EK DUM BASIC
TH-Delhi_18_May_2022.pdf
💢💢The Hindu Editorial with Vocab - 18th MAY
Symbolism and beyond: On PM Modi’s visit to Lumbini
India’s current regime has a penchant for symbolism and optics, a tendency that becomes more pronounced when the symbolism is religious. So it was not a surprise that Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a short visit to Lumbini in Nepal on Buddha Jayanti. Lumbini, in Buddhist tradition, is the birthplace of Gautama Buddha and Mr. Modi along with his Nepali counterpart laid the foundation stone for the India International Centre for Buddhist Culture and Heritage in the Lumbini Monastic Zone. The Centre will play a role in challenging the preponderance of the Chinese sponsorship and patronage of the Buddhist festivals and institutions in the area. It could also be a harbinger of a focused development of the area into a tourist and cultural hub for pilgrims and other visitors. To that end, the PM’s visit would have been welcomed by his Nepali counterpart. With the PM also unequivocally asserting that Lumbini was the birthplace of Gautama Buddha, who was born as Siddhartha, this should put to rest a needless irritant in the India-Nepal relations, with some hyper-nationalist Nepalis claiming that the Indian government had a different belief on the Buddha’s origins. The visit also coincided with the signing of a few MoUs, the most prominent being the development and implementation of the Arun-4 hydropower project. The PM’s visit followed his counterpart Sher Bahadur Deuba’s trip to India in April, which thawed relations after a series of controversial steps (during the tenure of Mr. Deuba’s predecessor, K.P. Oli) on the Kalapani dispute.
Mr. Modi’s speech in Lumbini sought to highlight the strong cultural ties between the two countries, which already share a special relationship, cemented by the Treaty of Peace and Friendship signed in 1950. There are several irritants that have developed, straining this relationship, and for now there seems to be a concerted attempt by both regimes to return to bonhomie, with the Indian government seeking to utilise “religious diplomacy” as a means to emphasise the special relationship. But there have been significant changes in Nepal’s political-economy, in particular a substantial reduction in the Nepali youths’ dependence on the Indian economy as compared to the past. Beyond a soft power emphasis on cultural ties, India-Nepal relations need to graduate to a more meaningful partnership on economic and geopolitical issues, with the Indian government continuing to retain a substantial role in partnering the Nepali regime in development projects. The challenge is to utilise the return of bonhomie in ties to refocus on work related to infrastructure development in Nepal, which includes hydropower projects, transportation and connectivity, and which could benefit the citizens of the adjoining States in India as well. Symbolism, after all, is useful only to a certain extent.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Penchant(N): a strong or habitual liking for something or tendency to do something.
2. Patronage(N): the support given by a patron. संरक्षण, सहायता
3. Harbinger (N): Sign, Indicator , signal;
4. Prominent(adj): important; famous.
5. Thaw (v): unpleasant relationship with someone
6. Bonhomie(N): cheerful friendliness; geniality. खुशमिजाजी
Symbolism and beyond: On PM Modi’s visit to Lumbini
India’s current regime has a penchant for symbolism and optics, a tendency that becomes more pronounced when the symbolism is religious. So it was not a surprise that Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a short visit to Lumbini in Nepal on Buddha Jayanti. Lumbini, in Buddhist tradition, is the birthplace of Gautama Buddha and Mr. Modi along with his Nepali counterpart laid the foundation stone for the India International Centre for Buddhist Culture and Heritage in the Lumbini Monastic Zone. The Centre will play a role in challenging the preponderance of the Chinese sponsorship and patronage of the Buddhist festivals and institutions in the area. It could also be a harbinger of a focused development of the area into a tourist and cultural hub for pilgrims and other visitors. To that end, the PM’s visit would have been welcomed by his Nepali counterpart. With the PM also unequivocally asserting that Lumbini was the birthplace of Gautama Buddha, who was born as Siddhartha, this should put to rest a needless irritant in the India-Nepal relations, with some hyper-nationalist Nepalis claiming that the Indian government had a different belief on the Buddha’s origins. The visit also coincided with the signing of a few MoUs, the most prominent being the development and implementation of the Arun-4 hydropower project. The PM’s visit followed his counterpart Sher Bahadur Deuba’s trip to India in April, which thawed relations after a series of controversial steps (during the tenure of Mr. Deuba’s predecessor, K.P. Oli) on the Kalapani dispute.
Mr. Modi’s speech in Lumbini sought to highlight the strong cultural ties between the two countries, which already share a special relationship, cemented by the Treaty of Peace and Friendship signed in 1950. There are several irritants that have developed, straining this relationship, and for now there seems to be a concerted attempt by both regimes to return to bonhomie, with the Indian government seeking to utilise “religious diplomacy” as a means to emphasise the special relationship. But there have been significant changes in Nepal’s political-economy, in particular a substantial reduction in the Nepali youths’ dependence on the Indian economy as compared to the past. Beyond a soft power emphasis on cultural ties, India-Nepal relations need to graduate to a more meaningful partnership on economic and geopolitical issues, with the Indian government continuing to retain a substantial role in partnering the Nepali regime in development projects. The challenge is to utilise the return of bonhomie in ties to refocus on work related to infrastructure development in Nepal, which includes hydropower projects, transportation and connectivity, and which could benefit the citizens of the adjoining States in India as well. Symbolism, after all, is useful only to a certain extent.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Penchant(N): a strong or habitual liking for something or tendency to do something.
2. Patronage(N): the support given by a patron. संरक्षण, सहायता
3. Harbinger (N): Sign, Indicator , signal;
4. Prominent(adj): important; famous.
5. Thaw (v): unpleasant relationship with someone
6. Bonhomie(N): cheerful friendliness; geniality. खुशमिजाजी
💢💢The Hindu Editorial with Vocab - 20th MAY
Law and public opinion: On Perarivalan release
The Supreme Court has invoked its extraordinary power to order the release of A.G. Perarivalan, one of the seven convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, for whose freedom his mother, many political parties and vast sections of public opinion have been campaigning for years. The suicide bombing that took the life of Rajiv Gandhi, along with that of 15 others, including nine police personnel, on “Tamil soil” caused a great deal of revulsion in the State, but this sentiment abated with the passage of time. Perarivalan drew much public sympathy, largely due to the fact that he was only 19 when he got embroiled in the assassination plot and later revelations that a portion of his confessional statement was improved by a police officer to link his purchase of a battery to the one used in the belt bomb that was used in the suicide bombing. But essentially, the verdict of the three-member Bench is an indictment of the disregard for federal norms in the deliberate inaction that Raj Bhavan displayed when presented with a Cabinet advice to release them in 2018. Going by the Union government’s arguments, one can discern that it was the Centre’s guiding hand that was responsible for the delay. The then Governor had referred the Cabinet advice to the President for a decision. The Centre, too, argued, that cases involving murder under the IPC came under the President’s exclusive jurisdiction in matters of remission of life sentences. The Court has put an end to all doubts by holding that the Governor is bound by the State Cabinet’s advice when acting under Article 161 of the Constitution, that his reference to the President was “inimical to the scheme of the Constitution” and that remission remains firmly under the State’s jurisdiction in this case.
Even when a Constitution Bench, while resolving legal questions over the statutory power of remission under the Cr.P.C., held that the release of these convicts would require the Centre’s concurrence, it had made it clear that the constitutional powers of the President (Article 72) and the Governor (Article 161) “remain untouched”. In the light of this, and the position that remission powers are exercised solely on Cabinet advice, there was no infirmity in the State’s recommendation to the Governor in 2018 for their release. While the Bench has done well to put an end to doubts about the Governor’s remission power and the manner of its exercise, a sticking point remains. Nothing has been said on what should be done when the absence of any time-frame for the President or the Governor is cynically exploited to indefinitely delay executive decisions. It is impractical for every matter to be escalated to the point that the Supreme Court needs to invoke its extraordinary powers under Article 142. However, the judgment should not be seen as any endorsement of the claims of innocence of the convicts in the dastardly conspiracy. And whether governments should recommend remission on the basis of public opinion remains a question to ponder.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Convict(v): declare (someone) to be guilty of a criminal offence by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law.
2. Personnel(N): staff, employees, workers;
3. Revulsion(N): a sense of disgust and loathing.
4. Abate(v): (of something unpleasant or severe) become less intense or widespread.
5. Embroil(v): involve (someone) deeply in an argument, conflict, or difficult situation. उलझाना, व्याकुल करना
6. Revelation(N): a surprising and previously unknown fact that has been disclosed to others.
7. Indictment(N): a formal charge or accusation of a serious crime.
8. Revulsion(N): a sense of disgust and loathing.
9. Deliberate(adj): careful and unhurried.
10. Inimical(adj): tending to obstruct or harm.
11. Dastardly(adjective): wicked and cruel.
12. Ponder(v): think about (something) carefully, especially before making a decision or reaching a conclusion.
Law and public opinion: On Perarivalan release
The Supreme Court has invoked its extraordinary power to order the release of A.G. Perarivalan, one of the seven convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, for whose freedom his mother, many political parties and vast sections of public opinion have been campaigning for years. The suicide bombing that took the life of Rajiv Gandhi, along with that of 15 others, including nine police personnel, on “Tamil soil” caused a great deal of revulsion in the State, but this sentiment abated with the passage of time. Perarivalan drew much public sympathy, largely due to the fact that he was only 19 when he got embroiled in the assassination plot and later revelations that a portion of his confessional statement was improved by a police officer to link his purchase of a battery to the one used in the belt bomb that was used in the suicide bombing. But essentially, the verdict of the three-member Bench is an indictment of the disregard for federal norms in the deliberate inaction that Raj Bhavan displayed when presented with a Cabinet advice to release them in 2018. Going by the Union government’s arguments, one can discern that it was the Centre’s guiding hand that was responsible for the delay. The then Governor had referred the Cabinet advice to the President for a decision. The Centre, too, argued, that cases involving murder under the IPC came under the President’s exclusive jurisdiction in matters of remission of life sentences. The Court has put an end to all doubts by holding that the Governor is bound by the State Cabinet’s advice when acting under Article 161 of the Constitution, that his reference to the President was “inimical to the scheme of the Constitution” and that remission remains firmly under the State’s jurisdiction in this case.
Even when a Constitution Bench, while resolving legal questions over the statutory power of remission under the Cr.P.C., held that the release of these convicts would require the Centre’s concurrence, it had made it clear that the constitutional powers of the President (Article 72) and the Governor (Article 161) “remain untouched”. In the light of this, and the position that remission powers are exercised solely on Cabinet advice, there was no infirmity in the State’s recommendation to the Governor in 2018 for their release. While the Bench has done well to put an end to doubts about the Governor’s remission power and the manner of its exercise, a sticking point remains. Nothing has been said on what should be done when the absence of any time-frame for the President or the Governor is cynically exploited to indefinitely delay executive decisions. It is impractical for every matter to be escalated to the point that the Supreme Court needs to invoke its extraordinary powers under Article 142. However, the judgment should not be seen as any endorsement of the claims of innocence of the convicts in the dastardly conspiracy. And whether governments should recommend remission on the basis of public opinion remains a question to ponder.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Convict(v): declare (someone) to be guilty of a criminal offence by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law.
2. Personnel(N): staff, employees, workers;
3. Revulsion(N): a sense of disgust and loathing.
4. Abate(v): (of something unpleasant or severe) become less intense or widespread.
5. Embroil(v): involve (someone) deeply in an argument, conflict, or difficult situation. उलझाना, व्याकुल करना
6. Revelation(N): a surprising and previously unknown fact that has been disclosed to others.
7. Indictment(N): a formal charge or accusation of a serious crime.
8. Revulsion(N): a sense of disgust and loathing.
9. Deliberate(adj): careful and unhurried.
10. Inimical(adj): tending to obstruct or harm.
11. Dastardly(adjective): wicked and cruel.
12. Ponder(v): think about (something) carefully, especially before making a decision or reaching a conclusion.
👍1
EK DUM BASIC
5_6073181943791355695.pdf
💢💢The Hindu Editorial with Vocab - 22nd MAY
Act early, decisively: On the bid to change nature of places of worship
It is a matter of great concern that laws are being used to rake up religious controversies to give a fig-leaf of legitimacy to a communal onslaught on the country’s secular character. Obviously emboldened by the Supreme Court verdict handing over a disputed site in Ayodhya to Hindu claimants, determined and malicious efforts are being made by communal elements to capture sites in Varanasi and Mathura where the Gyanvapi mosque and Shahi Idgah Masjid are located. The idea that key places of worship among Muslims have been built after demolishing Hindu temples is beginning to take hold among sections of Indian society, with the active encouragement of politically affiliated religious groups. It was to prevent such attempts to change the character of places of worship in the name of correcting perceived historical wrongs that Parliament enacted the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. It sought to freeze the status of places of worship as on August 15, 1947, so that existing suits and proceedings abate and new claims are not entertained. Yet, in flagrant violation of the law, courts are repeatedly allowing proceedings to be initiated. In Gyanvapi, not only has a civil judge entertained a suit but has also ordered a commission to videograph the mosque to ascertain its religious character. The Supreme Court has not been strong enough. Instead of putting an immediate halt to such proceedings aimed at creating a groundswell of opinion in favour of converting such sites into temples, it has only ordered some elementary measures to protect Muslim worshippers and their place of worship.
Anyone familiar with the history of the Ayodhya dispute, which led to the Babri Masjid’s demolition, riots and bombings, will understand that all such attempts to change the character of places of worship have a motive of using religion for political ends and marginalising minorities. Yet, even the Supreme Court feels some inexplicable need to let procedural aspects of civil law to be gone through in such litigation. It has transferred the Gyanvapi suit to the District Judge and asked for priority to be given to the petition to reject the plaint — which will involve the question whether the suit is barred by the Places of Worship Act. As long as even one application is pending somewhere, revanchist groups will continue the relentless onslaught on minority places of worship. In Mathura, the District Court has overturned a lower court’s order and ruled that the Act will not bar a suit aimed at removing a Masjid in the name of the site being the birthplace of Lord Krishna. The political atmosphere is conducive for such efforts, whose proponents will expect state backing. It is up to the courts to act early and act decisively to uphold the spirit of the Places of Worship Act and preserve communal peace.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
------------------------------------------
1. Fig leaf(N): a thing intended to conceal a difficulty or embarrassment.
2. Onslaught(N): a fierce or destructive attack. हमला
3. Perceive(V): Recognize, discern;
4. Flagrant ( निन्दनीय): conspicuously offensive
5. Groundswell(N): a rapid spontaneous growth
6. Demolition(N): destruction; defeat; विध्वंस
7. Litigation(N) : the process of taking legal action.मुक़दमेबाज़ी
8. Decisively(adverb): निर्णायक रूप से; n a way that shows the ability to make decisions quickly and effectively.
Act early, decisively: On the bid to change nature of places of worship
It is a matter of great concern that laws are being used to rake up religious controversies to give a fig-leaf of legitimacy to a communal onslaught on the country’s secular character. Obviously emboldened by the Supreme Court verdict handing over a disputed site in Ayodhya to Hindu claimants, determined and malicious efforts are being made by communal elements to capture sites in Varanasi and Mathura where the Gyanvapi mosque and Shahi Idgah Masjid are located. The idea that key places of worship among Muslims have been built after demolishing Hindu temples is beginning to take hold among sections of Indian society, with the active encouragement of politically affiliated religious groups. It was to prevent such attempts to change the character of places of worship in the name of correcting perceived historical wrongs that Parliament enacted the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. It sought to freeze the status of places of worship as on August 15, 1947, so that existing suits and proceedings abate and new claims are not entertained. Yet, in flagrant violation of the law, courts are repeatedly allowing proceedings to be initiated. In Gyanvapi, not only has a civil judge entertained a suit but has also ordered a commission to videograph the mosque to ascertain its religious character. The Supreme Court has not been strong enough. Instead of putting an immediate halt to such proceedings aimed at creating a groundswell of opinion in favour of converting such sites into temples, it has only ordered some elementary measures to protect Muslim worshippers and their place of worship.
Anyone familiar with the history of the Ayodhya dispute, which led to the Babri Masjid’s demolition, riots and bombings, will understand that all such attempts to change the character of places of worship have a motive of using religion for political ends and marginalising minorities. Yet, even the Supreme Court feels some inexplicable need to let procedural aspects of civil law to be gone through in such litigation. It has transferred the Gyanvapi suit to the District Judge and asked for priority to be given to the petition to reject the plaint — which will involve the question whether the suit is barred by the Places of Worship Act. As long as even one application is pending somewhere, revanchist groups will continue the relentless onslaught on minority places of worship. In Mathura, the District Court has overturned a lower court’s order and ruled that the Act will not bar a suit aimed at removing a Masjid in the name of the site being the birthplace of Lord Krishna. The political atmosphere is conducive for such efforts, whose proponents will expect state backing. It is up to the courts to act early and act decisively to uphold the spirit of the Places of Worship Act and preserve communal peace.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
------------------------------------------
1. Fig leaf(N): a thing intended to conceal a difficulty or embarrassment.
2. Onslaught(N): a fierce or destructive attack. हमला
3. Perceive(V): Recognize, discern;
4. Flagrant ( निन्दनीय): conspicuously offensive
5. Groundswell(N): a rapid spontaneous growth
6. Demolition(N): destruction; defeat; विध्वंस
7. Litigation(N) : the process of taking legal action.मुक़दमेबाज़ी
8. Decisively(adverb): निर्णायक रूप से; n a way that shows the ability to make decisions quickly and effectively.