The issue of jawans’ right to complain about poor service conditions in the army and paramilitary forces also came up for discussion
The recent India Legal Show took up two diverse topics for debate and discussion. One was the need for keeping a check on the unaccounted funds flowing into political parties in the name of donation. This has been considered a major source of black money creation in India. The Supreme Court’s recent decision supporting IT exemption enjoyed by political parties on funding has escalated the issue further. The Court had gone further to say that parties needed money to propagate their beliefs amongst the public. It had also made it clear that changes if any needed to be brought in by the government.
The second topic of discussion was the recent leaks on social media by jawans, both in the paramilitary and army, complaining about poor service conditions. The complaints rattled both the government as well as the armed forces. The Army chief had issued instructions that the jawans will have to route their complaints through “effective” grievance mechanisms ingrained in the Army system while the home ministry had called for an inquiry into several complaints posted on social media.
Editor-in-chief, India Legal, Inderjit Badhwar supported the court ruling on IT exemptions. He said: “Whatever reforms were to be brought, should be brought through legislatures. In the McCutcheon vs Federal Election Commission, the United States Supreme Court invalidated the imposition of a limit on contributions an individual can make over a two-year period to national party and federal candidate committees. The donations made by a company or an individual speak about his/her political views and this judgment protects that; it protects the right to free speech. I am giving US example as our constitution is very similar to theirs.”
He further added that what worked was of course transparency, and, to start with, the party at the centre should come forward and make its donations transparent. “In my personal opinion, political parties should also be brought under the Right to Information Act.”
Retired chief justice of the Gauhati High Court K Sreedhar Rao also supported the exemption of political parties from IT Act. “It is true that for electoral reforms, we have to bring it through legislature. Political parties are doing public duty. If they have to pay tax, then their donations will suffer and there won’t be enough money to do their duty. As far as transparency of donors, it is not possible in India. Business houses and corporations will suffer. Once one political party comes to know who donated how much amount to what party, there stands the risk of that business house being blackmailed by the opposition parties… The basic problem with our elections is that it is driven by money power and muscle power.” He said that state funding was one of the ways to neutralize the problem of money power in elections.
Well-known political scientist and an expert in Indian constitution, Subhas C Kashyap reiterated that there were no separate laws for political parties except the Representation of the People Act 2010. He said: “We constantly try to bring laws for political parties. Their accounts should be maintained and audited regularly. The humongous money these political parties spend on their campaigns is all black money and unaccounted for.”
Taking the discussion further, Kashyap said, “There were about 1,900 parties registered with the Election Commission (EC) but few stood in elections. They registered just to get income tax exemption. EC states that they cannot de-register any party once they register themselves with the poll watchdog. But one should know that when EC registers these parties they also have the power to de-register them. EC should show the courage and exercise the power.”
Badhwar supported the reforms and commented: “People with minority votes should not be given electoral positions. Anybody is given money to stand in the elections to split the majority votes.”
Retired Lt. General AK Bakshi said that the army and the BSF functioned in different environments where fundamental rights were suspended. “We do not have the right to religion, right to association, right to freedom of speech, etc. But there is an internal redressal mechanism to put forth issues. Section 27 of the Army Act 1950 gives that provision… I have worked in that area as the commanding officer. Weather is harsh in high altitudes. Sometimes it is difficult to get fresh food up in high altitudes. They get tinned foods. The water is hard. Sometimes food cannot be cooked well in that hard water. There have been instances when they had to make tea in their helmets. Now if somebody takes that instance and complains that they are going to war but do not even have utensils to cook their food, that is unfair. I am not saying that a jawan shouldn’t have complained but a mechanism is there to address such grievances and complaints and he should have followed that.”
Section 27 in the Army Act 1950 allows an aggrieved officer to complain to the centre in case his complaint to the commanding officer or any other superior officer is not redressed.
K Sreedhar Rao said: “There are certain institutions where general rights can’t be enforced like in military, police, etc. They have a code of conduct and this jawan has definitely violated it. This instance has created a dent in the Army.”
Badhwar said the case was sensitive and should be probed thoroughly. He added: “The bondage that jawans and their officers share is a special one. But when the system breaks down, the reason behind it should be looked into. Every jawan ought to take the permission for posting anything on social media. If he has taken such a risk and turned against his officers, it should be investigated. The army, government and BSF should be sensitive about his side too.”
Is an introspection of the system required? Bakshi commented: “The army is not frozen. There have been developments. They have recently brought roti-makers. At high altitudes, due to harsh weather conditions and work pressure, we cannot eat much. What to do with the surplus ration?… If anyone has any complain he/she can take up the matter with his immediate seniors. They can write letters and conduct interviews. Everybody is accessible there… Also, more than finding out about the enemy it is important that the enemy doesn’t find out about us. Hence such strict regulations about social media are there.”
Such food grievances are not the only issues that have raised questions on the integrity of the military. Pension is also one of the greatest concerns. The major problem is the Ministry of Defence appeals against almost every pension case and that leads to the concerned person fighting his case in court for years. Badhwar said: “Parrikar has instructed the Ministry of Defence to stop the practice of appeal. Ninety nine per cent of the pension cases are challenged and taken to courts where it takes years to fight them.”
—Compiled by Usha Rani Das
Lead Picture: Bhavana Gaur