'Budget is election manifesto,attempts to bribe voters'

Lucknow, Feb 16: Resident doctors at the AMU's Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital on Sunday demanded that the charges slapped against Dr Kafeel Khan under the National Security Act be withdrawn.

Dr Khan was arrested by the UP Special Task Force from Mumbai on January 29 in connection with a speech he had delivered during an anti-CAA protest at Aligarh Muslim University on December 12.

The Resident Doctors' Association (RDA) held a protest march on the hospital campus against the slapping of the NSA against the Gorakhpur doctor after he was granted bail in connection with the alleged hate speech.

RDA president Dr Hamza Malik said the move was a "blatant attempt to crush dissent and a violation of the Constitution of india".

He said by targeting the doctor, the UP government had done a great disservice to the entire medical community.

The AMU Students' Coordination Committee also described the decision to charge Dr Kafeel under the NSA a "direct assault" on a member of the medical fraternity who is "known for his upright behaviour and a champion of free speech".

Committee spokesperson and former AMU Students' Union president Faizul Hasan said by charging Dr Kafeel under the NSA even after he got bail was "a direct violation of a Supreme Court ruling on such issues".

Hasan said Dr Kafeel's fate should serve as an eye-opener for the rest of the country regarding the democratic rights in Uttar Pradesh.

The doctor was earlier arrested for his alleged role in the death of over 60 children within an week at the BRD Medical College in Gorakhpur in August 2017. Short supply of oxygen at the children's ward was blamed at that time for the deaths.

About two years later, a state government probe cleared Khan of all major charges, prompting him to seek an apology from the Yogi Adityanath government.

Jan 13: For the first time in years, the government of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is playing defense. Protests have sprung up across the country against an amendment to India’s laws — which came into effect on Friday — that makes it easier for members of some religions to become citizens of India. The government claims this is simply an attempt to protect religious minorities in the Muslim-majority countries that border India; but protesters see it as the first step toward a formal repudiation of India’s constitutionally guaranteed secularism — and one that must be resisted.

Modi was re-elected prime minister last year with an enhanced majority; his hold over the country’s politics is absolute. The formal opposition is weak, discredited and disorganized. Yet, somehow, the anti-Citizenship Act protests have taken hold. No political party is behind them; they are generally arranged by student unions, neighborhood associations and the like.

Yet this aspect of their character is precisely what will worry Modi and his right-hand man, Home Minister Amit Shah. They know how to mock and delegitimize opposition parties with ruthless efficiency. Yet creating a narrative that paints large, flag-waving crowds as traitors is not quite that easy.

For that is how these protests look: large groups of young people, many carrying witty signs and the national flag. They meet and read the preamble to India’s Constitution, into which the promise of secularism was written in the 1970’s.

They carry photographs of the Constitution’s drafter, the Columbia University-trained economist and lawyer B. R. Ambedkar. These are not the mobs the government wanted. They hoped for angry Muslims rampaging through the streets of India’s cities, whom they could point to and say: “See? We must protect you from them.” But, in spite of sometimes brutal repression, the protests have largely been nonviolent.

One, in Shaheen Bagh in a Muslim-dominated sector of New Delhi, began simply as a set of local women in a square, armed with hot tea and blankets against the chill Delhi winter. It has now become the focal point of a very different sort of resistance than what the government expected. Nothing could cure the delusions of India’s Hindu middle class, trained to see India’s Muslims as dangerous threats, as effectively as a group of otherwise clearly apolitical women sipping sweet tea and sharing their fears and food with anyone who will listen.

Modi was re-elected less than a year ago; what could have changed in India since then? Not much, I suspect, in most places that voted for him and his party — particularly the vast rural hinterland of northern India. But urban India was also possibly never quite as content as electoral results suggested. India’s growth dipped below 5% in recent quarters; demand has crashed, and uncertainty about the future is widespread. Worse, the government’s response to the protests was clearly ill-judged. University campuses were attacked, in one case by the police and later by masked men almost certainly connected to the ruling party.

Protesters were harassed and detained with little cause. The courts seemed uninterested. And, slowly, anger began to grow on social media — not just on Twitter, but also on Instagram, previously the preserve of pretty bowls of salad. Instagram is the one social medium over which Modi’s party does not have a stranglehold; and it is where these protests, with their photogenic signs and flags, have found a natural home. As a result, people across urban India who would never previously have gone to a demonstration or a political rally have been slowly politicized.

India is, in fact, becoming more like a normal democracy. “Normal,” that is, for the 2020’s. Liberal democracies across the world are politically divided, often between more liberal urban centers and coasts, and angrier, “left-behind” hinterlands. Modi’s political secret was that he was that rare populist who could unite both the hopeful cities and the resentful countryside. Yet this once magic formula seems to have become ineffective. Five of India’s six largest cities are not ruled by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in any case — the financial hub of Mumbai changed hands recently. The BJP has set its sights on winning state elections in Delhi in a few weeks. Which way the capital’s voters will go is uncertain. But that itself is revealing — last year, Modi swept all seven parliamentary seats in Delhi.

In the end, the Citizenship Amendment Act is now law, the BJP might manage to win Delhi, and the protests might die down as the days get unmanageably hot and state repression increases. But urban India has put Modi on notice. His days of being India’s unifier are over: From now on, like all the other populists, he will have to keep one eye on the streets of his country’s cities.

Jan 27: Bidders for Air India Ltd. will need to absorb $3.26 billion of its debt, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration tries once again to sell the national carrier.

The entire company will be sold but effective control needs to stay with Indian nationals, according to preliminary terms published Monday. Bids are invited by March 17 with Ernst & Young LLP India as transaction adviser.

Air India, which started in 1932 as a mail carrier before winning commercial popularity, saw its fortunes fade with the emergence of cutthroat low-cost competition. The state-run airline has been unprofitable for over a decade and is saddled with more than $8 billion in debt.

Indian regulations allow a foreign airline to buy as much as 49% of a local carrier, while overseas investors other than airlines can buy an entire carrier. The government didn’t find a single bidder when it tried to sell Air India in 2018.