Category: Editorial

Title: ​ ​Canary in the canopy: on the India State of Forest Report 2023

Through history, forests for humans have been sites of shelter, food, livelihoods, protection, and strength of spirit. According to the new India State of Forest Report 2023, 25% of India’s land is covered by forests or trees, on its face a healthy figure and a step closer to the National Forest Policy’s prescriptions. But big numbers always hide problems. Post-Independence, India’s forest governance has been typified by attempts to break free from European colonialists’ insular view of forests as sources of timber, codified in laws the country inherited. Two significant achievements in this regard were the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 and the Forest (Rights) Act 2006. The counteracting forces of industrial development and the pressures of climate change on the state have however troubled the implementation of both Acts and the government has, sadly, chosen the easy way out.

Courts and conservationists have demanded that the state follow the dictionary definition of forests whereas the administration has been muddying it to exclude “community” forests, among others, while including plantations and orchards. Even if the administration’s impetus is murky, it is allowing India to claim it is growing its carbon sink towards its climate commitments while allowing developmental activities to continue unimpeded. Thus, the 25% figure hides forest cover loss in the biodiverse Western Ghats, the Nilgiris and the northeast, the shrinking of mangroves in the Kutch and the Andamans, and of ‘moderately dense’ forests and the ongoing endangerment of open natural ecosystems. The report also lacks details about whether its estimates of the carbon sequestration potential of degraded land account for the specific uses to which they are currently being subjected. Forest loss in biodiverse areas cannot be adjusted with new plantations elsewhere, the consequences of which are exacerbated by the decision to include even commercial plantations, which have lower sequestration and ecological value, and the continued use of the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act. Indeed, the growing gap between theoretical and actual forests also extends to finances. In several northern districts, the extent of forest cover that suffered fire losses has increased by an order of magnitude in two years. Ground reports by The Hindu have documented a paucity of human resources, skill, and equipment to control fires. Economic growth is essential and trees will be lost, but this is precisely why the friction that laws impose on the growth impulse is essential too. Yet, the government has been weakening environmental safeguards — more recently, the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act 2023 further contracted the 1980 Act’s purview — and distorting its official inventory of forests. It is hard to imagine anyone winning in the end.

Meaning of the word:

Title: ​ Sound and fury: On the parliamentary debate on the Constitution

The parliamentary debate on the Constitution turned out to be yet another occasion of intense diatribe between the ruling alliance and the Opposition. While both sides agreed on the supremacy of the Constitution, now in its 75th year, each accused the other of undermining it. The debate could have been an opportunity to explore a new common ground for a sharply polarised polity, but, unfortunately, that is not how it played out. Speakers from parties in power, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Opposition speakers led by the Leader of Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, railed against their political opponents and used the Constitution as a facade for their partisan politics. Mr. Gandhi views the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Mr. Modi as disloyal to the Constitution, and sought to connect it all to the Hindutva ideology. Mr. Modi singled out Mr. Gandhi’s family, starting from his great-grandfather and the first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, for a no-holds-barred attack — that it has undermined the Constitution through acts of omission and commission. Both sides used facts selectively and the statements of past actors to exaggerate the point that their opponents did more harm to the Constitution than they themselves. Such an approach may work as a propaganda strategy but can do little in terms of constructive engagement on the question.

The Constitution, understood as a living document, provides the foundation and the framework for a fairer social, political and economic order for the country. Constitutionalism is an evolving project, and any discussion on it must account for this dynamism. History is a good teacher, but litigating the past endlessly is not a helpful learning technique. There have been many dark moments in the 75-year history of the Constitution, including the imposition of Emergency, but the brighter and bigger picture is that it still offers the strongest possible ethos for a secular, pluralist and progressive nation. The BJP and the Congress calling each other names is akin to the pot calling the kettle black. Both sides say they are for strengthening the unity of the country, but accuse each other of dividing the country. What emerges from the debate is that there is a lot of blame to go around; what were missing were introspection and self-reflection. Mr. Modi is right in saying that the Constitution is a unifier of the nation, and cited his government’s push for a uniform civil code as an example of the commitment to advancing this unity. Uneven demographic and economic trends will require close and unified attention by the political class in the decades ahead to reimagine the constitutional scheme. Sadly, little time was spent on these questions.

Meaning of the word:

Title: ​ ​Electronic distraction: On politics and the ‘EVM issue’

After consecutive electoral losses, in the Haryana and Maharashtra Assembly elections, the Congress has raised the tempo with regard to its concerns about electronic voting machines (EVM). While there are numerous issues related to the integrity of elections that the Election Commission of India (ECI) needs to come clean on, the risk of electronic tampering with EVMs is not among them. The Congress is barking up the wrong tree — that too selectively and only when it loses. Some of its party leaders have publicly expressed the view that there is no evidence that suggests the risk of manipulation, remotely or through preprogramming. At least two Opposition leaders, NC leader and J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, and Trinamool Congress leader Abhishek Banerjee, have distanced themselves from the allegations. To assume that EVMs are so elaborately and precisely manipulated that the BJP wins in some States and loses in some others in a detailed conspiracy, defies logic. After all, the BJP ended up short of a majority in the 2024 general election. Moreover, all these results, particularly those of Haryana, Maharashtra and Jharkhand are well explained by the social and political dynamics at play.

By repeatedly raising the spectre of EVM manipulation, the real and serious questions of election integrity are being overlooked. Among them, the possibility of old style, manual capture of EVMs in booths dominated by one party and where polling agents of opponents are absent. This is pertinent against the backdrop of questions about a massive turnout recorded in many places in the closing hours of polling. This trend has not yet been satisfactorily explained by the ECI. Large-scale additions and deletions of voter names are now a pattern, and the ECI seems to be brazening it out. In Delhi, where elections are now due, allegations of the selective removal of Muslim voters have surfaced. In the Uttar Pradesh by-elections, partisan police actions that restrained voters expected to vote against the BJP have been controversial. The scheduling of elections is another serious question that the ECI has been less than transparent about. For a country that is preparing to conduct all elections in one go, it scheduled the three recent Assembly elections in two batches, and the BJP is the one party that gained the benefits. As is evident, some of these issues are local, some related to the vast capacity gap between the BJP and the Opposition while some others are squarely in the court of the ECI. The Opposition needs to focus on the real questions of election integrity, and an EVM scare should not act as a distraction.

Meaning of the word:

Title: ​ ​Permissive no more: on places of worship and the Supreme Court’s interim order

The Supreme Court’s interim order halting the registration of fresh suits across the country regarding disputes of places of worship is a welcome departure from the permissive approach of the judiciary in recent times towards such motivated litigation. A Division Bench, headed by the Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, has done well to stop the flow of litigation and interim orders, including those that allow ‘surveys’ of such sites and structures, while it deals with the challenges to the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The order signifies a deep understanding that this is not about a set of civil disputes but the future of the country’s secular character. It is amply clear to right-thinking citizens that the law, which freezes the religious character of all places of worship in the country as they were on the day of Independence, would want this legislation to remain on the statute book as a bulwark against elements that want to perpetuate the religious divide caused by such disputes. It is unfortunate, and even condemnable, that courts of law have failed to block these suits at a nascent stage by invoking the bar under this law. Instead, they have been allowing applications for surveys, either disregarding the Act and the Court’s endorsement of its necessity in past judgments or ruling that the statutory bar does not apply to them.

In the name of reclaiming religious sites lost to invaders, several groups and purported devotees have been moving civil courts and obtaining questionable orders for surveying mosques for evidence that they may have been built on the ruins of destroyed temples. The success of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement was largely due to the political patronage enjoyed by its spearheads, and a final verdict from the Court, which handed over the disputed land to the Hindu litigants while condemning the demolition of the Babri Masjid mosque in December 1992. That the vandals involved in the demolition were acquitted, without any further appeal, added to the triumphalism that marks this movement for altering the status of mosques. This has given rise to further claims in Varanasi, Mathura, and, more recently, Sambhal, among other places that house mosques dating back to the 16th century. A notable feature of this permissive judicial attitude is the complete absence of any understanding of the history of the temple movement that was largely political in character. That judges could entertain obviously baleful and ill-motivated cases is a great cause of concern for those rightfully invested in the secular nature of the country. The criminal imprint on the nation’s fabric left by political movements in a religious garb should not be forgotten.

Meaning of the word:

Title: ​ ​Welcome spotlight: On the Supreme Court directive to Manipur government

Hearing a case by petitioners aggrieved with the unremitting hostilities in Manipur, the Supreme Court of India has directed the Manipur government to disclose details of destroyed and encroached properties following the ethnic violence a year and a half ago. The Court had also, a few months ago, extended the working tenure of the Justice Gita Mittal-led Committee supervising the investigations related to the violence and also humanitarian assistance and relief in the State. Ideally, these steps should not have been under the aegis of the Court and, instead, under the remit of the executive governments — in this case, the State and the Union Home Ministry. But the violent imagery of sexual violence, the wanton destruction of property, including places of worship, and the continuing hostility between the State’s two ethnic groups had forced the Court’s hand into foraying into a supervisory role through the Justice Mittal Committee. It has also become an imperative for the higher judiciary, first, because of the remarkable reticence of the Union government in answering questions from civil society and the political Opposition related to the situation in the State, and second, due to the lack of accountability by the misfiring State government that has been ineffective in bridging the ethnic gap. Even political representatives from the same parties have been split on ethnic lines and there seems little convergence in the political demands being made by the opposite camps.

There is also the rise of non-state actors, armed with sophisticated weapons — many of which are looted from the State armouries — exercising their illegal writ on the political process. They have also been engaged in violent acts in places such as Jiribam, which did not see any ethnic conflagrations earlier. Manipur’s tragic descent into ethnic hostilities receives national attention only when the scale of the violence is horrifying and reaches unconscionable levels. Despite the government averring that it is taking steps to restore the rule of law and addressing the political differences, a return to the status quo ante before May 2023 seems far away. The Court’s renewed attention is, therefore, welcome, but shorn of meaningful steps to reverse the spiral of hostilities, this exercise would remain incomplete. The government’s attorneys have also sought to retain a veil of secrecy over the committee’s functioning and findings using the tired rhetoric of “national security”. The Court should not pay heed to this ploy which seems more a case of seeking to divert attention than helping to find meaningful solutions to the conflict. Across the world, conflict resolution has focused on mechanisms such as “truth and reconciliation” exercises which have privileged accountability and normative actions, something that remains absent in Manipur. The Committee’s findings may provide the necessary push in the right direction.

Meaning of the word:

Title: ​ A legend, made: On D. Gukesh, the world’s youngest chess champion

Eighteen-year-old D. Gukesh has made history by becoming the 18th world chess champion, which will make him the youngest to do so and emulating the doyen of Indian chess, Viswanathan Anand, the only other Indian to achieve the honour. Gukesh managed his feat after a blunder made by the reigning world champion, Ding Liren of China, on the 55th move, Rf2, in the 14th and final classical game of the match. The game was headed towards a draw, but with Gukesh pressing for any advantage in a rook-bishop-pawn endgame and having an extra pawn, it took just one misstep for Ding to lose his crown. Ding was in poor form prior to the match but the Chinese GM proved his mettle by winning the first game, setting up a strong contest. Gukesh won Game 4 to tie the match and after a series of draws, Gukesh played an enterprising Game 11 to take the lead; Ding fought back brilliantly to tie the match again with a strong win in Game 12. The strategies of both players were evident. Gukesh played strong openings and exhibited tenacity in trying to gain advantages in near equal positions as the games progressed. Ding’s plan seemed to be to secure a stalemate in the classical games and to drag the match into the shorter rapid and if need be, blitz formats, and to use his strength in terms of experience. Sticking to his strategy of pushing through equal positions, Gukesh had the last laugh.

The Chennai-born Grandmaster’s mental toughness and wisdom beyond his age have been his calling card. His steady rise was due to his dedication and his accelerated path to glory was helped by the work done by his seconds — Gukesh revealed their names only after the match — besides the mentoring by GM Anand’s WestBridge Anand Chess Academy. His versatile game, built on an innate ability to calculate moves deeply on the board, kept him in good stead against his more experienced opponent. The surge of young Indian talent to the top echelons of world chess in recent years — compatriot GMs Arjun Erigaisi and R. Praggnanandhaa are in the top 15 along with Gukesh — raised expectations of another Indian world champion in chess. The youngsters have pushed each other to do their best. Gukesh won a strong Candidates tournament to emerge as Ding’s challenger and his prowess was evident following his individual gold winning performances in the Chennai and Budapest Chess Olympiads, the latter being India’s first gold in the team event. His next frontier would be to reach the heights scaled by the world’s strongest chess player, Magnus Carlsen. Gukesh becoming the world champion would also motivate his Indian compatriots and will add a fillip to the growth of modern chess as a sport and vocation in the country of its birth.

Meaning of the word:

Title: ​Bench and bigotry: On controversial remarks by Allahabad High Court judge

Political affiliations are seldom considered a disqualification to hold judicial office, but there is no doubt that open bigotry should be one. The controversial remarks of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court, including an unacceptable slur against the Muslim community, at an event organised by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) cast a shadow on his impartiality as a judge, if not his suitability to remain in office. Justice Yadav observed ominously that “this is India and it will be run as per the wishes of its majority”. It was clear from the context of a Hindu-Muslim dichotomy that he was speaking about, that he was not referring to a governing majority in a democracy, but the sort of numerical superiority that would give the larger group the final word on how the country is run. The judge also sought to compare Hindu and Muslim children and comment on how Hindus learn kindness and tolerance, while Muslims purportedly do not because they witness the slaughter of animals. He is previously known to have observed that the cow is the only animal that inhales and exhales oxygen and made remarks against conversion. It is a welcome development that the Supreme Court of India has taken note of reports highlighting Justice Yadav’s remarks and asked for details from the High Court. It is too early to speculate whether there will be an in-house inquiry, or a response to calls for his removal, but it is quite certain that the judge’s conduct and functioning will come under justified scrutiny.

Even though the event was a discussion on the need for a Uniform Civil Code, it was not an ideal stage for a meaningful debate. The VHP is an aggressive proponent of a Hindu majoritarian view, responsible for spearheading a violent movement for demolishing the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya and installing a Ram temple in its place, and an organisation that has been banned in the past for fomenting riots, discord and much bloodshed. It was quite obvious that the forum would be more inclined to assail minorities than extol the virtues of a uniform law for civil matters. Judges of constitutional courts are not expected to grace the platform provided by such groups. It is regrettable that the judge forgot the ethical principles that bind the higher judiciary. In 1997, the Supreme Court had adopted a ‘Restatement of Values of Judicial Life’, a set of guidelines under which the behaviours and conduct of members of the higher judiciary must reaffirm the people’s faith in the institution’s impartiality and any act that erodes such a perception should be avoided. While lapses from such principles are not rare, Justice Yadav presents a rather glaring example.

Meaning of the word:

                                      Title: Places and worship: On the Supreme Court hearing

A special Bench of the Supreme Court of India, headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, will begin hearing on December 12 a batch of petitions that question the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, a law that freezes the status of places of worship in the country as on the day of its independence and bars suits that seek to alter such status. It is no exaggeration to say these petitions pose a virulent challenge to the survival of secularism. The outcome may well decide the trajectory of communal relations and the future of secular thought in the country. The 1991 Act does have some exemptions: it did not apply to what was then the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, which ended in favour of the Ram temple. Nor does it apply to monuments, sites and remains covered by the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. It will also not apply to any suit that has been finally settled or disposed of, any dispute that has been settled by the parties before the 1991 Act came into force, or to the conversion of any place that took place by acquiescence. The challenge has come in the backdrop of a renewed attempt through motivated litigation by some Hindu organisations and devotees to target mosques such as the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi, the Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura and the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, among others. Any order that strikes down or dilutes the 1991 law is likely to have a malign influence on these proceedings.

The petitions highlight the demolition of temples by invaders in the past and contend that many mosques have been built on their ruins. The Places of Worship Act, they claim, legalises such depredations, and also violates the right of Hindus and other communities to reclaim their places of worship through legal proceedings. It also violates the right to practise and propagate religion and manage and administer places of worship. Ironically, they also contend that the Act goes against the principle of secularism, which would surely stand to be undermined if their attempts to reclaim these sites succeed. Fortunately, there are some clearly established principles in favour of the Act. In its Ayodhya judgment, a five-member Bench observed that the law “imposes a non-derogable obligation towards enforcing our commitment to secularism”. It also called it a “legislative intervention that preserves non-retrogression as an essential feature of our secular values”. For the present, it does not seem likely that the Court will depart from the Constitution’s secular vision and Parliament’s mandate against misusing judicial fora to remedy historical wrongs.

Meaning of the word: