Mersal row: BJP’s Raja drags Vijay’s Christian identity to justify GST!

May 11: Saudi Arabia will triple its value-added tax rate and suspend a cost of living allowance for state workers, it said on Monday, seeking to shield finances hit by low oil prices and a slump in demand for its lifeline export worsened by the new coronavirus.

Historic oil output cuts agreed by Riyadh and other major producers have given only limited support to prices after they sank on oversupply caused by a war for petroleum market share between the kingdom and its fellow oil titan Russia.

Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter, is also being hit hard by measures to fight the new coronavirus, which are likely to curb the pace and scale of economic reforms launched by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

"The cost of living allowance will be suspended as of June 1, and the value added tax will be increased to 15% from 5% as of July 1," Finance Minister Mohammed al-Jadaan said in a statement reported by the state news agency. "These measures are painful but necessary to maintain financial and economic stability over the medium to long term...and to overcome the unprecedented coronavirus crisis with the least damage possible."

The austerity measures come after the kingdom posted a $9 billion budget deficit in the first quarter.

The minister said non-oil revenues were affected by the suspension and decline in economic activity, while spending had risen due to unplanned strains on the healthcare sector and the initiatives taken to support the economy.

"All these challenges have cut state revenues, pressured public finances to a level that is hard to deal with going forward without affecting the overall economy in the medium to long term, which requires more spending cuts and measures to support non-oil revenues stability," he added.

The government has cancelled and put on hold some operating and capital expenditures for some government agencies, and cut allocations for some reform initiatives and projects worth a total 100 billion riyals ($26.6 billion), the statement said.

Central bank foreign reserves fell in March at their fastest rate in at least 20 years and to their lowest since 2011, while oil revenues in the first three months of the year fell 24% from a year earlier to $34 billion, pulling total revenues down 22%.

"The reforms are positive from a fiscal side as greater adjustment is essential. However, the tripling of VAT is unlikely to help that much in 2020 revenue wise with the expected fall in consumption," said Monica Malik, chief economist at Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank.

She said she kept unchanged her deficit forecast of 16.3% of GDP for this year, which already factors in a greater than previously announced spending cut.

About 1.5 million Saudis are employed in the government sector, according to official figures released in December.

In 2018, Saudi Arabia's King Salman ordered a monthly payment of 1,000 riyals ($267) to every state employee to compensate them for the rising living costs after the government hiked domestic gas prices and introduced value-added tax.

DIFFICULT TIMES

A committee has been formed to study all financial benefits paid to public sector employees and contractors, and will submit recommendations within 30 days, the statement said.

In late 2015, when oil prices fell from record highs, the kingdom slashed lavish bonuses, overtime payments and other benefits once considered routine perks in the public sector.

In a country without elections and with political legitimacy resting partly on distribution of oil revenue, the ability of citizens to adapt to such reforms is crucial for stability.

"Tripling the VAT will test the limits of the balance between revenues and consumption as the economy dives into a deep recession. The move will impact consumption and could also lower the expected revenues," said John Sfakianakis, a Gulf expert at the University of Cambridge.

"These are pro-austerity and pro-revenue moves rather than pro-growth ones," he said.

Hasnain Malik, head of equity strategy at Tellimer, said the VAT rise could bring about $24-$26.5 billion in additional non-oil fiscal revenue. The rise would hit consumer spending further but was a needed step towards fiscal sustainability, he said.

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.

New Delhi, Jan 15: The mother of 23-year-old paramedic student, who was raped and brutally assaulted by six men in December 2012, on Tuesday said she knew that the curative petitions of the convicts will be rejected and is confident that they will be hanged on January 22.

Her remarks came after the Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to stay the execution of two of the four death row convicts in the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case while dismissing their curative petitions against their conviction and capital punishment.

"The curative please had to be rejected. This was the third time they had gone to the Supreme Court. Whatever pleas they file, we are ready to face them and we will fight it out. We feel that they will be hanged on January 22. We want that to happen," Nirbhaya's mother told PTI over phone.

The four convicts -- Vinay Sharma (26), Mukesh Kumar (32), Akshay Kumar Singh (31) and Pawan Gupta (25) -- are to be hanged on January 22 at 7 am in Tihar jail as a Delhi court issued their death warrants on January 7.

Vinay and Mukesh had filed curative petitions on January 9.

Shortly after the apex court refused to stay the execution of two of them, Mukesh moved a mercy petition before President Ram Nath Kovind.

Mukesh also approached the Delhi High Court for quashing the death warrant. The high court is expected to take up his petition on Wednesday.