Modi govt's crackdown on civil society

[email protected] (Rohini Mohan | International New York Times)
January 13, 2017

Among their common traits, illiberal strongmen share a virulent mistrust of civil society. From Vladimir Putin's Russia to Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Turkey, illiberal governments regularly use imprisonment, threats and nationalist language to repress non-governmental organisations. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government is going after their money.

crackdownThe Lawyers Collective, an advocacy group in New Delhi run by the prominent lawyers Indira Jaising and Anand Grover, has for three decades provided legal assistance to women, non-union workers, activists and other marginalised groups, often without charge. In December, the Modi government barred it from receiving foreign grants. The political reasons were obvious: The Collective had represented critics of Modi's sectarian record and environmental vision.

Under law, non-governmental groups that seek foreign donations have to register under the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act, which prohibits the use of overseas funds for “activities detrimental to the national interest.” Although accountability in the non-governmental sector is necessary to control malpractice, the foreign funding law is better known as a tool of political retribution than transparent auditing.

It's not just the Collective that has been punished. The Home Affairs Ministry recently revoked the licences of around 10,000 other NGOs. Even groups whose funding licences were renewed are worried about the future. “It is activism on thinning ice from now on,” an education activist told me.

The funding law is rooted in Cold War fears about foreign interference in domestic politics. In 1975, prime minister Indira Gandhi raised the spectre of the “foreign hand,” suspended civil liberties, arrested political opponents, and censored the press for an almost two-year dictatorial stretch known as the Emergency.

Gandhi, a socialist who leaned toward the Soviet Union, proposed the foreign funding law as a deterrent to political meddling. During a 1976 debate in the Indian Parliament on the law, the CIA was mentioned dozens of times as lawmakers expressed outrage over “American bossism” and the United States' role in the overthrow of Salvador Allende's government in Chile.

The new law prohibited political parties, the news media and organisations “of a political nature” from receiving foreign contributions. Social, religious and educational organisations with foreign donors were required to obtain a permit.

India has moved away from the paranoid 1970s to a liberalised economy and is embracing the United States and global financial institutions. But the foreign funding law remains a handy weapon whose vague vocabulary (“public interest” and “national interest”) gives the state immense discretionary powers against critics.

In 2010, the Congress government made the law more stringent: it now requires licences to be renewed every five years, and allows the state to suspend permits and freeze groups' accounts for 180 days during any investigation. The Congress government used the law to pressure civil society groups protesting corruption and a nuclear power plant.

Modi's government has been even more openly hostile to civil society groups. It repeatedly denounces human rights and environmental activism as “anti-national” — a phrase that carries connotations of treason. The patriotic rage is a mask for a more pedestrian motive: punishing pesky critics. In 2016, what is normally a routine licence renewal process was used to punish groups that have been critical of Modi or his policies.

The Lawyers Collective has been prominent among such groups. In 2015, Priya Pillai, a campaigner from Greenpeace India, was travelling to London to testify in the British Parliament about coal mining in central Indian forests by Essar Energy, a corporation registered in Britain. Federal officers pulled Pillai off her flight, arguing that her deposition would have hurt India's “national interest.” Pillai went to court; the Lawyers Collective represented her.

The Collective also represented Teesta Setalvad, who has been campaigning for justice for the victims of sectarian riots in Gujarat in 2002, when Modi was the chief minister of the state. Setalvad has sought to put Modi and other Hindu nationalist politicians on trial for allegedly overseeing or participating in violence. After Modi's elevation to national office, Setalvad was accused of stealing donations meant for riot victims. In July, her home in Mumbai was raided by federal agents, and a few months later, Setalvad's organisations lost their foreign funding licences.

Dalit atrocities

Since Modi rose to power, emboldened hardline Hindu activists have assaulted cow traders and people suspected of eating beef, claiming to defend Hindu beliefs. In July, vigilantes stripped and flogged four Dalit, or lower caste men in Gujarat for skinning a cow. Many Dalits earn their livelihood from skinning dead animals and selling their hides to leather traders.

The assault prompted protests by Dalits and damaged Modi's image among the group, about a sixth of the country's population. A Dalit rights organisation, Navsarjan Trust, played a leading role in the protests. On December 15, the federal government cancelled the foreign funding licence of the Trust.

Newspapers quoted unnamed officials claiming that intelligence agencies have described seven civil society groups, including the Trust, as “working against public interest” and painting the Modi government as anti-Dalit abroad.

Some of these groups are seeking redress in courts, which have largely been fair. But legal battles exact a cost: With bank accounts frozen for months during investigations, bills for rent, electricity and lawyers mount. People's Watch, a human rights group, was unable to pay salaries for 23 months. Many Greenpeace India employees took pay cuts in 2014. As court duels drag on, campaigns lag, research comes to a standstill and years of community mobilisation dissipate.

Yet, neither Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party nor the Congress has had any qualms about accepting campaign funding from foreign businesses. In May 2014, a New Delhi court held both the BJP and the Congress guilty of receiving donations from a London-listed company in violation of the foreign funding law.

Modi's government found a way of legally transforming its donors from foreign companies to Indian ones. It amended the law to change the definition of a foreign business, retroactively making a wider range of companies permissible campaign donors. While the civil society groups working with the poorest Indians are being choked, India's political parties found many more avenues to receive more money.

Civil society groups do try hard to raise funds within the country, but philanthropists remain tight-fisted when it comes to issues like land or labour rights, health care access, quality of education, or resource exploitation by corporations.

“Our rich guys will feed poor kids but won't question governments,” a fund-raising manager in New Delhi explained. By yanking foreign funding licences, the Indian government is doing just what it accuses civil society organisations of: working against public interest.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 7,2020

New Delhi, Jun 7: The Government of India (GoI) must strengthen the laws to protect animals, said People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India CEO Dr Manilal Valliyate on Sunday, following an elephant's death in Kerala and cow injured due to ingestion of explosives in Himachal Pradesh.

"Such incidents are not just restricted to certain regions but are happening all across the country. PETA receives more than 100 similar cases every day. People send in their complaints to us, not just for cows and elephants but for so many other animals as well," he said.

The PETA chief urged the GoI to strengthen the laws established to protect animals.

"As per the current laws set out against animal cruelty, the perpetrator would only be charged Rs 50,000 as a fine. That is equivalent to no punishment at all," added PETA India CEO.

He expressed his anguish against municipal agencies as well, saying that they are not doing "serious" work. He also highlighted how cows are left on the roads to wander, after milking them, to feed on garbage, in several parts of the country.

"These injustices against animals through explosives has been going on for quite a while. But for the first time, it has received such public attention," he said.

After a pregnant elephant was fed cracker-filled pineapple and her eventual death on May 27 in Kerala's Palakkad district, a pregnant cow sustained fatal injuries on May 25 due to accidental ingestion of explosives in Dadh village of Bilaspur district of Himachal Pradesh.

One person has been arrested in the Dadh village for allegedly hurting the cow.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
June 22,2020

New delhi, Jun 22: As consumer sentiment runs high amid growing chorus for boycotting Chinese goods in the country, the fluid market situation offers new opportunities for various smartphone makers, especially the non-Chinese ones like Samsung, Apple, Nokia, Asus and others, to realign their strategies and regain the lost market share in the face of fierce Chinese competition.

The challenge here would be not to look "opportunistic" and leverage the current explosive situation on just riding on the anti-Chinese sentiment but to offer real challenges in the form of top-end devices with solid internals at affordable price points, feel industry experts.

"The current market conditions in India are fluid and open up new opportunities for smartphone original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to focus and leverage," Prabhu Ram, Head-Industry Intelligence Group, CyberMedia Research (CMR), told IANS.

In the first quarter (January-March) this year, Samsung's shipments were driven by its upgraded A and M series (A51, A20s, A30s, and M30s).

According to Counterpoint Research, Samsung managed to hold third position in Q1 2020 due to launches across several price tiers, especially in the affordable premium segment (S10 Lite, Note 10 Lite).

The South Korean smartphone maker last week announced a Rs 4,000 price drop on its popular Galaxy Note10 Lite smartphone that will now cost Rs 37,999 (6GB variant).

Earlier this month, Samsung launched two new smartphones, Galaxy M11 and Galaxy M01, with powerful batteries under Rs 15,000 in India.

Galaxy M11 comes in two variants. The 3GB+32GB will be priced at Rs 10,999 while the higher 4GB+64GB variant will be available for Rs 12,999.

Samsung has also launched an affordable Galaxy A21s smartphone with quad-camera system and 5,000mAh battery at a starting price of Rs 16,499.

Also read: Boycott China? OnePlus 8 Pro sold out within minutes of going on sale

On the other hand, Apple grew a strong 78 per cent YoY driven by strong shipments of iPhone 11 and multiple discounts on platforms like Flipkart and Amazon in Q1, according to Counterpoint.

Apple has also brought its cheapest yet powerful new iPhone SE that costs Rs 38,900 (64GB) in India with a special offer from HDFC Bank. The new iPhone SE is powered by the Apple-designed A13 Bionic, the fastest chip in a smartphone and features the best single-camera system ever in an iPhone.

According to Tarun Pathak, Associate Director, Counterpoint Research, consumer sentiments are running high and a section of users will look for alternatives, benefitting global and Indian brands.

"However, we do not think non-Chinese brands will run aggressive campaigns based on the situation as it might look like being opportunistic," Pathak told media.

It may actually let brands of Chinese origin try to run aggressive campaigns on their presence and scale.

"Some of these Chinese brands have been active in scaling up local value addition, creating jobs and investing in research and development," Pathak noted.

On Saturday, market leader Xiaomi said that it is "more Indian" than any other smartphone brand.

The company's India head Manu Kumar Jain said that the company's mobile phone R&D centre and product team is in India, it employs 50,000 people in the country, the entire leadership team is Indian and that the company pays its taxes in India.

Earlier, Realme India CEO Madhav Sheth who is also very active on social media said that Realme is an Indian startup.

In his latest episode of Ask Madhav' series on YouTube, Sheth said: "I can proudly say Realme is an Indian startup, which is now a global MNC (multinational corporation)".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 16,2020

Claiming that e-commerce giants like Amazon import as much as 80 per cent of the items sold on their platforms, small manufacturers' body has said that their business models do not benefit local industry and are creating jobs of delivery boys only.

"Neither manufacturers nor traders are getting any benefit from the business models of Amazon and Flipkart because they largely import their products from China and Korea and sell here. Nearly 80 per cent of their products are imported," said Anil Bhardwaj, Secretary General, Federation of Indian Micro and Small & Medium Enterprises (FISME).

Bhardwaj said that the global e-commerce players generally source and sell products through their own preferred suppliers and as a result a large number of local manufacturers and traders get crowded out.

He listed out deep discounting and buying products from preferred companies as unfair practices.

"Even if they buy products from local suppliers the commission charged is very high," Bhardwaj said adding that the issues related to unfair practices have been raised with Commerce Ministry on multiple occasions.

FISME maintains that the technology-driven retail is way forward and one cannot be oblivious of the benefits it brings to consumers but at the same time the local industry can also not be ignored given its role in job creation.

"If both traders and local manufacturers are crowded out then how would the local industry survive and employment be generated?" asked Bhardwaj.

As Amazon Founder and CEO Jeff Bezos is currently on his three-day visit to India, the local traders are up in arms against the "unfair" trade practices of the tech giant. Delhi-based Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has launched a countrywide protest against the company and has organised protests across 300 cities.

In a setback to Amazon and Walmart-backed Flipkart, the fair market watchdog Competition Commission of India (CCI) has ordered probe into the business operations of both the companies on multiple counts including deep-discounts and exclusive tie-up with preferred sellers.

"For the first time some concrete step has been taken against Amazon and Flipkart who are continuously violating the FDI policy in indulging in a vicious racket of controlling and monopolising not only the e-commerce but even the retail trade as well," CAIT National Secretary General Praveen Khandelwal said after the CCI order.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.