SBI’s Arundhati Bhattacharya amongst Forbes’ most powerful women

SBI Chairperson Arundhati Bhattacharya is amongst the 5 Indian women who featured in this year’s Forbes’ 100 most powerful women in the world list. The list was topped by German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Indian women in the list:-

Indra Nooyi (Pepsi Co – 13th) (Indian Born but US Citizen now)
Arundhati Bhattacharya (SBI – 36th)
Chanda Kocchar (ICICI Bank– 43rd)
Padamshree Warrior (Cisco – 71st)
Kiran Mazumdar (Biocon – 92nd) (Indian Born but US Citizen now)
Top 10 Most Powerful Women in the World:

Angela Merkel (Germany – Politics)
Janet Yellen (US – Finance)
Melinda Gates (US – Philanthropy/NGO)
Dilma Rousseff (Brazil – Politics)
Christine Lagarde (France – Philanthropy/NGO)
Hillary Clinton (US - Politics)
Mary Barra (US – Business)
Michelle Obama (US – Politics)
Sheryl Sandberg (US – Technology)
Virginia Rometty (US – Technology)

For quicker decision-making

By abolishing the system of having Empowered Groups of Ministers and Groups of Ministers — of which there were nine and 21 respectively that he inherited from the UPA government — Prime Minister Narendra Modi has sent out an unequivocal message: the new BJP-led NDA intends to end the “policy paralysis” that its predecessor was accused of, and achieve its goal of “minimum government, maximum governance.” A press note issued by the Prime Minister’s Office said this would empower the Ministries, expedite decision-making and usher in greater accountability. The mechanism of EGoMs and GoMs had been created by the first NDA government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee to tackle complex policy issues and resolve the clash of interests that are inevitable in a democracy, more so in a coalition where inter-ministerial turf wars are harder to resolve. However, under the UPA it often became an instrument to delay decisions. At one stage in UPA-II, around 80 such groups were grappling with a vast array of issues ranging from contentious matters such as the creation of Telangana, to the hotly debated ones of food security and land acquisition, to routine subjects such as post-retirement medical schemes and the age of superannuation for public sector workers. In the process, the authority and supremacy of the PMO got eroded, with the last incumbent, Dr. Manmohan Singh, virtually handing over his powers to the Ministers who headed most of these groups — Pranab Mukherjee, Sharad Pawar, P. Chidambaram and A.K. Antony, all men of differing styles and persuasion.

Mr. Modi has made it clear he will brook no delay in taking decisions, and that he will have the last word on policy-making. While this should restore coherence in the functioning of the government, especially as the BJP’s decisive electoral mandate will ensure it is not hampered by difficult coalition partners, Mr. Modi must guard against administration by fiat. The Congress, citing the PMO press release that has asked all Ministers who have difficulties in deciding issues relating to their own Ministry to refer them to the PMO and the Cabinet Secretariat for resolution, has cautioned that this should not lead to an unhealthy “centralisation of power” and an “autocratic regime in the future.” An omniscient super-PMO must not destroy the Cabinet system that envisages decisions through consensus. Rather, Mr. Modi should act as a facilitator, using persuasion and not diktat. He must rely on the collective wisdom of his Cabinet colleagues to create an effective — and harmonious — administration. In order to meet people’s expectations, Mr. Modi must not be tempted to become a single point of power, governing as he conducted his campaign, in a presidential manner, focussing all authority in the PMO. What worked in Gujarat may not succeed all across India.

One person dies on Indian roads every three minutes

One person dies on Indian roads every three minutes
Senior cabinet minister Gopinath Munde's death in a car crash in the capital Tuesday brought into sharp focus once again the alarming number of fatalities on Indian roads with little thought on safety.

To put this disquieting data in perspective, almost half the equivalent population of some countries like Iceland or the Maldives is wiped out on Indian roads every year.

As per the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), under the Ministry of Home Affairs, as many as many as 461 people died and 1,301 more were injured "every day" from traffic accidents in the country during 2012. (See Separate Box on Key Data)

This makes it 19 deaths every hour or more than one death every three minutes.

Kamajit Soi, an international expert on road safety and vice chair of Punjab Road Safety Council, has incidentally written a letter to union Transport Minister Nitin Gadkari, seeking immediate steps to end what he terms as "massacre" on Indian roads.

"Over 1.2 million innocent people died on the roads in the last 10 years of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. The last government did nothing to save lives," Soi, an advisor on road safety to the Asian Development Bank, told IANS.

"We have been banging our head against the wall. No one is bothered. Hundreds of lives are lost every day. It is like jumbo jet crashing every day. I hope the Narendra Modi government takes steps to ensure Indian roads become safer. I've written to him too."

Munde is among the several known people, including political leaders, who have died on Indian roads.

The list includes former president Zail Singh, former central minister Rajesh Pilot, former Punjab finance minister Kanwaljit Singh, former Delhi chief minister Sahib Singh Verma and Telugu Desam Party leader Yerran Naidu.

Little wonder the World Health Organization (WHO) says India accounts for the highest number of deaths in road accidents. China with 97,551, the US with 41,292 and and Russia with 37,349 have much lower deaths on their roads but with much more cars.

"Worldwide, over 1.4 million lives are lost annually; India is contributing 11 percent (to it)," Soi said.
"The incidence of accidental deaths has shown an increasing trend during the period 2003-2012 with an increase of 51.8 percent in the year 2012 as compared to 2002," the bureau said in its report "Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India - 2012".

"The population growth during the period 2003 to 2012 was 13.6 percent whereas the increase in the rate of accidental deaths during the same period was 34.2 percent," the report added.

At the same time, the report said, road accidents in the country may have come down marginally by 0.02 percent during 2012 compared to 2011, but the casualties have increased by 1.6 percent.

Among the causes of accidental deaths in 2012, road accidents topped the list with 35.2 percent, while rail-road accounted for 7.4 percent of the deaths.

"A total of 473,416 traffic accidents cases were reported during 2012, comprising 440,042 road accident cases, 1,762 rail-road accidents cases and 31,612 other railway accidents cases," said the report.

In sheer numbers, as many as 168,301 people died in the country in 2012 from traffic accidents with road accidents accounting for 139,091 -- this is almost half the population of countries like Iceland and the Maldives.

"It's not the killer roads alone where road safety is compromised. Even auto-makers continue to sell vehicles that are hardly safe. India's most successful car Maruti-800 alone has accounted for over 700,000 deaths since it was launched in 1985," said Soi.

"Such cars have been nothing but moving coffins."

no to tobacco

That over 27 per cent of tobacco consumers in India fall in the 15-24 year age bracket amply demonstrates how successful the tobacco companies have been in continually enticing the vulnerable sections of the population into the suicidal practice. The addition of new customers every year even as thousands of patrons die annually ensures that the tobacco companies’ customer base remains wide and tall. If the global tobacco-related mortality is about 5.5 million people annually, India’s burden alone is nearly one million. With nearly 35 per cent of the adult population in the country addicted to the dangerous substance rolled in paper or leaf or packed in plastic sachets, India is the second largest consumer of tobacco products in the world. Besides the high levels of mortality and morbidity, there is a huge economic cost involved in treating people with diseases caused directly or indirectly by tobacco use. As a result, the out-of-pocket expenditure on medical treatment results in “higher poverty rates.” A recently released Health Ministry report estimates that 9.3 lakh people in India are affected by the health costs of tobacco. According to the report, the total health expenditure burden of tobacco in the year 2011 was a little over Rs.100,000 crore. To put it in perspective, the amount was “12 per cent more than the combined State and central government expenditure on health in 2011-12.” The revenue earned through excise duty in the same year was a paltry 17 per cent of the health burden of tobacco. The “benefit” argument of revenue generation through sales therefore stands completely negated.

It is for these reasons that the Central government, which considers health to be one of the priority areas, should simultaneously implement multiple strategies to prevent people, particularly children as young as 15 years, from getting addicted to nicotine and help the existing users to quit smoking and/or chewing tobacco. If the government is indeed serious about reducing the prevalence by 15 per cent by 2020 and 30 per cent by 2025, the most effective way of achieving it is by raising taxes. It is indeed heartening that the new Union Health Minister “supports” higher taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products; raising tax on tobacco is the WHO’s theme this year. But for any tax increase to become effective, the price difference between various brands and different tobacco products must be minimal. But India follows a bizarre, producer-friendly excise duty structure for cigarettes, beedis and chewing tobacco that makes a mockery of taxation. Hence, a complete overhaul of the taxation system is warranted to achieve the desired benefits. It is time the tobacco issue was addressed with greater seriousness.

Indo-French air exercise begins

The fifth Indo-French bilateral air exercise — Garuda-V — began at the Jodhpur Air Base on Monday. It is aimed at enhancing operational cooperation and validating capabilities. The exercise will involve the assets of IAF’s main operational formations, including the Gandhinagar-based South Western Air Command and the Allahabad-based Central Air Command.

Frontline fighter aircraft of the IAF, including the SU 30, Mig-27 (UPG), MIG- 21 Bison, and force multipliers such as the AWACS and Flight Refueller Aircraft IL 78 are participating while the French have fielded their frontline Rafale Fighter aircraft along with the KC 135 Refueller.

A Defence spokesperson said during the war games both the Air Forces will practice aerial warfare, including manoeuvres to carry out surgical strikes,. In this fortnight-long exercise the Air Forces would also engage in operations based on their ‘operational philosophy’ and methodology of operations practising various challenging air situation scenarios. The exercise would help both in appreciating the intricacies of planning and conduicting combat missions in an operational environment.

The exercise, whose previous edition was held at Istres, France, in 2010 will end on June 13.

Environment Protection under Constitutional Framework of India

must read for ias mains
Environment Protection under Constitutional Framework of India


            The constitution of India is not an inert but a living document which evolves and grows with time. The specific provisions on environment protection in the constitution are also result of this evolving nature and growth potential of the fundamental law of the land. The preamble to our constitution ensures socialist pattern of the society and dignity of the individual. Decent standard of living and pollution free environment is inherent in this. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 defines environment as “environment includes water, air and land and the interrelationship which exists among and between air, water and land and human beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-organism and property”.

            The chapter on fundamental duties of the Indian Constitution clearly imposes duty on every citizen to protect environment. Article 51-A (g), says that “It shall be duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life and to have compassion for living creatures.”

            The Directive principles under the Indian constitution directed towards ideals of building welfare state. Healthy environment is also one of the elements of welfare state.  Article 47 provides that the State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties. The improvement of public health also includes the protection and improvement of environment without which public health cannot be assured. Article 48 deals with organization of agriculture and animal husbandry. It directs the State to take steps to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines. In particular, it should take steps for preserving and improving the breeds and prohibiting the slaughter of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle. Article 48 -A of the constitution says that “the state shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country”.

            The Constitution of India under part III guarantees fundamental rights which are essential for the development of every individual and to which a person is inherently entitled by virtue of being human alone. Right to environment is also a right without which development of individual and realisation of his or her full potential shall not be possible. Articles 21, 14 and 19 of this part have been used for environmental protection.

            According to Article 21 of the constitution, “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”. Article 21 has received liberal interpretation from time to time after the decision of the Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India, (AIR 1978 SC 597). Article 21 guarantees fundamental right to life. Right to environment, free of danger of disease and infection is inherent in it. Right to healthy environment is important attribute of right to live with human dignity. The right to live in a healthy environment as part of Article 21 of the Constitution was first recognized in the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra vs. State, AIR 1988 SC 2187 (Popularly known as Dehradun Quarrying Case). It is the first case of this kind in India, involving issues relating to environment and ecological balance in which Supreme Court directed to stop the excavation (illegal mining) under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. In M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086 the Supreme Court treated the right to live in pollution free environment as a part of fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

           Excessive noise creates pollution in the society. The constitution of India under Article 19 (1) (a) read with Article 21 of the constitution guarantees right to decent environment and right to live peacefully. In PA Jacob vs. The Superintendent of Police Kottayam, AIR 1993 Ker 1, the Kerala High Court held that freedom of speech under article 19 (1)(a)  does not include freedom to use loud speakers or sound amplifiers.  Thus, noise pollution caused by the loud speakers can be controlled under article 19 (1) (a) of the constitution.

          Article 19 (1) (g) of the Indian constitution confers fundamental right on every citizen to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.  This is subject to reasonable restrictions. A citizen cannot carry on business activity, if it is health hazards to the society or general public. Thus safeguards for environment protection are inherent in this.  The Supreme Court, while deciding the matter relating to carrying on trade of liquor in Cooverjee B. Bharucha  Vs Excise commissioner, Ajmer (1954, SC 220) observed that, if there is clash between  environmental protection and right to freedom of trade and occupation, the courts have to balance environmental interests with the fundamental rights to carry on any occupations.

            Public Interest Litigation under Article 32 and 226 of the constitution of India resulted in a wave of environmental litigation. The leading environmental cases decided by the Supreme Court includes case of closure of limestone quarries in the Dehradun region (Dehradun Quarrying case, AIR 1985 SC 652), the installation of safeguard at a chlorine plant in Delhi (M.C. Mehta V. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1037) etc.  In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs. Union of India (1996) 5 SCC 647, the Court observed that “the Precautionary Principle” and “the Polluter Pays Principle” are essential features of “Sustainable Development.”

            At local and village level also, Panchayats have been empowered under the constitution to take measures such as soil conservation, water management, forestry and protection of the environment and promotion of ecological aspect.

            Environment protection is part of our cultural values and traditions. In Atharvaveda, it has been said that “Man’s paradise is on earth; this living world is the beloved place of all; It has the blessings of nature’s bounties; live in a lovely spirit”. Earth is our paradise and it is our duty to protect our paradise. The constitution of India embodies the framework of protection and preservation of nature without which life cannot be enjoyed. The knowledge of constitutional provisions regarding environment protection is need of the day to bring greater public participation, environmental awareness, environmental education and sensitize the people to preserve ecology and environment.