive reliance on a cash ecosystem that for generations, fuelled a dirty, dark, parallel economy, depriving India of legitimate taxes and posing tough challenges to law enforcement and security agencies. It was Modinomics’ bold assault on tax cheats and cash hoarders, asking Indians to follow the rule of the law and not avoid taxes. Indians realised increased tax means increased government expenditure on its people. The move also helped the mutual fund and insurance market, because a large chunk of cash in bank deposits moved through these intermediaries into the equity market. Modinomics also did wonders when the government signed the Monetary Policy Framework Agreement with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on the maximum tolerable consumer inflation rate that RBI should target to achieve price stability. In one shot, Prime Minister Modi made the RBI responsible through the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) for containing consumer inflation at 4 per cent -- with a standard deviation of 2 per cent -- in the medium term. Hence, Modinomics tackled the issue of high inflation impacting the poor and - at the same time - encouraged long-term capital investments by businesses. Realising that the previous government messed up natural resources, getting embroiled in big buck corruption scams like the Coal and 2G scandal, Modi turned auctioning of natural resources into a crystal clear, competitive and price optimising allotment of natural resources like coal, minerals, spectrum and land. This is growth and power for a billion-plus nation. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Modinomics has played big role in India’s growth narrative

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/finlands-social-democrats-finish-close-to-emerge-victorious-against-far-right-finns-party-210441">Finland's Social Democrats finish close to emerge victorious against far-right Finns Party</a>

Finland's leftist Social Democrats won a razor-thin victory in Sunday's general election, holding off the far-right Finns Party which surged on an anti-immigration agenda.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/lok-sabha-elections-2019-parties-got-998-donations-through-electoral-bonds-rti-210439">Lok Sabha elections 2019: Parties got 99.8% donations through electoral bonds, says RTI</a>

A whopping 99.8 per cent of donations received by political parties was through electoral bonds of the highest denominations -- Rs 10 lakh and Rs one crore -- between March 2018 and January 24, 2019, revealed data obtained under the RTI Act.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/american-airlines-cancels-115-flights-daily-over-boeing-737-max-until-august-210442">American Airlines cancels 115 flights daily over Boeing 737 MAX until August</a>

American Airlines announced Sunday it would scrap some 115 flights per day in the coming months because its fleet of Boeing 737 MAX planes is being grounded until August 19.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/hazaras-protest-continues-for-3rd-day-in-pakistan-after-deadly-suicide-bombing-210452">Hazaras protest continues for 3rd day in Pakistan after deadly suicide bombing</a>

Minority Shia Hazaras blocked traffic in a sit-in protest for a third day in the southwestern Pakistani city of Quetta on Sunday after a suicide bomb killed 19 people in an outdoor market, many of them ethnic Hazaras.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iraq-unearths-mass-grave-of-kurds-killed-by-saddam-hussein-210445">Iraq unearths mass grave of Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein</a>

Iraq must never forget Saddam Hussein's crimes or allow his party to return, President Barham Salih said on Sunday after attending the unearthing of a mass grave of Kurds killed by the former leader's forces three decades ago.

&nbsp;

Finland's Social Democrats finish close to emerge victorious against far-right Finns Party Finland's leftist Social Democrats won a razor-thin victory in Sunday's general election, holding off the far-right Finns Party which surged on an anti-immigration agenda.

Finland's Social Democrats finish close to emerge victorious against far-right Finns Party Finland's leftist Social Democrats won a razor-thin victory in Sunday's general election, holding off the far-right Finns Party which surged on an anti-immigration agenda. Lok Sabha elections 2019: Parties got 99.8% donations through electoral bonds, says RTI A whopping 99.8 per cent of donations received by political parties was through electoral bonds of the highest denominations -- Rs 10 lakh and Rs one crore -- between March 2018 and January 24, 2019, revealed data obtained under the RTI Act. American Airlines cancels 115 flights daily over Boeing 737 MAX until August American Airlines announced Sunday it would scrap some 115 flights per day in the coming months because its fleet of Boeing 737 MAX planes is being grounded until August 19. Hazaras protest continues for 3rd day in Pakistan after deadly suicide bombing Minority Shia Hazaras blocked traffic in a sit-in protest for a third day in the southwestern Pakistani city of Quetta on Sunday after a suicide bomb killed 19 people in an outdoor market, many of them ethnic Hazaras. Iraq unearths mass grave of Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein Iraq must never forget Saddam Hussein's crimes or allow his party to return, President Barham Salih said on Sunday after attending the unearthing of a mass grave of Kurds killed by the former leader's forces three decades ago.

News brief: Big stories of the day

A whopping 99.8 per cent of donations received by political parties was through <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/all-you-need-to-know-about-electoral-bonds-209818">electoral bonds</a> of the highest denominations -- Rs 10 lakh and Rs one crore -- between March 2018 and January 24, 2019, revealed data obtained under the RTI Act.

Donors purchased bonds worth Rs 1,407.09 crore of which Rs 1,403.90 crore were in the highest denominations of Rs ten lakh and Rs one crore during the period.

Social worker Chandrashekhar Goud shared the data received from State Bank of India (SBI) through an RTI query.

The donors bought 1,459 electoral bonds of a denomination of Rs ten lakh and 1,258 bonds of Rs one crore denomination. They purchased 318 bonds of Rs one lakh, 12 bonds of Rs 10,000 and 24 bonds of Rs 1000 denomination, according to the RTI reply.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/political-parties-must-submit-details-of-funding-through-electoral-bonds-says-supreme-court-209753">Electoral bonds</a> worth Rs 1,395.89 crore were redeemed by the parties.&nbsp;

Gaud had also asked the bank how many parties redeemed the bonds and worth how much money, but the SBI did not disclose it, saying it was in fiduciary capacity disclosure which is exempted under Section 8 (1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act.

Electoral bonds were sold by the State Bank of India (SBI) in seven tranches. They were sold in five denominations of Rs 1,000, Rs 10,000, Rs 1 lakh, Rs 10 lakh, and Rs 1 crore.&nbsp;

The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a voluntary organisation, working for political reforms, had approached the Supreme Court seeking a stay order on the sale of electoral bonds.&nbsp;

On Friday, the Supreme Court refused to suspend the political funding through electoral bonds but, did introduce conditions to bring transparency in the process.&nbsp;

A whopping 99.8 per cent of donations received by political parties was through electoral bonds of the highest denominations -- Rs 10 lakh and Rs one crore -- between March 2018 and January 24, 2019, revealed data obtained under the RTI Act.

A whopping 99.8 per cent of donations received by political parties was through electoral bonds of the highest denominations -- Rs 10 lakh and Rs one crore -- between March 2018 and January 24, 2019, revealed data obtained under the RTI Act. Donors purchased bonds worth Rs 1,407.09 crore of which Rs 1,403.90 crore were in the highest denominations of Rs ten lakh and Rs one crore during the period. Social worker Chandrashekhar Goud shared the data received from State Bank of India (SBI) through an RTI query. The donors bought 1,459 electoral bonds of a denomination of Rs ten lakh and 1,258 bonds of Rs one crore denomination. They purchased 318 bonds of Rs one lakh, 12 bonds of Rs 10,000 and 24 bonds of Rs 1000 denomination, according to the RTI reply. Electoral bonds worth Rs 1,395.89 crore were redeemed by the parties. Gaud had also asked the bank how many parties redeemed the bonds and worth how much money, but the SBI did not disclose it, saying it was in fiduciary capacity disclosure which is exempted under Section 8 (1) (e) and (j) of the RTI Act. Electoral bonds were sold by the State Bank of India (SBI) in seven tranches. They were sold in five denominations of Rs 1,000, Rs 10,000, Rs 1 lakh, Rs 10 lakh, and Rs 1 crore. The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a voluntary organisation, working for political reforms, had approached the Supreme Court seeking a stay order on the sale of electoral bonds. On Friday, the Supreme Court refused to suspend the political funding through electoral bonds but, did introduce conditions to bring transparency in the process.

Lok Sabha elections 2019: Parties got 99.8% donations through electoral bonds, says RTI

The BJP is popular among the upper castes and in northern India. With the largest number of membership, the BJP today is one of the largest parties in the world.

Tracing the history of Bharatiya Janata Party

Union Minister Maneka Gandhi’s statement that if Muslims do not vote for them then they would find it difficult to get her recommendation for jobs did not raise an eyebrow at all.

Today, it is very difficult to distinguish fringe from mainstream politics. Many would argue that the religious fringe has become the mainstream and the mainstream is on the periphery of political discourse, but the fact remains that politics in India is hell-bent on labelling the other in our society.

Muslims have become the new beating boy of Indian politics. Not only they have been dehumanised in the political discourse but anything to do with minority has become a bad word. It has become okay for the political class to arouse sentiments of the majority community of imagined threat posed by the Muslims of India.&nbsp;

They have been labelled as a community which got better treatment from the government whereas the majority was left to eat the crumbs. BJP-RSS have had a field day in elections whereby every senior politician has used to describe Muslims as a community which has affected the health of the country.&nbsp;

Rahul Gandhi contesting from Wayanad too was reflected from the same perspective. Yogi Adityanath has been consistently using religious idioms to describe those who are with BJP and those against it.&nbsp;

The worst is that the debate on ‘Muslim Exceptionalism’ is constructed on imagined benefits which have been secretly passed on to the Muslim community post-independence at the expense of Hindus.&nbsp;

RSS is playing with fire. Instead of integrating the Muslims in the national mainstream it is politically alienating them. Fact is barring a couple of pockets in India, Muslims have opted for Hindus to lead them politically.&nbsp;

I would say that those who chose to stay behind have never supported a Muslim leader who had a national stature.&nbsp;I call it a Jinnah complex, lest they get accused of cession again. India today is standing at the cusp of creating a huge divide between majority and minority which will stay with us. It cannot be wished away.&nbsp;

Their identity cannot be wished away. Their existence cannot be wished away. They do not need charity nor anyone needs to feel sorry for them. What is required is a political approach which allows them to be part of the system for which they are meant - which is Indian Muslims. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Union Minister Maneka Gandhi’s statement that if Muslims do not vote for them then they would find it difficult to get her recommendation for jobs did not raise an eyebrow at all.

Union Minister Maneka Gandhi’s statement that if Muslims do not vote for them then they would find it difficult to get her recommendation for jobs did not raise an eyebrow at all. Today, it is very difficult to distinguish fringe from mainstream politics. Many would argue that the religious fringe has become the mainstream and the mainstream is on the periphery of political discourse, but the fact remains that politics in India is hell-bent on labelling the other in our society. Muslims have become the new beating boy of Indian politics. Not only they have been dehumanised in the political discourse but anything to do with minority has become a bad word. It has become okay for the political class to arouse sentiments of the majority community of imagined threat posed by the Muslims of India. They have been labelled as a community which got better treatment from the government whereas the majority was left to eat the crumbs. BJP-RSS have had a field day in elections whereby every senior politician has used to describe Muslims as a community which has affected the health of the country. Rahul Gandhi contesting from Wayanad too was reflected from the same perspective. Yogi Adityanath has been consistently using religious idioms to describe those who are with BJP and those against it. The worst is that the debate on ‘Muslim Exceptionalism’ is constructed on imagined benefits which have been secretly passed on to the Muslim community post-independence at the expense of Hindus. RSS is playing with fire. Instead of integrating the Muslims in the national mainstream it is politically alienating them. Fact is barring a couple of pockets in India, Muslims have opted for Hindus to lead them politically. I would say that those who chose to stay behind have never supported a Muslim leader who had a national stature. I call it a Jinnah complex, lest they get accused of cession again. India today is standing at the cusp of creating a huge divide between majority and minority which will stay with us. It cannot be wished away. Their identity cannot be wished away. Their existence cannot be wished away. They do not need charity nor anyone needs to feel sorry for them. What is required is a political approach which allows them to be part of the system for which they are meant - which is Indian Muslims. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Political marginalisation of Muslims in Indian politics

In a controversial remark, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/mamata-banerjee-govts-approach-towards-women-is-disastrous-maneka-gandhi-192326">Union minister Maneka Gandhi</a> told Muslims to vote for her as they will need her once the Lok Sabha elections are over.

"We are not Mahatma Gandhi's children that we keep giving and not get anything in return," she said in Muslim-dominated Turabkhani area on Thursday.

Gandhi, the BJP candidate from Sultanpur Lok Sabha constituency, claimed she is all set to win and told the Muslim audience that "you might need me tomorrow".

The Congress reacted strongly with spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala saying she is trying to divide people on the basis of caste and community.

"I am winning. I am winning because of the help and love of the people," Maneka Gandhi said at the meeting in Sultanpur, a constituency earlier held by her son Varun Gandhi.

"But if my victory is without the Muslims, I will not feel very good," she said, adding she will be left with a bitter feeling. "If Muslims come for some work after this, I will think why bother, what difference will it make."

Suggesting that it was matter of give and take, she added, "We are not Mahatma Gandhi's children to keep giving without getting anything in return."

The minister asked them to check with the people in Pilibhit, her earlier constituency.

"If there is even one person who says there had been something wrong on my part, don't vote for me," she said.

In a controversial remark, Union minister Maneka Gandhi told Muslims to vote for her as they will need her once the Lok Sabha elections are over. "We are not Mahatma Gandhi's children that we keep giving and not get anything in return," she said in Muslim-dominated Turabkhani area on Thursday.

In a controversial remark, Union minister Maneka Gandhi told Muslims to vote for her as they will need her once the Lok Sabha elections are over. "We are not Mahatma Gandhi's children that we keep giving and not get anything in return," she said in Muslim-dominated Turabkhani area on Thursday. Gandhi, the BJP candidate from Sultanpur Lok Sabha constituency, claimed she is all set to win and told the Muslim audience that "you might need me tomorrow". The Congress reacted strongly with spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala saying she is trying to divide people on the basis of caste and community. "I am winning. I am winning because of the help and love of the people," Maneka Gandhi said at the meeting in Sultanpur, a constituency earlier held by her son Varun Gandhi. "But if my victory is without the Muslims, I will not feel very good," she said, adding she will be left with a bitter feeling. "If Muslims come for some work after this, I will think why bother, what difference will it make." Suggesting that it was matter of give and take, she added, "We are not Mahatma Gandhi's children to keep giving without getting anything in return." The minister asked them to check with the people in Pilibhit, her earlier constituency. "If there is even one person who says there had been something wrong on my part, don't vote for me," she said.

Vote for me, you will need me once elections are over: Maneka Gandhi to Muslims

Electoral outcomes in West Bengal reveal that anti-incumbency is not a very big factor. Unless a major threshold of unacceptability has been crossed and a viable political alternative exists, a substantial section of the electorate continues to support the dominant political party.&nbsp;

At present, the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) occupies that exalted position.

Political temperatures have risen across the country and in West Bengal, the stakes could be among the highest. The BJP is striving for greater political penetration of the state, even though its prevailing political heft in the state is negligible.&nbsp;

The Congress Party, meanwhile, is in an emaciated position. The Communist Party of India (Marxist)-led Left Front is a steadily shrinking political entity. Naturally, the TMC is not too concerned about anti-incumbency. &nbsp;

However, there is latent political opposition to the TMC. The Congress, BJP, and CPI(M) would try to make a dent in TMC’s political vote base, but to the TMC’s satisfaction, there are no political alliances among any of the three parties regarding seat-sharing. Talks of a possible alliance between the CPI(M) and the Congress fell apart amid mutual discord.&nbsp;

However the BJP, notwithstanding its negligible presence, could be a cause of some worry for the TMC. With its pan-India presence and strong commitment of its members, the BJP could throw a spanner in the TMC’s works.&nbsp;

West Bengal Chief Minister and TMC supreme leader Mamata Banerjee’s alleged appeasement of Muslims is a major political issue for her opponents, particularly the BJP.&nbsp;

In a bid to introduce correctives, Banerjee has spoken of her identification with the best of Bengal’s culture and heritage, rejected charges of appeasement, articulated at length the inviolability of the rule of law, accorded high priority to national security and taken the narrative of holistic development to the heart of public discourse. &nbsp;&nbsp;

To the TMC’s credit, it has presided over improved conditions in rural Bengal. It has also helped provide better infrastructural facilities: roads, electricity and drinking water to the villages.&nbsp;

Plus, there have been social sector reforms. The state government has successfully initiated “Kanyashree”, which empowers the girl child through education; for it, Banerjee’s government has also won a UN award.&nbsp;

Farmers have been provided a measure of financial security in the event of flagging retail prices of agricultural products. The state’s food security system has been revamped.&nbsp;

Small-scale and medium scale enterprises have been encouraged. Banerjee has repeatedly expressed her government’s support for organised, accountable entrepreneurial investments. &nbsp;

Perennial inter-party factional wrangling, its attendant violence and intermittent charges of corruption against TMC leaders are negative attributes. However, the penchant for political high-handedness among some of them, often visible during the party’s first stint, looks like having decelerated for the moment. &nbsp;

A fortnight ago, Rahul Gandhi campaigned at Chanchal in Malda district. He ranted against the TMC. Whether he realises it or not, it would not be of much help to Congress Party’s Bengal unit.&nbsp;

There is grim irony in Gandhi’s criticism of the ruling TMC in West Bengal. Apart from Amethi, Gandhi is also contesting from Wayanad in Kerala. That state’s ruling CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front has interpreted it as a challenge to its candidate by Gandhi. In response, he has said that he would refrain from politically attacking the LDF. &nbsp;

If Gandhi can refrain from criticising the LDF in Kerala, then he could have withheld censuring the ruling TMC. Surely he knows that the TMC is much more opposed to the BJP than it is to the Congress.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, BJP president Amit Shah, and other party leaders have also attacked the TMC.&nbsp;

They are keen to highlight security issues like infiltration and the necessity for a stable, coherent government at the Centre. But Banerjee and other TMC leaders are ready with their repartees.&nbsp;

Any notable trend regarding the outcome of the Lok Sabha elections is still elusive, but most appraisals indicate that the TMC has a relative political edge in its bastion.&nbsp;

If it manages to win a substantial proportion of the state’s 42 parliamentary seats, its role could be crucial in supporting a coalition government. Conversely, it could constructively oppose another BJP-led NDA government.&nbsp; 
 
(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-there-is-no-anti-incumbency-or-grand-alliance-in-bengal-2738695">original article)</a> 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Electoral outcomes in West Bengal reveal that anti-incumbency is not a very big factor. Unless a major threshold of unacceptability has been crossed and a viable political alternative exists, a substantial section of the electorate continues to support the dominant political party.

Electoral outcomes in West Bengal reveal that anti-incumbency is not a very big factor. Unless a major threshold of unacceptability has been crossed and a viable political alternative exists, a substantial section of the electorate continues to support the dominant political party. At present, the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) occupies that exalted position. Political temperatures have risen across the country and in West Bengal, the stakes could be among the highest. The BJP is striving for greater political penetration of the state, even though its prevailing political heft in the state is negligible. The Congress Party, meanwhile, is in an emaciated position. The Communist Party of India (Marxist)-led Left Front is a steadily shrinking political entity. Naturally, the TMC is not too concerned about anti-incumbency. However, there is latent political opposition to the TMC. The Congress, BJP, and CPI(M) would try to make a dent in TMC’s political vote base, but to the TMC’s satisfaction, there are no political alliances among any of the three parties regarding seat-sharing. Talks of a possible alliance between the CPI(M) and the Congress fell apart amid mutual discord. However the BJP, notwithstanding its negligible presence, could be a cause of some worry for the TMC. With its pan-India presence and strong commitment of its members, the BJP could throw a spanner in the TMC’s works. West Bengal Chief Minister and TMC supreme leader Mamata Banerjee’s alleged appeasement of Muslims is a major political issue for her opponents, particularly the BJP. In a bid to introduce correctives, Banerjee has spoken of her identification with the best of Bengal’s culture and heritage, rejected charges of appeasement, articulated at length the inviolability of the rule of law, accorded high priority to national security and taken the narrative of holistic development to the heart of public discourse. To the TMC’s credit, it has presided over improved conditions in rural Bengal. It has also helped provide better infrastructural facilities: roads, electricity and drinking water to the villages. Plus, there have been social sector reforms. The state government has successfully initiated “Kanyashree”, which empowers the girl child through education; for it, Banerjee’s government has also won a UN award. Farmers have been provided a measure of financial security in the event of flagging retail prices of agricultural products. The state’s food security system has been revamped. Small-scale and medium scale enterprises have been encouraged. Banerjee has repeatedly expressed her government’s support for organised, accountable entrepreneurial investments. Perennial inter-party factional wrangling, its attendant violence and intermittent charges of corruption against TMC leaders are negative attributes. However, the penchant for political high-handedness among some of them, often visible during the party’s first stint, looks like having decelerated for the moment. A fortnight ago, Rahul Gandhi campaigned at Chanchal in Malda district. He ranted against the TMC. Whether he realises it or not, it would not be of much help to Congress Party’s Bengal unit. There is grim irony in Gandhi’s criticism of the ruling TMC in West Bengal. Apart from Amethi, Gandhi is also contesting from Wayanad in Kerala. That state’s ruling CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front has interpreted it as a challenge to its candidate by Gandhi. In response, he has said that he would refrain from politically attacking the LDF. If Gandhi can refrain from criticising the LDF in Kerala, then he could have withheld censuring the ruling TMC. Surely he knows that the TMC is much more opposed to the BJP than it is to the Congress. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, BJP president Amit Shah, and other party leaders have also attacked the TMC. They are keen to highlight security issues like infiltration and the necessity for a stable, coherent government at the Centre. But Banerjee and other TMC leaders are ready with their repartees. Any notable trend regarding the outcome of the Lok Sabha elections is still elusive, but most appraisals indicate that the TMC has a relative political edge in its bastion. If it manages to win a substantial proportion of the state’s 42 parliamentary seats, its role could be crucial in supporting a coalition government. Conversely, it could constructively oppose another BJP-led NDA government. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Lok Sabha elections 2019: There is no anti-incumbency or grand alliance in Bengal

The socioeconomic prospects of a country are best measured by the social and political status enjoyed by its women. In that context, India became a trailblazer by granting women the equal right to vote from day one along with men through Universal Adult Suffrage. It may not sound like a big deal today — but it is.&nbsp;

Take, for example, the case of the US, which took 144 years, and the UK, which took 100 years to confer political equality on women. By the time women got unconditional suffrage in the latter in 1928, Dr Muthulaxmi Reddy, a 41-year-old doctor, had already become the first female member of the Madras Legislative Council of colonial India.

Unfortunately, equal voting rights and elections have not translated into better outcomes for women in the field of political and socioeconomic participation. After seven decades, we remain a highly patriarchal society. Social and cultural stereotypes, educational and economic backwardness, safety and security issues lead to women facing uncertainty inside and outside the four walls of their home.&nbsp;

India suffers from one of the worst sex ratios in South Asia — 940 women for every 1,000 men. We rank poorly in World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index — 108 out of 149 countries. Even within that index, we rank 142 out of 149 countries on economic opportunity and participation. This deficit also translates into gender-skewed voter lists. For instance, the ratio was as low as 800 to 1,000 males when I joined the Election Commission in 2006.&nbsp;

To enable greater participation of women as voters, the Commission undertook the onerous task of searching for ‘missing women’ from the voter lists. Gender was included as a principal element in the review of the health of electoral rolls. It was found that some of the common issues post registration included concerns about security at the booths (for instance, encountering anti-social elements), family pressures, sanitation facilities, etc.&nbsp;

Subsequent voter education campaigns included targeted communication to family elders for curing stereotypes. Separate queues for women, female staff at the booths, female police force and all-women polling stations in some areas contributed to jump in female turnout. For instance, in 2012 UP elections, a simple but innovative idea of allowing two women in the queue to enter the polling station for every man proved to be a game-changer. &nbsp; 
 
The EC’s National and State level election icons helped bring women out. Celebrated figures such as folk singers Malini Awasthi in UP and Sharda Sinha in Bihar, inspired millions of women to go to the polling booths. Due to such efforts, women voters outnumbered men in the 2010 Bihar elections (54.85 per cent against 50.77 per cent) and 2012 UP elections (60.28 per cent against 58.68 per cent).

Due to the EC’s Systematic Voter Education for Electoral Participation (SVEEP) aimed at educating the masses and focusing on women, there was a 10 per cent point jump in women’s turnout - from 55.82 per cent in 2009 to 65.63 per cent in 2014! The icing on the cake- women outnumbered men in 16 states despite the adverse gender ratio. The gender voting gap shrank to mere 1.46 per cent.&nbsp; 
 
&nbsp;
<img alt="Figure 1" data-caption="Fig 1. Graph Source- Quraishi, SY. 2019. The Great March of Democracy, Seven Decades of India’s Elections. Penguin Random House." data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="71bddf57-a0ec-4c95-859f-d51a06ff2af6" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture1_1.png" />
Fig 1. Graph Source- Quraishi, SY. 2019. The Great March of Democracy, Seven Decades of India’s Elections. Penguin Random House. 
 
While the Commission has lead the way in making elections inclusive, the sorry state of women’s participation in the legislatures is abysmal 12.15 per cent in the Lok Sabha (Fig 2) and even more abysmal in most state legislatures. (Fig 3) 
 
<img alt="Figure 2" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="398f67b2-2eae-4af4-91be-ef91292bcf85" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture2.png" />

&nbsp;
<img alt="Figure 3" data-caption="Fig (2 and 3)Source- Trivedi Centre for Political Data (Image Courtesy:Citizen Matters)" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="7feb5eb3-f59c-4b6a-b11a-db003937a56e" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture3.png" />
Fig (2 and 3)Source- Trivedi Centre for Political Data (Image Courtesy:Citizen Matters) 
 
This is shameful as compared to some neighbouring conservative Muslim countries, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, which have high female political representation. This has become a reality due to affirmative legislation on women’s representation. Nepal has led the way with its latest progressive constitution and has recorded dramatic increase of women at all levels of government, not just the national legislature. (Fig 4)
<img alt="Figure 4" data-caption="Fig 4. Source- World Bank Data" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="5c90b5e6-2225-4490-ac29-aade0717e14a" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture4_0.png" />
Fig 4. Source- World Bank Data 
 
The unwillingness of Indian political leadership (which is dominated by males) to provide women fair representation in its legislatures is paradoxical. Women were allowed 33 per cent in local bodies in 1993, which was later made 50 per cent in 2009. A number of states have introduced 50 per cent reservations in corporations and municipalities. But the upper levels of government are still to pass their respective reservation bills that have been debated ad nauseam.&nbsp; 
 
Unfortunately, political parties are reluctant to even give enough tickets to women. Hardly one-tenth of total candidates are female — the excuse of low ‘winnability’ of female candidates is a myth. Anyone with the slightest bit of knowledge of our electoral history is aware of the simple fact that their “strike rate” has always been as much as two to four times higher! (Fig 5) 
&nbsp;
<img alt="Figure 5" data-caption="&lt;br /&gt;
Factly.com, ECI" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="f908e97a-c09e-496d-aabc-2f478aa097f8" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture5.png" />
Factly.com, ECI 
 
In this context, it is a welcome transformation that some parties are now competing to give tickets to women, with Trinamool Congress giving 41 per cent tickets to women, and Biju Janata Dal giving 33 per cent. The gender participation within all parties is abysmal and this is certainly a good start. But a lot more needs to be done. The women’s reservation bills at both state and National level are overdue. &nbsp;

Though our elections are considered a gold standard, the agenda of women’s political representation remains unfinished. The society must ensure that women don’t only choose their representatives, but become one. A comprehensive reform agenda must be a priority for the 17th Lok Sabha. Women’s representation in legislatures throughout the country needs to be written down into law and not left to the discretion of political parties. It is time the political parties follow the example of inclusive elections set by the Election Commission by making parliament inclusive. The time for walking the talk is now.

 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The socioeconomic prospects of a country are best measured by the social and political status enjoyed by its women. In that context, India became a trailblazer by granting women the equal right to vote from day one along with men through Universal Adult Suffrage.

The socioeconomic prospects of a country are best measured by the social and political status enjoyed by its women. In that context, India became a trailblazer by granting women the equal right to vote from day one along with men through Universal Adult Suffrage. It may not sound like a big deal today — but it is. Take, for example, the case of the US, which took 144 years, and the UK, which took 100 years to confer political equality on women. By the time women got unconditional suffrage in the latter in 1928, Dr Muthulaxmi Reddy, a 41-year-old doctor, had already become the first female member of the Madras Legislative Council of colonial India. Unfortunately, equal voting rights and elections have not translated into better outcomes for women in the field of political and socioeconomic participation. After seven decades, we remain a highly patriarchal society. Social and cultural stereotypes, educational and economic backwardness, safety and security issues lead to women facing uncertainty inside and outside the four walls of their home. India suffers from one of the worst sex ratios in South Asia — 940 women for every 1,000 men. We rank poorly in World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index — 108 out of 149 countries. Even within that index, we rank 142 out of 149 countries on economic opportunity and participation. This deficit also translates into gender-skewed voter lists. For instance, the ratio was as low as 800 to 1,000 males when I joined the Election Commission in 2006. To enable greater participation of women as voters, the Commission undertook the onerous task of searching for ‘missing women’ from the voter lists. Gender was included as a principal element in the review of the health of electoral rolls. It was found that some of the common issues post registration included concerns about security at the booths (for instance, encountering anti-social elements), family pressures, sanitation facilities, etc. Subsequent voter education campaigns included targeted communication to family elders for curing stereotypes. Separate queues for women, female staff at the booths, female police force and all-women polling stations in some areas contributed to jump in female turnout. For instance, in 2012 UP elections, a simple but innovative idea of allowing two women in the queue to enter the polling station for every man proved to be a game-changer. The EC’s National and State level election icons helped bring women out. Celebrated figures such as folk singers Malini Awasthi in UP and Sharda Sinha in Bihar, inspired millions of women to go to the polling booths. Due to such efforts, women voters outnumbered men in the 2010 Bihar elections (54.85 per cent against 50.77 per cent) and 2012 UP elections (60.28 per cent against 58.68 per cent). Due to the EC’s Systematic Voter Education for Electoral Participation (SVEEP) aimed at educating the masses and focusing on women, there was a 10 per cent point jump in women’s turnout - from 55.82 per cent in 2009 to 65.63 per cent in 2014! The icing on the cake- women outnumbered men in 16 states despite the adverse gender ratio. The gender voting gap shrank to mere 1.46 per cent. Fig 1. Graph Source- Quraishi, SY. 2019. The Great March of Democracy, Seven Decades of India’s Elections. Penguin Random House. While the Commission has lead the way in making elections inclusive, the sorry state of women’s participation in the legislatures is abysmal 12.15 per cent in the Lok Sabha (Fig 2) and even more abysmal in most state legislatures. (Fig 3) Fig (2 and 3)Source- Trivedi Centre for Political Data (Image Courtesy:Citizen Matters) This is shameful as compared to some neighbouring conservative Muslim countries, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, which have high female political representation. This has become a reality due to affirmative legislation on women’s representation. Nepal has led the way with its latest progressive constitution and has recorded dramatic increase of women at all levels of government, not just the national legislature. (Fig 4) Fig 4. Source- World Bank Data The unwillingness of Indian political leadership (which is dominated by males) to provide women fair representation in its legislatures is paradoxical. Women were allowed 33 per cent in local bodies in 1993, which was later made 50 per cent in 2009. A number of states have introduced 50 per cent reservations in corporations and municipalities. But the upper levels of government are still to pass their respective reservation bills that have been debated ad nauseam. Unfortunately, political parties are reluctant to even give enough tickets to women. Hardly one-tenth of total candidates are female — the excuse of low ‘winnability’ of female candidates is a myth. Anyone with the slightest bit of knowledge of our electoral history is aware of the simple fact that their “strike rate” has always been as much as two to four times higher! (Fig 5) Factly.com, ECI In this context, it is a welcome transformation that some parties are now competing to give tickets to women, with Trinamool Congress giving 41 per cent tickets to women, and Biju Janata Dal giving 33 per cent. The gender participation within all parties is abysmal and this is certainly a good start. But a lot more needs to be done. The women’s reservation bills at both state and National level are overdue. Though our elections are considered a gold standard, the agenda of women’s political representation remains unfinished. The society must ensure that women don’t only choose their representatives, but become one. A comprehensive reform agenda must be a priority for the 17th Lok Sabha. Women’s representation in legislatures throughout the country needs to be written down into law and not left to the discretion of political parties. It is time the political parties follow the example of inclusive elections set by the Election Commission by making parliament inclusive. The time for walking the talk is now. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Women shouldn't just choose their political representatives, they should become one

This segment of WION brings to you top stories of the morning from across the globe. Watch this video to get updated with the latest information.

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning, April 11th 2019

I am cynical/practical/experienced enough to know that pre-election opinion polls can go quite wrong for at least three reasons. Voters may not truly reveal their minds and/or change their minds close to polling day.&nbsp;

The sampling methodology may go wrong or converting vote shares based on sample surveys into seats can get tricky. Last but not the least, media organisations carrying out opinion poll results in league with pollster organisations can add a bit of spice to suit their own priorities.

After discounting for all this, I do believe that in the general elections that are now underway, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has reached a point where it will certainly not get a majority of its own like it did in 2014, and may also not be entirely home even with its National Democratic Alliance (NDA) partners.

One TV news channel that is visibly, loudly and consistently supportive of the BJP sees the NDA tally at 279, just four ahead of the half-way mark. An average of all opinion polls this week gives the NDA 277 seats in the Lok Sabha.&nbsp;

There are as many as 167 "marginal" seats where close contests will decide winners in the 543-member Lok Sabha.

It is time to ask some what-if questions. My guess is that in a scenario where the NDA is short of a clear majority, three leaders from the south will become important: Naveen Patnaik of the Biju Janata Dal from Odisha, Kalvakuntla Chandrashekhar Rao of the Telangana Rashtra Samithi and YS Jagan Mohan Reddy from the YSR Congress in Andhra Pradesh.&nbsp;

(If the Tropic of Cancer is seen as the dividing line between northern and southern India, Odisha, which is to the southeast, certainly falls in the south. It is also definitely south of the Vindhya mountain range, the traditional threshold to separate the south from the north.)

KCR, as the Telangana Chief Minister is called, is officially part of the 'Mahagatbandhan' (grand alliance) against Modi and will be needed by the BJP only if there is a significant late swing against it. With Telangana still in its honeymoon phase after he led a decades-old movement to carve the state out of the undivided Andhra Pradesh, he is perhaps the strongest ruling CM in India today, not counting Pawan Chamling of Sikkim. KCR's pro-farmer programmes are considered a role model for the rest of India.

Patnaik has been maintaining a studied equidistance from the BJP and the Congress and has had a phenomenal run in his state, having won four terms in a row to be the Odisha Chief Minister since the year 2000. His development efforts are part of the national folklore.

Jagan Reddy, only 46 years old, is yet to taste power but is seen as the front-runner in an anti-incumbency mood against Andhra CM N Chandrababu Naidu's Telugu Desam Party (TDP). He announced last week he had no ill-will against the Congress, from which his party broke off, even as he maintains that he favours anyone who grants special status to Andhra under an arrangement made when Telangana was carved out.

Jagan is perhaps the easiest for the BJP to woo since Naidu is already on the side of the anti-Modi alliance. KCR can be wooed in a desperate scenario. But Patnaik may be a harder nut to crack. It all depends on the exact break-up of the Lok Sabha that gets formed in the summer heat. Watch out in the coming days nice things to be said about these three gentlemen. They may be kingmakers, and they may even edge close to each other where the eventual verdict swings away from the current predictions.

(This article was originally published on Zee News. Read the <a href="https://zeenews.india.com/blogs/after-2019-lok-sabha-elections-the-kingmakers-are-likely-to-be-from-the-south-2194704.html">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

I am cynical/practical/experienced enough to know that pre-election opinion polls can go quite wrong for at least three reasons. Voters may not truly reveal their minds and/or change their minds close to polling day.

I am cynical/practical/experienced enough to know that pre-election opinion polls can go quite wrong for at least three reasons. Voters may not truly reveal their minds and/or change their minds close to polling day. The sampling methodology may go wrong or converting vote shares based on sample surveys into seats can get tricky. Last but not the least, media organisations carrying out opinion poll results in league with pollster organisations can add a bit of spice to suit their own priorities. After discounting for all this, I do believe that in the general elections that are now underway, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has reached a point where it will certainly not get a majority of its own like it did in 2014, and may also not be entirely home even with its National Democratic Alliance (NDA) partners. One TV news channel that is visibly, loudly and consistently supportive of the BJP sees the NDA tally at 279, just four ahead of the half-way mark. An average of all opinion polls this week gives the NDA 277 seats in the Lok Sabha. There are as many as 167 "marginal" seats where close contests will decide winners in the 543-member Lok Sabha. It is time to ask some what-if questions. My guess is that in a scenario where the NDA is short of a clear majority, three leaders from the south will become important: Naveen Patnaik of the Biju Janata Dal from Odisha, Kalvakuntla Chandrashekhar Rao of the Telangana Rashtra Samithi and YS Jagan Mohan Reddy from the YSR Congress in Andhra Pradesh. (If the Tropic of Cancer is seen as the dividing line between northern and southern India, Odisha, which is to the southeast, certainly falls in the south. It is also definitely south of the Vindhya mountain range, the traditional threshold to separate the south from the north.) KCR, as the Telangana Chief Minister is called, is officially part of the 'Mahagatbandhan' (grand alliance) against Modi and will be needed by the BJP only if there is a significant late swing against it. With Telangana still in its honeymoon phase after he led a decades-old movement to carve the state out of the undivided Andhra Pradesh, he is perhaps the strongest ruling CM in India today, not counting Pawan Chamling of Sikkim. KCR's pro-farmer programmes are considered a role model for the rest of India. Patnaik has been maintaining a studied equidistance from the BJP and the Congress and has had a phenomenal run in his state, having won four terms in a row to be the Odisha Chief Minister since the year 2000. His development efforts are part of the national folklore. Jagan Reddy, only 46 years old, is yet to taste power but is seen as the front-runner in an anti-incumbency mood against Andhra CM N Chandrababu Naidu's Telugu Desam Party (TDP). He announced last week he had no ill-will against the Congress, from which his party broke off, even as he maintains that he favours anyone who grants special status to Andhra under an arrangement made when Telangana was carved out. Jagan is perhaps the easiest for the BJP to woo since Naidu is already on the side of the anti-Modi alliance. KCR can be wooed in a desperate scenario. But Patnaik may be a harder nut to crack. It all depends on the exact break-up of the Lok Sabha that gets formed in the summer heat. Watch out in the coming days nice things to be said about these three gentlemen. They may be kingmakers, and they may even edge close to each other where the eventual verdict swings away from the current predictions. (This article was originally published on Zee News. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

After 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the kingmakers are likely to be from the south

In the run-up to Lok Sabha elections 2019, two women had a powerful influence on matters related to opposition's strategy to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP.

The key interlocutor of opposition - Mamata Banerjee is considered to be the prime reason behind Congress president Rahul Gandhi not being declared the prime ministerial candidate of the united opposition despite approvals from several leaders. The friction between Banerjee and Gandhi scion is quite evident, she recently called Rahul a 'kid' while responding to his attack on the Trinamool Congress (TMC).

Didi doesn't mince a word while attacking Prime Minister Narendra Modi as well. She is one of the most vocal members of the opposition who claims West Bengal will lead in throwing Narendra Modi government out and forming the new government at the Centre. She ran pillar and post to unite all like-minded parties against BJP.

Mayawati too has emerged as a strong Congress-opposer. When Congress approached SP and BSP for forging an alliance in Uttar Pradesh, unhappy with the seat-sharing ratio suggested by Congress, Mayawati outrightly rejected the offer.

There were still some chances of understanding between the SP-BSP-RJD alliance and the Congress when the latter said it was ready to leave &nbsp;7 Lok Sabha seats vacant for the alliance, however, this couldn't happen due to Mayawati's defiance.&nbsp;

In a joint rally on Sunday, Mayawati trained her guns towards Congress and said the party was dividing votes on the basis of caste and religion. &nbsp;She cautioned voters against any such attempt and asked them to give all their votes to the SP, BSP and RJD alliance.

Other opposition members are worried that this three-cornered contest will divide the votes in UP and help the BJP. UP is a politically crucial state which has the highest number of Lok Sabha seats in the country - 80. In such a scenario, Mayawati's decision to not tie-up with Congress could prove costly to the alliance.

Meanwhile, on the national front - setting aside three decades of rivalry - even Chandrababu Naidu dropped his 'non-Congress Third Front' plank and approached Congress president Rahul Gandhi. He stressed on the need for opposition unity to save the nation. DMK chief M K Stalin too endorsed Gandhi as the Prime Ministerial candidate of the 'Mahagathbandhan', but Didi remained&nbsp;adamant.

Going by her and ignoring Congress, which did exceptionally well in the recently-concluded Assembly elections under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi, isn't mature.&nbsp;

For 'Mahagathbandhan', leadership has become a divisive issue. The opposition parties need to reach a broader understanding and declare the grouping's PM face. Political analysts say that not having a credible face pitted against PM Narendra Modi would impact voters' decision during the polling. Electorates are curious and have the right to know who will lead the country if 'Mahagathbandhan' comes to&nbsp;power. &nbsp;

The resistance&nbsp;of Mamata and Mayawati is a big setback to the entire calculation for forming an anti-BJP coalition and the prospects of 'Mahagathbandhan' - both on state and national level.&nbsp;

Alliances need sacrifices, however, they have shown reluctance to have an understanding with Congress - the main opposition party. Mamata and Mayawati have no desire to become Gandhi’s minority partners. They want to be in the driver's seat themselves.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp;

&nbsp;

In the run-up to Lok Sabha elections 2019, two women had a powerful influence on matters related to opposition's strategy to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP.

In the run-up to Lok Sabha elections 2019, two women had a powerful influence on matters related to opposition's strategy to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP. The key interlocutor of opposition - Mamata Banerjee is considered to be the prime reason behind Congress president Rahul Gandhi not being declared the prime ministerial candidate of the united opposition despite approvals from several leaders. The friction between Banerjee and Gandhi scion is quite evident, she recently called Rahul a 'kid' while responding to his attack on the Trinamool Congress (TMC). Didi doesn't mince a word while attacking Prime Minister Narendra Modi as well. She is one of the most vocal members of the opposition who claims West Bengal will lead in throwing Narendra Modi government out and forming the new government at the Centre. She ran pillar and post to unite all like-minded parties against BJP. Mayawati too has emerged as a strong Congress-opposer. When Congress approached SP and BSP for forging an alliance in Uttar Pradesh, unhappy with the seat-sharing ratio suggested by Congress, Mayawati outrightly rejected the offer. There were still some chances of understanding between the SP-BSP-RJD alliance and the Congress when the latter said it was ready to leave 7 Lok Sabha seats vacant for the alliance, however, this couldn't happen due to Mayawati's defiance. In a joint rally on Sunday, Mayawati trained her guns towards Congress and said the party was dividing votes on the basis of caste and religion. She cautioned voters against any such attempt and asked them to give all their votes to the SP, BSP and RJD alliance. Other opposition members are worried that this three-cornered contest will divide the votes in UP and help the BJP. UP is a politically crucial state which has the highest number of Lok Sabha seats in the country - 80. In such a scenario, Mayawati's decision to not tie-up with Congress could prove costly to the alliance. Meanwhile, on the national front - setting aside three decades of rivalry - even Chandrababu Naidu dropped his 'non-Congress Third Front' plank and approached Congress president Rahul Gandhi. He stressed on the need for opposition unity to save the nation. DMK chief M K Stalin too endorsed Gandhi as the Prime Ministerial candidate of the 'Mahagathbandhan', but Didi remained adamant. Going by her and ignoring Congress, which did exceptionally well in the recently-concluded Assembly elections under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi, isn't mature. For 'Mahagathbandhan', leadership has become a divisive issue. The opposition parties need to reach a broader understanding and declare the grouping's PM face. Political analysts say that not having a credible face pitted against PM Narendra Modi would impact voters' decision during the polling. Electorates are curious and have the right to know who will lead the country if 'Mahagathbandhan' comes to power. The resistance of Mamata and Mayawati is a big setback to the entire calculation for forming an anti-BJP coalition and the prospects of 'Mahagathbandhan' - both on state and national level. Alliances need sacrifices, however, they have shown reluctance to have an understanding with Congress - the main opposition party. Mamata and Mayawati have no desire to become Gandhi’s minority partners. They want to be in the driver's seat themselves. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Lok Sabha polls 2019: Mamata Banerjee's dominance, Mayawati's reluctance is advantage BJP

Pakistan's Premier Imran Khan has said he believes there may be a better chance of peace talks with India and settle the Kashmir issue if Prime Minister Narendra Modi's party BJP wins the general elections.

India Election Watch: Better chances for peace if Narendra Modi wins, says Imran Khan

India Election Watch: Better chance for peace if Narendra Modi wins, says Imran Khan

Rally roster for top leaders for April 10, 2019. Watch more to know.

India Election Watch: Rally roster for top leaders for April 10, 2019

Over the last few years, we have been witnessing a debate on the subject of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Sadly, it is becoming more strident as media channels have multiplied, as have activists and ‘experts’.&nbsp;

Now with the social media, no channel is needed. Suddenly, everyone has a view and a platform to express it. So the debate has got high on rhetoric and low on content. There are frequent references to phrases like ‘draconian law’, ‘licence to kill’, ‘free hand to Army to rape and murder’, and much more.&nbsp;

Are we talking about our Indian Army, the simple soldiers who risk their lives day after day for country and countrymen? Or are we talking about characters from a James Bond movie? Why have the debates got so shrill? Partly because it is fashionable to talk about human rights (in that case, one needs to make a case about the human rights of soldiers as well, but I will leave it for a subsequent day). &nbsp;

The rights part have got discussed threadbare and the legal mores analysed to the hilt. Knowledgeable in their fields as they might be, these experts have no idea of how to operate in these tricky situations, where there is risk to life and limb.

The Indian Army, on the other hand, barely comes out openly in support of its stand on the AFSPA and has always been reluctant to put forward its views in public. The result is the public has got a one-sided and distorted picture. &nbsp;

Recently, this subject gathered additional momentum as a major political party suggested changes in their position on the AFSPA in their election manifesto. Once again, there was a flurry of activities, speeches and debates. Given the poll climes, there was the obvious political tilt, as can be expected. &nbsp;

But the Indian public deserves better. The purpose of this piece is to put forward the facts simply, correctly and directly, so that we can aspire for more informed debates.

Let us first understand what AFSPA is. It was first promulgated in its present form in 1958 in North East India when the army was called in to control the Naga insurgents, as the Naga National Council had declared independence.&nbsp;

Normally, a district magistrate hands over any given situation to the army by actually signing a form. But in remote, high altitude and thickly forested mountains, there is no habitation, let alone any representative of the civil administration. Hence the army officer in charge is empowered to take a few actions himself, such as searching a bunker or hideout without warrant, destroying illegal equipment, explosives and armament in situ, arrest anti-national elements without warrant (but hand them over to the police within 24 hours), and lastly stop anyone from doing anything that may be illegal and against the interests of the state, to the extent of opening fire, if needed. &nbsp;

Additionally, if an army man commits a wrong while operating under AFSPA, he can be prosecuted in a court of law, for which an approval of the central government is needed. &nbsp;

Later, when AFSPA was made applicable to Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir in 1990, two more provisions were added, namely authority to search a vehicle without warrant and to search an individual.&nbsp;

These checks have become commonplace in our lives these days. We open the boot of our cars and get body searched very readily by a security guard at a movie hall or a mall. Hardly ‘draconian’ or ‘licence to kill’! Here, we seem to understand that these checks are required for our own security and safety.&nbsp;

Let us also appreciate that the Army is the instrument of last resort. It is called in when the civil administration, the police and the central armed police forces have not been able to bring any given situation under full control. 
 
When the Army is called in, it should be empowered or enabled to operate effectively. If Army is also not effective in controlling the situation, who else will the country turn to?&nbsp;

Hence, to operate effectively in a disturbing situation, in the absence of policing powers, the Army needs an enabler in the form of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act.&nbsp;

The Act, as well as the deployment of the army, is temporary. As soon as the situation normalises, both will go and the army will be most happy to return to its primary duties. When conditions improve, and situation permits, the govt revokes AFSPA in consultation with the army and other stakeholders.&nbsp;

In the past, on the recommendations of the army, AFSPA has been revoked from Mizoram in 1987, Punjab in 1997 and Tripura in 2015.&nbsp;

Selective revocation of AFSPA is fraught with immense danger. It gives terrorists the latitude to operate from their safe sanctuaries. The failed model of Imphal is a case in point.&nbsp;

Revoking or diluting AFSPA should only be done in light of the security situation, after giving due consideration to views of all stakeholders. It will be highly dangerous if extraneous pressures come to dictate such sensitive decisions.&nbsp;

If it is so done, the situation is likely to worsen and slip back by a few years. And then Army will be called in again, and so the cycle will go on.

&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The ZeeNews. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-not-a-james-bond-movie-2738011">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Over the last few years, we have been witnessing a debate on the subject of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Sadly, it is becoming more strident as media channels have multiplied, as have activists and ‘experts’.

Over the last few years, we have been witnessing a debate on the subject of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Sadly, it is becoming more strident as media channels have multiplied, as have activists and ‘experts’. Now with the social media, no channel is needed. Suddenly, everyone has a view and a platform to express it. So the debate has got high on rhetoric and low on content. There are frequent references to phrases like ‘draconian law’, ‘licence to kill’, ‘free hand to Army to rape and murder’, and much more. Are we talking about our Indian Army, the simple soldiers who risk their lives day after day for country and countrymen? Or are we talking about characters from a James Bond movie? Why have the debates got so shrill? Partly because it is fashionable to talk about human rights (in that case, one needs to make a case about the human rights of soldiers as well, but I will leave it for a subsequent day). The rights part have got discussed threadbare and the legal mores analysed to the hilt. Knowledgeable in their fields as they might be, these experts have no idea of how to operate in these tricky situations, where there is risk to life and limb. The Indian Army, on the other hand, barely comes out openly in support of its stand on the AFSPA and has always been reluctant to put forward its views in public. The result is the public has got a one-sided and distorted picture. Recently, this subject gathered additional momentum as a major political party suggested changes in their position on the AFSPA in their election manifesto. Once again, there was a flurry of activities, speeches and debates. Given the poll climes, there was the obvious political tilt, as can be expected. But the Indian public deserves better. The purpose of this piece is to put forward the facts simply, correctly and directly, so that we can aspire for more informed debates. Let us first understand what AFSPA is. It was first promulgated in its present form in 1958 in North East India when the army was called in to control the Naga insurgents, as the Naga National Council had declared independence. Normally, a district magistrate hands over any given situation to the army by actually signing a form. But in remote, high altitude and thickly forested mountains, there is no habitation, let alone any representative of the civil administration. Hence the army officer in charge is empowered to take a few actions himself, such as searching a bunker or hideout without warrant, destroying illegal equipment, explosives and armament in situ, arrest anti-national elements without warrant (but hand them over to the police within 24 hours), and lastly stop anyone from doing anything that may be illegal and against the interests of the state, to the extent of opening fire, if needed. Additionally, if an army man commits a wrong while operating under AFSPA, he can be prosecuted in a court of law, for which an approval of the central government is needed. Later, when AFSPA was made applicable to Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir in 1990, two more provisions were added, namely authority to search a vehicle without warrant and to search an individual. These checks have become commonplace in our lives these days. We open the boot of our cars and get body searched very readily by a security guard at a movie hall or a mall. Hardly ‘draconian’ or ‘licence to kill’! Here, we seem to understand that these checks are required for our own security and safety. Let us also appreciate that the Army is the instrument of last resort. It is called in when the civil administration, the police and the central armed police forces have not been able to bring any given situation under full control. When the Army is called in, it should be empowered or enabled to operate effectively. If Army is also not effective in controlling the situation, who else will the country turn to? Hence, to operate effectively in a disturbing situation, in the absence of policing powers, the Army needs an enabler in the form of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. The Act, as well as the deployment of the army, is temporary. As soon as the situation normalises, both will go and the army will be most happy to return to its primary duties. When conditions improve, and situation permits, the govt revokes AFSPA in consultation with the army and other stakeholders. In the past, on the recommendations of the army, AFSPA has been revoked from Mizoram in 1987, Punjab in 1997 and Tripura in 2015. Selective revocation of AFSPA is fraught with immense danger. It gives terrorists the latitude to operate from their safe sanctuaries. The failed model of Imphal is a case in point. Revoking or diluting AFSPA should only be done in light of the security situation, after giving due consideration to views of all stakeholders. It will be highly dangerous if extraneous pressures come to dictate such sensitive decisions. If it is so done, the situation is likely to worsen and slip back by a few years. And then Army will be called in again, and so the cycle will go on. (This article was originally published on The ZeeNews. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Selective revocation of AFSPA is fraught with immense danger

The BJP’s vision document for the 2019 elections is a cocktail of the old and the new, as well as an assertion of certain narratives related to national security that have resonated with the people in recent months. The old has, among other things, its commitment to the construction of a Ram temple in Ayodhya in a lawful and harmonious manner. The new has a roadmap to make India a five-trillion-dollar economy, a massive push to infrastructure, further booster shots for the Make in India campaign, employment generation ideas and a more simplified Goods and Services Tax regime. But it is the party’s position on national security which stands out, primarily because both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his senior party colleagues have made it a key election issue. The other reason is that the BJP’s commitment in the 'Sankalp Patra' on this subject contrasts sharply with that of the Congress’s promise in its manifesto.&nbsp;

The BJP’s stand on Article 370 and Article 35A, which are exclusive to Jammu &amp; Kashmir, have been known for long. But the underlining of its commitment to scrap the two provisions becomes especially important in an election season. The party seems to have come around to the view that one of the ways to effectively tackle the problems that the state keeps throwing up at regular intervals is to divest it of the special provisions which were supposed to have helped integrate it better with the rest of India. &nbsp;

The other reason for the BJP to give the issue prominence in its vision document was to put the Congress on the defensive. The Congress had in its manifesto promised to retain Article 370. It’s position on Article 35A too is that of maintaining the status quo. However, the popular perception nationwide seems to be veering towards a rethink on these provisions, and that fits well with the BJP’s overall nationalist agenda. &nbsp;

The BJP would be pleased with the response after it set the cat among the pigeons. Both the state’s leading parties, the National Conference and the Peoples Democratic Party have reacted strongly against the promise and warned that any tinkering with the two provisions would result in India losing hold over Kashmir. This is playing straight into the BJP’s hand since the party has for long been maintaining that these parties promote soft separatism and are not just reluctant to act against separatists but also back them when the Centre acts against them. There is more than a grain of truth in the BJP’s allegation, and taking the matter to the people helps the party burnish its nationalist credentials.&nbsp;

One may wonder if such strong statements do not harm the BJP’s prospects in Kashmir valley. The first fact is that the BJP has little electoral prospects in that region. The second fact is that there is a constituency beyond Kashmir in the state — Jammu, for instance, where the BJP has a strong presence and which would be more than satisfied with the party’s position on the issue. But even more importantly, there is the larger constituency beyond the state itself which aligns with the BJP’s thoughts on the matter and can help the party garner more seats nationally.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The 'Sankalp Patra' also promises to strengthen the country’s Armed Forces, have zero tolerance to terror, and continue to give a free hand to the forces to deal with terror. Read alongside the Congress manifesto which has spoken about reviewing the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, the BJP’s vision document virtually endorses AFSPA and leaves the issue to be decided in consultation with the Armed Forces. &nbsp;

In confirmation of its belligerent stand on anti-national activities, the vision document does not, as the Congress manifesto does, speak of scrapping the sedition law. Here it’s important to note that the vision document commits the party to “taking necessary and effective steps against Left-wing extremism to eliminate this menace in the next five years”. The connection cannot be missed, given that many Maoist sympathisers have been in recent months facing the heat for their support to Left-wing extremism, and the cry for charges of sedition to be slapped against them have grown from Right-wing elements.&nbsp;

The BJP’s aggressive stance, which has been reflected in the Sankalp Patra, should not surprise those who have been following the party’s election campaign. Led by Prime Minister Modi, it has made nationalism and national security, apart from development, the fulcrum of its poll narrative. The Congress has willy nilly extended a helping hand by its soft attitude, with senior Union Minister Arun Jaitely quipping that the BJP’s vision document had not been crafted by any 'tukde-tukde' group. The party clearly believes that it has the upper hand when it comes to keeping the focus on national security and nationalism.&nbsp;

&nbsp; (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The BJP’s vision document for the 2019 elections is a cocktail of the old and the new, as well as an assertion of certain narratives related to national security that have resonated with the people in recent months.

The BJP’s vision document for the 2019 elections is a cocktail of the old and the new, as well as an assertion of certain narratives related to national security that have resonated with the people in recent months. The old has, among other things, its commitment to the construction of a Ram temple in Ayodhya in a lawful and harmonious manner. The new has a roadmap to make India a five-trillion-dollar economy, a massive push to infrastructure, further booster shots for the Make in India campaign, employment generation ideas and a more simplified Goods and Services Tax regime. But it is the party’s position on national security which stands out, primarily because both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his senior party colleagues have made it a key election issue. The other reason is that the BJP’s commitment in the 'Sankalp Patra' on this subject contrasts sharply with that of the Congress’s promise in its manifesto. The BJP’s stand on Article 370 and Article 35A, which are exclusive to Jammu & Kashmir, have been known for long. But the underlining of its commitment to scrap the two provisions becomes especially important in an election season. The party seems to have come around to the view that one of the ways to effectively tackle the problems that the state keeps throwing up at regular intervals is to divest it of the special provisions which were supposed to have helped integrate it better with the rest of India. The other reason for the BJP to give the issue prominence in its vision document was to put the Congress on the defensive. The Congress had in its manifesto promised to retain Article 370. It’s position on Article 35A too is that of maintaining the status quo. However, the popular perception nationwide seems to be veering towards a rethink on these provisions, and that fits well with the BJP’s overall nationalist agenda. The BJP would be pleased with the response after it set the cat among the pigeons. Both the state’s leading parties, the National Conference and the Peoples Democratic Party have reacted strongly against the promise and warned that any tinkering with the two provisions would result in India losing hold over Kashmir. This is playing straight into the BJP’s hand since the party has for long been maintaining that these parties promote soft separatism and are not just reluctant to act against separatists but also back them when the Centre acts against them. There is more than a grain of truth in the BJP’s allegation, and taking the matter to the people helps the party burnish its nationalist credentials. One may wonder if such strong statements do not harm the BJP’s prospects in Kashmir valley. The first fact is that the BJP has little electoral prospects in that region. The second fact is that there is a constituency beyond Kashmir in the state — Jammu, for instance, where the BJP has a strong presence and which would be more than satisfied with the party’s position on the issue. But even more importantly, there is the larger constituency beyond the state itself which aligns with the BJP’s thoughts on the matter and can help the party garner more seats nationally. The 'Sankalp Patra' also promises to strengthen the country’s Armed Forces, have zero tolerance to terror, and continue to give a free hand to the forces to deal with terror. Read alongside the Congress manifesto which has spoken about reviewing the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, the BJP’s vision document virtually endorses AFSPA and leaves the issue to be decided in consultation with the Armed Forces. In confirmation of its belligerent stand on anti-national activities, the vision document does not, as the Congress manifesto does, speak of scrapping the sedition law. Here it’s important to note that the vision document commits the party to “taking necessary and effective steps against Left-wing extremism to eliminate this menace in the next five years”. The connection cannot be missed, given that many Maoist sympathisers have been in recent months facing the heat for their support to Left-wing extremism, and the cry for charges of sedition to be slapped against them have grown from Right-wing elements. The BJP’s aggressive stance, which has been reflected in the Sankalp Patra, should not surprise those who have been following the party’s election campaign. Led by Prime Minister Modi, it has made nationalism and national security, apart from development, the fulcrum of its poll narrative. The Congress has willy nilly extended a helping hand by its soft attitude, with senior Union Minister Arun Jaitely quipping that the BJP’s vision document had not been crafted by any 'tukde-tukde' group. The party clearly believes that it has the upper hand when it comes to keeping the focus on national security and nationalism. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

National security BJP's 'sankalp' as party manifesto vows to repeal Articles 370 & 35A, end left-wing extremism

BJP’s manifesto was nationalism unplugged. The manifesto reflected the core agenda of RSS, which has been promoting cultural nationalism since its inception. The coming of age could only happen during Narendra Modi’s tenure as he allowed the vision to be incorporated and propagated unapologetically during his tenure as the Prime Minister.

At the launch ceremony, speaker after speaker spoke about national unity and how BJP was committed to the idea of national renewal, tough security response and enhanced prestige abroad. This theme was visible after 2014 but very few understood the intent of BJP that it wanted to contest 2019 Lok Sabha elections on it.&nbsp;

If it would not have been the failure of BJP in Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, BJP would not have introduced direct subsidy to distressed farmers and neither state BJP governments would have waived electricity bills and loans taken by the farmer nor taken such a populist turn.

This particular event brought both BJP and Congress together barring the issue of nationalism. Both parties have committed themselves to a large welfare architecture which is going to trouble middle class even more. Both have become very loud in their commitment towards popular politics. For the PM to say Antyodaya is the philosophy reflects strong pro-poor sentiments. NYAY is also one such arrow from the quiver of populist politics. The only difference is that Congress manifesto is restrained when it comes to national security and nationalism-based politics and that of BJP is very aggressive and does not refrain from taking on strong regional sentiments of North East and Kashmir. It helps BJP in rest of India.

BJP’s manifesto looks more in tune with the India of 1970 under former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. A famous leader who taught a lesson to Pakistan but held the promise of keeping the nation together. She ran the country with an iron hand and the party was subservient to her. Her strength bordered on being dictatorial and ran a left-leaning economy. Congress, on the other hand, barring the model of a strong leader is also committing itself to running a left-leaning economy which would be high on welfare schemes.

Both BJP and Congress of today are a strong departure from the turn India took in 1991. Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh were reformers and committed to economic liberalisation. All three Prime Ministers fought the populist narrative that business is a bad word and capitalism cannot do good for the poor. Even if they failed in parts, they did not create a subsidy monster.

It was Sonia Gandhi who forced Manmohan Singh’s hand after 2008 that Congress started to reflect party sensibilities of the 1970s. Even Modi who started with a promise of reform and minimum governance gave in to the populism which continues to wreak Indian politics. Till today, there exists no consensus on land acquisition bill which continues to lie in cold storage after suit boot kee sarkar jibe.

The only differentiator which BJP has with Congress is on national security and aggressive politics against internal insurgencies and Pakistan. It is for this reason, BJP has made nationalism a pivotal issue against Congress.

Not only it blunts the charge of Congress that RSS never participated in the freedom struggle, but it also helps BJP bridge the caste politics. It is for this reason that Ram Temple, Article 370, 35 A, Pakistan and internal insurgencies have all come together as one issue.&nbsp;

Both manifestos claim that they have presented a competing vision of India but remain similar when it comes to promoting statism. The lines have also blurred on Hinduism. Both parties compete for the same space. BJP’s vision is hard nationalism laced with Hindutva married to a welfare state whereas Congress vision is that of soft Hindutva married to a vigorous welfare state. We will know only on May 23 as to which brand sold well.

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

BJP’s manifesto was nationalism unplugged. The manifesto reflected the core agenda of RSS, which has been promoting cultural nationalism since its inception. The coming of age could only happen during Narendra Modi’s tenure as he allowed the vision to be incorporated and propagated unapologetically during his tenure as the Prime Minister.

BJP’s manifesto was nationalism unplugged. The manifesto reflected the core agenda of RSS, which has been promoting cultural nationalism since its inception. The coming of age could only happen during Narendra Modi’s tenure as he allowed the vision to be incorporated and propagated unapologetically during his tenure as the Prime Minister. At the launch ceremony, speaker after speaker spoke about national unity and how BJP was committed to the idea of national renewal, tough security response and enhanced prestige abroad. This theme was visible after 2014 but very few understood the intent of BJP that it wanted to contest 2019 Lok Sabha elections on it. If it would not have been the failure of BJP in Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, BJP would not have introduced direct subsidy to distressed farmers and neither state BJP governments would have waived electricity bills and loans taken by the farmer nor taken such a populist turn. This particular event brought both BJP and Congress together barring the issue of nationalism. Both parties have committed themselves to a large welfare architecture which is going to trouble middle class even more. Both have become very loud in their commitment towards popular politics. For the PM to say Antyodaya is the philosophy reflects strong pro-poor sentiments. NYAY is also one such arrow from the quiver of populist politics. The only difference is that Congress manifesto is restrained when it comes to national security and nationalism-based politics and that of BJP is very aggressive and does not refrain from taking on strong regional sentiments of North East and Kashmir. It helps BJP in rest of India. BJP’s manifesto looks more in tune with the India of 1970 under former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. A famous leader who taught a lesson to Pakistan but held the promise of keeping the nation together. She ran the country with an iron hand and the party was subservient to her. Her strength bordered on being dictatorial and ran a left-leaning economy. Congress, on the other hand, barring the model of a strong leader is also committing itself to running a left-leaning economy which would be high on welfare schemes. Both BJP and Congress of today are a strong departure from the turn India took in 1991. Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh were reformers and committed to economic liberalisation. All three Prime Ministers fought the populist narrative that business is a bad word and capitalism cannot do good for the poor. Even if they failed in parts, they did not create a subsidy monster. It was Sonia Gandhi who forced Manmohan Singh’s hand after 2008 that Congress started to reflect party sensibilities of the 1970s. Even Modi who started with a promise of reform and minimum governance gave in to the populism which continues to wreak Indian politics. Till today, there exists no consensus on land acquisition bill which continues to lie in cold storage after suit boot kee sarkar jibe. The only differentiator which BJP has with Congress is on national security and aggressive politics against internal insurgencies and Pakistan. It is for this reason, BJP has made nationalism a pivotal issue against Congress. Not only it blunts the charge of Congress that RSS never participated in the freedom struggle, but it also helps BJP bridge the caste politics. It is for this reason that Ram Temple, Article 370, 35 A, Pakistan and internal insurgencies have all come together as one issue. Both manifestos claim that they have presented a competing vision of India but remain similar when it comes to promoting statism. The lines have also blurred on Hinduism. Both parties compete for the same space. BJP’s vision is hard nationalism laced with Hindutva married to a welfare state whereas Congress vision is that of soft Hindutva married to a vigorous welfare state. We will know only on May 23 as to which brand sold well. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Lok Sabha polls 2019: High on populism, both BJP and Congress manifestos compete for same space

Indian Elections 2019: Jyotiraditya Scindia, Leader, Congress speaks to WION

At a time when BJP under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has completed its five-year term, it is time to evaluate the government’s performance in the last five years.&nbsp;

Foreign policy has been one of the most talked about aspects of Modi’s tenure. There is no denying the fact that this government has appeared determined to go beyond established foreign policy norms. &nbsp;

The first sign of this was the Modi government’s announcement of its “Neighbourhood First” policy. So, while the Prime Minister visited all other South Asian countries, India settled its long-standing border problem with Bangladesh and ties with Sri Lanka and Nepal marked an encouraging upward trajectory.&nbsp;

The relationship between Bhutan and Afghanistan also touched new heights.&nbsp;

Though India faced a tough time in dealing with Maldives during the tenure of President Mohammed Waheed Hassan, Modi’s calibrated efforts have helped New Delhi in reconnecting historical ties with Male after the coming of the President Ibrahim Solih last year.&nbsp;

As about Pakistan, the Modi government initially adopted the conventional method of fostering working ties. Thus, he invited Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for his government’s swearing-in ceremony in New Delhi in 2014, and later dropped by Lahore for Sharif’s birthday.&nbsp;

Pakistan, however, reciprocated with terrorist attacks against India. But unlike in the past, India under Modi showed the determination to hit back Pakistan proportionately.&nbsp;

It was in this context text that India carried out surgical strikes inside Pakistan territory along the border after the Uri terrorist attack. Later, the IAF went deep inside Pakistan hitting a LeT training ground at Balakot in response to the deadly Pulwama attack.&nbsp;

Terming its air strikes as “non-military pre-emptive” action, the Indian government succeeded in garnering global support. Even China could not openly support Pakistan against India’s action.&nbsp;

India’s successive military and air strikes have called Pakistan’s nuclear bluff. They have shifted India’s Pakistan policy in two ways: first, New Delhi can in future exercise similar options against Pakistan if Islamabad fails to reign-in terrorist organisations operating from its soil against India.&nbsp;

Second, the world community increasingly shares India’s concerns about Pakistan having emerged as the epicentre of terrorism. This is why efforts led by the US have been intensified to designate Hafiz Saeed as a global terrorist.&nbsp;

At a time when ASEAN countries want India to play an active role in the region, the Modi government has brought about a new energy in India’s orientation towards Southeast Asian countries.&nbsp;

India’s Middle East policy under Modi has also undergone a defining shift, with New Delhi finally removing the veil over its ties with Israel. Modi became the first Indian Prime Minister to visit that country.&nbsp;

At the same time, he has left no stone unturned in strengthening ties with the other countries of the region. The success of Modi’s Middle East policy can be gauged from the fact that India was invited to address the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). &nbsp;

The Modi government has been successful in dealing with all the major powers –the US, Russia, China, France, Japan and others.&nbsp;

Displaying astute pragmatism, the Prime Minister has shown his determination to elevate ties with the US by signing several important agreements, including the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) and the Communications, Compatibility, Security Agreement (COMCASA). This has helped in removing long-standing obstacles in realising the potential of defence ties with the US.&nbsp;

Signing the S-400 missile agreement with Russia simultaneously, underscored the Modi government’s effort to maintain India’s strategic autonomy vis-a-vis the US and to effectively checkmate Islamabad’s desire to foster defence ties with Moscow.&nbsp;

With regard to China, while the Modi government continued to promote friendly ties, its strong response to Beijing on the Doklam issue showed India’s readiness to rise to the occasion, when needed. &nbsp; India under Modi has come out of its timid approach to assert its rightful place in international politics.

 
(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-modi-years-represent-a-paradigm-shift-in-foreign-policy-2736395">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

At a time when BJP under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has completed its five-year term, it is time to evaluate the government’s performance in the last five years.

At a time when BJP under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has completed its five-year term, it is time to evaluate the government’s performance in the last five years. Foreign policy has been one of the most talked about aspects of Modi’s tenure. There is no denying the fact that this government has appeared determined to go beyond established foreign policy norms. The first sign of this was the Modi government’s announcement of its “Neighbourhood First” policy. So, while the Prime Minister visited all other South Asian countries, India settled its long-standing border problem with Bangladesh and ties with Sri Lanka and Nepal marked an encouraging upward trajectory. The relationship between Bhutan and Afghanistan also touched new heights. Though India faced a tough time in dealing with Maldives during the tenure of President Mohammed Waheed Hassan, Modi’s calibrated efforts have helped New Delhi in reconnecting historical ties with Male after the coming of the President Ibrahim Solih last year. As about Pakistan, the Modi government initially adopted the conventional method of fostering working ties. Thus, he invited Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for his government’s swearing-in ceremony in New Delhi in 2014, and later dropped by Lahore for Sharif’s birthday. Pakistan, however, reciprocated with terrorist attacks against India. But unlike in the past, India under Modi showed the determination to hit back Pakistan proportionately. It was in this context text that India carried out surgical strikes inside Pakistan territory along the border after the Uri terrorist attack. Later, the IAF went deep inside Pakistan hitting a LeT training ground at Balakot in response to the deadly Pulwama attack. Terming its air strikes as “non-military pre-emptive” action, the Indian government succeeded in garnering global support. Even China could not openly support Pakistan against India’s action. India’s successive military and air strikes have called Pakistan’s nuclear bluff. They have shifted India’s Pakistan policy in two ways: first, New Delhi can in future exercise similar options against Pakistan if Islamabad fails to reign-in terrorist organisations operating from its soil against India. Second, the world community increasingly shares India’s concerns about Pakistan having emerged as the epicentre of terrorism. This is why efforts led by the US have been intensified to designate Hafiz Saeed as a global terrorist. At a time when ASEAN countries want India to play an active role in the region, the Modi government has brought about a new energy in India’s orientation towards Southeast Asian countries. India’s Middle East policy under Modi has also undergone a defining shift, with New Delhi finally removing the veil over its ties with Israel. Modi became the first Indian Prime Minister to visit that country. At the same time, he has left no stone unturned in strengthening ties with the other countries of the region. The success of Modi’s Middle East policy can be gauged from the fact that India was invited to address the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). The Modi government has been successful in dealing with all the major powers –the US, Russia, China, France, Japan and others. Displaying astute pragmatism, the Prime Minister has shown his determination to elevate ties with the US by signing several important agreements, including the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) and the Communications, Compatibility, Security Agreement (COMCASA). This has helped in removing long-standing obstacles in realising the potential of defence ties with the US. Signing the S-400 missile agreement with Russia simultaneously, underscored the Modi government’s effort to maintain India’s strategic autonomy vis-a-vis the US and to effectively checkmate Islamabad’s desire to foster defence ties with Moscow. With regard to China, while the Modi government continued to promote friendly ties, its strong response to Beijing on the Doklam issue showed India’s readiness to rise to the occasion, when needed. India under Modi has come out of its timid approach to assert its rightful place in international politics. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Narendra Modi government has been successful in dealing with major world powers

The reluctance to concede ground to allies and its choice of candidates are sufficient indications that Congress is experimenting with the 2019 general elections to revive its organisational structure, rather than halt BJP’s march. &nbsp;

This is particularly pronounced in politically crucial UP. &nbsp;

Political pundits want to know why Congress has changed its strategy from consolidating secular and democratic forces, to going alone in key states. &nbsp;

Even its earlier plans to prevent the consolidation of Hindu votes in favour of Prime Minister Narendra Modi by adopting soft Hindutva, has been ignored. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Unlike Sonia Gandhi’s strategy that led to the defeat of Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government in 2004, Rahul Gandhi has chosen to rebuild the mortgaged and depleted Congress 'haveli’, instead of dealing with the real situation on the ground.&nbsp;

At a time, when the grand old party faces a real political threat, it is surprising that it was still not ready to concede ground to like-minded allies.

Even in Jammu and Kashmir, where the party has no base, it has refused to part with two seats in the Kashmir Valley to ally National Conference or the PDP. Both these parties left two seats in the Jammu region to the Congress, making the contest a cliff hanger for the BJP. &nbsp;

Instead, the Congress has fielded candidates from the north and south Kashmir seats. &nbsp; &nbsp;

In stitching alliances, the NDA has taken the lead, cobbling together 40 parties. It has succeeded in bringing in estranged partners like Shiv Sena and Asom Gana Parishad, who were critical of Modi over the years. &nbsp;

Alliances need sacrifices and BJP has shown the way by sacrificing its ministers and sitting MPs to concede seats to its allies. &nbsp;

In the words of analyst Anurag Modi, the common village voter is hardly influenced by TV debates. His voice may not be heard by those sitting at the highest pedestals, but his time comes when India votes. &nbsp;

Congress’s main challenge is to avoid the fragmentation of this vote. This can only be possible if Rahul Gandhi ignores sycophants around him and toes his mother’s tried and tested line.

Rahul Gandhi’s experiment fits in with the resolution adopted at the September 1998 Congress session at the scenic Pachmarhi hills in Madhya Pradesh. &nbsp;

The party decided to reclaim its lost ground by going to the polls alone, with the exception of few states like Tamil Nadu.

Leaders, more sycophantic than visionary, told Sonia Gandhi in 1998 that the NDA will disappear and meet a fate similar to the Janata Party in 1979, which had ousted the Congress under powerful Indira Gandhi for just two years. &nbsp;

It would appear that Rahul Gandhi has reached similar conclusions about the secular and regional parties thriving at the expense of the Congress. &nbsp;

A senior Congress leader bluntly confided to this writer that while BJP is a political rival, regional secular parties were enemies. “They have eaten into our vote base, making us non-existent in West Bengal, Bihar, UP and Tamil Nadu,” he said. &nbsp;

Sonia learned that going alone will harm the party. In the 1999 Lok Sabha elections, fighting solo under Sonia Gandhi, the Congress lost more ground, depleting its numbers further. &nbsp;

Thereafter, the party lost state after state in the assembly elections. Following the 2002 Gujarat riots, CPI(M) general secretary Harkishan Singh Surjeet approached Sonia and asked her to review the Pachmarhi resolution.&nbsp;

In a brainstorming session at Shimla in July 2003, the party adopted an open-minded approach on pre-poll and post-poll alliances, which, it said will be implemented at the national level.

Soon after the Karnataka assembly elections last year in May, a revival of the 2004 Congress spirit to lead liberal and democratic forces, resurfaced.&nbsp;

It was, in fact, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) supremo Mayawati who immediately dialled Sonia after the Karnataka election results indicated a fractured mandate. &nbsp;

She reportedly brought the Congress and Janata Dal (S) chief, HD Devegowda, together to keep the BJP at bay in the southern state. She called up Devegowda and convinced him to take Congress support.&nbsp;

Naturally, questions are being asked as to why Rahul didn’t restructure or rebuild the organisation in the last five years.

After its worst defeat in 2014, it was a godsend scenario for the current Congress president to initiate reforms and delegate powers to district committees to choose candidates and be accountable. He had ample time to get the organisation come out of the grip of family loyalists.

The result is that Congress remains in tatters, as Rahul has done nothing except make noises about “structural reforms”. &nbsp;

He first told workers in UP that the party would not be revived in the state unless it contests on its own and then justified an alliance with the Samajwadi Party in the last assembly election. &nbsp;

Even though Congress continues to be a central column for any secular alliance, there is need to have clarity on alliances.

Many opposition leaders asked the Congress to emulate a Bihar-type grand alliance at the national level by sacrificing ego.&nbsp;

Tactically, they asked the party to focus on west India, including Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh and leave eastern India, basically UP and Bihar, to regional parties to limit seats of the BJP-led NDA. &nbsp;

But in the words of Rasheed Kidwai, a veteran writer on Congress affairs, the party’s 2019 story is bad and muddled. &nbsp;

In addition to Rahul Gandhi’s inexperience, the grand old party lacks self-belief and its ability to communicate and connect, even though it has produced a really sound manifesto. But then Indian elections are not contested on manifestos alone.&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-ignoring-key-election-allies-what-is-congress-gameplan-for-ls-poll-2019-2736401">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

The reluctance to concede ground to allies and its choice of candidates are sufficient indications that Congress is experimenting with the 2019 general elections to revive its organisational structure, rather than halt BJP’s march.

The reluctance to concede ground to allies and its choice of candidates are sufficient indications that Congress is experimenting with the 2019 general elections to revive its organisational structure, rather than halt BJP’s march. This is particularly pronounced in politically crucial UP. Political pundits want to know why Congress has changed its strategy from consolidating secular and democratic forces, to going alone in key states. Even its earlier plans to prevent the consolidation of Hindu votes in favour of Prime Minister Narendra Modi by adopting soft Hindutva, has been ignored. Unlike Sonia Gandhi’s strategy that led to the defeat of Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government in 2004, Rahul Gandhi has chosen to rebuild the mortgaged and depleted Congress 'haveli’, instead of dealing with the real situation on the ground. At a time, when the grand old party faces a real political threat, it is surprising that it was still not ready to concede ground to like-minded allies. Even in Jammu and Kashmir, where the party has no base, it has refused to part with two seats in the Kashmir Valley to ally National Conference or the PDP. Both these parties left two seats in the Jammu region to the Congress, making the contest a cliff hanger for the BJP. Instead, the Congress has fielded candidates from the north and south Kashmir seats. In stitching alliances, the NDA has taken the lead, cobbling together 40 parties. It has succeeded in bringing in estranged partners like Shiv Sena and Asom Gana Parishad, who were critical of Modi over the years. Alliances need sacrifices and BJP has shown the way by sacrificing its ministers and sitting MPs to concede seats to its allies. In the words of analyst Anurag Modi, the common village voter is hardly influenced by TV debates. His voice may not be heard by those sitting at the highest pedestals, but his time comes when India votes. Congress’s main challenge is to avoid the fragmentation of this vote. This can only be possible if Rahul Gandhi ignores sycophants around him and toes his mother’s tried and tested line. Rahul Gandhi’s experiment fits in with the resolution adopted at the September 1998 Congress session at the scenic Pachmarhi hills in Madhya Pradesh. The party decided to reclaim its lost ground by going to the polls alone, with the exception of few states like Tamil Nadu. Leaders, more sycophantic than visionary, told Sonia Gandhi in 1998 that the NDA will disappear and meet a fate similar to the Janata Party in 1979, which had ousted the Congress under powerful Indira Gandhi for just two years. It would appear that Rahul Gandhi has reached similar conclusions about the secular and regional parties thriving at the expense of the Congress. A senior Congress leader bluntly confided to this writer that while BJP is a political rival, regional secular parties were enemies. “They have eaten into our vote base, making us non-existent in West Bengal, Bihar, UP and Tamil Nadu,” he said. Sonia learned that going alone will harm the party. In the 1999 Lok Sabha elections, fighting solo under Sonia Gandhi, the Congress lost more ground, depleting its numbers further. Thereafter, the party lost state after state in the assembly elections. Following the 2002 Gujarat riots, CPI(M) general secretary Harkishan Singh Surjeet approached Sonia and asked her to review the Pachmarhi resolution. In a brainstorming session at Shimla in July 2003, the party adopted an open-minded approach on pre-poll and post-poll alliances, which, it said will be implemented at the national level. Soon after the Karnataka assembly elections last year in May, a revival of the 2004 Congress spirit to lead liberal and democratic forces, resurfaced. It was, in fact, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) supremo Mayawati who immediately dialled Sonia after the Karnataka election results indicated a fractured mandate. She reportedly brought the Congress and Janata Dal (S) chief, HD Devegowda, together to keep the BJP at bay in the southern state. She called up Devegowda and convinced him to take Congress support. Naturally, questions are being asked as to why Rahul didn’t restructure or rebuild the organisation in the last five years. After its worst defeat in 2014, it was a godsend scenario for the current Congress president to initiate reforms and delegate powers to district committees to choose candidates and be accountable. He had ample time to get the organisation come out of the grip of family loyalists. The result is that Congress remains in tatters, as Rahul has done nothing except make noises about “structural reforms”. He first told workers in UP that the party would not be revived in the state unless it contests on its own and then justified an alliance with the Samajwadi Party in the last assembly election. Even though Congress continues to be a central column for any secular alliance, there is need to have clarity on alliances. Many opposition leaders asked the Congress to emulate a Bihar-type grand alliance at the national level by sacrificing ego. Tactically, they asked the party to focus on west India, including Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh and leave eastern India, basically UP and Bihar, to regional parties to limit seats of the BJP-led NDA. But in the words of Rasheed Kidwai, a veteran writer on Congress affairs, the party’s 2019 story is bad and muddled. In addition to Rahul Gandhi’s inexperience, the grand old party lacks self-belief and its ability to communicate and connect, even though it has produced a really sound manifesto. But then Indian elections are not contested on manifestos alone. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Ignoring key election allies: Congress lacks ability to communicate and connect

Everyone loves elections in India. Especially the vibrant Indian media which lives off elections, seemingly at the cost of all other news. &nbsp;

In the process, television news today has created its own imagery: capturing the pandal, a stage set high above the ground far removed from the people gathered in front; a line-up of leaders in white khadi photographed with arms raised, their hands clasped in a photo-op of solidarity; tinselly crowns, swords, bows, and arrows being presented to a supreme leader. &nbsp;

It is the crowning glory. What takes the cake, rather the crown, is the mukut or tiara itself. Innumerable images, even of Dalit leaders, who have spent lifetimes fighting for equality and constitutional freedoms are on camera juggling uneasily with gold-plated tiaras on their heads. &nbsp;

An accessory befitting a local theatre group enacting Ramayana scenes is now seen occupying pride of place. For upper caste political leaders, the mukut seems just right. &nbsp;

The mukut-dhaaris wear it with a sense of entitlement completely at odds with our democratic polity. The King-like mystique or Goddess-like aura is recreated time and again, reinforcing the image of rulers with their ‘right to rule’ persona. No questions asked. &nbsp;

Now is the time when swords create images. Throughout the Hindi heartland, the talwar or sword held aloft is a metaphor of martial strength sanctified by our caste hierarchies. Leaders are filmed drawing the sword, often shakily, from its scabbard. Undoubtedly, it is a mighty act.&nbsp;

 
Unsheathing the power of the sword, bringing die-hard bravery to the fore and reaffirming their right to fight for democratic rights with such ancient weaponry. &nbsp;

Images of women leaders, conservatively draped in saris, now with a naked sword in hand gets its share of coverage. It is an image of empowerment in this age of gender fluidity, with the clarion calls for Bharat Mata ki Jai in the background. &nbsp;

Next is the imagery of togetherness and leadership. On a dais or a stage way above the ground level, a mass of men and women come together signifying their unity and uniformity. &nbsp;

Seen from a distance, this critical mass of leadership is often indistinguishable. The images captured have flashes of white and red, green and saffron, the dominant colours signifying India. &nbsp;

The leaders’ attire, body language and speeches do make them distinct for a while, as they speak from the rostrum. Speech over, they merge together again. Today’s leadership is about numbers; the more leaders on stage, the more powerful they are perceived to be. Politics and perceptions share shadowy borders. &nbsp;

When there are people, people everywhere, there’s new powerful imagery. Janata or the crowds are packed together. Like a wheat-field packed, filled with ripening stalks. When Elias Canetti used such strong imagery to explain crowds, he visualised homogeneous faceless masses. &nbsp;

Crowds in India seem homogeneous but they are not. Village folk sit, crouch, and stand in similar ways; they lean together and when prompted, cheer in unison. They are the audience, watching political dramas unfold on the stage in front of them. &nbsp;

What they see and what they hear is not what is telecast or broadcast. Leaders often hail this janata as ‘janardan’, likening them to a benevolent God, who always helps. What a turn and twist in this phrase: Janata janardan hai. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The Gandhi cap is still an omnipresent image. But it just doesn’t fit all or anybody! Even though the cap is freely available at all Khadi Bhandar showrooms, stacked in cardboard boxes, it really seems like a limp relic of the past. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Neither the Congressmen and women nor leaders of other political hues have shown the imagination to make capital out of this simple cap. Merely putting the cap on has become a defining moment. Like during the ‘India Against Corruption’ movement at Ramlila grounds of New Delhi. Each leader who donned one was hoping it would create a new image, generate a new aura around them and make history. &nbsp;

The socialists of Uttar Pradesh prefer red instead of white caps. Colours change but the simplicity, austerity of the Gandhi cap continues to be a complete misfit in today’s time and age of consumerism, opulence and fortune-for-the-few. &nbsp;

On TV studio-floors, there’s the taandav of image-making. Television anchors are adept at creating their own imagery, aesthetically designed to pull audiences into a studio-generated illusionary world. &nbsp;

Here colours streak across screens with music rising to a crescendo and merging visuals into words. One TV anchor has made rubbing hands his signature style. It was a gesture rarely seen on TV screens; he created the imagery of an eager auctioneer rubbing his hands in glee. Breaking news made him break the mould. &nbsp;

Other anchors are in throes of self-induced ecstasy, a news-morphine-high, which makes them leap across studio floors, punching the air in front of large studio screens.

The whiplash of their words activates a mass of graphical data, conjuring images of a ringmaster on a circus floor, summoning jokers, who cartwheel and monkeys who ride bicycles. And then suddenly it all fades away…time now for Chyawanprash ads to roll. &nbsp;

These images and performances go on, evening after evening, night after night, when electoral politics are dissected, debated and discussed. Our television studios, newspapers, magazines and news portals are a world of such profound sound and fury, music and graphics. &nbsp;

It signifies our reality: so western, so contemporary, where modern style and substance go together hand in hand. Who said we are stereotypical, regressive, chauvinistic, unimaginative and unconstitutional…? 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-the-imagery-of-poll-politics-2735806">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Everyone loves elections in India. Especially the vibrant Indian media which lives off elections, seemingly at the cost of all other news. In the process, television news today has created its own imagery: capturing the pandal, a stage set high above the ground far removed from the people gathered in front; a line-up of leaders in white khadi photographed with arms raised, their hands clasped in a photo-op of solidarity; tinselly crowns, swords, bows, and arrows being presented to a supreme leader.

Everyone loves elections in India. Especially the vibrant Indian media which lives off elections, seemingly at the cost of all other news. In the process, television news today has created its own imagery: capturing the pandal, a stage set high above the ground far removed from the people gathered in front; a line-up of leaders in white khadi photographed with arms raised, their hands clasped in a photo-op of solidarity; tinselly crowns, swords, bows, and arrows being presented to a supreme leader. It is the crowning glory. What takes the cake, rather the crown, is the mukut or tiara itself. Innumerable images, even of Dalit leaders, who have spent lifetimes fighting for equality and constitutional freedoms are on camera juggling uneasily with gold-plated tiaras on their heads. An accessory befitting a local theatre group enacting Ramayana scenes is now seen occupying pride of place. For upper caste political leaders, the mukut seems just right. The mukut-dhaaris wear it with a sense of entitlement completely at odds with our democratic polity. The King-like mystique or Goddess-like aura is recreated time and again, reinforcing the image of rulers with their ‘right to rule’ persona. No questions asked. Now is the time when swords create images. Throughout the Hindi heartland, the talwar or sword held aloft is a metaphor of martial strength sanctified by our caste hierarchies. Leaders are filmed drawing the sword, often shakily, from its scabbard. Undoubtedly, it is a mighty act. Unsheathing the power of the sword, bringing die-hard bravery to the fore and reaffirming their right to fight for democratic rights with such ancient weaponry. Images of women leaders, conservatively draped in saris, now with a naked sword in hand gets its share of coverage. It is an image of empowerment in this age of gender fluidity, with the clarion calls for Bharat Mata ki Jai in the background. Next is the imagery of togetherness and leadership. On a dais or a stage way above the ground level, a mass of men and women come together signifying their unity and uniformity. Seen from a distance, this critical mass of leadership is often indistinguishable. The images captured have flashes of white and red, green and saffron, the dominant colours signifying India. The leaders’ attire, body language and speeches do make them distinct for a while, as they speak from the rostrum. Speech over, they merge together again. Today’s leadership is about numbers; the more leaders on stage, the more powerful they are perceived to be. Politics and perceptions share shadowy borders. When there are people, people everywhere, there’s new powerful imagery. Janata or the crowds are packed together. Like a wheat-field packed, filled with ripening stalks. When Elias Canetti used such strong imagery to explain crowds, he visualised homogeneous faceless masses. Crowds in India seem homogeneous but they are not. Village folk sit, crouch, and stand in similar ways; they lean together and when prompted, cheer in unison. They are the audience, watching political dramas unfold on the stage in front of them. What they see and what they hear is not what is telecast or broadcast. Leaders often hail this janata as ‘janardan’, likening them to a benevolent God, who always helps. What a turn and twist in this phrase: Janata janardan hai. The Gandhi cap is still an omnipresent image. But it just doesn’t fit all or anybody! Even though the cap is freely available at all Khadi Bhandar showrooms, stacked in cardboard boxes, it really seems like a limp relic of the past. Neither the Congressmen and women nor leaders of other political hues have shown the imagination to make capital out of this simple cap. Merely putting the cap on has become a defining moment. Like during the ‘India Against Corruption’ movement at Ramlila grounds of New Delhi. Each leader who donned one was hoping it would create a new image, generate a new aura around them and make history. The socialists of Uttar Pradesh prefer red instead of white caps. Colours change but the simplicity, austerity of the Gandhi cap continues to be a complete misfit in today’s time and age of consumerism, opulence and fortune-for-the-few. On TV studio-floors, there’s the taandav of image-making. Television anchors are adept at creating their own imagery, aesthetically designed to pull audiences into a studio-generated illusionary world. Here colours streak across screens with music rising to a crescendo and merging visuals into words. One TV anchor has made rubbing hands his signature style. It was a gesture rarely seen on TV screens; he created the imagery of an eager auctioneer rubbing his hands in glee. Breaking news made him break the mould. Other anchors are in throes of self-induced ecstasy, a news-morphine-high, which makes them leap across studio floors, punching the air in front of large studio screens. The whiplash of their words activates a mass of graphical data, conjuring images of a ringmaster on a circus floor, summoning jokers, who cartwheel and monkeys who ride bicycles. And then suddenly it all fades away…time now for Chyawanprash ads to roll. These images and performances go on, evening after evening, night after night, when electoral politics are dissected, debated and discussed. Our television studios, newspapers, magazines and news portals are a world of such profound sound and fury, music and graphics. It signifies our reality: so western, so contemporary, where modern style and substance go together hand in hand. Who said we are stereotypical, regressive, chauvinistic, unimaginative and unconstitutional…? (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Politics and perceptions: The more leaders on stage, the more powerful they are perceived to be

Has Congress president Rahul Gandhi taken a wrong step forward (or backward) by deciding to contest for the Lok Sabha from Wayanad in Kerala? In principle, this is not so, but in practical detail, I think the answer is yes.

It seems to be that the keenly contested general elections this year has begun to resemble a snakes and ladders game. When the Pulwama attack happened, it seemed like the BJP had hit the mouth of a snake, but when the Balakot strikes happened, Prime Minister Narendra Modi seemed to have converted a potential snake into a ladder as national security became mainstream in the election discourse.

Again, when the Congress president upped the ante for Modi and BJP president Amit Shah by announcing a Rs 6,000-per-month basic income scheme for the poorest Indians to counter the NDA government's PM KISAN scheme that offers a fraction of that to farmers, it seemed Rahul Gandhi had begun climbing a ladder.

However, the Wayanad move has turned out to be a snake for Rahul Gandhi, in my opinion, because it gave Modi a chance to hit out against minority-centric politics. We thought the Congress had begun to avoid the minority-ist tag after Rahul Gandhi declared himself a Shiv bhakt to counter insinuations that he was not for Hindus.

BJP's national-security-plus-Hindutva pitch seems to be working substantially across the Hindi belt, though I would not say that about the regions south of the Vindhyas and east of Patna. In this see-saw, snakes-and-ladders election year, Rahul Gandhi is stronger than what his critics might say but is weaker than what his supporters might think.

The Wayanad gambit invites charges that the Congress needs to avoid if it is to remain a national party because the sentiments whipped up by the BJP are such that even a please-all manifesto of the kind Congress released this week has limitations despite its sense of painstaking detail. The cynic might say speeches matter more than manifestos.

I have also been reading that the anti-incumbency factor in elections has been receding since 2002 in India, and this means Congress needs to go more than that extra mile.

The Wayanad shift by Rahul Gandhi has made the CPM counter the Congress when one thought they were teaming up to beat the BJP. With friends like that, Congress is definitely on a tricky wicket. If you had asked me which seat Rahul G would contest from if the south was a priority, I would have guessed Medak in Telangana because that is the place from where his grandmother Indira Gandhi won in 1980 on her comeback after the Congress suffered a humiliating defeat in the post-Emergency elections in 1977. Of course, this would mean playing ball with K Chandrashekar Rao, the Telangana Chief Minister, who won the seat in 2014 before relinquishing it to become the CM of the newly-carved state. KCR now is pulling his own line as a "Third Front" leader, mocking both the Congress and the BJP.

Now, here is the deal. Mainstream Telugu parties like the YSR Congress and Telugu Desam Party are discredited in Telangana because they staunchly opposed the division of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh. KCR is enjoying a long political honeymoon thanks to his decades of leadership for the movement that created the state he is ruling. But somewhere, the anti-incumbency factor kicks in, and that would help the Congress. Given that KCR walks the tightrope between the BJP and Muslim groups alike, befriending him would have helped the Congress as a tactical alliance. The Congress is the natural inheritor of the opposition mantle in Telangana, given its support for the formation of the state and its socio-economic platform that helps farmers, Dalits and minorities in the region. Being gracious to KCR's Telangana Rashtra Samiti here now would have fortified Congress in the north while building a beach-head in the south. That would have required Rahul Gandhi to go that extra mile.

But if there is one thing the Congress does not know, it is going that extra mile. Like the Maharajas who sported their royal turbans long after Independence in 1947, the Congress has an identity crisis in which it has to choose between defeating the BJP and retaining its identity.

The Congress is reluctant to live down memories of an overarching, imperious "Grand Old Party" of India. It does not know that winning and keeping allies is an art. Modi won power in 2014 on the BJP's own strength, but his party has been nice to those who stood by him in difficult times and has even kissed and made up with a difficult ally like Nitish Kumar of Janata Dal (United) in Bihar.&nbsp;

Under a fourth-generation PM aspirant, one would have thought Congress would shed its modern maharaja attitude under Rahul Gandhi. There is not enough sign of it so far, though the manifesto he has outlined is a dramatically democratic one. Given that he is coming out with his own ideas and crafting his own set of advisers, his decision to contest from Wayanad is strange because the move smells of the Congress of yore. Habits die hard, it seems.

What all this means on the political chessboard is that by gaining a pawn in Kerala, Congress may be losing a rook and a bishop in Rajasthan or MP. In plain English, Rahul Gandhi may win in Wayanad, but Modi's BJP will win more seats in the north thanks to that.&nbsp;

Ultimately, politics is a game in which when a throw of dice is done well, the board changes from snakes and ladders to chess. That's dicey.

(This article was originally published on The Zee News. Read the <a href="https://zeenews.india.com/blogs/rahul-gandhis-mistake-congress-may-have-gained-if-he-contested-in-the-north-than-wayanad-2192177.html">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) 
&nbsp;

Has Congress president Rahul Gandhi taken a wrong step forward (or backward) by deciding to contest for the Lok Sabha from Wayanad in Kerala? In principle, this is not so, but in practical detail, I think the answer is yes.

Has Congress president Rahul Gandhi taken a wrong step forward (or backward) by deciding to contest for the Lok Sabha from Wayanad in Kerala? In principle, this is not so, but in practical detail, I think the answer is yes. It seems to be that the keenly contested general elections this year has begun to resemble a snakes and ladders game. When the Pulwama attack happened, it seemed like the BJP had hit the mouth of a snake, but when the Balakot strikes happened, Prime Minister Narendra Modi seemed to have converted a potential snake into a ladder as national security became mainstream in the election discourse. Again, when the Congress president upped the ante for Modi and BJP president Amit Shah by announcing a Rs 6,000-per-month basic income scheme for the poorest Indians to counter the NDA government's PM KISAN scheme that offers a fraction of that to farmers, it seemed Rahul Gandhi had begun climbing a ladder. However, the Wayanad move has turned out to be a snake for Rahul Gandhi, in my opinion, because it gave Modi a chance to hit out against minority-centric politics. We thought the Congress had begun to avoid the minority-ist tag after Rahul Gandhi declared himself a Shiv bhakt to counter insinuations that he was not for Hindus. BJP's national-security-plus-Hindutva pitch seems to be working substantially across the Hindi belt, though I would not say that about the regions south of the Vindhyas and east of Patna. In this see-saw, snakes-and-ladders election year, Rahul Gandhi is stronger than what his critics might say but is weaker than what his supporters might think. The Wayanad gambit invites charges that the Congress needs to avoid if it is to remain a national party because the sentiments whipped up by the BJP are such that even a please-all manifesto of the kind Congress released this week has limitations despite its sense of painstaking detail. The cynic might say speeches matter more than manifestos. I have also been reading that the anti-incumbency factor in elections has been receding since 2002 in India, and this means Congress needs to go more than that extra mile. The Wayanad shift by Rahul Gandhi has made the CPM counter the Congress when one thought they were teaming up to beat the BJP. With friends like that, Congress is definitely on a tricky wicket. If you had asked me which seat Rahul G would contest from if the south was a priority, I would have guessed Medak in Telangana because that is the place from where his grandmother Indira Gandhi won in 1980 on her comeback after the Congress suffered a humiliating defeat in the post-Emergency elections in 1977. Of course, this would mean playing ball with K Chandrashekar Rao, the Telangana Chief Minister, who won the seat in 2014 before relinquishing it to become the CM of the newly-carved state. KCR now is pulling his own line as a "Third Front" leader, mocking both the Congress and the BJP. Now, here is the deal. Mainstream Telugu parties like the YSR Congress and Telugu Desam Party are discredited in Telangana because they staunchly opposed the division of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh. KCR is enjoying a long political honeymoon thanks to his decades of leadership for the movement that created the state he is ruling. But somewhere, the anti-incumbency factor kicks in, and that would help the Congress. Given that KCR walks the tightrope between the BJP and Muslim groups alike, befriending him would have helped the Congress as a tactical alliance. The Congress is the natural inheritor of the opposition mantle in Telangana, given its support for the formation of the state and its socio-economic platform that helps farmers, Dalits and minorities in the region. Being gracious to KCR's Telangana Rashtra Samiti here now would have fortified Congress in the north while building a beach-head in the south. That would have required Rahul Gandhi to go that extra mile. But if there is one thing the Congress does not know, it is going that extra mile. Like the Maharajas who sported their royal turbans long after Independence in 1947, the Congress has an identity crisis in which it has to choose between defeating the BJP and retaining its identity. The Congress is reluctant to live down memories of an overarching, imperious "Grand Old Party" of India. It does not know that winning and keeping allies is an art. Modi won power in 2014 on the BJP's own strength, but his party has been nice to those who stood by him in difficult times and has even kissed and made up with a difficult ally like Nitish Kumar of Janata Dal (United) in Bihar. Under a fourth-generation PM aspirant, one would have thought Congress would shed its modern maharaja attitude under Rahul Gandhi. There is not enough sign of it so far, though the manifesto he has outlined is a dramatically democratic one. Given that he is coming out with his own ideas and crafting his own set of advisers, his decision to contest from Wayanad is strange because the move smells of the Congress of yore. Habits die hard, it seems. What all this means on the political chessboard is that by gaining a pawn in Kerala, Congress may be losing a rook and a bishop in Rajasthan or MP. In plain English, Rahul Gandhi may win in Wayanad, but Modi's BJP will win more seats in the north thanks to that. Ultimately, politics is a game in which when a throw of dice is done well, the board changes from snakes and ladders to chess. That's dicey. (This article was originally published on The Zee News. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Lok Sabha polls 2019: Rahul Gandhi's Wayanad choice could hurt Congress in the North

5 main themes of Congress manifesto for 2019 Lok Sabha polls

Unemployment, woman safety, education, national security,&nbsp;healthcare, farmers distress and&nbsp;Nyuntam Aay Yojana (NYAY) for poor are the key issues in Congress manifesto, said Congress president&nbsp;Rahul Gandhi as he released party's manifesto for the upcoming Lok Sabha&nbsp;elections&nbsp;on Tuesday at the party headquarters in New Delhi.&nbsp;

There are five main themes in Congress manifesto, first among them is minimum income scheme NYAY under which Rs 72,000 will be given to poorest, he said.

''Not a single lie has been incorporated in the manifesto,'' Gandhi said.

''Whatever is going to be in this manifesto has to be truthful, I do not want a single thing in this manifesto that is a lie because we have been hearing a large number of lies spoken every day by our PM,'' Rahul Gandhi said.

Congress president also said that there will be a separate budget for farmers and 150 days guaranteed employment under MNREGA.

''PM had spoken about MGNREGA. He mocked and said it is a bogus and useless scheme. Today everyone knows how much it helped the country. So now we want to guarantee jobs for 150 days, instead of 100 days, under the scheme.'' Rahul said.

Congress will allocate six&nbsp;per cent of GDP to education and strengthen government&nbsp;hospitals and give high-quality healthcare access to the poor, he added.

On his decision to contest from Wayanad in Kerala, Rahul said, ''South India feels hostility from Narendra Modi; I wanted to send a message, I am standing with you."

Several heavyweight Congress leaders including Sonia Gandhi, Manmohan Singh, P Chidambaram and several others were present.&nbsp;

Unemployment, woman safety, education, national security, healthcare, farmers distress and Nyuntam Aay Yojana (NYAY) for poor are the key issues in Congress manifesto, said Congress president Rahul Gandhi as he released party's manifesto for the upcoming Lok Sabha elections on Tuesday at the party headquarters in New Delhi.

Unemployment, woman safety, education, national security, healthcare, farmers distress and Nyuntam Aay Yojana (NYAY) for poor are the key issues in Congress manifesto, said Congress president Rahul Gandhi as he released party's manifesto for the upcoming Lok Sabha elections on Tuesday at the party headquarters in New Delhi. There are five main themes in Congress manifesto, first among them is minimum income scheme NYAY under which Rs 72,000 will be given to poorest, he said. ''Not a single lie has been incorporated in the manifesto,'' Gandhi said. ''Whatever is going to be in this manifesto has to be truthful, I do not want a single thing in this manifesto that is a lie because we have been hearing a large number of lies spoken every day by our PM,'' Rahul Gandhi said. Congress president also said that there will be a separate budget for farmers and 150 days guaranteed employment under MNREGA. ''PM had spoken about MGNREGA. He mocked and said it is a bogus and useless scheme. Today everyone knows how much it helped the country. So now we want to guarantee jobs for 150 days, instead of 100 days, under the scheme.'' Rahul said. Congress will allocate six per cent of GDP to education and strengthen government hospitals and give high-quality healthcare access to the poor, he added. On his decision to contest from Wayanad in Kerala, Rahul said, ''South India feels hostility from Narendra Modi; I wanted to send a message, I am standing with you." Several heavyweight Congress leaders including Sonia Gandhi, Manmohan Singh, P Chidambaram and several others were present.

Congress unveils party manifesto titled 'Congress will deliver' 

India ka DNA 2019: "Congress trying to defame Hindus," says Amit Shah

The law permits a candidate to contest from two seats, and so there is nothing irregular in Rahul Gandhi deciding to contest from two Lok Sabha constituencies. But the law is not the issue here; the issue is political in nature. From the time it became officially known that the Congress president would fight from Wayanad in Kerala, in addition to re-contesting from Amethi — from where he is the sitting Member of Parliament — his party has been trying to justify the decision using various ways. Whether that defence sounds credible is one matter, but the fact that the Congress has been pushed to the back foot should be a source of satisfaction for the Bharatiya Janata Party.&nbsp; 
 
Congress has given two broad explanations. The first is that it is not unusual for politicians to contest from two constituencies. The party has pointed to Narendra Modi fighting the 2014 Lok Sabha polls from Varanasi and Vadodara. There are many other examples too, but the Modi analogy is flawed. Leaders generally take this route to be ‘safe’, in case the feedback from one constituency is not very assuring. Modi was not a Lok Sabha MP when he decided to take the national plunge. He had 26 ‘safe’ seats in Gujarat, and thus safety could not have been a reason for his choice of Varanasi as an additional constituency.&nbsp;

The idea was to energise his party in Uttar Pradesh where once the BJP was strong but had fallen on bad times since the previous two decades. Besides, Uttar Pradesh, with 80 Lok Sabha seats, was the key to win over the Centre. We now know that the strategy worked wonderfully for the party.&nbsp; 
 
Rahul Gandhi won in 2014 with a vastly reduced margin as compared to 2009 from Amethi. And this happened when he faced a newcomer to electoral politics, Smriti Irani. It needs to be remembered that, in a show of arrogance which is characteristic of the Nehru-Gandhi family, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra had then quipped: “Irani who?” Since then, Irani has maintained close touch with the constituency, arguably visiting it more frequently than the incumbent MP. The so-called Nehru-Gandhi bastion fell to the BJP in the 2017 State elections, where the Congress could not win a single Assembly constituency. &nbsp;

Over the last five years, with the BJP regime at the Centre and later in the state, Rahul Gandhi’s constituency has benefitted from the equation. The development in the period and lack of it in the previous times despite the Congress chief being its representative is the narrative that the BJP has been relentlessly pushing in the constituency. There is an additional factor to be considered — the refusal of the SP-BSP combine to put up a candidate in the constituency. Apparently, this has been done as a token of magnanimity, and to also ensure that the anti-BJP votes do not split. But it is a double-edged sword. There is no certainty that a majority of the votes that would have gone to SP-BSP candidate will fall in the Congress’s kitty. There is a possibility that some of them might end up in the BJP’s coffer, especially if neither Mayawati nor Akhilesh campaigns for Rahul Gandhi.&nbsp;

In sum, the Congress president faces a tougher contest than even the last time, and this is probably the reason why he has chosen a ‘safe’ seat in Wayanad. How safe even that, remains to be seen, given that the Communist Party of India (Marxist), which too in the fray from that constituency, has vowed to defeat the Congress heavyweight.&nbsp;

The second explanation the Congress has given for the Wayanad choice is that the party wants to ‘bridge’ the north-south divide, carry forward Indira Gandhi’s south-bound legacy, and boost the Congress’s prospects in Kerala. The fact is that Indira Gandhi had contested from Chikmagalur in Karnataka after facing a shocking and humiliating defeat from Rae Bareli in the post-Emergency elections. Karnataka had big leaders from the ruling Janata Dal at the Centre, and yet she won because by then the Janata Party experiment had just about begun to fall apart. The narrative of the north-south divide is specious because by that logic there must have been a west-north divide too when Modi contested from Vadodara and Varanasi — and he managed to bridge it! As for boosting the Congress’s chances in the state, that, for now, remains a fond hope.&nbsp;

The fact is: The choice of Wayanad is self-explanatory, and it has nothing to do with bridging any regional divide or taking a legacy forward. According to the 2011 Census, the percentage of Muslim and Christian population taken together is over 50 per cent, and the Congress believes that the demographics provided a safe enough cushion for Rahul Gandhi to emerge victorious. As per the same Census, nearly 95 per cent of the population lives in rural regions which, the Congress calculates, can be exploited in the party’s favour. &nbsp; 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) 
&nbsp;&nbsp;

The law permits a candidate to contest from two seats, and so there is nothing irregular in Rahul Gandhi deciding to contest from two Lok Sabha constituencies. But the law is not the issue here; the issue is political in nature.

The law permits a candidate to contest from two seats, and so there is nothing irregular in Rahul Gandhi deciding to contest from two Lok Sabha constituencies. But the law is not the issue here; the issue is political in nature. From the time it became officially known that the Congress president would fight from Wayanad in Kerala, in addition to re-contesting from Amethi — from where he is the sitting Member of Parliament — his party has been trying to justify the decision using various ways. Whether that defence sounds credible is one matter, but the fact that the Congress has been pushed to the back foot should be a source of satisfaction for the Bharatiya Janata Party. Congress has given two broad explanations. The first is that it is not unusual for politicians to contest from two constituencies. The party has pointed to Narendra Modi fighting the 2014 Lok Sabha polls from Varanasi and Vadodara. There are many other examples too, but the Modi analogy is flawed. Leaders generally take this route to be ‘safe’, in case the feedback from one constituency is not very assuring. Modi was not a Lok Sabha MP when he decided to take the national plunge. He had 26 ‘safe’ seats in Gujarat, and thus safety could not have been a reason for his choice of Varanasi as an additional constituency. The idea was to energise his party in Uttar Pradesh where once the BJP was strong but had fallen on bad times since the previous two decades. Besides, Uttar Pradesh, with 80 Lok Sabha seats, was the key to win over the Centre. We now know that the strategy worked wonderfully for the party. Rahul Gandhi won in 2014 with a vastly reduced margin as compared to 2009 from Amethi. And this happened when he faced a newcomer to electoral politics, Smriti Irani. It needs to be remembered that, in a show of arrogance which is characteristic of the Nehru-Gandhi family, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra had then quipped: “Irani who?” Since then, Irani has maintained close touch with the constituency, arguably visiting it more frequently than the incumbent MP. The so-called Nehru-Gandhi bastion fell to the BJP in the 2017 State elections, where the Congress could not win a single Assembly constituency. Over the last five years, with the BJP regime at the Centre and later in the state, Rahul Gandhi’s constituency has benefitted from the equation. The development in the period and lack of it in the previous times despite the Congress chief being its representative is the narrative that the BJP has been relentlessly pushing in the constituency. There is an additional factor to be considered — the refusal of the SP-BSP combine to put up a candidate in the constituency. Apparently, this has been done as a token of magnanimity, and to also ensure that the anti-BJP votes do not split. But it is a double-edged sword. There is no certainty that a majority of the votes that would have gone to SP-BSP candidate will fall in the Congress’s kitty. There is a possibility that some of them might end up in the BJP’s coffer, especially if neither Mayawati nor Akhilesh campaigns for Rahul Gandhi. In sum, the Congress president faces a tougher contest than even the last time, and this is probably the reason why he has chosen a ‘safe’ seat in Wayanad. How safe even that, remains to be seen, given that the Communist Party of India (Marxist), which too in the fray from that constituency, has vowed to defeat the Congress heavyweight. The second explanation the Congress has given for the Wayanad choice is that the party wants to ‘bridge’ the north-south divide, carry forward Indira Gandhi’s south-bound legacy, and boost the Congress’s prospects in Kerala. The fact is that Indira Gandhi had contested from Chikmagalur in Karnataka after facing a shocking and humiliating defeat from Rae Bareli in the post-Emergency elections. Karnataka had big leaders from the ruling Janata Dal at the Centre, and yet she won because by then the Janata Party experiment had just about begun to fall apart. The narrative of the north-south divide is specious because by that logic there must have been a west-north divide too when Modi contested from Vadodara and Varanasi — and he managed to bridge it! As for boosting the Congress’s chances in the state, that, for now, remains a fond hope. The fact is: The choice of Wayanad is self-explanatory, and it has nothing to do with bridging any regional divide or taking a legacy forward. According to the 2011 Census, the percentage of Muslim and Christian population taken together is over 50 per cent, and the Congress believes that the demographics provided a safe enough cushion for Rahul Gandhi to emerge victorious. As per the same Census, nearly 95 per cent of the population lives in rural regions which, the Congress calculates, can be exploited in the party’s favour. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Lok Sabha polls 2019: Rahul Gandhi chose to contest from Wayanad because Amethi may no longer be a 'safe' seat for him

The general elections 2019 are in full swing. It is hardly surprising that the controversy over the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) is also at its peak.&nbsp;

There is a well-documented history of EVM controversy. After all, every political party has raised doubts about the machines when in opposition. But when they come to power through the same machines, doubts are not put to rest. Only we have new accusers and the controversy continues.&nbsp; 
 
In 2011, the Election Commission (EC) got a rare opportunity to test the relative strength of EVMs and ballot papers. It was to conduct bypolls in 12 seats of Andhra Pradesh assembly. These seats had fallen vacant in the wake of mass resignations in the heat of the Telangana agitation.  Polls were conducted in half the constituencies using ballot papers because of a clever ploy.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Chandrababu Naidu ensured that the number of candidates in a number of constituencies was more than 64 – which is the maximum limit the EVMs could handle. And what was the conclusion? While the results from the machines came out in four hours, the paper ballots took over forty hours. Adding to that, in the seats where polls were conducted with ballot papers, thousands of invalid votes were found. The results from both the systems were exactly the same.&nbsp;

This debate should have ended way back in 2010 when the Commission called an all-party meeting to understand concerns of the political parties on the matter. It was unanimously recommended that VVPATs be adopted as the final remedy, and we promptly accepted it. The two factories which manufacture EVMs were asked to develop VVPATs. An independent committee of professors of five different IITs was requested to monitor every aspect of the process. &nbsp;

&nbsp;A series of trials were held, followed by two full-day election simulations in five cities with varying climatic conditions – namely Cherrapunji, Delhi, Jaisalmer, Leh, Thiruvananthapuram, in July 2011 and again in 2012 in the same month. Only after the VVPATs passed all the rigorous tests of technology and climatic endurance, were they deployed successfully in 20,000 polling booths. As manufacturing progressed, all constituencies were equipped with VVPATs.&nbsp;

In 2013, the Supreme Court lauded the Commission’s decision and directed the government to release adequate funds so that VVPATs can be procured for use in all the booths in the 2019 elections. As the machines kept coming in, these were randomly deployed. Since 2017, all assembly elections are held with EVMs which are attached with VVPATs. As per the present norms, slips generated by one VVPAT in each assembly constituency are counted. Of the 1,500 machines thus counted, not a single mismatch has been found. &nbsp;

The Opposition parties have demanded that half of the total slips should be cross-checked. As many as &nbsp;23 Opposition parties have also moved the Apex Court demanding the same. A group of 73 retired bureaucrats and diplomats have written to the EC on the matter, demanding an appropriate audit of votes cast in the 2019 election. To quote the central premise of the letter, “The real issue today is not about EVMs vs paper ballots, rather it is about EVMs with perfunctory VVPAT audits vs. EVMs with proper VVPAT audit.”&nbsp;

The letter highlighted the urgent need for a statistically sound sample size “With 99.9 per cent reliability, in a suitably defined population.” The &nbsp;EC sought the advice of the Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, on an appropriate sample size that would ensure 99.99 per cent public satisfaction. The much-awaited report has finally been submitted to the EC according to the latest reports and is being examined.&nbsp;

Meanwhile, when the case came up before SC, the Chief Justice asked the Election Commission why the sample size should not be increased. EC has apparently submitted that the experts of ISI have endorsed the current sample of one VVPAT per assembly constituency. On the other hand, the sample size proposed by the political parties would delay the results by six days. All eyes are now on the SC where the case would come up next week. &nbsp; 
 
I would also like to venture a more out of the box alternative. &nbsp;

Let the top two runners up in the constituency choose any two VVPAT machines that they would like to be counted as they have the highest stake in the results. An appropriate analogy is that of the game of cricket in which two referrals are allowed for each team. This is called the Decision Review System, and ever since its introduction, the violent disputes about the controversial decisions taken by the umpire have disappeared. This could serve to do away with a large random sample being demanded at present, as only four machines per assembly would have to be counted to ensure public faith in the system.&nbsp;

EVMs, equipped with VVPATs, are the most dependable arrangement. With only a few weeks to go for the counting, the Commission or the Supreme Court must clinch the debate without any further delay. &nbsp; 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) 
&nbsp;

The general elections 2019 are in full swing. It is hardly surprising that the controversy over the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) is also at its peak.

The general elections 2019 are in full swing. It is hardly surprising that the controversy over the Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) is also at its peak. There is a well-documented history of EVM controversy. After all, every political party has raised doubts about the machines when in opposition. But when they come to power through the same machines, doubts are not put to rest. Only we have new accusers and the controversy continues. In 2011, the Election Commission (EC) got a rare opportunity to test the relative strength of EVMs and ballot papers. It was to conduct bypolls in 12 seats of Andhra Pradesh assembly. These seats had fallen vacant in the wake of mass resignations in the heat of the Telangana agitation.  Polls were conducted in half the constituencies using ballot papers because of a clever ploy. Chandrababu Naidu ensured that the number of candidates in a number of constituencies was more than 64 – which is the maximum limit the EVMs could handle. And what was the conclusion? While the results from the machines came out in four hours, the paper ballots took over forty hours. Adding to that, in the seats where polls were conducted with ballot papers, thousands of invalid votes were found. The results from both the systems were exactly the same. This debate should have ended way back in 2010 when the Commission called an all-party meeting to understand concerns of the political parties on the matter. It was unanimously recommended that VVPATs be adopted as the final remedy, and we promptly accepted it. The two factories which manufacture EVMs were asked to develop VVPATs. An independent committee of professors of five different IITs was requested to monitor every aspect of the process. A series of trials were held, followed by two full-day election simulations in five cities with varying climatic conditions – namely Cherrapunji, Delhi, Jaisalmer, Leh, Thiruvananthapuram, in July 2011 and again in 2012 in the same month. Only after the VVPATs passed all the rigorous tests of technology and climatic endurance, were they deployed successfully in 20,000 polling booths. As manufacturing progressed, all constituencies were equipped with VVPATs. In 2013, the Supreme Court lauded the Commission’s decision and directed the government to release adequate funds so that VVPATs can be procured for use in all the booths in the 2019 elections. As the machines kept coming in, these were randomly deployed. Since 2017, all assembly elections are held with EVMs which are attached with VVPATs. As per the present norms, slips generated by one VVPAT in each assembly constituency are counted. Of the 1,500 machines thus counted, not a single mismatch has been found. The Opposition parties have demanded that half of the total slips should be cross-checked. As many as 23 Opposition parties have also moved the Apex Court demanding the same. A group of 73 retired bureaucrats and diplomats have written to the EC on the matter, demanding an appropriate audit of votes cast in the 2019 election. To quote the central premise of the letter, “The real issue today is not about EVMs vs paper ballots, rather it is about EVMs with perfunctory VVPAT audits vs. EVMs with proper VVPAT audit.” The letter highlighted the urgent need for a statistically sound sample size “With 99.9 per cent reliability, in a suitably defined population.” The EC sought the advice of the Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, on an appropriate sample size that would ensure 99.99 per cent public satisfaction. The much-awaited report has finally been submitted to the EC according to the latest reports and is being examined. Meanwhile, when the case came up before SC, the Chief Justice asked the Election Commission why the sample size should not be increased. EC has apparently submitted that the experts of ISI have endorsed the current sample of one VVPAT per assembly constituency. On the other hand, the sample size proposed by the political parties would delay the results by six days. All eyes are now on the SC where the case would come up next week. I would also like to venture a more out of the box alternative. Let the top two runners up in the constituency choose any two VVPAT machines that they would like to be counted as they have the highest stake in the results. An appropriate analogy is that of the game of cricket in which two referrals are allowed for each team. This is called the Decision Review System, and ever since its introduction, the violent disputes about the controversial decisions taken by the umpire have disappeared. This could serve to do away with a large random sample being demanded at present, as only four machines per assembly would have to be counted to ensure public faith in the system. EVMs, equipped with VVPATs, are the most dependable arrangement. With only a few weeks to go for the counting, the Commission or the Supreme Court must clinch the debate without any further delay. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

VVPAT-equipped EVMs are most dependable arrangement

lok-sabha-elections-2019

Lok Sabha Elections 2019, News on Lok Sabha Elections 2019, stories on Lok Sabha Elections 2019, articles on Lok Sabha Elections 2019, Lok Sabha Elections 2019 stories at Wion, Lok Sabha Elections 2019 news, Lok Sabha Elections 2019 latest news

lok sabha-elections-2019