[Reader-list] reader-list Digest, Vol 68, Issue 62Freedom and right to express at what cost to society.?

[rajenradhika at vsnl.net]

  We the citizens of India gave ourselves the constitution of India which gave us rights  to property, rights to life, rights to express individually and we live in the nation state as a social group of citizens and the state when it declared itself as a secular, it means in letter and spirit that the state does not uphold any faith, faith is strictly in the individuals prerogative to live life as per his personal belief, practice the faith he believes in, but th conflict comes in to play when the individual wants to impose his faith in his right to express on the the other individuals in the society.

Right to property is upheld by the constitution in its articles but the governance by leaders elected by us, the citizens have systematically denied this right to property, right from Keshavanand Bharathi vs. Union of India case law judgement by amending the constitution and inserting such laws into schedules in the constitution which are beyond the perview of judicial system.

Right to have faith as strictly personal domain is again violated by the Shah bano case law judgement by amending the laws to suit vote banks, faith is used as a tool to gather votes.
  We see today and in the last sixty two years of governance all the political parties either for a faith or against a faith, either for a community or against a community, either for few business houses or against a few more business houses. Is this the true facet of democratic governance.?

   True democratic rule in letter and spirit is when the elected who take oaths of office to govern, without fear or favour in just governance to all the citizens. But our leaders violate the oath taken the very day by imposing their whims and fancies on selective governance to citizens. Irrespective of the political parties the issues of good governance alays take the last priority, the community which voted them to power gains its pound of flesh and discrimination in governance starts immediately.

   As to the four pillars of democratic governance, let us examine the role of each of these in good governance or lack of it. Political leadership or legislative pillar as explained above is partisan and never does it rule with just and fair rule of law enshrined in constitution. Only this can explain the coterie culture of leaders as seen in every political parties, Sonia with her one faith folowers as her inner circle, Advani with core idealogists as his advisers, less said it is better.

   Now our babus, with weak and corrupt leadrs to pamper, the babus for a nexus to keep these leaders happy and in the meanwhile feather their nests. Thus deprived citizens are frustrated lot, so naxal movement and other form of demand for fair rule of law is evident in the nation, but naxals when they take law in to their own hands towards reform of the system, they are outlawed, naturally. So are the religious fanatics as they take violence as a method of correction of the system.Hence rama sena and such other outfits are illegal as the method is illegal .

  The next is judiciary which in normal rule of laws is most respected of all the pillars of democracy. But when the retired chief justice of the highest court admits that there are 10 percent corrupt in judiciary, and we see the case of a judge not being impeached for regional considerations by "national" party, a chief justice fudging his date of birth to be in seat for a few more months, a chief justice shielding his sons in his official residence  to avail 600 crore loans in non-existent land assets, judges in PF scams encashing employees' provident funds, judge keeping the funds in his personal account being the receiver of the court, are all indications of decay in judicial process. The chief justice who can not act when his judicial officer goes to London to release 21 crore to uncle Q with begging the crown prosecutors' office, but instead gets the promotion, and scam money reaches the culprit with the knowledge of the law minister and the beneficiary pretends ignora
nce of the loot, what more certification is needed of the falling standards of judicial system other than untold delays and subversion of the system.? The lawyers playing with the process, bribing the witness, duress to witness is also not uncommon.

  The last of the pillars, the media, has its own fair share of corrupt men and women in journalism. The poll surveys, reportage of the events have ,ade the citizens realise that all the news are not news but only views of such blacksheep in journalism. As to rewards and awards, what service these blacksheep of media anchors served the society is big question mark as they seem to be more involved in newly evolved moral games of life styles  and reportage of sensation rather that relevance to the society with trp as only driving forces.

 Unless the society and citizens understand and inculcate what is right and correct way of life irrespective of faith, ( as all faiths are only way of life to live life ethically and morally correct.) and what is wrong in societal life, the democratic rule of laws and god governance will be a mirage.

Regards,

Rajendra Uppinangadi,
rajen882uppinangad at gmail.com.

PS: Author is not member to the list if the moderator/ administrator feels fit may invite the author to be its member of the list, any way freedom of expression for author is not a right of obsession to rule other thoughts but to exchange all thoughts and take the best for the life. 
----- Original Message -----
From: Rakesh Iyer <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 3:43 pm
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] reader-list Digest, Vol 68,Issue 62Freedom	and	right to express at what cost to society.?
To: bipin <aliens at dataone.in>
Cc: rajenradhika at vsnl.net, sarai-list <reader-list at sarai.net>

> Dear all
> 
> I can understand the point that freedom of expression is more 
> important than
> peace, for after all any peace without any freedom of expression is 
> only the
> lull before the storm waiting to happen. Plus of course, it hampers 
> one of
> the basic human rights of citizens.
> 
> However, the other question which is confusing my mind, as pointed 
> out in
> the article, is regarding nation-states providing rights to 
> citizens. I
> don't know much on this, so it would be good if we can discuss on 
> whetherit's nation-states which act as the agencies to provide 
> rights (and hence
> without them people can't ask for rights), or is it that rights are 
> inherentirrespective of whether nation-states exist or not.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rakesh
>