By Sudhansu Mohanty
The welter of information on the Rafale deal already available in the public domain – including very pertinent points by several defence and political commentators – still leaves relevant and important aspects unanswered or unexplained. We need to analyse these issues in an objective and dispassionate manner.
There is the issue of categorisation. Day One of the present procurement is April 10, 2015 when PM Modi announced in Paris, in a joint statement with French President Hollande, that 36 aircraft would be purchased. How was this magic number of 36 arrived at?
Since the defence minister was not in the know, it can safely be inferred that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) was not consulted either. And the Indian Air Force obviously couldn’t have agreed to this number, down from 126 aircraft.
This is obvious because the Request for Proposal or RFP of 2007 was still alive. It hadn’t been withdrawn or cancelled yet. Agreeing to another proposal from the same company, for the same item, would subvert the spirit of the MoD’s very own Defence Procurement Policy in effect since 2013.
Aside from the moral issue raised by two concurrent procurement proposals, the processes laid down in DPP 2013 for obtaining the Acceptance of Necessity for an RFP were not followed.
The new RFP – in sharp contrast to the RFP 2007 for Global “Buy and Make” – was merely a Global “Buy”. It is hard to understand how the SCAPCHC (Services Capital Acquisition Plan Categorisation Higher Committee) could have approved the new RFP, and importantly, recommended only the Global “Buy” – and not Global “Buy and Make” – as in the RFP 2007.
Further, how could the SCAPHC accept the reduced number of aircraft, 36 vis-à-vis the earlier RFP for 126 aircraft which it had accepted?
There is also the question of why the government junked the earlier proposal when it had reached a near finality.
Another Contract in the Works?
Another niggling question remains: how does the IAF’s recent Request for Information (of April 6, 2018) for 110 fighter aircraft jell with this decision?
Let me explain the disquiet.
Para 48 of DPP 2013 says that:
“It would be desirable to negotiate the licence production contract along with the contract for the finished product. In cases where this is not feasible, the purchase contract should include a clause wherein the vendor agrees to negotiate the licence contract at a subsequent date, thus obtaining a commitment from the vendor to part with the ToT [transfer of technology]. In cases where ToT for Maintenance Infrastructure is being sought, the maintenance contract involving the OEM [original equipment manufacturer] and the industry receiving the technology would also be negotiated along with the main contract.”
So, was a transfer of technology included in RFP 2015, as it was in RFP 2007? If it wasn’t, what were the reasons?
If ToT was not recommended by the SCAPCHC, and was not negotiated in RFP 2015 because it wasn’t feasible to negotiate the ToT at the time, did the new RFP, as per Para 48 and Para 30 of DPP 2013 which cater for such contingencies, “clearly indicate that Government reserves the right to negotiate ToT terms subsequently and that the availability of ToT would be a pre-condition for any further procurements”, and that the “terms and conditions of obtaining ToT would be included in subsequent RFP”?
If it did not, how will this impact the fresh RFP that will likely come up for 110 fighter aircraft, as can be inferred from the RFI issued in April 2018?
Another troubling issue is of benchmarking, where Para 52 of DPP 2013 is relevant. It says:
“Cases for which contracts have earlier been signed and benchmark prices are available, the CNC [contract negotiation committee] would arrive at the reasonable price, taking into consideration the escalation/ foreign exchange variation factor.” (emphasis supplied)
Since there were no contracts on the item signed earlier and hence no benchmark price was available, going by media information one wonders how the benchmark price was revised upwardly, by use of an “aligned cost table”.
Para 47 of DPP 2013 stipulates that “the CNC would carry out all processes from opening of commercial bids till conclusion of contract”.
Many people have asked me if in such a logjam of disparate views the majority views should hold. I have demurred at the suggestion and responded in a copybook way, that anyone familiar with the DPP would profess that the CNC decisions are carried out in a collegiate manner/ vetting/ discussions and on logic/ merit of issues to protect government interest, and nothing else matters.
If there were differences of opinion on benchmarking among members of the CNC, with three crucial members – Joint Secretary & Acquisition Manager, Finance Manager, and Advisor (Cost) – who had the relevant domain expertise on benchmarking, plumping for €5.2 billion while others sought enhancement to €8.2 billion based on an “aligned cost table”, the details doubtless merit scrutiny.
Several defence commentators have opined that if the case of the 36 Rafale jet purchase had followed the original benchmarking cost of €5.2 billion based on the price benchmarked for 18 fly-away aircraft in RFP 2007, there wouldn’t have been much brouhaha.
It appears that it was this conundrum of upward revision, by taking the price of 126 Rafale aircraft (18 flyaways and 108 manufactured in India) that makes it far from credible.
The manufacturing of 108 aircraft which were proposed to be made in India included the ToT and licence production cost, plus the cost of setting up the facility in India. This expenditure was to be amortised over the entire spectrum of 108 aircraft to be produced. Thereafter even the depreciated value of the facility upon closure of this production line would have a residual value.
Amortisation in its classical sense is applied to intangible assets. When funds need to be invested for setting up a particular facility that is quantity-neutral, it is natural that the greater the number the better it is for the investor.
With the cost of such investment deemed as inexorable because it is the irreducible minima, the higher the number, the lesser is the cost per unit, since the investment spreads across a wider spectrum, thereby whittling down the individual price.
So, apportioning this expenditure over 36 units isn’t the best way to arrive at the reasonable price to benchmark. It’s much too simplistic a calculation – and it doesn’t work that way!
Going by media reports, the Defence Acquisition Council/ MoD did not recommend the case as authorised by the Allocation and Business Rules of the Government of India, and instead referred it to the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) for taking a decision that falls within its power (which it has exercised in other cases).
But for the Ministry of Finance to have agreed to refer it to the CCS for decision-making is truly a puzzle. This is because the CAG in its audit report on the AgustaWestland case – the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Acquisition of Helicopters for VVIPs; Union Government Defence Services (Air Force) No. 10 of 2013, tabled before Parliament on August 13, 2013 – had observed that:
“the MoF should have either recommended, not recommended or recommended with conditions the proposal as MoF provides financial advice to CCS and Government” (emphasis supplied). Para 10 of the audit report states, “On 20 July 2009, MoF stated that they were unable to support the proposal in light of certain concerns raised by MoF, which were to be addressed in the final Note to CCS.”
Further, how could the finance ministry have agreed to a proposal involving advance and stage payments of huge sums without a Bank Guarantee or Sovereign Guarantee, which would have meant a lower quoted amount, since BG comes with a cost that banks charge, and long-term BG coverage can tot up to a tidy sum? This violates the defence ministry’s DPP and the finance ministry’s General Financial Rules’ prescriptions to protect public funds.
Or was it done on the presumption that the Inter-Governmental Agreement would be twined with a Sovereign Guarantee? Was the Letter of Comfort also made part of such conditional concurrence of the proposal?
What then was the difference in price between the IGA-Sovereign Guarantee backed RFP and the one backed by BG?
Sadly, no details are forthcoming.
Maybe we will have to wait for the CAG’s audit report to learn the truth.
(The author is a former Controller General of Defence Accounts and also a former Financial Adviser (Defence Services) in the Ministry of Defence who retired on May 31, 2016. Courtesy: thecitizen.in).
Growing crimes against women
By Aritry Das
For years India has grappled with the tag of being the ‘most dangerous country for women‘. Successive governments introduced measures, but there is increasing evidence that they don’t work – and are counter-productive. Indeed, in key Indian states, cases of sexual violence are on the rise.
The Constitution of India mandates that as a federal union of states, law and order issues remain primarily with state governments, unless there are overarching issues such as terrorism. This results in many states trying different methods to tackle growing violence against women, and creating a range of other problems rather than solutions.
States like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra are the top states for registered rapes and sexual assaults, according to data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), a federal body that collates statistics across states. These state governments are introducing new measures to increase women’s safety, but experts say their moves are not addressing root causes and systemic failures in India’s creaking criminal justice system.
As many as 38,947 rapes were reported in 2016, which was a rise of 12% from 2015. The number of cases reported under “sexual assault, harassment and molestation”, was 84,746 nationally. This is the second-most common crime against women after “domestic violence” cases.
When Uttar Pradesh chief minister Ajay Singh Bisht, (Yogi Adityanath) came to power in 2017, he decided to tackle the problem of women’s safety by creating the controversial ‘anti-Romeo squad’, with police roaming in civil dress to surveil public spaces to keep a check on street harassers (also known as “roadside Romeos”).
The squad was eventually disbanded. But following a spate of rapes of minors, Bisht directed the police to revive the squad with the new power to issue a warning ‘red card’ to ‘suspected harassers’. If a person is caught twice doing a similar act, he will face criminal proceedings.
The squad had earlier drawn flak after reports surfaced about them targeting and publicly shaming young men, giving moral advice to couples, while some were made to do sit-ups or had their heads shaved in public.
Vaibhav Krishna, a Senior Superintendent of Police in Noida, Uttar Pradesh, told Asia Times that police officers for 23 anti-Romeo squads were receiving gender sensitization and training programs to help them handle cases better.
The squad’s further empowerment has raised concerns. Reports of the squad “moral policing” couples and a subsequent increase in sexual violence cases indicated that the measure was not working, according to PoonamKaushik, a women’s rights activist and general secretary of PragatisheelMahilaSangathan.
In the neighboring state of Rajasthan, crimes against women under all sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) jumped by around 40% and rape cases rose by 30% in the first five months of this year compared to the same period last year. This happened despite the government setting up its own version of the anti-Romeo squad in 2018 with policewomen on two-wheelers.
“In Rajasthan, the government has not set up enough women’s help desks or One-Stop Crisis Centers [to assist rape victims]. Instead, they are trying to create these mechanisms [anti-Romeo squad] that are working against women being in public spaces due to moral policing,” said women’s rights activist KavitaSrivastava, who played a key role in the framing of the Vishakha guidelines to address sexual harassment at workplaces.
Now the Rajasthan government plans to set up special investigation units for crimes against women.
Delhi, meanwhile, had at least five rapes reported every day last year, according to NCRB data. So, the state government wants to boost safety by bringing more women into public spaces through free metro and bus rides, and installing 300,000 CCTV cameras. The Delhi Police, which reports to the Home Ministry, also launched a motorcycle-fleet of female cops to patrol the streets called Raftar.
But it is hard to spot this patrol squad on the road, according to Jaya Velankar, director of Jagori, a women’s organization that works to make city spaces safer. She also pointed out that unless roads are safe, free public transport won’t work.
Data from Delhi Police shows that sexual violence against women has only marginally decreased in recent times. In the first six months of 2019, reported cases of rape (IPC 376) were 973, down from 1,005 cases in the same period in 2018, while cases of assault on women with intent to outrage her modesty (IPC 354) decreased by 172 and insults to the modesty of women (IPC 509) decreased by 101.
Madhya Pradesh was the first state to propose the death penalty for men who rape girls under the age of 12, back in 2017. But violence against women has not gone down. Rape of minor girls in the state made headlines throughout June this year. Now the government has taken an initiative to introduce GPS tracking devices and emergency “panic buttons” in passenger vehicles such as buses and taxis.
Maharashtra assigned a 2.5-billion-rupee (US$36 million) budget for women’s safety initiatives. But sexual violence cases have risen despite this. But a survey by non-government groups Akshara and Safetipin found that 44% of areas in Mumbai, the state capital, were unsafe. It said women were only safe to walk on 22% of Mumbai’s streets.
This year the Maharashtra government finally proposed safety measures such as setting up SOS hotspots, tracking apps and installing more CCTV cameras.
However, feminists are not convinced that surveillance leads to greater safety for women or a loss of autonomy.
The rising number of crimes has put state lawmakers in a difficult position and they have criticized the police, who then discourage women from filing cases, Velankar claimed. But a higher number of reported cases also meant that more women were coming out to report violence and governments now had greater responsibility to assure they get justice, she said.
The implementation of a major national scheme to increase women’s safety is also not faring well. Recent reports revealed that between 2015 and 2018, states and union territories used less than 20% of the 8.5-billion-rupee ($124 million) budget allocated to them under the Nirbhaya Fund, which supports schemes for women’s safety. The fund was set up in the aftermath of a brutal gang-rape of a paramedical student in New Delhi in December 2012. Delhi, which has the highest rate of crime against women, fared the worst by using only 0.84% of the 350 million rupees it received.
“The Nirbhaya Fund is used as per proposals from different departments of the central and state governments. It will not be implemented if there is no will to do so,” a senior federal official of the Ministry of Women and Child Development told Asia Times on the condition of anonymity.
Experts say government initiatives and implementation of laws won’t create change if a culture of impunity has made the criminal justice system weak. Kaushik noted that some of the worst accusations against the police stem from recent rape cases of minors in Unnao and Kathua, where they are alleged to have bowed to pressure from people of influence to bury cases and evidence.
The Unnao rape victim, who claimed she was a minor at the time of the incident, tried to self-immolate last year due to the police not registering her complaint against a BJP lawmaker. In the Kathua case verdict, four police officers were convicted among the six accused in connection to rape and murder of an eight-year-old Kashmiri girl.
Another major hurdle that stops victims of sexual violence from getting justice is the low conviction rate in India, which is a mere 25.5% for rape and just under 22% for sexual assault and harassment, according to NCRB data.
Why justice matters in Jammu and Kashmir
By Harinder Baweja
Pakistan has for long sponsored terrorism in?Kashmir. But is it enough for India to point to “causality”, without introspecting on the fact that Kashmir has a long litany of documented human rights violations that have gone unpunished?
Think about it. Why does India get prickly each time allegations of human rights abuse in Jammu and Kashmir are placed at its door? Is it because there is some truth in the allegations? Does India have a lot to hide when it comes to violations committed by its men in uniform?
Dismissing an updated report by Office of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), which faulted both India and Pakistan for not improving the situation in Kashmir, a ministry of external affairs (MEA) spokesperson said last week, “A situation created by years of cross-border terrorist attacks emanating from Pakistan has been analysed without any reference to its causality.”
Reflecting India’s indignation at being called out, the spokesperson said, the report “seems to be a contrived effort to create an artificial parity between the world’s largest and most vibrant democracy and a country that openly practices state-sponsored terrorism.”
Let us get this out of the way first.
Yes, it can be said, with no hesitation at all, that Pakistan has for long sponsored terrorism and will likely continue to practise its “bleed India through a thousand cuts” policy. It has suffered humiliation at the hands of the United Nations Security Council, which recently declared Jaish-e-Mohammad chief, MasoodAzhar, a global terrorist. But that tag too is unlikely to lead to the Pakistani deep State severing its ties with the jihadi outfits it sees as “assets.”
But is it enough for India to point to “causality”, without introspecting on the fact that Kashmir has a long litany of documented human rights violations that have gone unpunished? The Valley, in fact, has erupted in anger each time the men in uniform have crossed the line, but justice – that ever so important balm for a population as alienated as Kashmir’s – has mostly stayed elusive.
Let’s talk about the two occasions when the Valley boiled over with anger.
First, in 2010, Kashmiris took to the streets after the Indian Army, in a fake encounter, killed three civilians and passed them off as infiltrating terrorists. The gross violation was proved beyond a doubt. The unsuspecting civilians had been lured to Machil, a forward sector along the Line of Control, and killed in cold blood. Despite an Army court martial pronouncing five of its men guilty and sentencing them for life, the Armed Forces Tribunal suspended the sentence, arguing that civilians ought not to have been in a forward location, wearing “pathan suits”.
Just like in 2010, when over 100 protesting youth were shot dead, in 2016 too, the civilian toll crossed 100 after stone pelters – angry with the killing of militant commander Burhan Wani – took to the streets. Kashmir gave vent to deep anger and betrayal – not only because Wani was eliminated – but because the trust deficit between the Valley and Delhi had eroded over years, and reached break point.
The pellet gun became the symbol of oppression. It blinded, maimed and killed. The OHCHR report that India summarily dismissed, pointed to the basic tenets of injustice: “There is no information about any new investigation into excessive use of force leading to casualties. There is no information on the status of the five investigations launched into extrajudicial executions in 2016… No prosecutions have been reported.”
Kashmiris live with this reality every day. Why must brazen killings go unpunished? More importantly, why lash out at a report that questions excessive use of force?
The Kashmiri wound is deep and it has festered for too long. One major step forward would be to reduce the repressive security measures. Instead of negating charges of abuse and human rights violations, India ought to take steps towards setting up a truth and reconciliation commission. Why not encourage public hearings in which victims and their families are encouraged to speak?
Reaching out and admitting to violations will help rebuild trust. It is not enough to merely look at figures that point to a reduction in infiltration. The problem now centresaround home-grown militants. Violations only fuel the cycle of violence.
Admit, address and provide justice, for Kashmir is not a piece of real estate, to be ruled by force.
(Courtesy: Hindustan Times)
Remove stigma, report psychiatric ailments
By Dr Arif Maghribi Khan
“All patients are mad. All psychiatric medicines cause sleep.” Yes, this is the common perception in Kashmir. While the fact remains that according to easiest classifications of diseases, there are two types of psychiatric ailments – neurotic and psychotic. In neurotic diseases, patient does not lose contact with reality.
The patient can tell you his or her name, address, locality correctly while in psychotic ailments, patient’s contact with reality is lost and he or she lives in world of their own. Such patients often report seeing angels, strange figures, or hearing voices or sounds, which nobody else sitting with the patient sees or hears.
One example of psychotic ailments is schizophrenia, the prevalence of which is as low as 0.5 per 1000, while ailments like depression, anxiety, phobia form the bulk of psychiatric ailments. Even in this day and age, when all the world of knowledge and information is at our fingertips, we as a society have not been able to differentiate between the two.
So the stigma remains attached with psychiatric ailments thus delaying diagnosis and treatment. It is because of this stigma, people visit psychiatric settings with faces covered or masked. Young adults and children fear to disclose to their parents if they suffer from depression or anxiety disorders, which leads them to live an impaired life, wherein they struggle with issues like loss of interest in studies or even loss of employment as their inability to concentrate consistently tears apart their social and professional lives.
Parents are there to discipline and guide children but not to make them fear depression. Another problem hitting psychiatric healthcare in Kashmir is the myth that all medicines prescribed by psychiatrists cause sleep, while the fact is that psychiatric medicines work by increasing, changing or blocking activities of neurotransmitters.
Nerves carry information from the body to the brain and vice versa. The brain is composed of roughly 86 billion neurons. Chemical messengers called neurotransmitters carry messages between neurons to help the brain receive the information, decide what it means and execute a reaction. Neurotransmitters are responsible for emotional regulation, pain perception, motivation, concentration, memory energy, mood, sleep patterns, libido. Any imbalance can result in Depression, Nightmares, Mental Fatigue, Anxiety, Impaired cognition, attention, and arousal, Apathy, Lack of motivation, Poor attention, and Fatigue. Most of the time a qualified psychiatrist uses anti-depressants which do not cause sleep, in first few months of treatment depending upon the psychiatric ailment anxiolytics, also known as ‘tranquilizers’ are used.
So let’s stop assuming that all medicines cause sleep and we will be dependent on them for rest of our life.
The biggest challenge faced by doctors today and specially psychiatrists is that due to easy availability of internet most patients start Google searching medicine for 8 minutes prescribed by a doctor who studied medicine for 8 years, fact is that not all information surfers get on medicine by Google search is authenticated. Patients are well advised to seek such information from doctor rather than what is searched on internet or what a specialist from other field like education or engineering has to say!
We need to fight epidemic of psychiatric ailments including drug abuse on basis of science and not search on internet. It’s as simple as that, to aware common people doctors, counsellors from field of mental health need to work vigorously in community to clear myths and mist surrounding psychiatric ailments. We need to give patients of anxiety disorders or drug abuse respect and not scare them with unfounded information. Also next time we label some person as mad for being stressed kindly read this survey of again “Nearly 1.8 million adults (45% of the population) in the Kashmir show symptoms of significant mental distress according to a comprehensive mental health survey conducted by the medical humanitarian organisation Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF) between October and December 2015. The research was done in collaboration with the Department of Psychology, Kashmir University and the Institute of Mental Health and Neuroscience (IMHANS).
(Author can be mailed at [email protected])
ACB officers to undergo training at CBI Academy
Srinagar, Jul 18: The Governor-led administration Thursday accorded sanction to the deputation of 20 officers and officials of the State’s Anti-Corruption...
Hafiz Saeed sent to 7-day judicial custody
Islamabad: Jamaat ud-Dawa (JuD) chief Hafiz Saeed on Wednesday was sent to seven-day judicial custody following his arrest on “terror...
Soldier hit by falling tree in Kupwara, dies
Srinagar, Jul 18: A 35-year-old soldier died after a tree fell on him due to a landslide while he was...
1 killed, 9 injured in Poonch road accident
Jammu, July 18: One person was killed and nine others injured on Thursday in a road accident in Jammu and...
Rajnath Singh to visit Kargil on July 20
Defence Minister Rajnath Singh will visit Kargil on July 20 to pay tributes to soldiers who laid down their lives...
Kathua rape, murder: HC notice to accused, J&K on plea by victim’s father
Chandigarh, July 18: The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday issued notice to the accused and the State of...
Ayodhya case: SC allows mediation to continue till July 31
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed mediation process to continue in the politically sensitive Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land...
Detention of Jadhav illegal, call upon Pak to release him: Jaishankar
Describing the detention of Indian national Kulbhushan Jadhav in Pakistan as “illegal” and under “fabricated” charges, External Affairs Minister S...
Appreciate ICJ’s decision not to acquit, return Jadhav to India: Imran Khan
A day after the International Court of Justice in The Hague directed Pakistan to review the trial accorded to Indian...
SC declines urgent hearing on plea against states for failing to curb lynching
New Delhi, July 18: The Supreme Court on Thursday declined urgent hearing on a plea seeking initiation of contempt proceedings...