Helping the invisible hands of agriculture

With the ‘feminisation of agriculture’ picking up pace, the challenges women farmers face can no longer be ignored

October 15 is observed, respectively, as International Day of Rural Women by the United Nations, and National Women’s Farmer’s Day (Rashtriya Mahila Kisan Diwas) in India. In 2016, the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare decided to take the lead in celebrating the event, duly recognising the multidimensional role of women at every stage in agriculture — from sowing to planting, drainage, irrigation, fertilizer, plant protection, harvesting, weeding, and storage.

This year, the Ministry has proposed deliberations to discuss the challenges that women farmers face in crop cultivation, animal husbandry, dairying and fisheries. The aim is to work towards an action plan using better access to credit, skill development and entrepreneurial opportunities.

Data and reality

Yet, paying lip service to them is not going to alleviate their drudgery and hardships in the fields. According to Oxfam India, women are responsible for about 60-80% of food and 90% of dairy production, respectively. The work by women farmers, in crop cultivation, livestock management or at home, often goes unnoticed. Attempts by the government to impart them training in poultry, apiculture and rural handicrafts is trivial given their large numbers. In order to sustain women’s interest in farming and also their uplift, there must be a vision backed by an appropriate policy and doable action plans.

The Agriculture Census (2010-11) shows that out of an estimated 118.7 million cultivators, 30.3% were females. Similarly, out of an estimated 144.3 million agricultural labourers, 42.6% were females. In terms of ownership of operational holdings, the latest Agriculture Census (2015-16) is startling. Out of a total 146 million operational holdings, the percentage share of female operational holders is 13.87% (20.25 million), a nearly one percentage increase over five years. While the “feminisation of agriculture” is taking place at a fast pace, the government has yet to gear up to address the challenges that women farmers and labourers face.

Issue of land ownership

The biggest challenge is the powerlessness of women in terms of claiming ownership of the land they have been cultivating. In Census 2015, almost 86% of women farmers are devoid of this property right in land perhaps on account of the patriarchal set up in our society. Notably, a lack of ownership of land does not allow women farmers to approach banks for institutional loans as banks usually consider land as collateral.

Research worldwide shows that women with access to secure land, formal credit and access to market have greater propensity in making investments in improving harvest, increasing productivity, and improving household food security and nutrition. Provision of credit without collateral under the micro-finance initiative of the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development should be encouraged. Better access to credit, technology, and provision of entrepreneurship abilities will further boost women’s confidence and help them gain recognition as farmers. As of now, women farmers have hardly any representation in society and are nowhere discernible in farmers’ organisations or in occasional protests. They are the invisible workers without which the agricultural economy is hard to grow.

Second, land holdings have doubled over the years with the result that the average size of farms has shrunk. Therefore, a majority of farmers fall under the small and marginal category, having less than 2 ha of land — a category that, undisputedly, includes women farmers. A declining size of land holdings may act as a deterrent due to lower net returns earned and technology adoption. The possibility of collective farming can be encouraged to make women self-reliant. Training and skills imparted to women as has been done by some self-help groups and cooperative-based dairy activities (Saras in Rajasthan and Amul in Gujarat). These can be explored further through farmer producer organisations. Moreover, government flagship schemes such as the National Food Security Mission, Sub-mission on Seed and Planting Material and the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana must include women-centric strategies and dedicated expenditure.

Gender-friendly machinery

Third, female cultivators and labourers generally perform labour-intensive tasks (hoeing, grass cutting, weeding, picking, cotton stick collection, looking after livestock). In addition to working on the farm, they have household and familial responsibilities. Despite more work (paid and unpaid) for longer hours when compared to male farmers, women farmers can neither make any claim on output nor ask for a higher wage rate. An increased work burden with lower compensation is a key factor responsible for their marginalisation. It is important to have gender-friendly tools and machinery for various farm operations. Most farm machinery is difficult for women to operate. Manufacturers should be incentivised to come up with better solutions. Farm machinery banks and custom hiring centres promoted by many State governments can be roped in to provide subsidised rental services to women farmers.

Last, when compared to men, women generally have less access to resources and modern inputs (seeds, fertilizers, pesticides) to make farming more productive. The Food and Agriculture Organisation says that equalising access to productive resources for female and male farmers could increase agricultural output in developing countries by as much as 2.5% to 4%. Krishi Vigyan Kendras in every district can be assigned an additional task to educate and train women farmers about innovative technology along with extension services.

As more women are getting into farming, the foremost task for their sustenance is to assign property rights in land. Once women farmers are listed as primary earners and owners of land assets, acceptance will ensue and their activities will expand to acquiring loans, deciding the crops to be grown using appropriate technology and machines, and disposing of produce to village traders or in wholesale markets, thus elevating their place as real and visible farmers.

Seema Bathla and Ravi Kiran are Professor and research scholar, respectively, at the Centre for the Study of Regional Development, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

Source: The Hindu, 15/10/2018

From food security to nutrition security

Biotechnology can be a game-changer in the battle against malnutrition in much the same way that the Green Revolution was in ensuring self sufficiency.

October 16 is observed as the World Food Day to mark the creation of the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) in 1945. The world body envisions a “zero hunger world” by 2030. Perhaps, the occasion is incomplete without remembering Nobel Peace laureate Norman E Borlaug, whose “miracle seeds” of wheat saved over a billion people from starvation. Borlaug also instituted the World Food Prize in 1986, which is sometimes described as the Nobel Prize in agriculture. It’s important to understand the role of science and technology in ushering the Green Revolution, which ensured food security in India. Today, similar innovations in biotechnology hold the promise to provide nutrition security.

In 1943, the Bengal Famine claimed 1.5 to 3 million lives. After independence, India faced the challenge of feeding 330 million people. The situation became grim when the country was hit by back-to-back droughts in the mid-1960s. Grain production plummeted from 89.4 million metric tonnes (MMT) in 1964-65 to 72.4 MMT in 1965-66. India became heavily dependent on the PL 480 food aid from the US. Self-sufficiency in foodgrains became the country’s top policy priority.

In the early 1960s, India imported 18,000 tonnes of the semi-dwarf high yielding (HY) wheat variety, Lerma Rojo and Sonora 64. Developed by Borlaug and his team at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico, these wheat varieties proved to be the harbinger of the Green Revolution. Indian scientists adapted the imported germplasm to create indigenous varieties: Kalyan developed by D S Athwal and Sona created by M S Swaminathan. Around the same time, the HY miracle rice, IR8 — developed by Peter Jennings and Henry M Beachell of the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) — was imported. About a decade later, an improved variety, IR36 — developed by IRRI’s Gurdev Khush — made its presence felt in the country’s fields. The breeding programme under the All India Coordinated Research Project (AICRP) produced Padma and Jaya, the first indigenous HY rice varieties. These became the centrepiece of India’s rice revolution.

Breakthroughs in Basmati rice came with the development of Pusa Basmati 1121 and 1509 from 2005 to 2013. These rice varieties were developed by teams led by V P Singh, A K Singh and K V Prabhu at the Indian Agriculture Research Institute. Pusa Basmati gave Indian rice more value with less water and 50 per cent higher yields compared to the traditional basmati. V Singh et al estimate that the cumulative earnings through exports of Pusa Basmati 1121 between 2008 and 2016 and the sale of the rice variety in the domestic market in the same period to be about $20.8 billion.

Where does India stand today in terms of wheat and rice? While the country’s population has grown by more than four times, from 330 million in 1947 to 1.35 billion in 2018, India’s wheat production has increased by over 15 times in roughly the same period — from about 6.5 MMT in 1950-51 to 99.7 MMT in 2017-18. India contributes about 13 per cent of the world wheat production, next only to China whose share is about 17 per cent. Rice production has shot up by about 5.5 times — from 20.6 MMT in 1950-51 to 112.9 MMT in 2017-18. India has a 23 per cent share in world rice production, next only to China whose share is about 29 per cent. India is also the largest exporter of rice in the world with about 12.7 MMT, valued at $7.7 billion (Basmati at $4.17 billion and Non-Basmati at $3.56 billion) during 2017-18.

Source: Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare, Government of India, Agricultural Processing and Export Development Authority (APEDA), Government of India.

Notwithstanding its foodgrain surpluses, the country faces a complex challenge of nutritional security. FAO’s recent publication, The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World, 2018 estimates that about 15 per cent of the Indian population is undernourished. More than 38 per cent of Indian children aged below five years are stunted and 21 per cent suffer from wasting. Several factors ranging from poor diet, unsafe drinking water, poor hygiene and sanitation, low levels of immunisation and education, especially that of women, contribute to this dismal situation. But latest innovations in biotechnology that fortify major staples with micro nutrients like vitamin A, zinc and iron can be game changers.

Source: Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare, Government of India, Agricultural Processing and Export Development Authority (APEDA), Government of India.

Globally, the HarvestPlus programme of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) is doing lot of work in this direction. In India, the group has released the iron-rich pearl millet. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research has independently released zinc and iron rich wheat (WB 02 and HPWB 01), rice (DRR Dhan 45), and pearl millet (HHB 299 and AHB 1200) in 2016-17. This could possibly lead to the next breakthrough in staples, making them more nutritious. A research team led by Monika Garg at the National Agri-Food Biotechnology Institute in Mohali has innovated biofortified coloured wheat (black, blue, purple) through crosses between HY Indian cultivars (PBW550, PBW621, HD2967) and coloured wheat from Japan and America. These are rich in anthocyanins (antioxidants such those found in blueberries) and zinc (40 ppm compared to 5 ppm in white wheat). Farmers of the Borlaug Farmers Association from Punjab and Haryana have been roped in to multiply production of this wheat variety. This seems to be the beginning of a new journey, from food security to nutritional security. The best is yet to come. But innovations in biofortified food can alleviate malnutrition only when they are scaled up with supporting policies. This would require increasing expenditure on agri-R&D and incentivising farmers by linking their produce to lucrative markets. Can the Modi government do it? Only time can tell.

Source: Indian Express, 15/10/2018

Autonomy and Patience

There are no shortcuts to creating world-class universities

The past year has seen several controversies in India’s higher education sector. These pertain to the selection of institutions for full or partial autonomy or recognising “Institutions of Eminence”. The debate essentially centres around one question: Should institutions of excellence be about good students, with little focus on infrastructure, or should they be about world-class facilities that only a select few can afford? In other words, is education a merit good or should education policies follow the public choice theory?

Introduced in the mid-20th century by economist Richard Musgrave, the merit goods concept states that policies dealing with services like education and health should focus on people’s needs rather than their ability to pay. In contrast, the public choice theory, that has evolved in the past two centuries through the works of economists like Knut Wicksell, Duncan Black and James M Buchanan Jr, elucidates the utilitarian concept in social welfare. In recent times, the work of Buchanan Jr, along with the ideas of billionaire industrialist, Charles Koch, has been instrumental in pushing the public choice theory to the forefront of government policies in many parts of the developed world. The thNone of these theories are perfect. The proponents of merit goods felt the tremors of the dissolution of the USSR, while the financial crisis of 2008 has pushed public choice theorists into contemplation. Most of the English-speaking world has followed in the footsteps of the US, while the non-English part of the developed world has kept the idea of merit goods alive.

Both schools accept that privately funded education can never become the backbone of a nation’s education system. It can, however, reduce the social burden by providing quality education to a willing few. Such institutions can also provide benchmarks for public sector institutions. In the US, for example, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Yale, Princeton, Brown and other Ivy League colleges set the standards in higher education. However, it took Harvard University some 300 years to become what it is today. Stanford University took more than 50 years to establish itself among the top global universities. However, once they proved their mettle, fees, scholarship, and most importantly, recognitions fell in place.

There are no shortcuts towards the creation of world-class universities. The ability of private higher education to attain the standards of their counterparts in the US and other parts of the developed world will depend on the willingness of the philanthropists towards giving them the long-term cushion of sustenance. Examples like BITS Pilani and the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research show such philanthropy in excellent light. However, the pressure of revenue generation, along with the demands of profitability, has pushed many a private sector educational institution from deviating from its original lofty goal.

The question that we need to ask is not whether we want India’s private universities to become like Ivy League colleges. Instead, we should ask if we are ready to give these institutes the environment, time and resources to work on their original vision. The idea should be to give them the much-needed autonomy and enable them to flourish — not merely recognise them as institutions of eminence.

Simultaneously, the government needs to ensure that merit goods like quality higher education do not end up at the mercy of public choice theory. Policies should be nuanced enough to create the much-needed environment for private education, they should enable these institutions to attain world-class standards and, in the process, also set a benchmark for public institutions. At the same time, the government needs to be cautious of crony capitalism in the education sector. For this reason, it should desist from recognising greenfield institutions in the education sector.

Philanthropists need to understand the long-term nature of higher education goals. A premature push for recognition or excessive emphasis on revenue generation will only lead to mediocrity.eory has influenced the privatisation of pension, healthcare and higher education in the US.

Source: Indian Express, 15/10/2018

Leadership lessons from sex workers

Why do sex workers show so many more leadership attributes than a business leader? The answer is straightforward – out of necessity

Can sex workers be intelligently, seriously and usefully compared to business leaders and, when they are, might they come out better? An analysis along these lines is one of the more interesting parts of a book due to be released next month. I was sent a preview copy and found it fascinating.

Called A Stranger Truth, it’s by a clearly talented author, Ashok Alexander. His career started as a high-profile executive with the international consultants, McKinsey & Company. Then, one day, he threw it up to head Avahan, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s programme to fight HIV. He ended up running this organisation for a decade. The book is based on his experiences.

It begins in the most striking way possible: “‘Don’t step on the people having sex!’ the NGO worker whispered urgently as we ventured into the darkness.” This was Alexander’s first encounter with sex workers. Their names were Parvati, Vatsala and Jayanthi. “I could hear them giggle as they watched me move gingerly around the couples that lay strewn around the field… sounds of frantic coitus emanated from behind the bushes.”

Chapter six contains the comparison I found intriguing. It’s called ‘Leadership secrets of the commercial sex worker’. “Every time I met and interacted with sex workers I would ponder over a fundamental question”, Alexander writes. “Why did sex workers show so many more leadership attributes than a business leader? The answer is straightforward — out of necessity.”

As Alexander points out, business leaders have the attributes they need to have and “very often just one or two might suffice”. Rarely does a business leader have to be an all-rounder in terms of leadership qualities. He has people to cover for him.

Female sex workers are very different. “Her world is far more complex, much more challenging. She must deal with emotional, health and financial crises all the time. There’s the constant threat of violence and her first mission is really to survive. She has no power, but she still must stay in control. She has no support system, but she must cope. She simply cannot win with just one or two shots in her game. She needs a whole repertoire.”

Alexander got to know sex workers well. He says they’re “tremendous judges of body language”. They develop this faculty to survive. This also means “they’re amazing judges of people, especially of men”. They can size up an individual not just in a moment but from as far as twenty feet.

Not surprisingly, negotiation is one of their prime skills. “It’s not just business leaders who have to be adept at negotiating. A sex worker negotiates all the time with her clients for safe sex.” On the outcome depends more than the success of a business. It can determine the sex worker’s life.

Alexander’s conclusion is simple and straightforward: “I was constantly learning about life, leadership and values from the commercial sex worker.” I suspect the former McKinsey executive ended up a very different person and a better man.

Now, if you think about it, there’s nothing surprising about Alexander’s analysis. Indeed, it’s hard to disagree with. The jolt lies in the fact this is not a subject we think about leave aside discuss. Alexander has broken that taboo. The result is a truth he calls strange but which feels undeniable.

Karan Thapar is the author of The Devil’s Advocate: The Untold Story

Source: Hindustan Times, 15/10/2018

Deifying Women

Prime Minister Narendra Modi once said that respecting women is an intrinsic part of Indian tradition and culture, so there is no need for celebrating International Women’s Day. In Hindu mythology, mother goddess worship is one of the longest-standing religious traditions. A woman is treated as manifestation of Goddess Durga Shakti, and this is the theme of the Navratri festival celebrated twice a year. In the Ardhanarishvara murti, the left side is depicted in the shape of Devi, and the right, as Shiva. Prakriti, Devi, is the power of Purusha. Fire and its brilliance are distinct but not different. Creation, maintenance and dissolution of the universe is dependent on both forces and, therefore, woman must be respected irrespective of her looks, status or vulnerability, at all places. The Mother Goddess of the Indus Valley never really gave place to a dominant male. Mother Earth continues to be worshipped as the power that nurtures the seed and brings it to fruition. This basic reverence affirms that woman gives life, food and strength. Therefore, mother goddesses were worshipped at all times. Yet, women in real life are not respected; there is a huge disconnect between ritual and reality. The culture of respecting woman must come from right attitude, right thinking, right action. Sexual violence can be catastrophic, resulting in physical injury, mental agony and loss of dignity, besides compromising women at home and workplace. Hence the importance of acknowledging the #MeToo movement for course correction

Source: Economic Times, 15/10/18

Whither inclusiveness?

The Windrush scandal has raised questions on Britain’s attitude towards immigrants

In the 1960s, hundreds of immigrants reached the United Kingdom from the West Indies, on the ship, the Windrush. They came to provide an essential service. Sadly, they were not properly integrated into the U.K. and recently many of them have been sent ‘home’, because, it was claimed, they were not recorded as U.K. citizens.

This has become a major issue, and, fortunately, the British government has accepted that there is a problem, and that something must be done about it. That, though a good development, does not alter the problems, and the unhappiness, that many have suffered.

The Windrush problem provides a good reflection of a major issue — the attitude towards immigrants in the U.K.

Many of them are here because there is a need for the service which they provide. That is particularly true, for example, of the National Health Service, which depends greatly on people from overseas to fill many of its posts.

The major question, however, concerns the negative attitudes to people of different races which many — not, of course, all — people in the U.K. demonstrate. For those of us who believe that people should be treated properly and with respect, regardless of their race or ethnic origin, that is depressing.

Much of it, it must be said, derives from ignorance. In some parts of the country, there are very few people from different races, and the residents in those areas have no experience of them. The proportion of the population who are immigrants is in fact quite small — around 9% — but many people assume it is much greater, and therefore constitutes a threat. There is of course no excuse for that, but it goes some way to explain it.

What can, and should, we do about this? First and foremost, we should recognise, and accept, that people deserve to be treated equally and with respect, whatever their ethnic origin. As part of the way of achieving this, we should recognise that something needs to be done about the level of ignorance that exists. In short, we should take steps to ensure that people are well informed and become conscious of the nature of people of many different ethnic groups.

Much can, and should, be done in schools, but not only there. There is clearly a need for much wider efforts to ensure that people are properly informed. Politicians should play their part in this.

The Windrush scandal was a graphic reminder that things have gone badly wrong, and it should provide a strong incentive to ensure that nothing like it happens again. If we require proof of the importance of this, we need only note the huge problems that many people have faced because of the failure to ensure that their position in the U.K. was clear.

The writer is an Emeritus Fellow and former Vice President of Wolfson College, Cambridge University, U.K.

Source: The Hindu, 12/10/2018

The great Indian abdication

The judiciary alone cannot take forward the mission of deepening democracy and protecting social freedoms 

Unless… philosophers become kings in the cities… there can be no cessation of evils… for cities nor, I think, for the human race . — Plato, The Republic

After the slew of verdicts by the Supreme Court, on triple talaq, Section 377, adultery, and the Sabarimala temple, a prominent cartoonist adapted the famous “Road to Homo Sapiens” picture to depict the Supreme Court Justice as a barber who cleans up the barbarous Neanderthal to make him a modern human.

India, at present, is going through a deep crisis in which the mission of deepening democracy, and protecting and advancing social freedoms is placed solely upon the judiciary. On the one hand there is a complete abnegation of the role of the legislature, and on the other there is a dichotomy between social morality and judicial morality (itself an interpretation of constitutional morality).

Both are dangerous tendencies.

A divide

The Supreme Court verdicts have curiously become a spectator sport on primetime television with a great amount of anticipation about the judgments in pending cases. The same curiosity is missing about parliamentary bills/debates, which are absolutely vital to a parliamentary democracy.

One example would suffice. Earlier this year, the government amended the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act to retrospectively legalise political donations from foreign companies and individuals since 1976. This move — with potentially catastrophic ramifications for Indian democracy — was pushed through without discussion in Parliament and hardly any debate in the public sphere.

If the judiciary has assumed the role of the single most important pillar of India’s parliamentary democracy, built on separation of powers, it is mainly because of the degradation and abuse of the roles of the legislature and the the executive.

Parliament’s erosion

Parliament, the supreme venue representing the people, has become a shadow of what it should be (even when the representation of marginalised communities has gone up). The words, “A fraud on the Constitution, used by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s words (in a recent judgment), have ironically been used before by the Supreme Court to refer to executive and legislative actions.

The Prime Minister rarely attends parliamentary debates, affecting the sanctity of the forum. If the Lok Sabha met for an average of 127 days in the 1950s, in 2017 it met for a shocking 57. If 72 Bills were passed in a year in the first Lok Sabha, the number was 40 in the 15th Lok Sabha (2009-14).

The Budget session for this fiscal year saw a scarcely believable usage of 1% of its allotted time in the Lok Sabha, and the Budget, the most vital cog of a national’s material basis, itself passed without discussion through the guillotine process. The basic minimum that could have been done amidst mounting allegations in the Rafale fighter aircraft deal was to institute a probe by a Joint Parliamentary Committee, but even that is not forthcoming. And what is the worth of Parliament when its convening could be held to ransom to the campaigning by the ruling party in the 2017 Gujarat elections?

Parliament, instead of representing the highest democratic ethos, panders to electoral majorities, leaving it incapable of challenging barbaric social/religious practices enforced by dominant interests. That is why it took 70 years for Section 377 to be partially struck down. Is it then surprising that the Supreme Court steps into this dangerous void left by the executive and the legislature?

But the task of democratising society cannot be left to the judiciary, an unelected body, the higher echelons of which self-appoint their members through the collegium system (itself a result of the executive trying to muzzle the independence of judiciary). Instead, it must be through social and political struggles from the bottom, and not through judicial diktats from above (even if the latter can be useful).

State of the judiciary

More importantly, the judiciary does not exist in a vacuum. Even when it attempts to correct regressive social practices, it is still a reflection of our society. Nothing could be more illustrative of this than the serious lack of diversity and representation, especially in the higher judiciary.

In 1993, Justice S.R. Pandian estimated that less than 4% of judges in the higher judiciary were from Dalit and tribal communities, and less than 3% were women. This led former President K.R. Narayanan to recommend that candidates from marginalised communities be considered as Supreme Court judges. Since Independence, only four Dalits have become Supreme Court judges, including one Chief Justice of India.

Even in the lower judiciary, the story is not starkly different. Data from 11 States show that the representation of Other Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes judges ranged from 12% to 14%. It took 42 years for a woman judge to be appointed to the Supreme Court, and there have been only eight women judges in the Supreme Court so far.

While representation can become tokenistic and essentialist, democracy is absolutely hollow without it.

Case backlog

The abdication of responsibility by the legislature is even more damaging considering that the judiciary is groaning under the weight of a mammoth 3.3 crore pending cases. The backlog of cases in the High Courts and the Supreme Court is 43 lakh and 57,987, respectively.

What could be more unjust in a democracy than thousands of innocent undertrials languishing in jails for a lifetime awaiting justice? A staggering 67% of India’s prison population awaits trial; 55% of these undertrials are Dalits, tribals, and Muslims.

In this context, should the valuable time of the judiciary be spent in entertaining and delivering verdicts on Public Interest Litigations (PILs), seeking, to take a couple of instances, a ban on pornography or making the national anthem mandatory in cinema halls? The PIL, a unique and powerful tool to seek justice for the weakest sections, has now degenerated. Witness the recent example of one having been filed seeking segregated seats for vegetarian and non-vegetarian passengers in trains.

Overworked courts cannot become a one-stop solution for performing legislative/executive tasks such as banning fire crackers/loud speakers, enforcing seat belt/helmet wearing rules, or solving theological/civil society questions such as what the essence of Hinduism is or whether a mosque is integral for namaz (going beyond whether religious practices violate constitutional norms).

The process of abolishing religious or secular hierarchies/injustices cannot become deep-rooted if it is merely judicial or legal. Take the Supreme Court’s recent directive urging new legislation to curb lynching. Politically-motivated lynchings targeting a community do not happen because of the absence of laws. They happen because of a wilful subversion of laws by the executive backed by mobs riding on electoral majorities. That is why the head of India’s most populous and politically crucial State can declare publicly that he is proud of the demolition of Babri Masjid.

Yet, the irony of democracy is such that the task of completing the world’s largest democracy’s political and social revolution cannot be laid only at the doorstep of the wise men and women in robes.

Nissim Mannathukkaren is with Dalhousie University, Canada. Twitter: @nmannathukkaren

Source: The Hindu, 12/10/2018