INDIA FOUNDATION
mail@indiafoundation.in

Knowledge exchange, student meetings and games

Mauris non velit eu lectus gravida facilisis. Integer adipiscing lacinia sapien at vulputate. Quisque sed massa a eros molestie elementum. Vivamus sed mauris leo. Suspendisse nunc elit, euismod accumsan vulputate in, faucibus id tortor. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Curabitur mattis lectus at aliquam facilisis. Mauris in quam laoreet, molestie nibh at, ultrices nisl.

  • Sed porta dui eu sapien varius
  • Lobortis est tincidunt
  • Nam pulvinar at lacus
  • Vulputate porttitor

Mauris dictum feugiat libero quis auctor. Suspendisse malesuada fringilla enim quis convallis. Suspendisse semper risus non purus placerat, et consectetur libero gravida. Phasellus dignissim porttitor lobortis. Fusce accumsan, leo ut fringilla ultrices, orci neque gravida leo, eu vestibulum augue justo at nisl.

Of Sanction, Cognizance and Ordinance – Rajasthan Diaries

The Government of Rajasthan promulgated the ‘Criminal Laws (Rajasthan Amendment) Ordinance, 2017’ (Ordinance No.3 of 2017) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ordinance’) which was notified on 7th September, 2017 after obtaining instruction from Union of India in pursuance of the proviso to clause (1) of Article 213 of the Constitution of India. The Ordinance seeks to insert proviso to Section 156(3) and Section 190 of Cr.P.C. and Section 228-B in Indian Penal Code.

Before adverting to the issue at hand, one must understand the complaint filing and the investigative procedures prevalent for offences relating to the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988(hereinafter referred to as the ‘PC Act’). In most States and also at the Centre, it is a specialized independent body in the nature of a Lokayukta (Anti-Corruption Ombudsman),that is tasked with dealing with complaints against the Public Servants. This body is headed by a retired High Court or Supreme Court Judge, generally appointed by a consensus between the Chief Justice, the Chief Minister and the Leader of Opposition in the State. Therefore, it may be noted that the said Ombudsman is a high constitutional functionary appointed through a transparent and balanced mechanism. It is to be further noted that such ombudsman also has a legal team of officers, a specialized Police Station, a Special Court and relevant know how in terms of dealing with sensitive matters concerning probity in public life by officials, judges and elected representatives. It may be noted that considering the rigours of public life in India and the fact how vested interests, on both sides of the political spectrum, often make irresponsible moonshine allegations against officials, the Ombudsman functions as key check-post in separating the wheat from the chaff. At this juncture, it may be noted that normally, complaints against public servants by private individuals are to be addressed to such Ombudsman which have specified mechanism is dealing with the said complaints and taking the necessary action. Otherwise, when a complaint is filed with some other Police Station, the officers often forward the same to the nearest Lokayukta office or the relevant Ombudsman. Therefore, the standard procedure for any complaint would be to approach the above said authorities to seeks investigation against the allegedly erring officials. It may be noted that investigation, in such cases is not barred till the sanction under Section 19 of the PC Act or Section 197 of Cr.P.C. is procured. The said provisions only estop the Special Judge from taking ‘cognizance’ of the offence before taking sanction from the appropriate authority.

The other mechanism, which is rarely used by complainants after failing to convince the independent ombudsman, is the procedure under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.It may be noted that in a way, this amounts to circumvention of the procedure and the systems established by the specialized body. Section 156(3)empowers the Magistrate to order ‘further investigation’ against the persons complained against by the Complainant. Section 156(3) has been a subject of endless legal debate, with experienced criminal law practitioners and judges often having differing views on nature of power exercised under Section 156(3), the standard by which the complaint is to be judged and whether it would amount to taking ‘cognizance’ or not. There are conflicting views about it, especially on the nature of the application of mind required by the Magistrate at this stage. A three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in DevarapalliLakshminarayana Reddy and Others v. V. Narayana Reddy and Others[i], held as follows;

 

“If on a reading of the complaint he finds that the allegations therein disclose a cognizable offence and the forwarding of the complaint to the police for investigation under S.156(3) will be conducive to justice and save the valuable time of the Magistrate from being wasted in inquiring into a matter which was primarily the duty of the police to investigate, he will be justified in adopting that course as an alternative to taking cognizance of the offence, himself”

 

Therefore, in the above said case, the power under Section 156(3) was considered as an alternative to taking cognizance and more importantly, it was presumed that the power under Section 156(3) was not to be exercised by ‘inquiring’ into the matter. Further, the bench presumed that the standard for the exercise the power was limited to ascertaining if the allegations in the complaint disclosed a cognizable offence. Similarly, the Supreme Court in SrinivasGundluri&Ors.vs M/S. Sepco Electric Power Construction Corporation[ii], took a view that the Magistrate, instead of applying his mind to the complaint for deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding, may directly order the police for conducting investigation under Section 156(3).

Contrary to the said judgments, in Ramdev Food Products Private Limited v. State of Gujarat[iii] while dealing with the exercise of power under Section 156(3) CrPC by the Magistrate, a three-Judge Bench held that:

 

“…. the direction under Section 156(3) is to be issued, only after application of mind by the Magistrate. When the Magistrate does not take cognizance and does not find it necessary to postpone instance of process and finds a case made out to proceed forthwith, direction under the said provision is issued. In other words, where on account of credibility of information available, or weighing the interest of justice it is considered appropriate to straightaway direct investigation, such a direction is issued.”

 

Therefore, the Court herein, clearly recognized that the ‘application of mind’ may be necessary to exercise power under Section 156(3) and the credibility of the information was to be ‘weighed’ before ordering any investigation. This position may be opposition to the view of the Supreme Court in the case of Devarapalli supra.

Be that as it may, considering that allegations against public servants under PC Act offences (or related offences in the IPC), are technical in nature and would require a higher evaluatory standard, it is safe to assume that Magistrates ought to apply their mind before ordering investigation against the public servant. However, as per the view in Devarapallisupra and considering the fact that there are a host of judgments on Section 156(3) given under different circumstances, the Magistrates may often be forced to exercise their power in a routine manner with weighing the veracity of the allegations. Moreover, the Supreme Court has in Suresh Chand Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh[iv] and Mohd. YousufVs. AfaqJahan[v], stated that once the power under Section 156(3) is exercised, the Police is ought to register an FIR. Therefore, it may result in a situation wherein the Magistrate exercised the power under Section 156(3) in a routine manner resulting in an FIR against a public servant who may have no role in the allegations made. Considering the rough and tumble of today’s media machinery and the cringe-worthy presumption of guilt against the public servants, the said exercise of power often results in suspension, or at least unwarranted transfers, of public officials.

Now, let us advert to the provisions of the Ordinance. The Ordinance adds the following proviso to the text of Section 156(3):

“Provided that, under the aforesaid sub-section, no Magistrate shall order an investigation nor will any investigation be conducted against a person, who is or was a Judge or a Magistrate or a public servant, as defined under any other law for the time being in force, in respect 2 of the act done by them while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of their official duties, except with previous sanction under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) or under any other law for the time being in force:

Provided further that the sanctioning authority shall ordinarily take a decision within one hundred and eighty days from the date of the receipt of the proposal for sanction:

Provided also that if the sanctioning authority fails to issue prosecution sanction within one hundred and eighty days, the prosecution sanction under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) or under any other law for the time being in force shall be deemed to have been issued:

Provided also that no one shall print or publish or publicize in any manner the name, address, photograph, family details, or any other particulars which may lead to disclosure of identity of a Judge or Magistrate or a public servant against whom any proceeding under this section is pending, until the sanction as aforesaid has been or deemed to have been issued.”

 

Similar changes have been carried out in section 190 of the Cr.P.C. and there has been an addition of Section 228-B mandating a maximum punishment of two years for revealing the identity of public servants/judges.

There are four aspects to the changes sought to be made by the Ordinance:

  • No investigation can be ordered under Section 156(3) only without prior sanction. Investigation through ordinary route by relevant specialized agencies remain unhindered by the said requirement.
  • The requirement of sanction under Section 156(3) and the decision therein has to be taken by the appropriate authority within 180 days.
  • If no decision is taken under 180 days, there would be a concept of a deemed sanction.
  • During the period of 180 days, when the question of sanction is pending, no one shall publicize or disclose the identity of the public servant involved.

The first three point are clearly defendable with clear judgment of the Supreme Court mandating exactly the same. The last proviso may have a different constitutional issue involving the freedom of press and what constitutes reasonable restrictions on it, which is beyond the scope of this article.

It is to be noted that the changes sought by the Ordinance are largely redundant because as per the judgments of the Supreme Court, that is exactly the exposition of law the said subject. The Supreme Court, recent cases, has consistently held that the sanction is a clear requirement before ordering investigation against a public servant under Section 156(3). The Supreme Court in Anil Kumar and Others v. M.K. Aiyappa and Another[vi] and ManharibhaiMuljibhaiKakadia and Another v. ShaileshbhaiMohanbhai Patel and Others[vii]has held the same in unequivocal terms. More recently, the Supreme Court in L. NarayanaSwamyvs State of Karnataka[viii], when asked to judge the correctness of Aiyappa supra and Manharibhai supra, reiterated the position with certain clarity. The Court held as under:

 

“Having regard to the ratio of the aforesaid judgment [Anil Kumar v. M.K. Aiyappa, (2013) 10 SCC 705 : (2014) 1 SCC (Cri) 35] , we have no hesitation in answering the questions of law, as formulated in para 10 above, in the negative. In other words, we hold that an order directing further investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC cannot be passed in the absence of valid sanction.”

 

The Court relied upon the text of Section 19/Section 197 to ascertain the nature of the special protection afforded to public servants before any Court takes cognizance of offences against them. It may be noted that perhaps the Court recognized the difficulties in the routine application of power under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. to the PC Act offences. The Court opined as under:

 

“12. As is clear from the plain language of the said section, the court is precluded from taking “cognizance” of an offence under certain sections mentioned in this provision if the prosecution is against the public servant, unless previous sanction of the Government (Central or State, as the case may be) has been obtained. What is relevant for our purposes is that this section bars taking of cognizance of an offence. The question is whether it will cover within its sweep, order directing investigation under Section 156(3) CrPC?”

 

To answer the said question, the Court first referred the case of Manharibhaisupra. The Court held as under:

 

  1. …….. However, it was held that even while directing inquiry, the Magistrate applies his judicial mind on the complaint and, therefore, it would amount to taking cognizance of the matter. In this context, the Court explained the word “cognizance” in the following manner: (ManharibhaiMuljibhaiKakadia case [ManharibhaiMuljibhaiKakadia v. ShaileshbhaiMohanbhai Patel, (2012) 10 SCC 517 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 218] , SCC p. 533, para 34)

 

“34. The word “cognizance” occurring in various sections in the Code is a word of wide import. It embraces within itself all powers and authority in exercise of jurisdiction and taking of authoritative notice of the allegations made in the complaint or a police report or any information received that an offence has been committed. In the context of Sections 200, 202 and 203, the expression “taking cognizance” has been used in the sense of taking notice of the complaint or the first information report or the information that an offence has been committed on application of judicial mind. It does not necessarily mean issuance of process.”

 

The Court clearly mentions that directing an enquiry under the PC Act (or against public officials in general for offences committed ‘in the course of their duty’) under Section 156(3), would necessarily require an application of mind by the Magistrate and therefore, cannot be assumed to be carried out in a routine manner. Therefore, the Court states that once there an application of mind to the complaint, that would amount to ‘taking cognizance’ and therefore, Section 19 of the PC Act or Section 197 of the IPC would kick in.

The Supreme Court further relied upon the Aiyappacase to ascertain the meaning of the term ‘taking cognizance’. The Court held as under:

 

  1. The second judgment in Anil Kumar [Anil Kumar v. M.K. Aiyappa, (2013) 10 SCC 705 : (2014) 1 SCC (Cri) 35] referred to above is directly on the point. In that case, identical question had fallen for consideration viz. whether sanction under Section 19 of the PC Act is a precondition for ordering investigation against a public servant under Section 156(3) CrPC even at pre-cognizance stage? Answering the question in the affirmative, the Court discussed the legal position in the following manner: (SCC pp. 711-12 & 713-14, paras 13-15 & 21)

“13. The expression “cognizance” which appears in Section 197 CrPC came up for consideration before a three-Judge Bench of this Court in State of U.P. v. ParasNath Singh [State of U.P. v. ParasNath Singh, (2009) 6 SCC 372 : (2009) 2 SCC (L&S) 200] and this Court expressed the following view: (SCC p. 375, para 6)

‘6. … “10. … And the jurisdiction of a Magistrate to take cognizance of any offence is provided by Section 190 of the Code, either on receipt of a complaint, or upon a police report or upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his knowledge that such offence has been committed. So far as public servants are concerned, the cognizance of any offence, by any court, is barred by Section 197 of the Code unless sanction is obtained from the appropriate authority, if the offence, alleged to have been committed, was in discharge of the official duty. The section not only specifies the persons to whom the protection is afforded but it also specifies the conditions and circumstances in which it shall be available and the effect in law if the conditions are satisfied. The mandatory character of the protection afforded to a public servant is brought out by the expression, “no court shall take cognizance of such offence except with the previous sanction”. Use of the words “no” and “shall” makes it abundantly clear that the bar on the exercise of power of the court to take cognizance of any offence is absolute and complete. The very cognizance is barred. That is, the complaint cannot be taken notice of. According to Black’s Law Dictionary the word “cognizance” means “jurisdiction” or “the exercise of jurisdiction” or “power to try and determine causes”. In common parlance, it means taking notice of. A court, therefore, is precluded from entertaining a complaint or taking notice of it or exercising jurisdiction if it is in respect of a public servant who is accused of an offence alleged to have been committed during discharge of his official duty.” [Ed.: As observed in State of H.P. v. M.P. Gupta, (2004) 2 SCC 349, 358, para10 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 539] ’

  1. In State of W.B. v. Mohd. Khalid [State of W.B. v. Mohd. Khalid, (1995) 1 SCC 684 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 266] , this Court has observed as follows:

‘13. It is necessary to mention here that taking cognizance of an offence is not the same thing as issuance of process. Cognizance is taken at the initial stage when the Magistrate applies his judicial mind to the facts mentioned in a complaint or to a police report or upon information received from any other person that an offence has been committed. The issuance of process is at a subsequent stage when after considering the material placed before it the court decides to proceed against the offenders against whom a prima facie case is made out.’ [Ed.: As considered in State of Karnataka v. Pastor P. Raju, (2006) 6 SCC 728, 734, para13 : (2006) 3 SCC (Cri) 179]

 

Therefore, the Court held that the act of taking notice of the complaint, coupled with the act of application of mind, would amount to ‘taking cognizance’. To further said point, the Court relied upon the Black’s Law Dictionary definition of term ‘cognizance’.  Hence, it is clear that as per the law as on date, the Ordinance makes little to no change in the application of Section 156(3) therefore, must be validated in case of challenge in the Courts.

 

It must however be clarified that there is considerable body of academic opinion on the subject of the above said judgments being per incuriam. It is argued thatas per the definition of the term ‘cognizance’ and as per the the numerous precedents stating that exercise power under Section 156(3) would not amount to ‘taking cognizance’, the judgements post Aiyappaare erroneous. The major reliance in this regard is placed upon the case of R.R.Chari vs. State of U.P.[ix]. The Supreme Court, in the said case, approved the following observations of Calcutta High Court in Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs, West Bengal v. Abani Kumar Banerji[x]:

 

“What is taking cognizance has not been defined in the Criminal Procedure Code and I have no desire to attempt to define it. It seems to me clear however that before it can be said that any magistrate has taken cognizance of any offence under S. 190 (1) (a), Criminal Procedure Code, he must not only have applied his mind to the contents of the petition but must have done so for the purpose of proceeding in a particular way as indicated in the subsequent provisions of this Chapter – proceeding under S. 200 and thereafter sending it for inquiry and report under S. 202. When the magistrate applies his mind not for the purpose of proceeding under the subsequent sections of this Chapter, but for taking action of some other kind, e. g., ordering investigation under S. 156 (3), or issuing a search warrant for the purpose of the investigation, he cannot be said to have taken cognizance of the offence.”

 

The same language, more or less has been repeated consistently by the Supreme Court in the NarayandasBhagwandasMadhavdas Vs. State of West Bengal[xi], Gopal Das Sindhi Vs. State of Assam[xii], Jamuna Singh Vs. Bhadai Shah[xiii], D. Lakshminarayana Reddy and Others v. V. Narayana Reddy and Others[xiv], Tula Ram Vs. Kishore Singh[xv], etc. Therefore, there is considerable force, at least as an academic opinion, in argument that “taking cognizance” in S.190 means application of mind for the purpose of proceeding under S. 200 and subsequent sections of Ch. XV of the Cr.P.C. To extend the argument further, it may argued that exercise of power under Section 156(3) would not amount to taking cognizance, even in case of offences against public officials under the PC Act or the IPC. It would also presume that ‘application of mind’ and ‘taking cognizance’ would be, two different and unrelated acts, carried out by the Magistrate. It can further be argued that the by reading the phrase ‘taking cognizance’ differently in different situations(particularly PC Act offences), the Court has made a fundamental alteration in the words of the Statute which is completely impermissible[xvi].

It is to be noted that perhaps, what played on the minds of the judges in deciding these cases, would have been the increased presence of certain anti-social elements, seeking to overreach the Ombudsman and ostensibly gain unwarranted leverage over vulnerable public servants. Recently, the Supreme Court in possibly recognizing the misuse of Section156(3) by unscrupulous elements, in PriyankaSrivastava&Anrvs State Of U.P.[xvii], held as follows:

 

“In our considered opinion, a stage has come in this country where Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. applications are to be supported by an affidavit duly sworn by the applicant who seeks the invocation of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. That apart, in an appropriate case, the learned Magistrate would be well advised to verify the truth and also can verify the veracity of the allegations. This affidavit can make the applicant more responsible.”

 

Be that as it may, the position as on date remains governed by the Aiyappacase and thejudgments after that. The meaning of the word ‘cognizance’ may be a sticky wicket considering that different judges have used it different. The stage of ‘taking cognizance’ also remains shrouded in doubt and malleability considering the language of Section 190 Cr.P.C. and the clear element of application of mind in complaints involving Section 156(3). The question whether a Magistrate took Cognizance or not depends upon the purpose for which he had applied his mind to it and the stage at which he has done so. The Supreme Court in Whirlpool Corpn. v. Registrar of Trade Marks, (1998) 8 SCC 1, has held that even statutory definitions, can mean different things in different contexts. The Court held as under: 

 

“28. Now, the principle is that all statutory definitions have to be read subject to the qualification variously expressed in the definition clauses which created them and it may be that even where the definition is exhaustive inasmuch as the word defined is said to mean a certain thing, it is possible for the word to have a somewhat different meaning in different sections of the Act depending upon the subject or context. That is why all definitions in statutes generally begin with the qualifying words, similar to the words used in the present case, namely “unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context”. Thus there may be sections in the Act where the meaning may have to be departed from on account of the subject or context in which the word had been used and that will be giving effect to the opening sentence in the definition section, namely “unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context”. In view of this qualification, the court has not only to look at the words but also to look at the context, the collocation and the object of such words relating to such matter and interpret the meaning intended to be conveyed by the use of the words “under those circumstances”. (see Vanguard Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Fraser &Ross[AIR 1960 SC 971 : (1960) 3 SCR 857] )”

 

Therefore, when the Magistrate applied his mind for exercising his powers to issue a search warrant under Section 96Cr.P.C. or granting or refusal of bail during investigation Sections 436,437Cr.P.C. or for the recording a confession or a Statement under Section 164Cr.P.C., it cannot be said that he had taken cognizance of the case. On the other hand,it can said that when the Magistrate applies his mind for examining the complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. or conducting an inquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. or in special case of exercise of power under Section 156(3) where the offence involves public servant or is committed under the PC Act (wherein there is a clear protection against cognizance under Section 19), it can be concluded that he had ‘taken cognizance’ of the offence.

The above said academic criticism aside, it is clearly established that the major supposed ‘change’ sought by the Ordinance is largely redundant as per the law declared by the Supreme Court. It must be noted that the law declared by the Supreme Court is exactly in consonance with the content of the Ordinance. As far as the media ‘gag’ element is concerned, it may be difficult to sustain considering that the Ordinance seeks to impose a high criminal liability in cases of disclosure.Other than that, the criticism surrounding the alleged barring of investigation before sanction is farcical if one studies the impact of the changes brought about by the Ordinance and the precedents surrounding the issue.

The powers of the designated authorities like Lokayuktas or other anti-corruption ombudsman are not restricted by the Ordinance. Further, informed and responsible citizens are open to approach such authorities with complaints for the authorities to act under the relevant provisions. The only limitation that the Ordinance imposes is to the procedure under Section 156(3) which seeks to circumvent the established process by extending the protection of sanction even in cases of such circumvention.We must realise that law making is a highly technical process and requires discussion, debate and deliberation to result in to a viable draft. As if often the case in democracies, public sentiment affects the law judging process to a great extent and that sentiment in the present case has been highly negative.This public sentiment based approach is insincere, and is an avoidable latch in the quality law making.

 

(KanuAgrawal is an advocate practicing at the Supreme Court of India.)

[i]1976 AIR 1672

[ii]2010 (2) SCC 1539

[iii](2015)6 SCC 439

[iv](2001)2 SCC 628

[v](2006)1 SCC 627

[vi] (2013)10 SCC 705

[vii](2012)10 SCC 517

[viii](2016) 9 SCC 598

[ix]AIR 1951 SC 207

[x]AIR 1950 Cal 437

[xi]AIR 1959 SC 1118

[xii]AIR 1961 SC 986

[xiii]AIR 1964 SC 1541

[xiv]AIR 1976 SC 1672

[xv](1977) 4 SCC 459

[xvi]Danckwerts L.J. in Artemiou v. Procopiou, 1966 (1) Q.B. 878

[xvii](2015) 6 SCC 287

COUNTER TERRORISM CONFERENCE 2018

Brochure

[wpc_countdown theme=”flat-colors” now=”1518685446955″ end=”672″ bg=”#fff” padding=”5″]

With technological advancements and changing narratives of globalization, terrorism has also undergone considerable transformation. Today, the agents of terror are far more tech-savvy and globally connected, with an aim of achieving their objectives through continuous innovation. They no longer need an umbrella of any organisation as they are capable of carrying out lone wolf attacks. The ideological commitment is stronger and thus the absence of command and control infrastructure is incapable of posing any hindrance.

With recent successes against Islamic State (IS) in Syria and Iraq, the area controlled by the Caliphate has virtually disappeared, but its influence has not diminished. Recent developments in South Asia, Southeast Asia, Africa and other parts of the world indicate that the influence of IS and other jihadi outfits is only increasing with time. No longer can terrorism be discarded as law and order issue or a matter of regional security. These terror groups are forging new alliances to threaten international peace and security.

The 21st century has witnessed usage of innovative technology by the terrorist groups to further their objectives. From devastating missiles to new forms of chemical weapons and drone technology to usage of transport vehicles as mediums of spreading terror, the terrorist groups have tried them all. The innovation is not restricted to weapons but can also be seen in their modes of recruitment and influence on general public. As the terrorists are constantly innovating, it is essential for counter terrorism agencies across the world to innovate in order to counter them and be ahead of them. This conference therefore intends to analyse the changing contours of terrorism in the current scenario and evolve strategies to equip the international community with the technical and analytical ability to counter the menace of terrorism.

Program Schedule

Date: 14-16 March 2018
Venue: Gurugram, Haryana

Students have enough time to enjoy the summer holidays

In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Suspendisse venenatis mattis eros, nec pulvinar ipsum euismod sed. Mauris iaculis neque urna, tincidunt placerat lectus placerat at. Integer eget neque vel diam auctor auctor. Quisque sed interdum est. Proin quam erat, viverra eu pellentesque et, congue in est. Sed accumsan non elit at bibendum.

Morbi ligula magna, varius ac vulputate at, malesuada eu tortor. Cras molestie ipsum non ligula congue semper. Vestibulum gravida metus at lacus pellentesque, sollicitudin elementum lacus auctor.

  • Aliquam in nibh euismod
  • Gravida erat ac
  • Semper nibh
  • Nulla nec pulvinar risus

Nunc sit amet eros id tortor dapibus molestie eu in magna. Vestibulum id eros vel tortor dictum pellentesque nec vitae odio. In rutrum massa in erat cursus consequat.

Megan Boyle flourishes at Boston University

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Quisque pretium porta vulputate. Duis fermentum id nulla sed ultrices. Nulla facilisi. Suspendisse porta metus et nisl bibendum, eu ultricies magna laoreet. Ut porta molestie justo, sit amet vestibulum nunc iaculis vel. Mauris ac metus tortor. Proin id massa sed dolor rutrum rutrum. Mauris aliquet mollis tellus, rhoncus lobortis nunc.

Nunc in lobortis diam, at condimentum ligula. In tristique pulvinar auctor. Duis ultricies egestas orci, id luctus sem. Aliquam pulvinar porttitor magna ut vehicula. Sed eget felis vitae est bibendum molestie. Integer eros mi, fermentum nec dui eu, rutrum fermentum dolor. Duis laoreet mi sed quam dictum, eu blandit diam lobortis.

What next?

Aliquam id interdum metus. Nullam nec ornare dui, sit amet luctus risus. Etiam eu lacus nunc. Phasellus convallis massa at sem semper consectetur. In hendrerit imperdiet turpis vitae condimentum. Suspendisse ac odio ut leo congue commodo. Pellentesque arcu urna, porttitor sit amet arcu non, auctor faucibus eros. Etiam vitae lorem sit amet justo aliquam ultrices. Vivamus lobortis dignissim lacus ac aliquam. Phasellus feugiat dolor nec fringilla vestibulum.

Indian Ocean Conference 2017


GUTE-URLS

Wordpress is loading infos from firstpost

Please wait for API server guteurls.de to collect data from
www.firstpost.com/india/indian-o...

4th International Dharma Dhamma Conference



Buntington Alum Marc Bloom Pens New Book

Sed rhoncus tincidunt bibendum. Suspendisse nec justo libero. Nunc ornare, tellus vitae dignissim laoreet, ipsum sapien facilisis ligula, vel egestas elit quam a arcu. Donec laoreet quis neque sed tincidunt. Duis eu iaculis lacus. Nunc ut risus lobortis, gravida metus non, varius dolor. Fusce viverra erat eu gravida blandit. Donec tincidunt sapien quis arcu porttitor semper.

Vestibulum semper enim in quam auctor pulvinar. Suspendisse malesuada odio at ipsum cursus, id semper odio rutrum. Curabitur placerat elementum orci non ornare. Ut quis commodo mi. Integer feugiat tristique nibh quis ultrices. Duis ac porta elit.

Book Review : The Last Battle of Saraighat

The Story ofthe BJP’s Rise

in the North-east

Authors: Rajat Sethi and Shubhrastha

Publisher: Penguin Viking, 2017, pp 182

Price: Rs.599/-

Book Review by: K. Raka Sudhakar Rao

      Winning an election in a geographical behemoth like UP looks a child’s play compared to winning Assam in India’s North-east. Such are the complexities of Assam. Though just 126 seats, the voters in the Ujoni (upper) Assam have different set of priorities compared to Namoni (Lower region). The Barak Vally with its 14 seats thinks and behaves differently, at times diametrically opposed to the Assamese regions. A Rabha in Goalpara has little in common with the Mishing in Jorhat in terms of voting behaviour. Plains tribe Bodo has nothing in common with the hill tribes like Dimasa or Karbi when it comes to exercising his franchise. A tilt here or a nudge there can profoundly alter the poll outcome in this small but extremely important state. One only has to remember how Tarun Gogoi’s statement that Bengali Hindus should be treated as refugees and not foreigners has tilted the scales at the finish line and led to a Congress sweep in the Barak Valley during 2011 elections.

But, winning Assam is very important as much for emotional and sociological reasons as for political reasons for the BJP. It is not just winning another state. It is a gateway to seven-state North-east and a key to unlock the maze of complex regional dynamics there. Even geographically, Assam looks like the peduncle of a flower that holds six petals. For the BJP, a victory represents growing pan-India presence particularly in the wake of a post-2014 political geography faultline where East and South bucked the pro-BJP trend, as correctly pointed by Martin W Lewis in his Geocurrents Blog. A victory in Assam for the BJP has great salience for its nationalist and integrationist ideological moorings. More over, as Ram  Madhav rightly points out in his forward, it was a much-needed morale boosting victory after two back-to-back defeats in Delhi and Bihar.

The Last Battle of Saraighat: The Story of the BJP’s Rise in the North-east, by Rajat Sethi and Shubhrastha is an account of how BJP powered and propelled itself to wrest the biggest Congress bastion in the North-east. Both Rajat and Shubhrastha were political campaigners for the BJP and have seen the unfolding of the high-octane political drama from the closest possible quarter. They were partners in the process of how the BJP managed to crack the code of demographic riddle that Assam is and are eminently qualified to chronicle the story of how the last battle for Saraighat was won. And they did it with a seamless unfolding of narrative that is as lucid as it is insightful. They managed to tell the story of the “seemingly calm yet ever-churning” political waters of Mahabahu Brahmaputra.

Gleaning through the pages of this book is a personal déjà vu for this reviewer. During the 1985 elections, post the historic Assam Accord, this reviewer campaigned for the then state BJP president Praveen Baruah, in Jamuguri constituency. He was thrashed for merely carrying BJP pamphlets (Such were the pro-Assam Gana Parishad (AGP) passions then) and the state president ended up with just 432 votes. One vividly remembers majestic Rajmatha Vijayraje Scindia visiting more temples than voters and managing to address a motley crowd of 50 people in Nepali-dominated area in Tezpur constituency during her day-long electioneering toil (The Nepalis gathered just because Rajmatha spoke flawless Nepali). One also witnessed the strangest spectacle of redoubtable Atal Bihari Vajpayee speaking at the near-empty Judges Ground in Guwahati. From that pariah-hood to primacy in North East is a stirring saga of a scintillating journey for the BJP.  Rajat Sethi and Shubhrastha narrate with candour and commitment how this watershed moment became a reality.

Respecting the diversity and grooming of diverse local leadership, seamless blending of “Bharat Matha Ki Jai with Joi Ai Axom” and forging a rainbow coalition of political parties with diverse political aspirations without diluting the spirit of nationalism had helped the BJP register its first electoral victory in the North East.

One very significant aspect is the authors’ acknowledgement of the silent contribution made by nationalist organisations like the RSS. The authors wonder: In the monolithic narrative that dominated Assam’s contemporary politics, no one saw nationalism as a politically viable alternative or a rallying political thought.  How did organisations like the RSS make a foray into the battered Assam in late 1940s? What helped the Sangh, an organization that did not have roots in Assam, gain a firm foothold in the multi-lingual, multi-ethic and multi-polar state? How did the organization make such an indelible imprint in Assam that while interpreting the assembly election results in 2016, analysts were forced to acknowledge its pervasive influence in galvanizing the support of the electorate?

They then go on to explain the growth and expansion of the RSS in Assam, which is vital to understand how BJP could get acceptance of Assamese voter. “Creating a counter narrative in an atmosphere of vitiated political and intellectual environment has been one of the greatest achievements of the Sangh. Even after losing so many swayamsevaks and pracharaks to violence, the RSS kept its firm resolve and commitment to achieve the goals of national integration,” say the authors (page 67).

It is interesting to note that even during the epic Mahabharata War, Pandavas forged rainbow coalitions in the North East in the run-up to Kurukshetra. Marriages with Hidimba, Uloopi, Prameela and others had helped the Pandavas muster strength to take on the mighty Kauravas in Kurukshetra. Under Ram Madhav’s leadership, the BJP managed to cobble up seemingly unlikely alliances. Spirited leadership of affable Sarbananda Sonowal and master strategist Himantha Biswa Sarma provided the much-needed spearhead in this battle of the ballot. Finally, the BJP did all the right things in the run-up to the poll battle and clinched that well-deserved victory.

The book is an important tool for all political science students to understand the art of politics and how a determined and visionary leadership can make seemingly impossible become possible.

 

  1. Raka Sudhakar Rao is a Hyderabad-based journalist and commentator. He has worked in the

North East from 1984 to 1995. He can be reached at krakasudhakarrao@gmail.com

(This article is carried in the print edition of January-February 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

The Beauty of Indic Thought

Indic thought is the most liberal that the world has ever produced. This is because it is the most democratically evolved of all. It is a product of the deep contemplation of great sages and saints, their great dialogues and discourses. A bhadra icchha, a benign wish had originated from that, and it was about abhyudaya, progress and prosperity.

Bhadram icchhantah rishiyah

swar vidayah, tapo dikshaamupanshed agre.

Tato raashtram, bala, ojasya jaatam

tadasmai devaupasannmantu

That bhadra icchha led to the evolution of the core principles of Indic thought several millennia ago. It explored all dimensions of human existence, and concluded that life is a celebration. ‘Aananda’, eternal bliss, is the ultimate objective of this. Indic Thought teaches us to celebrate life.

A few years ago, I was at a conference in China. A Chinese scholar had made a startling comment that Indians can never compete with the Chinese. I asked him to explain. “You Indians are worshippers of poverty,” he insisted, saying that Indians worship loin cloth-clad saintly men as heroes, whereas the Chinese civilisation had always worshipped prosperity.

It prompted me to wonder whether they have misunderstood our worldview. We are one people who always strived for ‘aananda’, eternal bliss.

Alexander bumps into Diogenes, a half-naked man lying on the banks of a river on his way. He asks the man, “Who are you?” The man says he is Diogenes. And then he asks Alexander, “Who are you?” A little surprised and a lot annoyed, Alexander replies, “I am Alexander the Great.” Hearing it, Diogenes laughs out aloud. “I am seeing a man for the first time who calls himself ‘the Great’,” he says.

They engage in a discussion. At the end, impressed by Diogenes’ philosophy, Alexander promises to become his disciple. “Do it today, or it will be too late,” warns Diogenes. Alexander hesitates, “I have a mission to conquer the world. I shall come back after that,” he promises. “You can never,” says Diogenes. “Can I do something for you?” asks Alexander. “Yes! I am enjoying my beautiful sun bath. You are coming in the way. Please get off,” shouts Diogenes.

Alexander was looking for his happiness in wars, conquest and subjugation. Diogenes, a saintly man, finds it in his freedom to lie down by the side of the river in his sun bath. Freedom, absolute and unmitigated, is the Indic way.

“God is dead; Man is free,” exclaimed Nietzsche. But we said, “No. God is here, and hence man is free. God is all around. He is in me. I am God, the unbound. Hence I am free.” We are a society that cherishes freedom.

Our Dharma, a view and vision of life that has evolved out of this thought, is the Dharma of happiness and celebration. ‘Sarve api sukhinah santu’ is the daily morning prayer of us all. At one level, it is purely a material prayer. It says, ‘Let all be happy; let all be free from disease; let all enjoy goods in life; let all be free of sorrow’. It is about material happiness.

But the operational word in this prayer is ‘sarvepi’ or ‘all’. We pray that everybody should be happy. In order for all to be happy, all have to also sacrifice. ‘Tyaaga’, sacrifice, is thus made a virtue for the greater aananda of society.

Indic Thought is very profound, and yet very humble. It doesn’t ordain any final word and demand that followers believe it. We are not ‘believers’, we are ‘seekers’. Indic Thought is man’s journey, an unending exploration of the Absolute.

Since we are seekers, we have to be ever open to new ideas. We shouldn’t assume that all the Indic wisdom can be available in a single gathering. Humility, the quality of accepting our inadequacy to realise the Ultimate Truth, and a constant yearning for it, is best captured in the Indic concept of ‘Neti Neti’. Scholars have interpreted it in many ways: ‘Neither this nor that’ etcetera. But Chaturvedi Badrinath’s interpretation, ‘Not just this alone’, best captures the Indic spirit. In our seeking, we must not forget that what we explore is not the entire truth. We must respect the other; continue to seek.

The seeker has no boundaries. He can find virtue anywhere in the world. “Hold your own values with one hand, close to your heart. Stretch your other hand into the universe, and collect as much wisdom as you can,” exhorted Swami Vivekananda. Indic Thought doesn’t discard any idea based on its origin, East or West. It accepts all noble thoughts.

Any effort to restrict it in a framework will be the ‘Victorianisation’ of Indic Thought. It will be the death of it.

Indic Thought wants a human to evolve in inner spaces, not just in outer morals. Semitic faiths and Victorians have emphasised ‘character’. This English word has two equivalent Hindi words: ‘sheel’ and ‘charitra’. The latter is a discipline imposed from outside. Social norms, ethics, societal morals – all these form your ‘charitra’. But ‘sheel’ is the blossoming of the inner self; it is not bound by external restrictions; it is an innate virtue.

Go to an uneducated old woman of the poorest household in a remote village in our country. Listen to her morning prayer. She might not have enough food to eat for the day, or enough clothes to wear. But her prayer will be: ‘Ganga maiyya ki jai ho; gau mata ki jai ho’, ‘Glory to the Ganges and the revered cow’. And it will end with ‘Lok kalyaan ho’, ‘Let the whole world be happy.’ It was not taught to her; it is her ‘sheel’ speaking.

Religions have imposed so-called values externally. They wanted society to have character. One should never become ‘dus-charitra’, a man of bad character. But one shouldn’t remain ‘charitravaan’, a man of external character, alone. One should become ‘sheelvaan’, a man of innate virtue. That is Indic Thought.

It is this virtue that might sometimes seem to go against societal mores, which is the real freedom that Indic Thought accords the individual. Because many a time, these norms that we construct – for ‘charitra’ – might end up subjecting some sections of people to injustice. Victims of this are true minorities. A minority is not defined numerically; it refers to those whose voice has been taken away. Discrimination on the basis of sex, caste or race, even in the name of social character, is against Indic Thought.

Draupadi is the epitome of ‘sheel’. She is in a way the first feminist of the world. A woman with five husbands, but fiercely independent, as she is not to obey any of them, and only listen to her dear colleague Krishna. Draupadi was partly responsible for the epic Mahabharata War. Yudhisthira, being Dharmaraj, was willing to settle for five villages. But Krishna turns to Draupadi, and it was she who insists that she wouldn’t settle for anything less, quite rightfully, than the blood of Dusshasana. It was Draupadi’s ‘sheel’, not Yudhisthira’s ‘charitra’ of peace and no-war that finally led to the victory of Dharma. We didn’t call Draupadi an obdurate woman; instead, we call her Maha Sadhvi, an epitome of virtue.

Indic Thought is about promoting and respecting that ‘sheel’, irrespective of whether one is born as a man or a woman, or even a transgender.

Such a profound and evolved way of thought has still not taken its rightful place in the world. It is still regarded as regressive, obscurantist, etcetera. But as Gandhiji rightly used to say, “If there is something bad in your society, don’t blame Dharma; blame yourself, that you have failed to realise it fully.” We have to realise it. More importantly, we have to articulate it properly.

That is the challenge. I have another one to proffer: think of ways to make Indic Thought fashionable, something that a 21st century young man would like to wear on his sleeve.

*This article is a summary of the inaugural address delivered by Shri Ram Madhav,

National General Secretary, BJP and Director, India Foundation at the Indic Thoughts Festival organised by India Foundation and Indic Academy at Goa on 17th December, 2017.

(This article is carried in the print edition of January-February 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

India-Mongolia

India Foundation is organising a Conference on India-Mongolia Relations inJawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, on 9th January 2018. The theme of theConference would be “Historical Linkages, Scripts, and Literary Heritages”.

India and Mongolia are ancient lands of the ancient people of Asia. The historicand cultural collaboration between India and Mongolia is most fascinating butalong with the past, it is equally imperative to keep alive the knowledge anddocumentation of modern day collaborations between the two nations.

To look into the deeper aspect of the relationship, India Foundation incollaboration with ICCR, Jawaharlal Nehru University and Embassy of Mongolia inIndia is organising a day long conference which will discuss the followingthemes:

1)Historical Linkages

2)Scripts and literary heritage

3) Role of KushokBakula Rinpoche in shaping the India-Mongolia Relations

 

India Ideas Conclave 2017

Men are mortal. So are ideas. An idea needs propagation as much as a plant needs watering.” Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s words signify the importance of a persistent set of efforts necessary for permeating an idea within each and every strand of society. India Ideas Conclave, an annual platform in its fourth edition this year, is one such effort made by India Foundation to take forward the churning of ideas for the peace, progress and prosperity of the world in the 21st century. The theme of the India Ideas Conclave 2017 – Leadership in 21st century, was aimed at generating meaningful discussions around this subject of crucial importance in the global arena. A brief report of the proceedings of the three-day Conclave is here below.

Day 1 – December 15, 2017

  1. Inaugural Session
  2. Mr. M.J. Akbar

Minister of State for External Affairs, Government of India, Mr. M.J. Akbar, in his Welcome Address remarked, “In order to understand what is leadership in the 21st century, one needs to first understand what the 21st century is.” Mr. Akbar emphasised through the examples of Battle of Waterloo (1815) and Mahatma Gandhi’s “Satyagraha” for India’s freedom during the late 1910s and early 1920s, that these kinds of events define the inception of a century rather than merely the turn of the century in numerical terms.

He attributed the birth of 21st century to two events, i.e. 9/11 (New York twin tower attacks) and 26/11 (Mumbai terror attacks). Mr. Akbar stated that terrorism has become an existential challenge to the very concept of a nation state and further added that nationalism is the ideological response to terrorism.

Reiterating the underlying philosophy of ‘Sabka Saath Sabka Vikaas’ Mr. Akbar said, “21st century is going to be the century where we search for prosperity. Not for few, but prosperity for all.”

  1. Mr. Zakir Anwar Nusseibeh

Minister of State, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Mr. Zakir Anwar Nusseibeh stated, “Those who do not remember their past are doomed to repeat it.” He further stated that lack of efficient political leaders creates the space for failed states and proxy wars. He added that by ensuring effective governance and administration, promoting investment and delivering smart and timely public services, UAE has become a pioneer in the Arab world for governance. Mr. Nusseibeh asserted that a leader must be aware of the consequences of failure and hence must be prepared to deftly face a highly uncertain set of challenges in the 21st century.

  1. Smt. Chandrika Kumaratunga

Former President of Sri Lanka, Smt. Chandrika Kumaratunga stated, “Today’s leaders in the 21st century will have to work together to strengthen the mechanism of regional and global governance. This is an absolute must.” She said that conflicts are bound to happen in the process of evolution and hence, continuous exchange of ideas is an imperative in order to promote understanding and developing consensus. She cautioned about the critical issue of climate change and asserted, “Solutions to the threat of climate change will have to begin from within nations but will have to be managed and handled at a global level.”

Advising the future leaders to be audacious in their decision making, she said that the problems of today cannot be solved by age-old solutions of the past and hence, the leaders must believe in themselves and not fear to be different.

  1. Mr. Manohar Parrikar

Delivering the concluding address at the Inaugural session, Goa Chief Minister,
Mr. Manohar Parrikar stated, “Lack of information or distorted information creates political chaos,” and added that “The real biggest challenge for 21st century leader is to ensure that this message goes in a focused manner to the citizenry.” He highlighted the need to develop acumen to undertake quick decision-making in such times of information asymmetry as an imperative to become a great leader in the 21st century.

  1. Ms. Mehbooba Mufti

in conversation with Mr. S. Prasannarajan

Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister, Ms. Mehbooba Mufti asserted, “Idea of India is not separate from the idea of Kashmir.” She said that there is immense hope for finding a solution for Jammu and Kashmir if the leadership can go beyond the use of force, especially against its own people. Ms. Mufti went on to iterate that her party PDP formed an alliance with the BJP in the interests of the state of Jammu & Kashmir. She highlighted the need to increase the engagement of the entire country with Jammu and Kashmir and further added that by making the state a part of the broader SAARC vision of the country, Jammu and Kashmir can become India’s gateway to the Central Asia. Ms. Mufti emphasized that the concept of Kashmiriyat refers to the love for humanity and asked the members of media fraternity to help bring forth this aspect to the people across the country and the world.

  1. Panel Discussion I
    Effective Nationalist Discourse

The panellists were – Mr. Zafar Sareshwala, Chancellor, Maulana Azad National Urdu University; Mr. Kanchan Gupta, Commissioning Editor & Commentator, ABP News; Mr. Anand Ranganathan, Associate Professor, JNU; Ms. Yogini Deshpande, Entrepreneur; and Mr. Vivek Agnihotri, Filmmaker. The session was moderated by Mr. Rajeev Srinivasan, Adjunct Faculty, IIM Bangalore.

Mr. Srinivasan began the discussion with bringing ‘Indic Exceptionalism’ into light and set the parameters for the discussion to include the meaning of nationalism, its role in the international arena and the nationalist narrative it subscribes to.

Mr. Sareshwala said that the idea of nationalism is devoid of any religious identity or sub-text. Culture and ethnicity help form better bonds than religion. For him, nationalism and patriotism are complimentary and one cannot exist without the other. Mr. Kanchan Gupta did not agree and stated that for him, the concept of nationalism is different from that of patriotism. He referred to patriotism as a ‘reduced idea’ to the geographical reality of a nation state. He asserted, “Civilisational identity is the national identity.”

Mr. Ranganathan stated that he considered nationalism as anti-science or anti-evolution and added that whereas human evolution respects diversity, nationalism on the other hand, restricts such diversity. Ms. Deshpande also acknowledged the difference between patriotism and nationalism and stated that the former is restricted to territorial bounds. Very significantly, she went on to challenge the token value of the oft-used adage ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ by stating that the real essence of the entirety of the Hitopadesha shloka from where this adage is derived is that one should be careful to decide whom to invite to one’s home. Mr. Agnihotri called for a balanced approach in understanding the concepts of globalism and nationalism.

Day 2 – December 16, 2017

  1. Breakfast Session I
    Mainstream Media

The panellists were – Ms. Aarti Tikoo, Senior Assistant Editor, the Times of India; Mr. Abhijit Majumdar, Managing Editor, Mail Today; Mr. Prashant Jha, Associate Editor, Hindustan Times and Ms. Liz Mathew, Associate Editor, Indian Express. Prof. Madhav Das Nalapat, Editorial Director, The Sunday Guardian was the moderator for this session. Important issues were raised about how media is being used for one-sided narratives due to which media is seen in a bad light and is losing credibility in the society. When questioned if ‘Media is power or it exists to empower’, the panel answered that media exists to check people in power and that it is not just confined to politics. The role of media is that of being a mediator and a facilitator. Ms. Tikoo highlighted that social media has in fact pushed back the mainstream media to correct its course, but mainstream media is effective in the matrix of current situation. Important concerns raised during the session included – whether mainstream media should be restricted to geographical hotspots; the need for media to refrain from blowing up incidents to disproportionate sizes and for maintaining a standard of ethics in its functioning. It was also generally agreed that nature of media should not be right or left to the centre, but it should concentrate on the right or wrong aspect of any particular incident or event.

  1. Special Address by Sri M

Addressing the gathering on the subject – Bhagwad Gita and leadership in 21st century, Founder of Satsang Foundation, Sri M (born Mumtaz Ali Khan) stated, “Shrimad Bhagwad Gita is the scripture of mankind.” The Bhagwad Gita was narrated in the battle field with the dissatisfaction of Arjun as its backdrop, which, according to Sri M, makes it not just a form of literature for a particular era but is meant for eternity. He stated that Bhagwad Gita teaches that ‘nishkaam karma’ is an important aspect of leadership and further added, “A leader should be in control of his emotions and be level-headed in all circumstances”.

Sri M said Gita narrates the attributes of the greatest yogi (leader) as one who can think for others as well as ensure self-growth. Referring to teachings of Swami Vivekananda, he stated that, “By considering underprivileged as ‘daridra-narayan’, service to them not only makes one a leader but also paves the path for one’s salvation.” Sri M iterated that in his view, Swami Vivekananda founded the concept of ‘vedantic socialism’, a basis of Indian leadership, which considers all souls to be equal.

  1. Presentations I
  2. Mr. Grandhi Mallikarjuna Rao

Chairman, GMR Group, Mr. Grandhi Mallikarjuna Rao stated that earlier, the nature of the world order was closed, but with rising effects of globalisation and economic interdependence, citizens across nationalities acquired a form of a global citizenship. Mr. Rao stated, “An ethical leadership with strong governance is the need of leadership in the 21st century.” He emphasised that the modern world is an extremely volatile one and efforts must be made to develop leaders who can impart ‘timeless leadership’.

  1. Ms. Naheed Farid

Member of Parliament from Herat province in Afghanistan, Ms. Naheed Farid commenced her presentation with Rumi’s words – ‘Raise your words, not voice’. She drew civilisational similarities between India and Afghanistan and referred to the need of eliminating the artificial boundaries which divide our societies. The purpose of the Conclave, according to her, is to conclude what to make of humanity. In her view, a leader must undertake several tasks namely – reverse poverty, diffuse terrorism, achieve sustainable lifestyle, prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction and plan for advancing the human civilisation. She asserted that terrorism and violence cannot dictate the choices of a leader and leaders should take full responsibility for their actions.

  1. Mr. Swapan Dasgupta

Member of Parliament, Rajya Sabha, Mr. Swapan Dasgupta said that times are changing and the ideas from yesterday have become the reality of today. He talked about the need for expanding our horizons and incorporating our national identity with the concept of global citizenship thereby making it more nuanced in nature. While advocating embracing change, he also cautioned, “There is a difference between having a critical view of the past and a dismissive view of the past.” He stated that the need of the hour is to be balanced and not become overwhelmed with modernity. The notion of ‘common decency’ or common values needs to be upheld at all times.

  1. Mr. Rajiv B. Lall

Founder Managing Director and CEO, IDFC Bank, Mr. Rajiv Lall stated that a strong leadership is a must to make a political case for a market-based economy. He talked about the need for a leader to catalyse social change when tensions exist between modernisation and conservatism. He observed, “There is a fierce contestation in our times to find new identities.” He said, “The new India needs statesman who can build generations.” In conclusion, he stated that a leader must revisit the idea of national identity and forge a new identity for a new India.

  1. Panel Discussion II
    Intellectual Leadership

The panellists were – Mr. Minhaz Merchant, Journalist & Author; Prof. Makarand Paranjape, Professor, JNU; Mr. Badri Narayan, Director, G.B. Pant Social Science Institute; and Mr. Amish Tripathi, Author. Mr. Rahul Pandita was the moderator. Mr. Pandita stated, “There is no civilisation that is not rooted in culture.” Mr. Merchant spoke about the need for laying down the essentials of what comprises of national interest for a country. According to him, social inclusiveness, governance and geo-politics are the important parameters for delivering intellectual leadership.

Prof. Paranjape attributed the main cause of Indian backwardness on its lack of thought and the incapacity to think. Stating that India is blessed with ‘Avataric leadership’ since centuries, he went on to emphasise his point by giving the illustration of free-thinking leadership imparted by Lord Buddha. Thus, the Indic leadership is shifting of consciousness and not imposing of a one, single idea. He asserted that change must occur at all levels in the society to revive intellectualism.

Mr. Narayan acknowledged that every community needs intellectuals to make their identities visible in the society. These intellectuals do not merely deliver education but impart wisdom. He spoke about the need for leadership in 21st Century to speak in a language that can instantly connect and directly interact with the thoughts of people like Kabir.

Mr. Amish Tripathi stated, “Despite the system trying to do everything to make us forget, we refuse to forget.” He asserted that the source of India’s wealth in the past was its colossal intellectual leadership. He highlighted the need to reform Indian education system to reflect its true intellectuality and the need to reconnect with the roots of our culture for the same.

The panel agreed that rationality alone cannot save the dying knowledge creation and the ancient wisdom is important. It is important to adopt a bottom-up approach to build a genuine intellectual ecosystem in the country. The panel concurred on the fact that the academic leadership in the 21st century needs to become more outcome oriented. The challenge is to make this ecosystem conducive where formal and informal learning can thrive in harmony in the society.

  1. Presentations II
  2. Mr. Haseeb Drabu

Jammu and Kashmir Finance Minister, Mr. Haseeb Drabu’s presentation focused on the subject – ‘Relationship between the civil society and state of J&K and the interventions made by the state as a matter of policy.’ He asserted that the situation in J&K has become better as the role of civil society has increased since 2015 and the engagement has not been confined to any one segment but with people of India as a whole.

He stressed that the long-term experiment set in motion with the alliance of the BJP and the PDP in J&K is an example of displaying the traits of a sound leadership by both sides. Explaining the kind of national identity he envisages for the country, Mr. Drabu stated, “I would rather see a national identity as a matrix of regional identities.” He went on to add that this can happen not merely through the Indian state, but through holistic participation by the Indian civil society. He said, “I think the real challenge of leadership in Kashmir and also in rest of the country is not about leadership in terms of political or economic leadership, but the core issue would be social leadership in the country.”

  1. Mr. Baijayant Jay Panda

Member of Parliament from the state of Odisha in Lok Sabha, Mr. Baijayant Jay Panda stated that the most important challenge for a leader is to take democracy to the last mile. Describing democracy as a work-in-progress, Mr. Panda identified important attributes of leadership in 21st century as – branding, organising and possessing charisma. Talking about the importance of being a charismatic leader, he stated, “If you want to bring about seminal changes in your field, charisma is an important attribute for a leader to possess.”

Mr. Panda spoke about the two trends visible in Indian polity in today’s times namely – cynicism vs optimism; and the argumentative Indian vs the decisive Indian. Explaining the difference between a cynical and an optimist leader, he remarked, “Cynical leadership looks at the past, (whereas) optimistic leadership looks at the future.” He also highlighted that the gradual shift of our polity from an argumentative one to a decisive one is an achievement in itself which must be attributed to leadership of the country.

  1. Mr. Jayant Sinha

Focusing on the virtues of economic leadership, Minister of State for Civil Aviation, Government of India, Mr. Jayant Sinha confidently stated that India can become an economic leader if it can become a global hub for innovative and entrepreneurial businesses. Talking about the need to develop a long-term vision for becoming the economic growth-engine of the world, he said, “We must aim to not merely build a unicorn (1 billion) or a super unicorn (10 billion) but target at building a mega unicorn (100 billion market cap companies).”

Mr. Sinha stated, “When we solve India’s problems, we solve the world’s problems.” He spoke about how focusing on getting our own processes right through an indigenous ‘Indian’ style of functioning can help develop prototypes which can then be emulated in developing countries across the globe. Mr. Sinha remarked, “If we want to seize the leadership in the 21st century, we need to become the entrepreneurial engine of the remaining 6 billion people of the world.” He identified financial technology, electric vehicles and drone technology as the three possible sectors that can make India an economic leader in the 21st century.

  1. Special Address by
    Vice President of India

Vice President of India, Mr. M. Venkaiah Naidu presented the India Foundation-Swarajya Awards 2017. Dr B R Shenoy Award was presented to Mr. Niranjan Rajadhyaksha.
Dr Shyam Prasad Mukherjee Award was presented to Mr. Himanta Biswa Sarma. Sree Narayana Guru Award was presented to Ms Lakshmi Narayan Tripathi. Ustad Bismillah Khan Awardwas presented toMr. Sirivennela Seetharama Sastry.

In his special address Mr. Naidu stated, “The time has now come for us to build a New India, which shall again take its rightful place in the comity of nations.” Speaking about the nature of Indian culture, he stated, “If you have a roti (a form of bread), you eat that roti, it is prakruti (nature). If you don’t have a roti, you take other’s roti and eat, that is vikruti (regression). If you have a roti and there is someone starving and you give them the roti that is sanskruti (values of culture). This is Bharatiya Sanskriti (Indian cultural values).”

Speaking about the importance of a functional and accountable Parliament, Shri Naidu said, “The effective functioning of Parliament and Legislatures is extremely important for strengthening the foundations of democracy in the country.” Talking about the significance of Vedas from ancient Indian history, he said,” Answers for many problems facing the world can be found in the Vedas, which provide us with guidance needed to achieve moral, economic, social and political development.”

  1. Panel Discussion III
    Business Leadership

The panellists were – Ms. Shamika Ravi, Member, PM’s Economic Advisory Council; Mr. Ashish Chauhan, MD & CEO, Bombay Stock Exchange; Mr. Nilesh Shah, MD Kotak Mahindra Mutual Fund and Mr. Niranjan Rajadhyaksha, Executive Editor, Mint. Mr. Saket Misra was the moderator for this session. Ms. Ravi stated that growth must not merely be considered as a ‘macro concept’. She emphasised on the need for having focus on developing human capital to address the ‘culture of growth’ for business leadership in the country. Mr. Chauhan emphasised on the need for creating an ‘entrepreneurial culture’ to manage the wealth that will be created in the future in our economy. He stated, “Leadership has to concentrate not only on developing trade and commerce but also on the creation of trust.” Mr. Rajadhyaksha stated that in order to develop strong leadership, there is an imperative need to create a conducive environment to foster innovation and to implement a sound legal framework in the country. He stated, “We cannot think of India as a market economy unless we think of India as an effective state.” Ms. Ravi also spoke about the need for inculcating financial discipline in order to enable growth. The panel collectively agreed that it is important to bring economic and financial discourse into the mainstream within the country.

  1. Panel Discussion IV
    Editors Panel

The panellists were – Mr. Raj Chengappa, Group Editorial Director (Publishing), India Today Group; Ms. Milee Aishwarya, Editor-in-Chief, Penguin India; Mr. R Jagannathan, Editorial Director, Swarajya and Mr. Prabhu Chawla, Editorial Director, The New Indian Express and The Sunday Standard. Mr. Balbir Punj, former Member of Parliament was the moderator. Mr. Punj said that an effective leadership must be well-equipped in order to resolve civilisational issues. Mr. Chengappa stressed on the need to deal with fundamentals and reform leadership across all the stratas of the society.

Ms. Aishwarya highlighted that a leader must possess the ability to mobilise the people for a cause or an idea. She also mentioned that the writings of 21st century should be able to reflect what is happening in the society. For Mr. Jagannathan, the attributes of a leader would depend on the issues that need to be resolved. He cautioned saying, “Everything that was taken for granted in the 20th century has been challenged in the 21st century and so old ideas cannot be adhered to.” He stated that there is a need for ‘post-ideology leaders’ in the country, and that 29 such state leaders have to deliver, to make a case for strong Indian leadership.

Mr. Chawla expressed his concerns on the changing discourse on leadership that only speaks an economic language and not the language of the whole country. He stated, “Leaders have to be not only cautious of the political terrors but also of the market terrors to ensure equality.” He asserted that the focus should be on creation of ‘ethical Indian’ developmental solutions for our nation’s problems. The panel agreed that leadership in the 21st century needs to deliver on the key parameters of ‘Vikaas’ with a focus on micro-level development in the country.

  1. Presentations III
  2. Mr. P.V. Rajgopal

President of Ekta Parishad, Mr. P. V. Rajgopal stated, “Leadership needs to be initiated from the bottom where the people are capacitated to solve their own problems.” He remarked that unjust systems produce violence and conflict and therefore it is important to engage with the youth in the 21st century. He also emphasised that means are as important as ends and hence, ethics become important in the discourse of development. He said, “Indian leadership should be an ‘enlightened leadership’ based on renouncement and sacrifice.”

  1. Mr. C.R. Mukunda

Akhil Bharatiya Saha-Baudhik Pramukh of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Mr. C.R. Mukunda stressed on the need for developing ‘cultural leadership’ in the 21st century. He talked about how good values inculcated from within the family can be spread across the world order. He stated, “Leadership will emerge from the society which will be a product of values and dynamism from within the community.” He stressed on the fact that a leader is known by the decision he takes and therefore, it is important for a leader to stay balanced and not get influenced by extreme thoughts. He further stated, “There should be a balance between values-based idealism and needs- based pragmatism.”

  1. Mr. Syed Salman Chisty

Gaddi Nashin- Dargah Ajmer Sharif and Chairman – Chishty Foundation, Mr. Syed Salman Chisty emphasised on the subject of the spiritual responsibility of a leader. He said, “There is enough discourse on the physical aspect of the responsibilities of a leader but there is a dearth of literature on a leader’s spiritual responsibility.” He said, “Living entity is not a mere resource. It is an instrument of healing created by the divine.” To the leaders of 21st century, Mr. Chisty gave the message that India has always had a rich past of spiritual legacy and imparting service to humankind which they must always keep in mind.

Describing the qualities of a good leader, he stated, “A leader must have earth like hospitality, river like prosperity and sun like bounty. A leader should serve the (nature’s) creation to serve the nature.” Emphasising on the actions to be undertaken by a leader, he iterated that a leader must approach his work as a form of meditation, be honest towards his actions and overcome selfishness to impart world-class leadership in the 21st century.

Day3 – December 17, 2017

  1. Breakfast Session II – Social Media

The panellists were – Mr. Amit Paranjape, Co-Founder, PuneTech; Ms. Smita Barooah, writer; Ms. Shefali Vaidya, columnist, Swarajya; and Mr. Amit Malviya, In-charge, National IT Cell, BJP. Mr. Vijay Chada, Owner, VIANA Consultants, was the moderator.

Talking about the need to build credibility on social media, Mr. Paranjape said, “Like any other media platform, for social media too, one needs to build credibility and then sustain the same.”  Speaking about how social-media has led to altering the status-quo in the world of communication, Ms. Barooah remarked, “Social media has led to the breakdown of the ‘Raja-Praja’ model. Instead of vertical communication, horizontal communication is happening which is altering the entire dynamics.” She went on to add, “One needs to be mindful that on social media, one must ‘respond’ and not ‘react’.”

On being asked the change that has been brought in the discourse by social media, Mr. Malviya said, “Social media has democratized the discourse.” He further stated, ”I believe social media shall continue to remain as chaotic as it is today and that is the beauty of it.”

  1. Presentations IV
  2. Mr. Himanta Biswa Sarma

Finance Minister of Assam, Mr. Himanta Biswa Sarma stated that the problems faced by the world today have a reflection of their past. He said, “India needs an ‘organic leadership’ and not a ‘dynastic’ leadership.” He attributed leadership in 21st century to attributes such as respect for culture, education, family values, principles of ahimsa and universal tolerance.

He stated, “The problems of India can be answered through Indic solutions which are found in the Indian heritage.” He referred to Swami Vivekananda and said, “The purpose is not to go back to the past but to develop a scientific and healthy understanding of our philosophy and tradition so that our future generations can benefit.” Talking about the impact of positive leadership, he said that the change in leadership in the state of Assam has had a positive impact not restricted only to the state of Assam, but has created a ripple effect across entire North-eastern India.

  1. Mr. Prasoon Joshi

in conversation with Mr. Vikram Sampath

Referring to a leader as a Guru, Chairperson, Central Board of Film Certification and noted lyricist and poet, Mr. Prasoon Joshi said, “A true Guru is the one who frees you of himself.” Speaking about Indian leadership, he said, “It is important to institutionalise the culture and the collective sub-conscious to make a strong case for Indian leadership.”

Taking cue from the teachings of Bhagawad Gita, Mr. Joshi said, “The world out there is not predictable. Have you prepared leaders who can instinctively take decisions in such a world using his ‘vivek’ (wisdom) by being ‘sthitapragya’ (one with equilibrium of mind in all situations)?”

Describing the kind of creativity he believes in, Mr. Joshi said, “Expression and responsibility go hand in hand. I subscribe to that kind of creativity.” But he also cautioned that in the era of ‘snacking entertainment’, one must know the subject well before commenting or else it becomes a disservice to the society. On the question of whether there should be a boundary on creative expression, Mr. Joshi provided with an affirmative answer. The society of India is complex and therefore it becomes necessary to be responsible within the defined structure. One should be creative, but also respect the society. One should not kill and progress. Degrading a human form cannot be entertained. He categorically stated, “Depiction is acceptable, not derogation.”

  1. Panel Discussion V
    Global Leadership

The panellists were – Ms. Veena Sikri and Mr. Basant Kumar Gupta, both former diplomats. Mr. Shakti Sinha, Director, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library was the moderator. Mr. Sinha brought many aspects before the panel such as – multi-polarity in 21st Century, Chinese hegemony, Indic thought of governance, academic power in the realm of international relations, etc. He said, “India is solidly democratic. Both contestation and participation are an integral part of democracy of the country.”

Ms. Sikri emphasised on the need for ‘thought-based leadership’ in 21st Century. She remarked, “Misuse of power is dictatorship. Leadership is the wise use of power.” She said that only when there is a clear national vision of ‘brand India’, will the global leadership come organically. She stated, “The Indian soft power is the strategic asset of the Indian foreign policy.”

Mr. Gupta claimed spirituality to be India’s biggest power. He believed that thoughts from texts such as the Bhagawad Gita must be learnt to reform the Indian leadership. Giving an example he remarked, “Leadership in Sanskrit means ‘Netrutva’ which originates from the word ‘Niti’.” He further added, “There is a need to ensure that the Indian ethics and values are taught to today’s demography in order to enjoy its dividend while providing for a global leadership.”

  1. Panel Discussion VI
    Women Leadership

The panellists were – Ms. Lalitha Kumaramangalam, former Chairperson, National Commission for Women; Ms. Nistula Hebbar, Journalist, the Hindu; Ms. Sandhya Jain, Editor, Vijayvaani; and Ms. Setara Hassan, CEO, Zan TV, Afghanistan. Ms. Smriti Kak, journalist, the Hindustan Times was the moderator. Ms. Kumaramangalam iterated that the women can be said to have gained leadership only when they can become contributing decision-makers in the society. She said, “It is not about men vs. women, but about giving women a chance to portray their skills.”

Ms. Jain focused on the momentum of women empowerment in the 21st Century. South Asia has a dynamic heritage which has witnessed women leaders much before the other countries in the world. She said, “Women in power are making subtle differences with significant impact but not being adequately noticed.” She also highlighted the need to recognise women in the fields of science and technology, sports, combat services etc.

Ms. Hebbar noted that entry is not difficult for women in today’s times, but climbing up the ladder is relatively tough.  She stated, “Women should be recognised for their proportion in the population and not because they are better or deserve sympathy.” She made a case for ‘targeted intervention’ for the case of women leadership in the society.

Ms. Hassan also spoke about the under-representation of women in the top managerial positions both in the East and the West. She highlighted the fact that the notion that women must have masculine characters to be a good leader should change. She said, “Domestic work does not disqualify her from being strategic thinkers.” The panel concurred that leadership is not about forced modernisation, but when women shall get freedom to make a choice in every aspect of their lives.

  1. Valedictory Session

The valedictory session was graced by Shri Khilraj Regmi, former Prime Minister & Chief Justice of Nepal and Smt. Mridula Sinha, Governor of Goa.

  1. Mr. Khilraj Regmi

Talking about leadership in politics, Shri Regmi stated, “When we are talking about politics and philosophy, we cannot forget our ancient philosophers.” He spoke about the need for instilling morality and self-discipline in leaders of the 21st century. Talking about the kind of challenges that shall be faced by leaders in the 21st century he stated, “21st Century leadership cannot escape from the complexities of the societal boundaries.” He asserted that the modern society shall march towards peace and prosperity only when we can eliminate poverty and inequality from the world.

  1. Smt. Mridula Sinha

Smt. Mridula Sinha stated, “Leadership is an ability or capacity to do something through talent (natural ability) and skill (proficiency).” Describing the qualities of a good leader, she said that a leader must have the qualities of self-awareness, sense of direction, vision, motivation, social awareness, innovation, respect for history, ability to dream for a future and must foster creativity in the 21st century. She affirmed the need to imbibe Indian values in truest sense in order to become a global leader in the 21st century. She said, “In order to become a world leader, one must not only embrace technological changes, but also thoughts, values and culture of Indian origin which talk about human service as the supreme service to the mankind.” She said, “Leadership is needed to solve the problems – closing the gap between the way things exist and the way they ought to be.”

(This report is carried in the print edition of January-February 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

North East Development Summit

India Foundation in collaboration with Government of Manipur and Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India  organised the North East Development Summit at Imphal, Manipur from 21-22 November, 2017. The Summit was an effort to highlight and explore the potential of North East India in further establishing itself as a land hub of India’s Act East Policy. Key focus areas of the summit centred around themes of trade & investment, connectivity & infrastructure development, tourism development, agri-business & sports in North-East region, skill development, capacity building and entrepreneurship. States of the region with visuals showcased each of their resource potential and capacity in a special session.

The President of India, Shri Ram Nath Kovind, inaugurated the Northeast Development Summit. Speaking on the occasion, the President said that the Northeast is an amazing social and cultural ecosystem. Few regions of the world have such a wealth of cultural, ethnic and religious diversity packed into such a small area. This variety is an inspiration for all of us. The President said that the Northeast’s geographical location makes it the obvious gateway to India, linking the vast economies of the Indian subcontinent and of today’s ASEAN countries. This is the potential we have to tap. And this is the idea that must inspire this Summit.

The President said that central to the Government of India’s approach to the development of the Northeast is an urgent and speedy enhancement of connectivity. This is a multi-modal programme, across land, water and air. And it refers both to connectivity within India as well as to connectivity between India and its eastern and Southeast Asian neighbours. The President emphasised that in the development of the Northeast is both the development of India – as well the true measure of the India-ASEAN partnership. He stated that the opportunity is before us and we should grab it.

Shri Suresh Prabhu, Minister of Commerce and Industry, Government of India, also addressed the gathering in the inaugural session and said that the North East Development Summit was aimed to boost trade and investment in underdeveloped region of North East and at building confidence and altering perception among visiting delegates and investors.

Union Minister of State for Civil Aviation Shri Jayant Sinha announced at the summit that to provide a major boost to air connectivity in the Northeast, 92 new routes will be opened in the region in the second round of the government’s ‘Udaan’ scheme. Shri Sinha also announced a direct bi-weekly Air India flight from Delhi to Imphal from January next year, which he said would be made a daily service when the demand picks up.

Assam Chief Minister Shri Sarbananda Sonowal also spoke in the Inaugural session and said that “the Central Government has made a huge effort in developing the infrastructure” in the region with “new highways having been declared and constructed and existing highways have been widened”. He also echoed that connectivity will provide economic prosperity for the country and not just Northeast region.

While addressing the gathering at the Summit in the inaugural session, Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh, Shri Pema Khandu said that “Nehruvian policy of ‘Panchsheel’ had become a barrier for economic development. The decades of 80s and the 90s saw tremendous development in the rest of the country. But sadly, for the northeast people, these were decades of opportunity lost.” He welcomed investors in the region, particularly in Arunachal Pradesh, in hydroelectricity, social infrastructure, agro-processing, farming, and research and development, pharmaceutical and information technology.

Nagaland Chief Minister T R Zeliang in his remarks at the Inaugural session said that “Centre should indulge in improving air and road connectivity” so as to improve the geographical remoteness and remove the feeling of alienation which has made the region backward compared to mainland states. He urged for a “right policy” for promoting investment in the region as the region serves as a gateway to the South East Asian Nations.

Mr Yutaka Kikuta, Deputy Chief of Mission, Embassy of Japan, spoke in the session on Trade and Investment in the summit and said that North East region of India is a place where Japan’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy and India’s Act East Policy converge.

The two-day North East Development Summit concluded on a positive note with the Manipur government signing 39 Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) with various firms, primarily in healthcare, infrastructure, skill development and agriculture. The state forest department of Manipur signed four MoUs – two with the HSMM Group of Laos for agarwood plantation and production of essential oil and commercial production of orchids, one with NLR of Netherland for production of biofuels from bamboo and one with the Tribal Cooperative Marketing Development Federation of India for minimum support prices for minor forest produces. Manipur State’s higher education department signed an MoU with UNESCO Centre, the UK, for setting up a private university in Manipur. The finance department of Manipur Government signed an MoU with the Indo-Swiss Centre, Switzerland, for facilitating and attracting investment in trade and tourism. The agriculture department of Manipur Government signed an MoU with MSTC, a government of India undertaking, for e-marketing of agricultural produce from Manipur.

The State tourism department of Government of Manipur signed an MoU with the Lao Peoples Democratic Republic for development of tourism and another with Star Track Business House Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, for a Rs 50-crore infrastructure development project. The Manipur Police Housing Corporation signed an MoU with Fitzroy Salai Holdings, Calcutta, for a cable car project in
the state.

In the Valedictory Session, rounding off the summit, Chief Minister of Manipur Shri N. Biren Singh said that the North East Development Summit was an effort to showcase and explore the potential of the Northeast in establishing itself as the “hub” of India’s Act East Policy. He said the summit marked the beginning of his govt’s and private companies’ commitment towards building a partnership to address the aspirations of the people by unlocking the full potential of the state. He hoped that the positive outcome of the summit would transform the business and development environment of the region in general and Manipur in particular.

(This report is carried in the print edition of January-February 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

India’s North-East: Gateway to ASEAN

The development of the Northeast is tied with the development of India’s neighbours and the countries of ASEAN. Friendly partner countries from other regions too are integral to the vision for the Northeast and can contribute substantially. For a short period in the Indian history, there has been a misconception about the eight states of the Northeast being a “frontier” of India. The use of “short period of history” is deliberate here. If the hundreds and thousands of years of civilisation is considered, far from being a frontier, the Northeast has been at the heart of Indian imagination. If South Asia and Southeast Asia is taken as a continuum – as it has been perceived for most of history – then the Northeast is right in the middle of it.

The Northeast is an amazing social and cultural ecosystem. Few regions of the world have such a wealth of cultural, ethnic and religious diversity packed into such a small area. This variety is an inspiration for the mankind. The Northeast is home to some of the oldest indigenous communities in the world. It is one of the Indian spiritual homelands. Whether it is the traditions of the Devi in Kamakhya or of Buddhism in Tawang and elsewhere, they make for a sacred bond that unites India with Southeast Asia. Christian missionaries have contributed to education here and there is even a small but thriving Jewish community in Manipur and Mizoram.

Prosperity is the Northeast’s natural destiny, its default position if it maybe said. The geographical location makes it the obvious gateway to India, linking the vast economies of the Indian subcontinent and of the ASEAN countries. This is the potential that needs to be tapped and this is the idea that must inspire the Summit. Central to the Government of India’s approach to the development of the Northeast is an urgent and speedy enhancement of connectivity. This is a multi-modal programme, across land, water and air. It refers both to connectivity within India as well as to connectivity between India and its eastern and Southeast Asian neighbours.

In the past three years, railway lines have finally come up in Arunachal Pradesh, fulfilling an old demand. An extensive development of railway links in the Northeast is under way, with investments totalling to Rs.90,000 crore. Road building in the region is busier than it has ever been. Border roads, national highways and state roads are all being built or improved. Incorporated in July 2014, the National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporationis working with a special focus on the Northeast. It is engaged in about 100 road projects in the region. Inland waterways, especially along the majestic Brahmaputra and Barak rivers, can both save transport costs as well as facilitate connectivity. There is also a push for air connectivity. The creation of infrastructure in smaller cities and airports, along with more and more flights, is making the skies of the Northeast buzz with traffic.

In the broader neighbourhood, initiatives such as the India-Myanmar-Thailand trilateral highway and the Kaladan Multimodal Transit Transport Project are critical for many of the countries and especially for the Northeast. The Northeast is also the corridor for many trade and connectivity projects on the Bangladesh Bhutan India Nepal [BBIN] and the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation [BIMSTEC] platforms. It is rightful to say that the states of the Northeast region of India are the true drivers of India’s Act East policy.The Northeast Tourism Development Council, incorporated in March 2017is creating partnerships between government and private sector players, which will make the Northeast one of the leading tourism destinations of not just India, but also of Asia, where it deserves to be.

The sense of connect with the Northeast gives everyone a stake in the region. It doesn’t matter whether one is from the Northeast, from other parts of India or indeed from other countries connected by culture and geography, history and trade with the Northeast. The development of the North-East is a shared enterprise. The impressive degree of participation in the Northeast Development Summit, not only from Manipur and states of the Northeast, but from the rest of India and key partner countries is extremely optimistic.

In conclusion, the development of the Northeast is both the development of India, as well as the true measure of the India-ASEAN partnership. The opportunity is here to grab.

(This article is a summary of the inaugural address delivered by the President of India Shri Ram Nath Kovind at the North-East Development Summit organized by India Foundation in collaboration with Government of Manipur and Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India at Imphal on 21st November, 2017.)

 

(This article is carried in the print edition of January-February 2018 issue of India Foundation Journal.)

Explide
Drag