Faithful begin Hajj pilgrimage under strict Covid-19 measures

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.

Jaipur/New Delhi, Jul 12: The crisis in Rajasthan Congress has deepened with state Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot and his deputy Sachin Pilot at loggerheads.

While Gehlot is blaming BJP for trying to destabilise the state government by poaching MLAs, Pilot is camping in Delhi to speak to the party leadership regarding the political turmoil in the state.

According to sources, Pilot has sought an appointment with party's interim president Sonia Gandhi but time for the meeting has not yet been given by her. Although Pilot met another party leader to apprise him about the situation in the state and spelled out his grievance.

As of now, many MLAs, who are believed to be in the Pilot camp, are also in Delhi to meet the party leadership. According to sources, the deputy chief minister has the support of nearly 30 Congress MLAs along with many independent legislators.

It is important to note that the controversy broke out in Rajasthan after Special Operation Group (SOG) sent a notice to Sachin Pilot to record his statement in the case registered by SOG in the alleged poaching of Congress MLAs in the state. The clash between Gehlot and Pilot is also over the post of PCC Chief as Gehlot Camp wants that 'One Leader One Post' formula to be implemented in Rajasthan. Currently, Sachin Pilot is heading the PCC besides holding the Deputy CM post.

Sources close to Sachin Pilot have informed that the young leader is upset with the notice issued to him. He believes it is aimed to record his phone calls and keep him under surveillance. Many of Pilot's supporters feel indignation and told Pilot that they cannot work with Ashok Gehlot. Also, Pilot is unlikely to attend the meeting called by Gehlot today, according to sources.

While the top leadership of the party is keeping mum, sources say it is keeping a watch on the development. General Secretary KC Venugopal has taken up the matter of the rift with the party's top brass with them not happy about it.

Rajasthan AICC Incharge Avinash Pandey told media persons: "Everything is under control. Few MLAs had issues and after discussion, they have returned back to Jaipur and others are also in touch. BJP's attempt of destabilising the government will not be successful in Rajasthan and government is stable."

Gehlot also held a meeting with ministers last night in Jaipur.  According to Gehlot camp, the top leadership is apprised of the development of the poaching attempt in the state. Amid Political Crisis Rajasthan CM Ashok Gehlot called a meeting of Ministers and all Cong MLAs tonight at his residence.

The Rajasthan crisis has alerted the other senior leaders of the party who have opined that the Madhya Pradesh incident should not get repeated in Rajasthan.

Former Union Minister and Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibbal tweeted, "Worried for our party. Will we wake up only after the horses have bolted from our stables?"

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.