Law Of The Land - Caste Conflict and Honour Killing

The Emperor has no Clothes

            Once upon a time a little girl called Alice was dozing one summer afternoon on a meadow when she saw a strange sight. A white rabbit dressed in a coat and wearing a wristwatch was running while saying ‘I am late’.

            Alice followed the rabbit which jumped into a hole, and both fell and fell until they landed somewhere with a loud thump. Alice was caught by some policemen and led away to face a trial for some unknown offence. On the way she saw a large gathering of people and on enquiry was told that the place was a country called Wonderland, and the people had gathered to see the oath taking ceremony of the Chief Justice of Wonderland.

            Now the Chief Justice had to be given oath by the President of Wonderland, but before that could be done the Chief Justice grabbed a golden crown from somewhere and crowned himself (somewhat like Napoleon crowning himself at Notre Dame). The Chief Justice then declared himself the Emperor of Wonderland, a post above the President or Prime Minister.

            Thereafter the Chief Justice let loose a reign of terror in Wonderland, somewhat like Judge Jeffries (the ‘hanging’ Judge) in the time of James II. At the slightest opposition he would say “Off with his head”, and lo and behold the head of the objector would fall, whether of Prime Minister of Judge or anyone. The streets of Wonderland were literally littered with heads of High Court Judges, Ministers, etc.

            This Chief Justice surrounded himself with worthies who were called Judges and lawyers but were really spoons (chamchas), though in human form. Whatever the Chief Justice would say, the spoons would nod their heads and say “Quite right Your Majesty, Quite right” (following the adage ‘Billee oonth le gayi to haanji haanji kehna’). The spoons who were in the form of lawyers got favourable orders from the Chief Justice, about  whom they would say, “Chief tere jannisaar, beshumar, beshumar” ( Chief Justice, the people who are prepared to die for you are countless). None of the spoons who were in the form of Judges dared to dissent from the Chief Justice, and hence there was not a single dissenting opinion and all verdicts were unanimous.

            Now Wonderland had a Constitution, but the Chief Justice had read somewhere that the Constitution means what the Judges say it means. Since there was only one real Judge in the Supreme Court of Wonderland, that is the Chief Justice himself (since the other so-called Judges were really spoons, who were only supposed to nod their heads), the Chief Justice was of the opinion that the Constitution meant what he thought it meant, and according to his interpretation of the Constitution there was an Emperor in Wonderland, that is himself, who was supreme, above all other authorities or bodies, including the President, Prime Minister, Parliament, etc.

            There are several principles of interpretation (as every lawyer knows). The Chief Justice did not have a high opinion of the literal rule, and regarded Judges who followed it as asses. He preferred the purposive rule of interpretation, and his interpretation of the purposive rule was that that interpretation of the law should be followed which served his own purpose.

            When Alice was brought for trial to court she was shocked to see the Chief Justice sitting on a chair naked.

            This happened because some time earlier two of the spoons who always surrounded the Chief Justice told him that they had prepared beautiful clothes for him, but these could only be seen by upright and intelligent people. In fact these spoons were frauds, and they pretended to put on these invisible clothes on the Chief Justice. All the other spoons assembled there kept saying ‘what beautiful clothes the Chief is wearing’ although in fact he was naked. This they said became they did not want to be branded as dishonest and fools, in which case the verdict on them would be the usual “Off with their heads”. The Chief Justice also did not want the people to think he himself is dishonest or a fool, and he pretended to admire his beautiful clothes, although he was naked.

            When Alice saw the Chief Justice she exclaimed in horror “But you have no clothes”, at which the Chief Justice got furious and said “Off with her head”.

            Now Alice too got furious and said “This joke has gone on far too long. Off with yours”. At which the people gathered there beheaded the Chief Justice, and now all the spoons are facing trials somewhat like that held at Nuremberg after the Second World War.

     

Ecrasez L’ infame - II

When I was a Judge in Allahabad High Court a criminal appeal came before me in which some Muslim boys had been convicted by the trial Court for gang raping a young Dalit Hindu girl.

                In Uttar Pradesh (which is the largest State in India of about 200 million people) Muslims are about 18% of the total population, but in that particular village in U.P. where this incident happened 90% people were Muslims, and only about 10% Hindus, most of them being dalits (or low caste Hindus).

                I upheld the conviction, and observed that a hallmark of a civilized society is the protection it gives to minorities. It is the solemn duty of every person belonging to the majority community in a particular area to see to it that the minorities in that area live with dignity and respect. In that particular case it was the duty of the Muslims of that village (who were 90% in that village) to ensure that the Hindus could live with respect, but instead of doing so the accused had gang raped a dalit girl. Hence they deserved harsh punishment.

               I also observed in the same judgment that had the Hindus been the majority in the village it would have been their duty to see that Muslims or Christian (or any other minority in the village) could live with dignity, and if in such a village some Hindus committed a similar crime they would also be given harsh punishment.

The judgment assumes importance in view of the growing intolerance in many parts of the Indian subcontinent. The treatment to North East people in many parts of India, to Muslims in Gujarat, the terror created in the tiny Hindu and other minorities in Pakistan, are a disgrace to all of us. It shows that we are not really civilized.

  Thomas Jefferson in his book ‘Notes on Virginia’ writes “It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg”.

The spirit of tolerance is particularly important in our sub continent which has such tremendous diversity----- so many religions (and so many sects in these religions), so many castes, languages, ethnic groups etc.

                In my earlier article ‘Ecrasez L’infame’ I said that the ill treatment by many of us of the North East Indians is a disgrace. The atrocities on Muslims in Gujarat in 2002 and on Sikhs in 1984 are a disgrace.  Similarly, the ill treatment of minorities in Pakistan (whether Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Ahmadis, Shias or any other minority) is a disgrace, and invites Voltaire’s famous comment: Ecrasez L’ infame (Crush the Infamy).

                In my article ‘What is India’  I said that India is a country of immigrants (like North America) whose 92-93% population today are not the original inhabitants but descendants of immigrants who migrated into India because people migrate from uncomfortable places to comfortable places. India was a paradise for agricultural societies because it has level land, fertile soil, plenty of water for irrigation, etc unlike countries like Afghanistan which are rocky, cold, covered with snow for several months in a year, and hence very uncomfortable. Hence for thousands of year people kept coming into India, mainly from the North West. This comment is also true of Pakistan, and it explains the tremendous diversity in our sub continent, because each group of immigrants brought in their own language, religion, customs, etc. 

As the great Urdu poet Firaq Gorakhpuri wrote:

                “Sar Zameen-e-Hind par aqwaam-e-Alam ke Firaq

                   Qafile guzarte gaye, Hindustan banta gaya”

               The only policy therefore which can work in our sub continent is secularism, and giving equal respect to all communities, religious, lingual, regional or racial. This was the policy of the great Emperor Akbar who gave equal respect to all communities.

                Secularism does not mean that one cannot practice one’s religion. It means that religion is a private affair, unconnected with the State (which will have no religion) and everyone has the freedom to practice one’s   own religion without harassment or coercion from anyone. But in my opinion secularism means something more than merely accepting the rights of others to practice their own religion. It also means that minorities will be entitled to lead a life of dignity and respect, and it is the duty of the majority to ensure this. Hence every incident of ill treatment of minorities in India or Pakistan is a disgrace to the majority people there who have failed in their solemn duty of protecting minorities.

Published in The Express Tribune On August 23,2012

      

Ecrasez L’infame (Crush the infamy)

“Sar Zameen-e-Hind par aqwaam-e-Alam ke Firaq

Qafile guzarte gaye, Hindustan banta gaya”
                         --Firaq Gorakhpuri

News has come that 18,000 North East people have fled from Bangalore, Pune, etc. due to fear psychosis and feeling of insecurity. This is a disgrace to our nation.

             This is not an isolated incident. North East people are often insulted,  humiliated, looked down upon,  and discriminated against, and called ‘Chinks’ because of the Mongoloid  features of many of them. This is shameful. I am reminded of Voltaire’s famous statement ‘Ecrasez L’infame’ (crush the infamy) which is the dictum we should follow.

            Unfortunately the mindset of many people in the plains of India is that North East people with Mongoloid features are not really Indians but foreigners. Hence we have to explain   what is India?

            I have in my article ‘What is India’, explained that India is broadly a country of immigrants, like North America. Almost 92-93% people living in India today are descendants of immigrants, and not the original inhabitants. The original inhabitants of India, as it is now established, are neither the Aryans nor the Dravidians, but the pre-Dravidian tribals or Adivasis e.g. Bhils, Gonds, Santhals, Todas,  etc who were driven into the forests by many our ancestors and treated very badly. They are now only about 7 to 8% of our population. The rest of us are descendants of immigrants, as explained in my judgment in Kailas V State of Maharashtra (2011) 1 S.C.C. 793.

            People migrated into India (mainly from the North West, but also to some extent from the North East) because people migrate from uncomfortable to comfortable areas. Before the Industrial Revolution there were agricultural societies everywhere, and India was a paradise for agriculture, having level land, fertile soil, plenty of water, etc. Hence for thousands of years people have been coming into India.

            This theory, that India is broadly a country of immigrants, explains the tremendous diversity of India --  so many castes, religions, languages, ethnic groups, etc. Somebody is tall, someone short, somebody fair, someone dark, others brown (of all shades), someone with  Caucasian features, someone Mongoloid, someone Negroid, etc.

            We may compare India with China. China has a population of 130 crores as compared  with our 120 crores, and China has more than twice our land area. But there is broad (though not absolute) homogeneity in China. All Chinese have Mongoloid  features, they have one common written script called Mandarin (though spoken dialects are different), and 95% Chinese belong to one ethnic group called the Han.

In contrast, India has tremendous diversity, and  that is why the only policy which will keep our country united and take us to the path of prosperity is secularism and giving equal respect to people of all communities, region, language, race etc. This was the policy of the great Emperor Akbar who gave equal respect to all communities and proclaimed the doctrine of  suleh-e-kul i.e.  universal toleration of all religions, at a time when Europeans  were often massacring each other in the name of religion (see in this connection my judgment in Hinsa Virodhak Sangh Vs. Mirzapur Moti Kuresh Jamaat, available online) . It is because of this wise policy of Akbar that the Mughal Empire lasted so long. This policy was continued by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and his colleagues who enacted a Constitution giving equal respect to all Indians.

I am deeply distressed when I see violation of this Constitutional policy by some people. For example, the bhoomiputra (son of the soil) theory propounded by some people in Maharashtra is totally unconstitutional. The people who say that non-Maharashtrians like South Indians, U.P.ites, Biharis, etc should get out of Maharashtra because they are not bhumiputra forget that in that case 95% Maharashtrians will also have to get out of Maharashtra because the real sons of the soil in Maharashtra are the Bhils and other tribals in Maharashtra who are only 5% of the population of Maharashtra.

Moreover, Article 19(1) (e) of the Indian Constitution says that all Indian are entitled to reside and settle anywhere in India. If non-Maharashtrians are made to leave Maharashtra then Maharashtraians in Delhi, U.P., Punjab, etc will also have to go back to Maharashtra. This will be fatal for the unity of our country.

I therefore request all patriotic people in India to understand our country, and see through the nefarious designs of the mischievous elements who want to break up our country.

People of the North East are as much Indians as people of U.P., Bihar, and other States. Any insult to them or their harassment or discrimination is a national crime, and the perpetrators of such crimes should be severely punished.       

The Queen of Hearts

Once upon a time there was a little girl called Alice who was dozing in the afternoon in a meadow when she imagined she saw a rabbit with a watch running fast and saying “I am late”.

She got up and followed the rabbit who jumped into a hole in the ground, and both fell and fell until they landed with a thump somewhere deep below.

Alice was immediately arrested by some soldiers and brought before a Queen. This Queen was surrounded by spoons (chamchas) who had titles of Ministers and bureaucrats, but were nevertheless only spoons, and not human beings. Whatever the Queen would say they would respectfully, nod their heads in agreement and say “Quite right, your Majesty, quite right. How wise you are.”

The Queen said that she once saw a cat carrying away a camel, and they nodded their heads and said “Quite right, your Majesty” (following the advice of the Hindu adage ‘Oonth  billee le gayee to haanji haanji kehna’).

There were many persons who were brought before the Queen for trial for high crimes like asking for rice at Rs. 2 per kg (which she had promised before becoming Queen), or asking for some relief to farmers who were dying, or making cartoons of her, or protesting against rape of a woman.

The Queen had one simple solution of settling all difficulties, great or small, and dealing with such troublemakers in her kingdom (or rather queendom). She proclaimed all such persons as Maoists, and said “Off with their heads”
She had a peculiar notion that anything that had a head should be without one. Of course she forgot that she too had a head, but whether there were any brains in that head is a matter of conjecture.

Now this Queen was a great admirer of another great Queen, Marie Antoinette of France, who said that if the people do not have bread they should eat cake. Our Queen slightly altered that saying, and proclaimed “If the people do not have bread, let them eat Rabindra Sangeet.”

So she had loudspeakers put all over her kingdom (or rather, queendom) which blared out Rabindra Sangeet day and night to fill the empty stomachs of her subjects.

The subjects were very happy with such a great Queen who could fill their stomachs on music alone. After all, has not the great Shakespeare said that music is the food of love (Twelfth Night)? So the Queen decided that Rabindra Sangeet will take the place of food in her queendom, and when Alice appeared before the Queen for her trial her eardrums were rattling with Rabindra Sangeet.

Now it so happened that when Alice was brought forward for her trial the Queen was quite naked. This happened because a few days before two of the spoons who were always surrounding her and praising her (i.e. doing chamchagiri) promised the Queen a new suit of clothes which were extremely beautiful but was invisible to stupid and incompetent persons.
They pretended to put their clothes on the Queen, and the other spoons, fearing that they may not  be dismissed for being stupid and incompetent, starting admiring these ‘beautiful clothes’, although the Queen was stark naked.

The Queen, too, could not see these clothes, but for fear of appearing unfit did not say so, and she came into her court in these ‘beautiful’ garments, i.e. stark naked.

When Alice was brought before the Queen she was startled at seeing a naked women, and said “But you have no clothes”. This made the Queen furious and she said “Off with her head”, at which Alice, who got angry too, said “This joke has gone on too long. Off with yours”. And at this all the people there beheaded the Queen, and now all her spoons are facing a trial somewhat like that held in Nuremburg.

The Last Word: Was Mamata right to claim judgements can be bought?

Justice Katju,Soli Sorabjee,Vinod Mehta and Sunanda K on a Panel Discussion with Karan Thappar on Mamata Banarjee's Comments on Judiciary.

The Swami and the Amogh Astra

Once upon a time in a country called Buffoonistan there was a Swami (and there were hordes of them) called Mokshaprapta (one who has attained salvation). One day he decided to pray to Lord Shiva for a boon. So he stood on one leg for 1,000 years with both hands raised and eyes closed (which is the classic method of obtaining nirvana in India), praying for Lord Shiva’s darshan (revelation).

Pleased with his indefatigable devotion, Lord Shiva appeared and blessed him. He then told the Swami to ask for a boon.

The Swami said, “Mahadev, I am deeply dejected because while all countries in the world have invented wonderful weapons, my country Buffoonistan has invented none. The Chinese have invented gunpowder, the British warships, the Germans tanks, the Japanese kamimaze pilots, and the Americans atom bombs, my country has produced nothing.”

At this Lord Shiva said, “Do not be dejected. Your country will produce an Amogh Astra [invincible weapon] which none can match.”

“What is that?” enquired the Swami.

“It is anshan [fasting]” replied Lord Shiva. “No weapon can match this.”

The Swami became very happy, and asked for details of this wonderful weapon.

Lord Shiva said: “This weapon has no match because none can equal its spiritual power. However, there is a secret key for using this weapon. And that is this: whether you fast for 3 days or 10 or 20, at the end of it your weight must be more than what it was before you started fasting.”

The Swami felt a bit disturbed. “How is that possible?” he asked. “That is possible only by cheating and eating on the quiet.”

“Chee, chee, chee” said the Lord. “Can I advise you to cheat? No, I will tell you a miraculous method by which you can gain weight while fasting. You should close your eyes, open the third one, which, as Yogis have explained, is on everyone’s forehead, and while doing transcendental meditation, imagine seeing a lot of delicious dishes there. Then you must in your imagination eat that. That will really fill your stomach, and increase your weight.”

The Swami was delighted and he fell at the feet of Lord Shiva, who then disappeared.

The next day the Swami began his fast for abolition of corruption in Buffoonistan. Buffoons from all over the country had assembled in the shamshanghat (cremation ground) where the Swami always held his meetings. He chose this place rather than Jantar Mantar or the Ramlila ground because he wanted his followers to develop a spirit of detachment, forgetting about this world and thinking about the next.

The Swami stood up on an elevated platform before the huge crowd of buffoons and declared that if a law for abolition of corruption was not passed in 3 days his peaceful protest would turn into a revolution.

Now this word ‘revolution’ is dicey. It can mean different things to different people.

In the audience a rakshas (demon) called Charvak was sitting, and he was known to be a mischievous fellow. He had the nasty habit of asking uncomfortable questions. He got up and said, “As far as I know, a revolution seeks to totally transform the entire society, like the French Revolution. You have never mentioned what kind of revolution you want. I think you are a fraud.”

Now saying such a thing, particularly in a crowd of Buffoons, is extremely dangerous. The crowd has a mob mentality, like the Roman mob in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. When Mark Antony incited the mob against Caesar’s murderers, the mob went around seeking them. They caught hold of a poet called Cinna, who was different from Cinna the conspirator, and although he kept protesting that he was Cinna the poet, and not Cinna the conspirator, they lynched him saying, “Hang him for his bad verses.”

Something equally sinister may have happened to our rakshas friend, but the Swami, who is a benevolent person and above petty feelings, beckoned Charvak to the dais, embraced him, and whispered smilingly in his ears, “One more word and I will hang you here upside down.” But no one heard him say this, and people thought that out of magnanimity the Swami had forgiven Charvak.

The Swami then said loudly, “Our brother has raised a valid point and we must consider it seriously,” and having said so he let him back into the crowd, from where he disappeared post haste before the Swami or his followers could change their minds.

The Swami said, “Our brother has raised an important point. How do we make revolution? Can any of you answer? After a revolution Buffoonistan will become a land of milk and honey, there will be no more corruption, or poverty, unemployment, price rise, sickness, etc.

“To achieve all this we must realise that this world is Maya, that is, illusion, as our Vedanta philosophy teaches. So we must realise that corruption, poverty, unemployment, etc., are all illusions. Once we realise this, the revolution will have been achieved.

“So I request all of you to stand on your heads and contemplate the world as Maya.”

Everyone in the crowd then performed the yogic headstand (sheershasana), and that is the last they were seen doing by this observer.

The moral of this story is that everyone in Buffoonistan must have implicit faith in Babas and Swamis to achieve salvation and total revolution.

(Published In The Hindu on 12 August,2012)

Role of the Media and the Anna Hazare Movement

The Anna Hazare movement, which appears to have now subsided, raises crucial issues relating to the role of the media.

The first and foremost role of the media is to provide accurate and objective information to the public to enable it to form rational opinions, which is a sine qua non in a democracy.Obviously the people cannot go everywhere to collect information about important events,and hence the media acts as an agency of the people for supplying such information. Hence it plays a vital role in a democracy. 

For instance, Nikhil Chakravarty wrote about the terrible Bengal famine of 1943, and P.Sainath highlighted the farmers suicides in Vidarbha, Andhra Pradesh, etc

The problem, however, arises, when journalists do not maintain detachment and objectivity, and instead identify themselves with the event. This is precisely what happened to a large section of the media in December last year during the Anna Hazare stir. Most journalists practically became part of the movement instead of remaining detached observers and reporters. It reminded one of the Babri Masjid Ram Janmabhumi agitation when a section of the media (particularly a large section of the Hindi press) practically became kar sewaks.

A journalist must maintain some distance and detachment from the event he is covering. He has to cover and report the event, not become part of it. He should behave professionally, like a doctor who does not get personally involved with his patient while doing his best for him, or like a lawyer who does not identify himself with his client, while arguing for him. If one gets identified with his subject how can he maintain accuracy and objectivity?

A journalist may have sympathy for the subject he is reporting, but he must never forego his critical faculties and rational analysis.

Even a little rational thinking reveals that the Anna Hazare movement was only an emotional outburst and cannot make even a scratch on the prevailing rampant corruption in the country. Yet, like the Pied Piper of Hamelin, Anna led the gullible people of India in a dance of stupidity, ably assisted by most of our media. I was reminde of a line in Shakespeare's Macbeth "It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing".

In those days one never heard of a critical analysis by the media of the Janlokpal Bill, whose enactment Anna was insisting upon.Probably nobody had even read it.

Section 2 (e) of the Bill states that employees covered by the Prevention of Corruption Act come within the purview of the Lokpal. There are over 2 crore such employees, 39 lac Central Government employees, 55 lac employees of public sector undertakings and statutory bodies, 1.2 crore state government employees, and other categories like cooperative societies employees, teachers, judicial officers, etc.

Now if this law is made there are bound to be tens of lacs of complaints every year. This will require perhaps 2 lac lokpals to deal with them. These lokpals will have to be provided salaries, staff, housing, offices,etc. placing an additional heavy financial burden on the state exchecquer And considering the low level of morality prevailing in our country it is almost certain that most of them will become blackmailers. It will be creating a Frankenstein monster,a parallel bureaucracy which will at a stroke double the corruption in the country. And who will guard these praetorian guards? A body of superlokpals?

Should the media not have coolly and rationally considered all this instead of joining the revelry and merry making at Jantar Mantar and Ramlila grounds?

Apart from the above, there is a second role of the media, which is particularly important in the transitional period (from feudal agricultural to the modern industrial era) through which our country is passing, and that is of giving leadership and guidance to the people in the realm of ideas.

This transitional period is always a very painful period in history, full of turbulence, turmoil, wars, revolutions, social churning, intellectual ferment, etc. A study of the history of Western Europe in the 17th to 19th Centuries, when European society was passing through its transition, shows that it was only after going through this fire that modern society emerged in Europe. India is presently going through this fire. We are going through a very painful period in our history, which may last another 15 to 20 years.

In this transition period the role of ideas, and therefore of the media, becomes extremely important. The media is not an ordinary business which deals with commodities, it deals with ideas. To help society get over the transition period faster and with less pain the media should promote modern scientific ideas and combat backward feudal ideas and practices like casteism, communalism, and superstitions. In this connection I may refer to the glorious role played by the European media when Europe was passing through its transition. Voltaire attacked religious bigotry, Rousseau attacked the entire feudal system and Thomas Paine proclaimed the Rights Of Man. In my opinion the Indian media should play a similar role. Instead of pandering to the low intellectual level of our masses and perpetuating it, it should seek to uplift it so as to make the masses part of enlightened India.

When Anna Hazare called off his fast and said his movement will now enter politics, the media should have immediately asked him what exactly does he mean? Unfortunately most of our politics is on the basis of caste and religion. If he forms a party, which caste (or caste cmbination) will it represent? Without such a vote bank all his candidates will lose their security deposits.

Recently Anna said that he will not contest elections because each election costs 15 to 20 crore rupees, and he does not have that money, but he will support honest candidates. Now there is a clear contradiction here. Anna admits that an election (presumably a Lok Sabha election) costs 15 to 20 crores. Then where and how did the 'honest' candidate he supports get this 15 to 20 crores? These, and many other, are the questions our media should ask, but does it do so?

I have sometimes been misunderstood by a section of the media for criticizing it, but I criticized it as a well wisher, not an enemy. Kabirdas said "Nindak neeray raakhiye, angan kuti chawaye". I repeatedly said that instead of focussing on frivolous issues like lives of film stars, cricket, fashion parades, astrology, etc, the media should focus on the real issues facing the nation like poverty, unemployment, price rise, healthcare, etc

The Indian media has a glorious role to play in the coming days, provided it realizes its mistakes and corrects itself. I am sure the Indian media will do so, and thereby win the respect of the Indian people

( Published in Hindustan Times on 09th August,2012)

India, In Transition and Corrupt

Hum agar rishwat nahin lenge to khayenge kya— Josh Malihabadi

Now that the Anna Hazare agitation has subsided, the time has come for some rational, scientific analysis of the problem of corruption.

There is no doubt that there is rampant corruption in Indian society at almost every level.

In Western society, too, there is some corruption, but it is only at a very high level, and it ordinarily does not affect the common man. Corruption there takes such forms as multinational corporations giving bribes to top politicians, generals or bureaucrats of underdeveloped countries to get contracts, etc. But in North America you cannot offer a bribe to a policeman if he catches you violating some traffic rule. If you attempt to do that it will be a second, more serious, offence. Similarly, you cannot bribe an income tax official or other officials there. But in India corruption exists at every level, for example, in registering a sale deed, getting mutation in revenue records, getting an FIR registered, getting permission from a municipality to build a house, tax matters, etc.

Everyone is harassed by corruption in India, but what is to be done about it?

Anna Hazare’s movement, in my opinion, was only an emotional outburst, but serious problems cannot be addressed in that manner. A scientific analysis of the problem is required.

I submit the following: first, corruption is the normal feature of the transitional period when a society (such as India’s) is passing from a feudal, agricultural stage to a modern, industrial stage. Second, it is only when the transition is over and the country becomes a fully industrial society, like that in North America or Europe, that things will get relatively stabilised, and corruption will be considerably reduced. This, in my opinion, will take about 15 to 20 years more in India.

This needs to be explained.

Feudal, agricultural society is a relatively stable society, with everyone knowing his place, with stable social and ethical values. In contrast, when the process of industrialisation begins, things become topsy-turvy. In this transitional period, before the process of industrialisation is complete, two things happen. First, old (feudal) moral values disintegrate, but a new moral code does not come into existence. Second, prices start shooting up, while incomes are broadly stagnant (or rise much slower than the price rise). For both these reasons, corruption becomes rampant. To maintain one’s lifestyle and to keep up with the Joneses, one must supplement one’s regular income, and this is only possible by corruption. Since the old moral code has largely disintegrated there is little check on one’s conscience to prohibit taking bribes.

I am not trying to justify corruption. I am only presenting a scientific analysis to show that corruption is inevitable in a transitional society like India in which industrialisation has commenced, but is incomplete. Historical facts support this conclusion. For example, there was rampant corruption in England in the 18th and early 19th centuries when industrialisation was going on but was not complete. Sir Robert Walpole, who was the first prime minister of Great Britain (from 1721 to 1742), openly used to say that he can purchase any person, including members of parliament. John Wilkes and Junius attacked the corruption of the governments of the Duke of Grafton (1768-1770) and of his successor, Lord North. Similarly, in America too there was a lot of corruption in the 19th century when the process of industrialisation was going on. The administrations of Presidents Grant, Harding, etc were notoriously corrupt.

It is only when the process of industrialisation is broadly completed that society once again becomes relatively stable and corruption subsides. A new ethical code has emerged, and people in the West are relatively more honest in their dealings than people in underdeveloped countries. Anyone who has been to the West and has interacted with people there can bear this out.

In view of this analysis, I submit that corruption will continue in India for another 15-20 years, but will considerably disappear when the process of industrialisation is complete after this period.

The writer, a former judge of the Supreme Court, is chairman of the Press Council of India

(Published in The Indian EXPRESS on 08th August,2012)

India @ 9 with Rajdeep Sardesai

Justice Katju on a panel discussion with Rajdeep Sardesai, Anupam Kher and others on "Anna movement and Janlokpal".
Discussion from min (19:00 to 44:00)