India needs to talk about mental illness

National Mental Health survey shows urban areas to be most affected

At least 13.7 per cent of India’s general population has various mental disorders; 10.6 per cent of them require immediate interventions.

While nearly 10 per cent of the population has common mental disorders, 1.9 per cent of the population suffers from severe mental disorders.

These are some of the findings of a National Mental Health Survey held recently and conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS).

That is not all. The prevalence of mental morbidity is found to be very high in urban centres, where there is a higher prevalence of schizophrenia, mood disorders and neurotic or stress-related disorders. This disturbing scenario could be due to fast-paced lifestyles, experiencing stress, complexities of living, a breakdown of support systems and challenges of economic instability.

In 2014, concerned over the growing problem of mental health in India, the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare had appointed NIMHANS to study mental health status in the country.

After a pilot feasibility study in Kolar district, Karnataka using a sample size of 3,190 individuals, the team which comprised senior professors from NIMHANS, G. Gururaj, Mathew Varghese, Vivek Benegal and Girish N., began the survey in Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Assam and Manipur.

The study — which covered all important aspects of mental illness including substance abuse, alcohol use disorder, tobacco use disorder, severe mental illness, depression, anxiety, phobia and post-traumatic stress disorder among others — had a sample size of 34,802 individuals. Primary data collection was done through computer-generated random selection by a team of researchers, and local teams of co-investigators and field workers in the 12 States.

While the overall current prevalence estimate of mental disorders was 10.6 per cent in the total surveyed population, significant variations in overall morbidity ranged from 5.8 per cent in Assam to 14.1 per cent in Manipur. Assam, Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat reported prevalence rates less than 10 per cent. In eight of the 12 States, the prevalence varied between 10.7 per cent and 14.1 per cent.

Treatment gaps and impact

A major concern in the findings, which were recently submitted to the Union Health Ministry, is that despite three out of four persons experiencing severe mental disorders, there are huge gaps in treatment.

Apart from epilepsy, the treatment gap for all mental health disorders is more than 60 per cent. In fact, the economic burden of mental disorders is so huge that affected families have to spend nearly Rs.1,000-Rs.1,500 a month mainly for treatment and to access care.

Due to the stigma associated with mental disorders, nearly 80 per cent of those with mental disorders had not received any treatment despite being ill for over 12 months, the study says. Poor implementation of schemes under the National Mental Health Programme is largely responsible for this.

Dr. Gururaj says that there is also a paucity of mental health specialists, pointing out that mental disorders are a low priority in the public health agenda. The health information system itself does not prioritise mental health.

Recommending that mental health financing needs to be streamlined, he says that there is a need to constitute a national commission on mental health comprising professionals from mental health, public health, social sciences and the judiciary to oversee, facilitate support and monitor and review mental health policies.

Prevalence of mental disorders in different States

Manipur: 14.1 per cent

Madhya Pradesh: 13.9 per cent

Punjab: 13.4 per cent

West Bengal: 13 per cent

Tamil Nadu: 11.8 per cent

Chhattisgarh: 11.7 per cent

Kerala: 11.4 per cent

Jharkhand: 11.1 per cent

Rajasthan : 10.7 per cent

Gujarat: 7.4 per cent

Uttar Pradesh: 6.1

Assam: 5.8 per cent

Key findings

Common mental disorders such as depression, anxiety and substance use are as high as 10 per cent in the total population

Almost 1 in 20 suffer from depression; it is found to be higher in females in the age-group 40-49 years

22.4 per cent of the population above 18 years suffers from substance use disorder

The highest was contributed by tobacco and alcohol use disorder

Nearly 1.9 per cent of the population is affected by severe mental disorders

These are detected more among males in urban areas

While prevalence of mental illness is higher among males (13.9 per cent) as compared to females (7.5 per cent), certain specific mental illnesses like mood disorders (depression, neurotic disorders, phobic anxiety disorders etc) are more in females

Neurosis and stress related illness is also seen to be more in women

Prevalence in teenagers aged between 13 and 17 years is 7.3 per cent

yasmeen.afshan@thehindu.co.in

Keywords: mental illness, mental disorders

Source: The Hindu, 23-10-2016

Making cities inclusive

The challenges of a rapidly urbanising world and of providing people with equal opportunities in cities were the central themes at the just-concluded UN Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, Habitat III, in Quito, Ecuador. As a once-in-a-generation event, the Habitat conference sets a guiding compass for member-countries for the next 20 years, and attracts wide governmental and civil society participation. Yet, the process has to be strengthened to evaluate how countries have fared since the two previous conferences on issues such as reducing urban inequality, improving access to housing and sanitation, mobility, and securing the rights of women, children, older adults and people with disability. Moreover, as services come to occupy a dominant place in the urban economy, the divide between highly paid professionals and low-wage workers, the majority, has become pronounced. All these trends are relevant to India, where 31 per cent of the population and 26 per cent of the workforce was urban according to Census 2011, with more people moving to cities and towns each year. Urban governance policies, although mainly in the domain of the States, must be aligned with national commitments on reduction of carbon emissions under the Paris Agreement, and to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 11.

India’s ambition to harness science and data for orderly urbanisation is articulated in a set of policy initiatives, chiefly the Smart Cities Mission and the Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation. There is little evidence so far that these could achieve the scale needed to address the contradictions of building 21st century cities for 20th century industrial technologies. Today, these conflicts are reflected in the lack of adequate parks and public spaces, suitable land for informal workers who offer services in a city, egalitarian and non-polluting mobility options and new approaches to low-cost housing. In the national report prepared for the Quito conference, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation identified subsidised redevelopment of slums (which represented 17 per cent of urban households in 2011) involving private agencies, and low-cost, disaster-resistant, prefabricated constructions as key to the ‘Housing for All’ policy. This important programme should be pursued with a vigorous annual review that ranks States on the basis of performance. The Centre should also take its own National Urban Transport Policy on developing cities around mobility networks seriously, and liberate cities from the tyranny of traffic. UN Habitat plans to review country-level progress on its New Urban Agenda in Kuala Lumpur in 2018. India’s performance on improving the quality of life in its cities will be watched.

Keywords: Habitat conference, UN Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, urbanisation

Source: The Hindu, 24-10-2016

The laws against harassment are there, if only all women knew about them

The Trump gropathon saga saw women coming out almost every day with horrific stories of the presidential candidate’s predatory behaviour. Closer home we had the Pachauri episode, in which the climate change czar allegedly harassed a young colleague at the workplace. The victim here had evidence in the form of emails to prove her allegations though an almighty fight was put up by the offender including insisting that his emails were hacked.

The good news is that the Indian law on this issue is surprisingly comprehensive and I think it is just that many women don’t know enough about the provisions designed to protect them. Every organised sector is meant to have an internal committee to decide on matters of sexual harassment at the workplace. Few including government departments take this seriously. The inquiry into a complaint from a woman is meant to be completed in 90 days, according to the Sexual Harassment at the Workplace Act, 2013. This is rarely done except in a few workplaces which take this issue seriously.

The harassment is not confined to the workplace and here again the law is on the side of women in no uncertain terms. The ridiculous and demeaning practice of eve-teasing, glorified by our films, assumes threatening proportions on the roads. In films, the hero will follow a girl, jostle her in public places and pop up in unexpected places to embarrass her, and finally she gives in to his dubious charms. You will be glad to know that singing lewd songs to women in public spaces constitutes sexual harassment with a three-month jail term. That ought to silence budding roadside songsters but how many women know of this law. Women I know as well as myself have faced countless incidents of harassment in buses and other forms of public transport. I once actually filed a case against a man who harassed me relentlessly in a train to Kerala while I was in college. Of course, such sweeping laws were not in place at that time. I found no support among the women in the compartment or the police on account of the fact that the harasser was the nephew of the then chief minister of the state. The attitude of the public also is that these are harmless little indiscretions which don’t amount to violence and hence why should women make such a fuss about their private spaces being violated?

Demanding sexual favours, a form of harassment that takes place mostly at the workplace, could get the offender up to three years in jail. Stalking, of course, can get him three to five years. This is a serious problem in India, where many men almost feel entitled to a woman’s compliance if he happens to fancy her. In one case, the stalker followed the victim all the way to another city where he killed her. The police tend not to take complaints about stalking very seriously and in several cases the victims who approached the police were met with indifference.

Capturing images of a woman without her consent is voyeurism and punishable under IPC Section 354, which can get the accused up to seven years in jail. Making sexually coloured remarks against a woman too is punishable with up to three years. The same goes for using sexually inappropriate language in the presence of a woman. This has been a problem in many workplaces and the woman who objects is seen as a prude or hypersensitive. Yet, in India most men do not even seem to realise that their language or “locker room” banter as Donald Trump would have it is offensive and demeaning to women.

But the real problem lies with the majority of women in India who work in the unorganised sector. If they are farm workers, they have no particular law to protect them at their workplace, apart from the general laws. Since they are daily wagers, there is little chance that they will report untoward behaviour from landlords. In the small units which employ less than eight people again, the harassment law does not apply, leaving women wide open to all manners of abuse. So, we have excellent anti-harassment laws if only all women knew about them and it applied evenly to every one of them.

Source: Hindustan Times, 22-10-2016

You Could Achieve Global Peace Through Mysticism

Talk: Sant Rajinder Singh





Everyone wants peace. People want peace in the world ­ in their country , their city and in their home. Mostly , they want peace within their own selves. How can we achieve this universal dream? The world has seen numerous conferences, peace marches, and conventions for peace.What can we do about this so that we can build a peaceful world?
I believe that we can have global peace through mysticism which is the study of our own inner mystic self. It is the path of discovering who we are, why we are here, life after death ... It is the science of uncovering the greatest mysteries of the universe ­ God and our soul. Building a peaceful world begins with the first foundation stone ­ our own selves. We must first find peace ourselves through mysticism to attain global peace.What can a single individual do for world peace by attaining personal inner peace? Let me tell you a story. A man was walking along the beach and he spotted a second man from afar picking something up, twirling it around, and tossing it in the water. The second man kept repeating these movements, so the first man was curious, he approached him and asked, “What are you doing?“ The second man called back, “I am throwing the starfish back into the ocean. If I do not do this, they will die on the shore.“
Scanning the beach, the first man said, “But there are thou sands of starfish on the beach. What difference can you possibly make?“ Without the least hesitation the second man picked up another starfish, threw it back in the water, and said, “It made a difference for that one!“ We too can make a difference for all humanity and for posterity by the actions we choose to take. Let us begin with our own transformation and pursuit of peace. If you find inner peace and i find inner peace and the person on our right finds inner peace and the person on our left finds inner peace, then one by one, brick by brick, we will have built a world whose principles rest on peace.
Nobody wants to be told what to do by someone else.We resist when someone tries to make us do something in a new way . Knowing this, we persist in trying to change others. We try to change our spouse, our children and our relations. We propose that everyone else in our community be peaceful. We want to make all other cities and countries peaceful. Just as we do not want anyone criticising or changing us, so do other people dislike being changed. All the efforts in the world will not make others peaceful. All we can do is work on ourselves.
When we find that a new product, service, or technique is benefiting someone else, we ourselves feel motivated to try it. Similarly , if we find peace ourselves, our life will be transformed and others will be curious as to why we are experiencing such joy and happiness in our life. They themselves will want to learn how we achieved it. Example is one of the greatest teachers. Therefore, let us light the lamp of peace in our own hearts and shed that luminosity on all we meet.

LEARNING WITH THE TIMES - First ATM is believed to have been set up in 1967





When was the ATM invented?
An automated teller machine (ATM) is a telecommunication device that enables a financial transaction between a bank and its customer without involving any human cashier. Perhaps the first device on this concept was in stalled in Japan in 1966. Known as computer loan machines, these devices supplied loans to a bank customer after inserting a credit card. It is believed that the first cash machine that enabled withdrawal of money from a custom er's bank account was installed by Barclays Bank in the UK in 1967. Users had to in sert a special cheque issued by the bank and a six-digit per sonal identification number (PIN) to withdraw cash. The first modern ATM relying on an online network and capable of dispensing variable amounts of cash by deducting the money from the user's ac count was installed by Lloyds Bank in England in 1972.
How does the ATM work?
At its simplest, an ATM is a data terminal connected to an ATM controller (ATMC) like a computer connected to an internet service provider. Al so known as `EFTPOS (Elec tronic Funds Transfer at Point of Sale) Switch', the ATMC is used in financial institutions to route transactions between ATMs, the core banking system of the card-issuing bank and other banks.When a message enters an ATMC from an ATM, it examines the message, validates the PIN and routes the message to the core banking system of the bank.
How do interbank transactions work?
Initially, ATMs were connected to only one bank and a cardholder could withdraw money only if she was using the card issued by the bank. Later, to cut costs as well as provide more facilities to cardholders, an interbank network also known as an ATM consortium was established. This is a computer network connecting ATMs of different banks.Apart from connecting ATMs, these networks also connect EFTPOS terminals -the devices used at shops where one can insert or swipe their card to buy goods or services. India's largest interbank network is the National Financial Switch (NFS), which is a network of over 2 lakh ATMs.It has more than 90 banks as its direct members. Apart from the NFS, other ATM networks operating in the country include Cashnet, Immediate Payment Service, Banks ATM Network, Customer Services and so on.
What are card associ ations?
Card associations are the organisations that licence a bank's card programme and provide technology and access to various networks that help in transactions. These associations perform operational functions for their members.China Unionpay , VISA, MasterCard, American Express, Diner's Club are among the largest card associations.India has also started a similar payment service for domestic transactions known as RuPay.

Source: Times of India, 24-10-2016

BRICS and walls

Contradictions are mounting within. India’s diplomacy could explore alternative groupings.

With the benefit of hindsight, one can learn several lessons from the BRICS summit in Goa. Before this event, close observers of India’s foreign policy in general and of BRICS in particular, Samir Saran and Abhijnan Rej, had emphasised the need “for creating new and agile institutions that can help the group”. Such an objective was ambitious and the Goa meeting has allowed BRICS to work in that direction.

In the final declaration, the members countries not only felicitated themselves for “the operationalisation of the New Development Bank (NDB) and of the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA)”, but agreed to set up a credit agency. Here, BRICS are true to their DNA: Basically, this “geo-economic alliance”, to use the words of Saran and Rej, “perceives power concentration in the hands of Bretton Woods institutions as unfair and seeks to promote alternative models of development”. This is why, like in every summit since 2009, BRICS have targeted the governance of the IMF in Goa. Not only have they asked for a new quota formula that would “ensure that the increased voice of the dynamic emerging and developing economies reflects their relative contributions to the world economy”, but they have also called for the European countries to cede two chairs on the Executive Board of the IMF. For years, the targeting of West-dominated institutions has provided BRICS with a common cause.

But is it still sufficient today? The question is particularly relevant from the point of view of India after the acceleration of its rapprochement with the US in several domains, including economic and defence matters. This rapprochement has been resented by two key BRICS players, Russia and China, which have recently made moves bound to be perceived as provocations by India. Russia, which has already agreed to sell attack helicopters to Pakistan, sent troops to this country in September last for first-ever military joint manoeuvres. The Indian ambassador to Moscow had to convey to Russia New Delhi’s views that “military cooperation with Pakistan which is a country that sponsors terrorism as a matter of state policy is a wrong approach.”. Relations with China were even more tense since, over the last six months, China blocked India’s attempt at joining the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), made military incursions in Arunachal Pradesh and vetoed in the UN an India-supported resolution designating Masood Azhar as a terrorist. (Azhar is the chief of Jaish-e-Mohammed, one of the Pakistani groups already on a UN blacklist, which has been held responsible for the Uri attack and the killing of 19 Indian armymen).The Goa summit was bound to be “a moment of reckoning”, as Harsh Pant pointed out, precisely because of this context. All the more so as it happened at a time when the Indian government had initiated moves to isolate Pakistan on the international stage in the wake of the Uri attack. On that ground, the glass remained half empty. Certainly, the Indian attempt of isolating Pakistan from other South Asian countries — that had resulted in the cancellation of the Islamabad SAARC meeting in October — found another expression in the Outreach Summit of BRICS leaders of BIMSTEC countries, including Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Thailand, a clear signal that, in its region, India will look east even more than before. But the final declaration spared Pakistan.

On the first day of the summit, Modi had targeted Pakistan calling it the “mothership” of terrorism: “Terror modules around the world are linked to this mothership. This country shelters not just terrorists. It nurtures a mindset,” Modi said. However, the final declaration did not mention Pakistan, nor key words like “cross-border terrorism” or “state-sponsored terrorism” and the only terror groups named — ISIS, al Qaeda and Jabhat al-Nusra — were not Pakistani. Russia and China were not on the same wave length so far as this security issue was concerned. This hiatus may be due to Russian and Chinese perceptions that saving the Syrian regime is their priority and that both countries will need Pakistan to fight the Islamist groups listed above if they regroup in Afghanistan after being defeated in the Middle East.

In Goa, China has taken Pakistan’s side more explicitly than Russia, which somewhat bowed to Beijing instead of supporting New Delhi. A day after Modi called Pakistan a “mothership of terrorism”, the Chinese Foreign Ministry declared that their country opposed “linking terrorism with any specific country or religion”. It also said: “China and Pakistan are all-weather friends”.

Such divergences did not prevent India from using the Goa meeting to relate to China bilaterally. For instance, President Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi agreed to hold a dialogue on New Delhi’s bid for membership of the NSG. But China will clearly not help India to isolate Pakistan, as it was already evident from the CPEC project and, more precisely, from the fact that “its” Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (which is much bigger than the NDB) has recently granted a $300 million loan for extending the hydropower plant of Tarbela, jointly with the World Bank. Incidentally, Xi Jinping also used China’s financial resources to relate more effectively to another neighbour of India, Bangladesh: He stopped over in Dhaka on his way to Goa to sign off loans worth $24 bn, with a country to which India has lent $2 bn last year.

The Goa summit enabled India to re-engage Russia (or vice versa). On the one hand, New Delhi and Moscow signed a $4-5 billion deal on the S-400 defence missile system. On the other, “India recognised Russian side’s effort towards achieving a political and negotiated settlement of the situation in Syria”. This joint statement was issued by Vladimir Putin and Modi at a time when the Obama administration was highly critical of the Russian strikes on Aleppo.

The contradictions between India’s policies vis-à-vis Pakistan and the US and its membership of the BRICS, a
grouping dominated by Russia and China, have led observers to think about alternative routes, like the revival of IBSA. In a post BRICS summit article, Samir Saran mentions that IBSA countries have met “on the sidelines” in Goa and that such a grouping (“in many ways more organic than BRICS”) “should engage with both the US and one European power, like Germany, to promote a concert of democracies across continents, bringing advanced economies alongside emerging ones”. More than one European country might support such a move.

The writer is senior research fellow at CERI-Sciences Po/CNRS, Paris, professor of Indian Politics and Sociology at King’s India Institute, London.

Source: Indian Express, 22-10-2016

No proof required: When liberals are not liberal

When even Pakistan has banned triple talaq, our ‘liberals’ argue the uniform civil code should not be introduced until India solves all problems related to women — nay, all problems related to womankind.

The introduction of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) has been talked about for decades, indeed since Independence. It was part of the BJP’s 2014 manifesto, and the attempt at reform of triple talaq has sent alarm bells ringing among liberal intellectuals and conservative Muslims. The uniform liberal view seems to be that the UCC is an imposition by a right wing Muslim-unfriendly government and that reform of triple talaq is just a way to beat up or subjugate the Muslim community. The “liberals” (I will have the word in quotes until it is established that the “liberals” are actually liberals) claim that there are discriminatory anti-women laws among the majority Hindu community, and that these need to be reformed first, before imposing majority views on the minorities.

Let us start with first principles. In a fair, just and ideal world, rights should be human rights, unaffected by sex, or religion. The Indian Constitution came close to defining it in this manner. Article 44 of the Constitution, “Uniform civil code for the citizens” states: “The state shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India”. Unfortunately, the Constitution writers inserted this clause in the non-binding Directive Principles of State Policy section.

The Constituent Assembly debates make up for the lack of appropriate specification in the Constitution. Particularly relevant for today’s debate are the comments of K.M. Munshi, made 68 years earlier. His summary view on the UCC, which he supported, was “This attitude of mind perpetuated under the British rule, that personal law is part of religion, has been fostered by the British and by British courts. We must, therefore, outgrow it.”

At the time Munshi made his comments, Hindu law was very anti-women. However, post 2005 and passage of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005, men and women have equal rights to inheritance, property etc. Besides some possible capital gains benefits for those filing under HUF (Hindu Undivided Family), there are no differences (that I can surmise though I am willing to be corrected) in the rights of Hindu men and Hindu women.

However, this was not the case in 1948 when Munshi said: “I know there are many among Hindus who do not like a uniform civil code, because they take the same view as the honourable Muslim members who spoke last. They feel that the personal law of inheritance, succession etc is really a part of their religion. If that were so, you can never give, for instance, equality to women. But you have already passed a Fundamental Right to that effect and you have an article here which lays down that there should be no discrimination against sex. Look at Hindu Law; you get any amount of discrimination against women; and if that is part of Hindu religion or Hindu religious practice, you cannot pass a single law which would elevate the position of Hindu women to that of men. Therefore, there is no reason why there should not be a civil code throughout the territory of India.” (emphasis added). Not surprisingly, Munshi, a Congressman and governor of Uttar Pradesh during 1952-55, resigned from the Congress and became the vice-president of the newly formed Swatantra Party. He recognised early on that the Nehru-led Congress was no party for liberals.

The Muslim community has attacked the suggestion of a UCC as a direct attack on itself. A recent press release, signed by 103 “Muslims and people of Muslim descent” states at the outset that it is “against the instant arbitrary triple talaq as practiced in India and we support the demand of the Muslim women to abolish it.” However, the statement goes on to add that “The present regime and their earlier avatars have used the Uniform Civil Code as a stick to frighten and demonise the Muslim community and polarise opinion. Uniform Civil Code has been always been projected by such regimes and right wing politics as a Hindu vs Muslim tool. The fact of the matter is that many of the personal laws irrespective of which religion they belong to are archaic and anti-women… We appeal to all liberal, progressive sections of the Muslims as well as all other citizens to support the struggle of the Muslim women for reform and to expose the nefarious designs of both the present regime as well as of the patriarchal conservative Muslims who are colliding with the retrogressive forces to take the attention away from the most important issues and the failures of the present government on all fronts.” (emphasis added)

It is intriguing that the “liberals” have moved from attacking triple talaq and women’s rights to an all-out attack on a “right-wing” government. Let me see if I understand this right. The previous Congress governments went all out for appeasement (remember Shah Bano?) of Muslims to get a few extra votes and irrespective of the fact that they were being blatantly anti-women; the present government, even if it is against triple talaq and pro-women rights is suspect because it has failed on all fronts?
Even “liberals” like Flavia Agnes (interview to Firstpost.com, October 19) have problems with implementing the UCC at this time. In a not too dissimilar statement than the one above, she states “today the faith of Muslim communities in the present right-wing government is at very low ebb. Hence the political climate is not conducive to reforming laws of minorities or for bringing in a Uniform Civil Code”. (emphasis added)

When asked about why the UCC should not be implemented, she counters by obfuscation. “When discriminatory practices within Hindu law and cultural practices are discussed they are not framed as ‘Hindu’ but are discussed in general terms as ‘women’s problems.’’’ One such Hindu problem coming in the way of the UCC is “the problem of dowry-related violence and dowry deaths. There is no research conducted as to how many women who are murdered for dowry are Hindus. A research done by our organisation about cases which have reached the Supreme Court and the Bombay High Court revealed that more than 90 per cent were Hindus. Less than 10 per cent were Muslims and others.”

Assume for a moment that all 100 per cent of dowry deaths are Hindu. What does that fact have anything to do with the desirability of a UCC? These deaths are illegal; are not sanctioned by law, Hindu or otherwise. If not implemented, it is a law and order problem, not a UCC problem. It is somewhat disappointing to note that whereas a fundamentalist Muslim country like Pakistan has banned triple talaq our “liberals” are arguing that UCC should not be introduced until India has solved all problems related to women — nay, all problems related to womenkind. Masha Allah, “liberals”.

Implementation of the UCC will not result in zero dowry deaths, or make zero the practice of bigamy among Hindus, or the practice of “quadrigamy” among Muslims. Further, the UCC will not end violence against women. To ask for a solution to all women-related problems before introducing the UCC is to blatantly argue against the interests of women. Which is why the quotation marks on “liberals” remains.

The writer is contributing editor, ‘Indian Express,’ and senior India analyst, The Observatory Group, a New York based macro policy advisory group

Source: Indian Express, 22-10-2016