There are days for which the wise plan for and then, there are days nobody plans for. The days of the pandemic fit the description of the latter kind. The plethora of problems that the pandemic has made us come tête-à-tête with cuts across domains and goes from financial to environmental, political to social. It is common knowledge that a lot of countries, especially the developing ones, do not do great in terms of health infrastructure and times like these when the number of infected persons swell by thousands every day. The shortages and lacunae of the system stare at us with their mouths wide open. Surprisingly, the coronavirus pandemic gave even the most developed of countries a reality check vis-à-vis medical infrastructure and preparedness. The suddenness and the ensuing congestion were such that the Italians had to wait a full hour on the phone to get to ‘Emergency Services’. China created makeshift hospitals and India had to massively up its PPE production among other things. But among all of it, a rather peculiar problem appeared on the nontangible front.
When the numbers suddenly spiked in Lombardy, Italy, it was reported that some hospitals flatly denied admission to the elderly citing shortage of intensive care facilities. Similar situations appeared in Brussels, Belgium, where a number of elderly people succumbed to the virus in want of medical care. One of the reasons for the denial was that the survivability of the decrepit elderly people was less than that of young people mostly without comorbidities. Official guidance to doctors in Italy, as reported by The Independent, said that only patients “deemed worthy of intensive care” should get it (intensive care) and decisions based on a “distributive justice” approach balancing the demand for care versus available resources. This approach might have been practically viable and had saved more lives than lost but whether it was morally right or not, is a matter of discussion.
In this article, we attempt to delve into the dominant ethical principles of moral philosophy which shaped our thoughts and actions in the pre-corona world and how the same ethical principles play out in the peculiar situations which we find ourselves in, in the time of pandemic that is. The article however does not concern itself with medical ethics per se and only happens to incidentally use the case of hospital as the moral universe for showcasing the interplay of the ethical principles at work.
Moral righteousness of an act can be determined through normative ethical principles wherein either the actor is guided or assessed through the choices that he or she makes; or through the consequences of actions. Both these approaches have differing notions of underlying rationality that emphasise on parallel systems of moral justifications of any act or decision and are best understood in contrast to one another. These two prominent strands of approaches in ethical decision-making are deontology and utilitarianism.
In a world before pandemic, ethical decision making happened routinely with wonted moral implications wherein chronological advent of a patient prioritised the treatment to be received by them. For instance, a choice between an elderly and an adolescent (without comorbidity) is easier deontologically, where the first who came is prioritised, or preference of care is granted to the elderly/more needy. However, these priorities rapidly change in the pandemic-hit world, largely because of the magnitude of a multi-dimensional effect of decision making, and where the chronological age ceases to be a moral impediment and those most likely to survive are prioritised over those with remote chances of survival, making it a utilitarian approach. To put it simply, if an institution, under circumstances of making a choice employs a set of rules, like prioritising on the ground of age seniority, or chronology of arrival; without consideration of the consequence like chances of survival or immediate need of either party, it will be understood best in the light of a deontological approach. Whereas, if the same institution while making a choice treads the Utilitarian pathway and prioritises the consequences over means, it will in all likelihood treat the adolescent and not the elderly, since the former’s survival is more plausible than the latter.
With a two-dimensional understanding of whether means justify its end or its converse, it is easy to comprehend the ethical support of a philosophical approach guiding decision making. However, in complex circumstances it becomes difficult to identify the ethical righteousness of a decision through the classical approaches. It was perhaps easier to determine the course of action a medical institution would (should) take, if it faced a situation like the one discussed above, that is of a choice between an enfeebled elderly and an otherwise healthy adolescent, both infected with the coronavirus and requiring intensive care. However, the real world doesn’t present itself in white and black. Imagine with the other two candidates, there comes also a doctor who specializes in respiratory illnesses and works at the same facility which is faced with the current moral dilemma. Now in such a scenario, a third school of thought would seem to take the centre stage.
Contractarianism holds that actors are primarily self-interested, and that a rational assessment of the best strategy for attaining the maximisation of their self-interest will lead them to act morally (where the moral norms are determined by the maximisation of joint interest). If the medical facility takes the contractarian route, it would perhaps prioritise the doctor over the other two candidates, irrespective of doctor’s age, morbidities if any, or survivability. A plausible justification for it could be the first duty that the hospital owes to the doctor, who is an employee and also the general utility wherein the doctor if recovered can save more lives. With the three perspectives in the same line of sight, the contractarian approach seems to be reconciling with the utilitarian approach, given that the doctor has a utility not only for the medical facility where he works but also the society at large. Ironically, the deontological approach which enjoys the moral high ground otherwise comes a distant third in the race among the reconciling-conflicting philosophical pathways.
In the helter-skelter of the pandemic, the chaos has not remained just outside of us but has also shaped our conscience and actions. Our actions and their underlying moralities are undergoing change and all we can do is watch us becoming persons we probably never intended to become. For the conscientious beings it is difficult to stop at a traffic signal and shoo away the urchin who cleans their car’s windscreen in the hope of eliciting a penny or two. Of course, this is just one example but the divide is widening with each day passing. A crisis is an apt event to test the failings of popular norms and ideas. A crisis is also an apt event to find new ways of making the world a better place, proverbially.
Anurag Mishra is an independent researcher and an LLM from Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Sahiti Kachroo is a criminologist from Tata Institute of Social Sciences and practices law at the Supreme Court.
The Daily Guardian is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@thedailyguardian) and stay updated with the latest headlines.
For the latest news Download The Daily Guardian App.
IN A HUGE SETBACK FOR AAP, SIMRANJIT SINGH MANN WINS FROM SANGRUR
Former IPS officer and Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar) leader, Simranjit Singh Mann wrested the Sangrur Lok Sabha seat from the Aam Aadmi Party thus paving the way for his entry into Parliament for the third time. The Sangrur constituency was represented earlier by Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Singh Mann, who won from there both in 2014 and 2019. In fact, the loss so soon after the AAP’s massive Assembly victory indicates that there is disillusionment that has set in the State over the style of functioning of the government. S.S. Mann’s victory is being attributed to the perception that the AAP dispensation in the state was being remote controlled from Delhi and the Chief Minister was a mere puppet who had little time for governance but was busy with the campaigning both in Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat. Therefore, it would be very essential for AAP to correct this perception which would go against them in the long run. Punjab has always been a unique province and does not like interference from any quarter. The impression that the government was spending more on publicity rather on core issues is another factor that has contributed to the outcome. Simranjit Singh Mann, who is a maverick politician exploited the sentiments which have emerged in the rural belt over the deaths of both Sidhu Moosewala and Deep Sidhu. He also contested the polls on the plank of getting Sikh prisoners who have been overstaying in jails released. His victory can further be interpreted as the assertion of the Panthic agenda though the Shiromani Akali Dal owing allegiance to the Badals also took up the same issues but this time polled lesser votes than even the BJP candidate, Kewal Singh Dhillon. Simranjit Singh Mann had won his maiden election from Tarn Taran in 1989 after he had been jailed for being a sympathizer of the Khalistan movement and had gone underground after Operation Blue Star and other events of 1984. Simla born Mann is the son of former Punjab Speaker Joginder Singh Mann and is married to Captain Amarinder Singh’s sister-in-law, Geetinder Kaur. An avid follower of western classical music, Simranjit Singh Mann had refused to take oath as the Lok Sabha member in 1989 after being disallowed to go with a sword inside the Parliament house premises. He had won the second time from Sangrur in 1999. Political observers of Punjab were also hoping that his victory would be viewed merely as the rejection of the AAP model of governance and not as the re-emergence of radical politics. The selection of candidates for the seven Rajya Sabha seats in the State has also gone against the AAP and therefore corrective measures to re-set the agenda for the region shall also have to be taken by Bhagwant Mann and Arvind Kejriwal. Punjab is a border state and its politics has huge ramifications in other parts of the country as well. The outcome has several lessons for the Akalis (Badal), the Congress and the BJP besides AAP. In Sangrur it is not just one Mann replacing another Mann but the narrative appears to be changing.
Gujarat riots: Narendra Modi vindicated
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court with Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari, and CT Ravikumar, while dismissing the plea,noted that the claim of criminal conspiracy in the Gujarat riots by the then CM of Gujarat (Narendra Modi) and other State functionaries was absolutely false. “The structure of larger criminal conspiracy at the highest level has been erected. The same stands collapsed like a house of cards, after thorough investigation by the SIT,” the bench said,in a landmark judgment that has blown to smithereens, the allegations of those, who driven by nothing but visceral hatred for Narendra Modi, peddled vicious lies and anti-Modi propaganda for 20 long years.During the course of the hearing, Kapil Sibal and others appearing for Jafri, had essentially argued that the special investigation team (SIT) had not conducted a thorough probe into the matter and had ignored crucial evidence including certain sting operations by Tehelka, which suggested a larger conspiracy of complicity in the highest echelons of the Gujarat State’s power structure. Sibal’s frivolous arguments, sans any credible proof, were resoundingly and rightfully dismissed by the top Court. Dismissing the plea filed by Zakia Jafri, widow of Congress leader Ehsaan Jafri, the Court raised questions over the credibility of the petitioner and said, “Appellant in filing the protest petition had the gumption to assert that the list of persons was not exhaustive besides naming new persons as offenders. In the name of protest petition, appellant was also indirectly questioning the decisions rendered by the Courts in other cases, including sub judice matters, for reasons best known to her. She was obviously doing so under dictation of someone. In fact, the sizeable contents of the protest petition are founded on the affidavits filed by those persons, whose versions have been found to be replete with falsehoods,” the Supreme Court bench stated.
The top Court also noted that the SIT had formed its opinion after considering all the materials collated during the investigation. “The question of further investigation would have arisen only on the availability of new material/information in connection with the allegation of larger conspiracy at the highest level, which is not forthcoming in this case,” the Supreme Court order read. “We uphold the decision of the Magistrate in accepting the final report dated 08.02.2012 submitted by the SIT as it is, rejecting the protest petition filed by the appellant (Zakia Jafri). We don’t countenance the submission of the appellant regarding infraction of rule of law regarding investigation and the approach of the Magistrate and the High Court in dealing with the final report. Accordingly, we hold the appeal is devoid of merits and deserves to be dismissed in aforementioned terms” – with those words, the Supreme Court of India put paid to yet another sinister plan of PM Narendra Modi’s detractors & persecutors to fix him in what is famously known as Gujarat riots’ case.
Leaders like Narendra Modi are born once in a millennium. The Supreme Court upholding the clean chit given to Modi by the SIT, brings to an end the vicious propaganda of the Congress and it’s family retainers, the durbaari Lutyens’ media, the corrupt, Leftist ecosystem, the Modi hating self styled NGOs and an entire battery of national and international players, who tried their level best to halt Modi’s politically meteoric rise, but failed completely. PM Modi deserves unabashed applause because he bore every insult, every canard, every humiliation with a stoic dignity, that is rare. Not once did his faith in India’s judicial process waver or falter. Not once did he use State power to defeat his detractors. Not once did BJP karyakartas take to the streets to protest against the probe against Modi.
This is in sharp contrast to the shameful vandalism and thuggery that was on display, with Congress workers taking to the streets, when jaded Congress scion, Rahul Gandhi was being probed by the enforcement directorate (ED), recently, for his reported involvement in the National Herald related scam. Modi, like any law abiding citizen, allowed the law of the land for almost two decades,to take its course, without once using his status, power or privilege to stymie the judicial process. And do not forget that Modi has wielded unparalleled clout, after having been CM and then PM, in the last 20 years. They say power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. But in the case of Narendra Modi, the power that the electorate bestowed on him repeatedly and relentlessly was never abused or misused and that is essentially what separates Modi, the karmayogi, from the routine paraphernalia of Opposition leaders who have allowed success to get the better of them. Today, Modi stands vindicated, with the legal process finally giving him an unconditional clean chit,leaving his detractors exposed, shamed, pulverized and marginalised.
The ceaseless persecution of PM Narendra Modi, initiated at the behest of Congress and its ecosystem saw more than 60 investigations by government appointed commissions, self-proclaimed activists’ headed tribunals, media bodies, various national and international NGOs and Supreme Court appointed SIT. While every impartial probe gave clean chit to Modi, the Modi-hating lobby opposed to him didn’t stop trying–not even when he is into the 9th year of his tenure as Prime Minister of India,after spending more than 12 years as Gujarat’s Chief Minister. No wonder the Supreme Court was forced to make an observation that, “the proceedings have been pursued for the last 16 years to keep the pot boiling, obviously for ulterior design.” Going a step further, the Supreme Court held that “all those involved in such abuse of process, need to be in the dock and proceeded with in accordance with law.”
It is said revenge is a dish, best served cold. Well, in Modi’s case, his exoneration by the highest Court of the land, is surely sweet revenge against an entire “Congressi-fied” ecosystem that was served a damning indictment by the Supreme Court, which called out the bluff of this anti-Modi lobby. In its severe indictment of the petitioner (Zakia Jafri) and her backers, India’s top Court said, “it appears to us that a coalesced effort of the disgruntled officials of the State of Gujarat along with others, was to create sensation by making revelations which were false to their own knowledge.” This observation of the top Court is evident in the way malicious proceedings were initiated against Narendra Modi in 2002 by vested interest groups like Teesta Setalvad, Rahul Sharma & Mukul Sinha and with active financial and institutional backing provided by the UPA government headed by the Congress Party, then. It is important to mention here that Zakia Jafri became a petitioner in the Gujarat riots’ case for the first time in 2005-06, three to four years after Gujarat riots. The Supreme Court had appointed an SIT for investigation into the Gujarat riots much earlier, in 2003-04 and this SIT was submitting periodic reports to the top Court.
The “Teesta” gang used Zakia Jafri as cannon fodder, exploiting her emotionally and using her as a pliable tool for their nefarious designs against Modi. Teesta and her husband Javed Anand claim to be social activists but it is now widely known how this duo used their NGO to funnel funds for illegitimate purposes. Money raised for victims of Gulbarg society were used by Teesta and Javed to fund the duo’s foreign vacations and to buy expensive champagne and lingerie. What can be more shameful than usurping money meant for riot victims and then splurging it on hairdos at beautysalons,which is precisely what Teesta did. The dubious antecedents and mala-fide motives of the highly corrupt Teesta Setalvad are in the public domain and not based on hearsay. In fact,the apex Court has castigated Teesta in no uncertain terms, on how she used Zakia Jafri to abuse the judicial process, only because she wanted to hit back at Modi. The long arm of the law finally caught up with this devious, repeat offender, Teesta, with the Gujarat ATS arresting her on June 25,2022. Teesta’s case will be investigated by ATS DIG of Gujarat, Deepan Bhadran.
Teesta has done it all–from embezzling funds meant for charity, to raising foreign funds for her NGO CJP,by flouting FCRA norms, to using Zakia Jafri as cannon fodder,for her ulterior designs. Former IPS officer RB Sreekumar, arrested by Gujarat Police too on June 25,2022, for fake and misleading information on post-Godhra Gujarat violence, was also involved in framing scientist Nambi Narayanan in the fake ‘ISRO spy case’. RB Sreekumar, Sanjiv Bhatt and Teesta Setalvad have been booked under sections 468, 471, 194, 211, 218, and 120B of the IPC, for various criminal offences including forgery, perjury and wilfully lying under oath. Congress Party’s unbridled support for Teesta is evident from the fact that she was awarded the Rajiv Gandhi National Sadbhavna award in 2002 and with a Padma Shri, no less, in 2007.Tainted former cop Sanjiv Bhatt was directed to undergo life-imprisonment by a Sessions Court in Jamnagar in June 2019 for involvement in custodial death of Jamjodhpur resident, Prabhudas Vaishnani in November 1990.It does not take much to realise that Teesta,Bhatt, Sreekumar and others like them are all people who were propped up by the Congress leadership at 10 Janpath and all these dubious characters are either in prison or facing a probe as they sought to derail and abuse India’s judicial system, in their hatred for one man–Narendra Modi. And the common glue that binds all these criminal elements is that they were generously gratified by the Congress, in lieu of their ceaseless hate propaganda against Modi.
The Godhra train burning occurred on the morning of 27 February 2002, in which 59 Hindu pilgrims and karsevaks returning from Ayodhya, were set on fire by a frenzied Muslim inside the Sabarmati Express train near the Godhra railway station in Gujarat,as noted in the joint report of former High Court judge K.G Shah and former Supreme Court judge, G.T.Nanavati. It is shameful that ex judge U C.Banerjee ( a Lalu Yadav acolyte) had the gall to call the Godhra train murder of 59 innocent people as just another accident. Taking a cue from Banerjee, till this day, the very lobby that has used every trick in the book to sully,malign and demonise PM Modi,did not have the basic decency and humanity to even express regret and remorse about the horrific Godhra train burning. And then these selfish, Leftist lobbies and urban naxals have the audacity to call themselves human right activists! The Godhra train burning incident set in motion the Gujarat riots. Violence can never be a solution. Retributive justice cannot be rationalised, but to demonize Hindus and a CM who later became PM and to brazenly ignore that 59 Hindus were burnt alive by a deracinated, Muslim mob, needed to be called out. And the Supreme Court’s historic judgement of June 24,2002,did precisely that.
Amidst extremely provocative and open calls for treating Modi like a pariah by the likes of Siddharth Varadarajan, Modi, exhibiting a rare degree of boldness, courage, transparency and faith in rule of law, appeared before SIT for 9 hours, without so much as a whimper. Varadarajan repeatedly exhorted the international diaspora to cancel out Modi and Modi was even denied a US visa. But as they say, Karma always comes a full circle. In a befitting reply to the likes of Rajdeep, Burkha and Varadarajan and all his nefarious naysayers, after Modi became PM in 2014,since then he has not only addressed quite a few joint session the US Congress, but has been awarded with some of the highest civilian awards from a large array of countries across the globe. While 5 other Indian PMs before Modi also addressed US Congress in their stints abroad, PM Narendra Modi has the highly rare honour of getting 9 standing ovations and 33 applauses during his 48-minute-long speech, to the US Congress, in June 2016.
Coming back to Teesta, the Supreme Court on June 24,2022,made an observation that the SIT which gave a clean chit to PM Modi in 2010-11 had “fully exposed the falsity of the appellant’s claims after a thorough investigation. Terming Zakia/Teesta’’s submission as “far-fetched and an attempt to undo and undermine the industry of the SIT”,SC called it “questioning the wisdom of the Supreme Court,” in a scathing reply to Zakia, Teesta and her cronies on how they had wilfully abused the judicial process, simply to target Modi.
It is clear from the events of past 20 years and latest SC judgment that the endless saga of Narendra Modi’s persecution by his detractors to propagate Gujarat riot falsehoods as truth and continue their tirade against Modi, not only hardened his personal resolve, but also helped unmask the ugly game of Gujarat riots’ cottage industry anchored by the Congress. But what is bizarre is that the alibi of delivering justice for the riot victims of 2002 got transmogrified into the pursuit for political vengeance against Modi. The whole saga is a tell-tale commentary of how anti-Modi NGO activism by Leftists, Leftist academia, urban naxals and Leftist media has sustained itself as an industry for over a decade, with help from notorious elements both at home and abroad.
The naked attempt to internationalize Gujarat riot was already on but victimization of Narendra Modi began on March 19, 2005, when Shabnam Hashmi wrote an email on behalf of her NGO, ANHAD, to a broader ecosystem of Leftist activists and NGOs across the globe to mount a signature campaign against Modi, then sitting CM of Gujarat. More than 8 years on, Shabnam Hashmi on August 24, 2013, wrote on her facebook page about the launch of a website to expose alleged ‘lies’ of Narendra Modi. In the intervening period is a saga of how a well networked group of Leftist activists in India and spread across the globe have obsessed over every minutiae to do with Narendra Modi in their pursuit of political retribution against him for the 2002 riots, while showing little faith in the Indian Courts. and an Indian Court ordered Investigation. So blatant was the internationalization of Modi’s victimization that, the SC in January 2011, reprimanded activists and NGO lobbies for their report to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on the proceedings of the 10 cases related to the Gujarat riots, being monitored by the Supreme Court. The lobbies didn’t stop at merely writing reports and emails but they even lobbied with multilateral bodies and brought Christof Hendrik Heyns, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary execution, to Gujarat for investigations. They even ran a signature campaign to petition Obama for continuance of visa ban on Modi.
In the final analysis, going by the historic Supreme Court verdict of June 24,2002, there was no State sponsored pogrom in 2002,as claimed by many. Period. Not just Muslims, but Hindus too lost their lives in the 2002 Gujarat riots and hence to paint the 2002 riots as a pogrom against Muslims is nothing but divisive politics that was played brazenly by the then Congress led UPA government. The good part is, truth has finally prevailed and desperate attempts by the Congress, Leftists and the Lutyens’ establishment to tarnish the image of Narendra Modi, have flopped and failed miserably. PM Modi was earlier exonerated by the SIT, Magistrate’s Court, Metropolitan Court, Gujarat High Court and even by the Supreme Court on two earlier occasions.
“We hasten to add that it is only because of the ultra-sensational revelation projected by Mr Sanjiv Bhatt and Mr Haren Pandya, who unabashedly claimed to be privy to the utterances made by the then Chief Minister in an official meeting, the constitutional functionaries and this Court was required to move into action, taking serious note of the same. But, after thorough investigation by the SIT, the falsity of such claim has been fully exposed on the basis of credible indisputable materials collated by the SIT during the investigation in that regard,” the Court noted,
in a damning indictment of both Zakia Jafri and those like Teesta Setalvad who had been instigating Jafri in petition after petition, to frame false charges against Modi.
The latest judgment by the Supreme Court – that came in the 9th year of Modi’s tenure as Indian Prime Minister, is not the first time; various Courts in India gave Narendra Modi the clean chit in the past 20 years too, even when he served as the Chief Minister of Gujarat. No leader anywhere in the world has been subjected to so much scrutiny, so much public glare, so many false allegations, so much unwanted, baseless and needless criticism for actions that were never his to start with and yet emerged taller, stronger, more confident and more invincible than ever before. Modi’s integrity has been validated by India’s highest Court–the Supreme Court. The top Court’s judgment on June 24, 2002,giving a clean chit to the indefatigable Modi, is also a validation of India’s judicial system and the democratic ethos of this great nation.
SanjuVerma is an Economist, National Spokesperson of the BJP and the Bestselling Author of ‘The Modi Gambit’.
Why should you solve the concept of Neet sample paper?
Solving the concept of the Neet sample paper is directly associated with providing people with a good command of the basic technicalities associated with the NEET exam so that people can become familiar with it. Solving the concept of neet sample paper is very much critical for preparing the things for the theory section so that everybody will be able to make sure that there will be no chance of any kind of lack of preparation at any step.
Following are some of the major advantages of depending upon the concept of Neet sample paper so that everyone will be able to crack the examination in the very first attempt very easily and efficiently:
- Analysis and evaluation of the performance: One of the major aspects associated with the concept of Neet sample paper is that it will be very much helpful in terms of providing people with the opportunity of analysing the preparation very easily. In this particular manner, people will be able to analyse the results without any kind of problem and no doubt even if the preparation is rock solid, they will be able to deal with the things very easily and successfully without any kind of issue. Ultimately people will be able to crack the perfect score over here without any kind of chaos and will be able to improve the areas very easily and successfully by strengthening them without any kind of problem.
- Preparing the individuals for all types of topics and questions: During the very initial stage of the preparation the candidate will be sticking to the concept of question paper of the previous year only but act three depending upon the concept of Neet sample paper simultaneously is also a very good idea. This particular progress will be helpful in terms of providing people with multiple advantages of depending on the intermediate and advanced difficulty levels so that everything will be carried out with a very high level of efficiency without any kind of issue. Hence, overall goals are very successfully achieved so that there is no chance of any kind of problem and further people will be able to deal with the things easily.
- Confidence and accuracy combination: By solving the questions and depending upon the concept of Neet sample paper, everyone will be able to deal with time management with a very high level of efficiency because people will be able to develop the skill of speed with accuracy without any kind of problem. In this particular manner, everyone will be able to develop the speed of solving one question per minute so that they can get good results in the long run and further, accuracy will be given a great boost. In this particular matter, everybody will be able to enjoy the perfect experience of the things so that confidence will be given a great boost without any kind of comprehensive dependency on the books.
- Element of speed with time management: Depending upon the concept of Neet sample paper is considered to be a great idea because in this particular manner everybody will be able to develop the perfect combination of the time management with the speed and further people will be able to deal with the designing of the things in a very well-planned manner. Ultimately everything will be carried out in the duration of three hours without any kind of issue in this particular case so that people will be able to keep the clock adjustments very successfully and on time without any kind of hindrance in the whole process.
- Understanding the pattern of exam: Whenever it comes to the world of understanding the pattern of the exam there is no better guide than the concept of Neet sample paper. This is the only thing which will be providing people with an in-depth analysis of the question paper and further people will become successful in terms of judging the topics without any kind of issue. It will be helpful in terms of providing people with the review of the new preparation level of the students so that everything will be carried out very easily and further the things will be there on the high priority without any kind of problem. Thinking of the strategy will be undertaken very easily in this case so that everybody will be able to study accordingly and further, there will be no issues.
Hence, depending upon the jee main free mock test is considered to be a great idea for the day videos because experts from the house of Infinity Learn will be always at the forefront in terms of providing people with the best facilities and services throughout the process. In this case, everybody will be having a good command of the technicalities of the field and further everyone will be able to crack the examination on the very first attempt without any problem.
DROUPADI MURMU POISED TO BE THE PRESIDENT AFTER BJP CHOOSES HER
It is virtually certain that Droupadi Murmu, former Jharkhand Governor and Odissha’s Ex-Minister is going to be the next President of India after she became the unanimous choice of the NDA constituents as also some regional parties such as Biju Janata Dal and YSR Congress. The lady would also be the first tribal and the second woman to be the Head of the State and thus the country’s first citizen. Although the Opposition parties have fielded former Finance Minister and veteran politician Yashwant Sinha for the coveted post, it is most unlikely that the highly competent member of the Atal Behari Vajpayee’s Cabinet stands a chance given that it is all about the numbers game and they are heavily stacked against him. There is no doubt that Sinha would have been a very capable President but in choosing Droupadi Murmu, the BJP has made sure that the message of the Saffron Brigade’s commitment towards the tribals and economically depressed sections was reiterated. The tribals in large parts of the country have been voting for the BJP but under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the party has learnt the art of consolidating its support base. It would have been an ideal situation if the next President had been chosen through a consensus instead of a symbolic fight that would ensue. Yashwant Sinha has been a part of the BJP and may have many admirers in his previous party. However, it is not expected that any of his erstwhile colleagues would vote in his favour and even his son and former Union Minister, Jayant Sinha, the sitting MP from Hazaribagh, has made it clear that he would be voting as a member of his party and not in any other capacity. Droupadi Murmu would no doubt be the next President in the current scenario but she will have to face enormous challenges which could be very new to her. The President is the supreme Commander of the Armed Forces and is also a part of the Parliament in our system. She would have a large set of advisers to see her through difficult times, but in the end, it would be her own discretion and understanding of the entire system that shall stand by her at all junctures. Many Opposition leaders are apprehensive about her capacity to deliver and are unfairly undermining her choice. However, they must understand that in a democratic set up like ours, everyone has the right to aspire and occupy the highest office of the land. She is not being foisted but shall be duly elected by members of the legislatures and Parliament. Therefore, her rise to the esteemed position would be completely legitimate and it would be totally unnecessary to find any kind of fault in her. In fact, once she gets elected, the entire Nation should solidly back her and wish her well for a promising tenure. It would have been unthinkable many years ago that a tribal would ever be the President but if the BJP and its allies are making it possible, it is a tribute to their vision and acceptance of the need to promote economically depressed and socially deprived sections of our society.
The endemic of gun violence: An American tragedy
The Senate passed a bill on Thursday aiming at overhauling the existing laws on firearms.
The debate over the unimaginable carnage due to gun violence and privation of stricter gun control laws in the United States has grown and faded over the years and gets stirred frequently by incidents of gun violence. Last month the mass shootings at the Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, again reignited the fierce debate over gun control legislation in the country. Amidst the political divisions over how to address gun violence, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Thursday to strike down a New York Law limiting gun-carrying rights of American citizens has expanded the existing gun rights in the United States. President Joe Biden was extremely disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision, as it “contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should trouble us all”.
Guns have been woven into the fabric of American culture and politics since the Second Amendment (1791) to the U.S. Constitution affirmed that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. Gun legislations in the United States are built on the judicial interpretations of the Constitution and it was on the grounds of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments (1868) that in the case of District of Columbia vs. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court, in its landmark decision, declared the ban on handguns as unconstitutional, therefore, reaffirming the individual right to possess firearms and use them for self-defence.
According to the National Firearms Survey of 2021, more than 81.4 million Americans above the age of 18 years own firearms, which makes up for almost 32 per cent of the adult American population. But the actual numbers are believed to be much higher as the prerequisite for a permit or registration to purchase guns is not a necessary requirement in all American states. America’s problem with gun violence is not limited to mass shootings, although the use of firearms is disproportionately higher in incidents of mass shootings compared to other forms of shootings, they are still relatively rare. In 2021, mass shootings accounted for less than 2 per cent of the nearly 40,000 fatalities resulting from gun violence in cases of homicides, police shooting, domestic violence, accidents and suicides which make up the highest number of gun-related deaths in the country.
Over the years, the National Rifle Association of America (NRA), the US gun rights advocacy group has played a big role in pushing forward the idea that guns are necessary for self-defence. They believe that owning a gun is a basic right similar to their right to free speech, and gun control legislation is an effort to deprive law-abiding American citizens of their fundamental right to protect themselves. The NRA continues to oppose any effort to implement gun control policies and initiatives that override constitutional due process protections. It has shifted the narrative of gun politics where gun ownership is paralleled to patriotism and has become a political identity. Gun violence has taken more lives than any other public crisis in the US. Compared to other western countries, the US does not have an overall crime problem, but it certainly does have more lethal violence attributable to the prevalence of guns.
Over the years, the subject of gun rights has become an intensely partisan issue, with the Republicans voting in favor of protecting the gun rights and the Democrats voting against them and placing more importance on gun regulations. There are federal gun laws that apply uniformly across the whole United States, which ban convicted felons, people with mental illness and kids under the age of 18 years from buying guns. But the gun laws are not uniform across all states as there are state laws, and each state law has its own leeway to enforce their own regulations that are wildly at variance with one another. For instance, in Massachusetts which is a strong Democratic state, police permit and a background check to buy a gun is a legal requirement, whereas in Texas with a strong Republican state, there are laws that permit citizens to carry concealed hand guns without any permit. There are more than 20 states that do not require any permit for purchasing firearms. These differences reflect the underlying partisan divide which has grown wider in the last three decades and is the greatest political and ideological split between the Republicans and the Democrats compared to any other issue in the American political life.
The US Congress has repeatedly failed to pass tougher gun laws and legislative reforms even as public opinion strongly pushes for it, but the issue of gun control is a political battle than it is a public opinion battle. According to a Gallup poll conducted in 2021, only 52 per cent of the Americans believed in making stricter gun laws, a drop from 67 per cent in 2018. The United States is vastly divided on political partisan lines and gun ownership and these two divisions have created barriers making it difficult to move forward and overcome policy change at a national level.
President Biden considers gun violence as a public health epidemic and his plans to tackle gun control include investing in evidence-based community violence interventions to address the root causes of gun violence. After the mass shootings in Uvalde, the Biden Administration wants to toughen guns laws and make sure the ones that already exist are actually applied including zero tolerance policy for gun dealers who flout the rules. He also called for stricter laws to be imposed on ghost guns as these weapons are sold in parts and without a serial number so they cannot be traced. These are easily available kits which can be purchased online without a background check and can be turned into a fully functional firearm. Biden also wants to bring back the ban on assault weapons, mostly used in mass shootings. He himself authored the assault-weapons ban, which was in place for a decade until 2004.
Given the political climate and a divided Senate, President Biden has few realistic avenues to pursue gun control legislation without congressional action. The Democratic push for more gun control and regulation is often met with voters and politicians in Congress who believe that guns are not the problem and perceive it as an attack on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. There is always a promising consensus on potential legislation, but usually the prospects of a bipartisan action on gun control fades within weeks of mass shootings. The Senate on Thursday (23 June) passed a Bipartisan Gun Control Bill in a 65–33 vote, which will next have to clear through the House of Representatives before going to President Biden’s for his signature. The bill is considered to be an important legislation as it revises the measures such as expanding background checks for gun buyers under the age of 21 years and offering funding to states that have emergency programmes in place to seize guns from people deemed dangerous by a judge. But as the Senate worked towards this gun safety legislation, the Supreme Court overturned a handgun restriction.
Through the influences of culture and politics, the United States has a very powerful gun-centric movement where both gun rights and gun regulations have been respected, but at the moment gun violence is a public health issue. Gun homicides are number one cause of deaths for all youth in America, the No. 1 cause of deaths for Black men and the highest rate of firearms deaths among the world’s wealthy nations. Mass shootings in other western countries like New Zealand, Switzerland, Canada and UK have prompted these nations to enact gun reforms by imposing measures such as bans on semiautomatic firearms, stricter background checks and national registry requirement. To tackle the tragedy of America’s accelerating epidemic of gun violence there is need to address the divide on gun control regulation and find a common ground between Democrats and Republicans for a bipartisan outcome, which respects the Second Amendment, makes a significant headway into preventing gun crimes, ensures public safety and earns a wide support in the Senate.
The author is a doctoral candidate at the centre of Canadian, US and Latin American Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University.
Reforms needed to overcome ills of representative democracy
The first basic question is how many of us understand the difference between representative democracy and participatory/direct democracy? For the record, we are a representative democracy where selected representatives are expected to debate, provide inputs from their constituencies and enable passing of legislations that push India into the next century.
The question that repeatedly haunts us is what is wrong with India when there is so much The question that repeatedly haunts us is what is wrong with India when there is so much right happening around us. Why are path breaking reforms that were pending for decades, resisted after they are legislated? The back lash to the most recent much needed Military reforms, preceded by farmers bill, labour reforms etc. are perhaps symptoms of a disease that is yet to be fully understood.Its contours are obliquely discussed in debates both in print and social media.
The first basic question is how many of us understand the difference between representative democracy and participatory /direct democracy? For the record, we are a representative democracy where the elected representatives are expected to debate, provide inputs from their constituencies and enable passing of legislations that push India into the next century. That the Parliament does not function and that all political parties play to the gallery are there for all to see. But there is no angst, peaceful marches or even vandalism to show our rejection of petty politics on display. But repeatedly one hears seasoned journalists, academics and the educated commentators state that not enough consultations with the people have been done and hence the backlash. Really? On a variety of complex social, economic, industrial, military legislations or executive decisions, can we have open consultations with a billion people-largely uninformed due to literacy/education related constraints? No.
That is why we have a representational form of democracy. Here lies the next challenge. Due to the very nature of politics right from independence, sane, educated, well meaning and knowledgeable citizens do not wish to be in the money-muscle power driven elections. Even the most talented, patriotic, and affluent citizen cannot hope to win an election. Criminals and those who impress the poor with material or political promises of freebies will ensure that outstanding technocrats never succeed.Hence the preferred route of Rajya Sabha for the truly deserving.
Now, coming to “we the people.”Those of us who are educated, comfortable and well-endowed while participating incessantly on the social media and rarely in print, do not bother to vote, The only means to eliminate criminals and frauds from being elected is to participate with the EC to stem the tide of self-serving, corrupt or even dynastic politicians.Holding the political party accountable for noncompliance with manifestos and rejecting freebies with severe fiscal and financial liabilities on much needed public funds are essential features for reforms at the people’s end. We have a responsibility that we have will fully shunned, as we the people do not necessarily wish to participate in the process of finding the right people to represent us. The media does not believe in exposing our politicians to well informed debates.
The latest reform concerning the Military are being debated with elected representatives who neither know the ranks and structure of the Military nor even the difference between recruitment of soldiers and the selection process of officers. Just recently an educated politician referred to the former Army Chief Gen JJ Singh as Major. But he vaxed eloquent on the reforms per se.
Veterans who participate in debates are guilty of indirectly accusing the present military Veterans who participate in debates are guilty of indirectly accusing the present military leadership (who are the only accountable people for operations), of the most elementary consequences of such reforms: as if the knowledge resides only in them. By so doing in public, they are casting aspersions on the competence of the serving community. For the record they all begin their argument with how timely such a bold reform is. But……and this is precisely the first red flag for creating confusion that could affect the morale of the serving community, when the serving Chiefs have repeatedly assured that they will plug loop holes as they progress.
That the Parliament does not function and that all political parties play to the gallery are there for all to see. But there is no angst, peaceful marches or even vandalism to show our rejection of petty politics on display. But repeatedly, one hears seasoned journalists, academics and the educated commentators state that not enough consultations with the people have been done and hence the backlash. Really? On a variety of complex social, economic, industrial, military legislations or executive decisions, can we have open consultations with a billion people-largely uninformed due to literacy/education related constraints? No.
Perhaps such senior veterans were too busy in their careers and forgot to mentor and train their subordinates who now occupy decision making positions. You reap as you sow.
The most important lesson is that, when a decision is taken, after consultations with stake holders and the details are not available with the veterans, the best way is to communicate with the current military leadership directly. That would be of immense value than debating with an anchor on a TRP hunt and a panel of bumbling politicians.
Mr K Subramanyam, the doyen of the strategic community till the 1990s and the Chairman of the Kargil Review Committee, once said, “ the politician enjoys power without responsibility. The bureaucrat wields power without accountability and the Military assumes responsibility without direction.”
The recommendations of the Arun Singh committee report were to specifically address this lacuna by integrating the services with the MOD and creating a single point adviser to the RM/PM on matters military through CDS. It took 18 years to begin the process and create structures. We must learn to be patient with this new born set up. The new CDS is likely to assume duty soon. We are moving along the right path.
But India needs major reforms in administration, police and judicial sectors, along with labour, land and agriculture to to take her to the next level of eminence in international politics. There are enough lessons learnt to attempt all of these, if there a will.
Vice Admiral SCS Bangara, PVSM, AVSM (Retd.)
Opinion2 years ago
South Block’s mistakes will now be corrected by Army
Sports2 years ago
When a bodybuilder breaks Shoaib’s record
News2 years ago
PM Modi must take governance back from babus
Spiritually Speaking2 years ago
Spiritual beings having a human experience
News2 years ago
Chinese general ordered attack on Indian troops: US intel report
Legally Speaking2 years ago
Law relating to grant, rejection and cancellation of bail
Royally Speaking2 years ago
The young royal dedicated to the heritage of Jaipur
Sports2 years ago
West Indies avoid follow-on, England increase lead to 219