What is religion?

It may not be possible, therefore, to devise a precise definition of universal application as to what is religion and what are matters of religious belief or religious practice. Religion is not susceptible to a precise definition. It is a matter of faith and belief. Religion is not identical to Dharma.

In A.S. Nerayan Deekshitulu v State of Andhra Pradesh, SCC 548, the Supreme Court has observed: 

"Very often the words 'religion' and 'dharma' are used to signify one and the same concept or notion, to put it differently, they are used interchangeably the word 'religion' in the two articles has really been used, not as is colloquially understood by the religion, but in the sense of it comprehending our concept of Dharma. The English language having had no parallel word of dharma', the word religion was used in these two articles. The difference between religion and 'dharma' is eloquently manifested when it is remembered that this court's precept is "यतो धर्मस्ततो जय:". It is apparent that the word 'dharma' in this canon or, for that matter, in our saying: " धर्मो रक्षति रक्षित:." does not mean religion, but the same has been used in the sense defined in the some dictionaries. Our dhama is said to be 'Sanatana' i.e., one which has etemal values, one which is neither time bound nor space bound. It is because of this that Rig Veda has referred to the existence of "Sanatana Dharma". The concept of 'dharma', therefore has been with us for time immemorial. The word is derived from the root Dh.r - which denotes: "upholding", supporting. nourishing, and 'sustaining'. The word 'religion', as used in articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution cannot be confined, cabined and crabbed, to what is generally thought to be religion.

The distinction between religion' and 'dharma' has also been explained by saying that religion is enriched by visionary, methodology and theology, whereas dharma blooms in the realm of direct experience. The signs and symptoms of dharma are that it has no room for narrow-mindedness, sectarianism, blind faith, and dogma. The purity of dharma, therefore, cannot be compromised with sectarianism. A sectarian religion is open to a limied people whereas dharma embraces all and excludes none. This is the core of our dharma, our psyche."

Absolute power corrupts absolutely

यह बात महात्मा गांधी भी अच्छी तरह से जानते थे इसलिए वे हमेशा ग्राम स्वराज की कल्पना करते हुए शक्ति के विकेंद्रीकरण पर ज़ोर देते थें। गांधीजी का कहना था कि जो हम स्वतंत्रता संग्राम लड़ रहे हैं वह अंग्रेजों के विरुद्ध नहीं बल्कि अंग्रेजी व्यवस्थाओं के विरुद्ध है। वह कहा करते थे अंग्रेज रह जाए और उनकी व्यवस्था चली जाए तो मैं समझूंगा कि स्वराज आ गया और अंग्रेज चले गए पर उनकी व्यवस्था है रह जाए तो मैं समझूंगा कि स्वराज नहीं आया। वह संग्राम केवल स्वतंत्रता प्राप्ति के लिए नहीं था। उसका उद्देश्य स्वराज्य की स्थापना था उस स्वराज का अर्थ था कि भारत के सार्वजनिक व्यवस्थाएं भारत की विशिष्ट सभ्यता एवं प्रकृति के अनुरूप होंगी, भारत के लोग भारतीय ढंग से अनुशासित जीवन जीयेंगे। 

अब सवाल उठता है कि साध्य एवं साधन दोनों के प्रति इतनी स्पष्टता होते हुए जो स्वतंत्रता संग्राम गांधी जी जैसे सत्याग्रह के नेतृत्व में लड़ा गया उसकी परिणति अंग्रेजी व्यवस्था को सुदृढ़ एवं स्थाई करने वाले संविधान में कैसे हुई? यह निश्चित ही भारतीय इतिहास का एक अनुत्तरित प्रश्न है। 

कैसे भारतीय संविधान में गांधीवादी विचारों को दबाया गया और पश्चिमी विचार और व्यवस्थाओं को मूल रूप दिया गया। हम सब भारत के वर्तमान दृश्य को देखकर दुखी और चिंतित है। स्वतंत्रता प्राप्ति के 75 वर्ष बाद हमारी चार पीढ़ियांँ गुजर चुकी हैं और पांचवी पीढ़ी अब भारतभूमि पर है। ऐसे समय पर जब हम भारत को देखते हैं तो हमारे सामने यह प्रश्न खड़ा होता है कि क्या यह भारत का वही चित्र है जिसका निर्माण करने के लिए इस देश ने एक लंबा और विकट स्वाधीनता संग्राम लड़ा था? स्वाधीनता संग्राम का जिन्होंने दर्शन तैयार किया, उसके लिए जिन्होंने प्रेरणा भूमि तैयार की, उन लोगों का स्वाधीन भारत का चित्र क्या था? वह चित्र मूर्त क्यों नहीं कर पाए? क्या हमारे अंदर संकल्प की कमी थी? क्या हमें इसकी स्पष्ट कल्पना नहीं थी? क्या कारण है कि वह चित्र नहीं बन पाया? 

आज कि जो शिक्षा प्रणाली, प्रशासन तंत्र है यह तो अंग्रेजों का बनाया हुआ है। उन्होंने क्रमशः इस तंत्र को खड़ा किया। हम उसका विस्तार करते चले जा रहे हैं। इस संदर्भ में डॉ राम मनोहर लोहिया का एक वाक्य स्मरण में आता है वह कहते थे कि Congress government is equal to British government minus efficiency plus corruption. उनके कहने की अपनी ही शैली थी और उस शैली में वे कहते थे कि यह जो ब्रिटिश गवर्नमेंट की कार्य पद्धति है, यह उनका जो प्रशासन तंत्र है, वही हम जैसे का तैसा लेकर चल रहे हैं, उसमें हमने कोई परिवर्तन यह संशोधन नहीं की है बस उसे और अधिक असक्षम और भ्रष्ट बना लिया है। 

गांधी जी ने 1909 में हिंद स्वराज लिखा था उसमें उन्होंने पश्चिम की सभ्यता को पूरी तरह से अस्वीकार कर दिया। उन्होंने कहा कि यह सब बता हमें नहीं चाहिए। 1945 में भी अपने उसी आग्रह पर अटल रहे और अपने हिंद स्वराज के सपने को फिर से रेखांकित किया, फिर से दोहराया। लेकिन भारत तो उस रास्ते पर नहीं चला। गांधी का कहना था कि भारत शहरों में नहीं गांव में रहेगा, भारत महलों में नहीं झोपड़ियों में रहेगा, लेकिन हम तो अब केवल अट्टालिकाऔ का निर्माण कर रहे हैं, केवल शहरों का विस्तार कर रहे हैं। ग्राम शहर बनने का प्रयत्न कर रहे हैं। जिस सपने को लेकर हमने स्वाधीनता आंदोलन में प्रवेश किया और विजयी हुए, उससे उल्टी दिशा में जाते दिखाई दे रहे हैं।  

स्त्रोत: श्री देवेंद्र स्वरूप द्वारा संविधान की औपनिवेशिक पृष्ठभूमि। 

UP Govt's Anti-Conversion Law and Love Jihad

Today Uttar Pradesh Governor promulgates UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance 2020. Most media outlets have referred to it as an ordinance against 'love jihad,' but the UP government maintains that it is tackling the forceful conversion and not just the alleged phenomenon of 'love jihad.'

On this point, the State Government has to say that “The way in which religious conversions take place by means of deceit, lies, force and dishonesty is heart wrenching, and it was necessary to have a law in this regard." Therefore we have adopted an effective law to check conversion with some specific punitive provisions against individuals and organizations if found to have committed conversion, by demonstrating the use of force deception by luring marriage or some other improper way.

What does the law say?

According to the law, 

• The Unlawful conversion for getting married by force, deceit, undue pressure or by way of alluring into marriage will now be a non-bailable offence.

• Such marriages would lead to imprisonment of a maximum of 10 years and penalty of 50 thousand rupees.

• The ordinance further recommends 1 year to 5 years of imprisonment if the accused fails to prove that the conversion of the woman was not unlawful.

• The jail sentence for the offence against the woman from the Scheduled cast, Scheduled Tribe community would be of 3-10 years.

• It the case is of mass conversion, similar provision of 3-10 year imprisonment has been prescribed. Also, the registration of the organisation involving into mass conversion would be cancelled.

• The ordinance would declare the unlawful marriages null and void.

• Further, if any couple wants to marry after converting into any other religion, they need to take permission from the relevant district magistrate two months prior to the marriage.

Is Uttar Pradesh the first state to enact an anti-conversion law?

No, In 1967-68, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh enacted local laws called the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act 1967 and the Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantraya Adhiniyam 1968. Chattisgarh inherited the law when it was carved out of Madhya Pradesh.

The Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 1978 was enacted to prohibit the conversion from one religious faith to any other by use of force or inducement. As the state has not formulated rules, the law is yet to be implemented in the State.

The Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Forcible Conversion of Religion Ordinance was promulgated by the Governor on October 5, 2002 and subsequently adopted by the State Assembly. However, this law was repealed in 2004.

The Rajasthan Assembly passed an Act in 2006, however, the Presidential assent is still awaited.

A new generation of anti-conversion laws started in 2018 under the Narendra Modi government, Both Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh added the word ‘marriage’ to their acts — Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act and Himachal Freedom of Religion Act — and said that even if conversion is done for marriage, it has to be notified.

In Uttarakhand, the law empowered the parents and siblings of the individual being converted with the right to go and complain to the district magistrate if they feel a conversion is taking place without following the regular process.

Recently Allahabad high court said in a verdict (Salamat Ansari-Priyanka Kharwar case) that the right to choose a partner or live with a person of choice was part of a citizen’s fundamental right to life and liberty.

The verdict also said earlier court rulings that ‘religious conversion for marriage was unacceptable’ was not good in law.

History of “Love Jihad”

Allegations of Love Jihad first rose to national awareness in September 2009. Love Jihad was initially alleged to be conducted in Kerala and Mangalore in the coastal Karnataka region. According to the Kerala Catholic Bishops Council, by October 2009 up to 4,500 girls in Kerala had been targeted, whereas Hindu Janajagruti Samiti claimed that 30,000 girls had been converted in Karnataka alone.

The then Congress CM in Kerala, Oommen Chandy, admitted in the assembly that between 2006-2012, 2,667 women from other faiths had been converted to Islam because they married Muslim men.

“The Global Council of Indian Christians came up with the insinuation that a global Islamist project was being implemented in Kerala,” This caught spark after a Christian girl who had converted to Islam was arrested for supplying SIM cards to Lashkar-e-Taiba operatives.

“In Kerala some of this movement against a kind of love-jihad also came up from the Left — V.S. Achuthanandan (former chief minister of Kerala) said that Muslims were converting girls of other religions,”

The Protectors of Fundamental Rights themselves are violating the Fundamental Rights

Yesterday the Supreme Court has not only granted bail to Arnab Goswami but has also declared that the Mumbai High Court erred in denying him bail and thus it violated individual liberty. What action is being taken against the HC judge? Does he get to violate liberty yet continue to resume work as usual? At the minimum, he must be suspended from work for a period of one year and demoted. How else can we hold the judges accountable? How do we stop them from becoming rottweilers of corrupt local politicians?

 

The main problem is that the judiciary will take no action against the judiciary.  And the executive has no power to take any action on the judiciary for wrong judgments.  Even most politicians employ the system to do their dirty work. Ultimately it is a common man and the whistle blower and the honest man who suffers at the hands of the system.

 

Nobody wants to utter a single word against the judiciary not because they have trust upon them, but because of the fear of contempt proceedings. Sorry to say colonial laws are still prevailing in our society which are making us feel so helpless.

“The Protectors of Fundamental Rights themselves are violating the Fundamental rights of citizens”.

 

The judiciary is the only institution in the country which remains totally unaccountable. There is no institution with disciplinary powers over the judiciary. In order to provide for their independence, the Constitution made judges of the superior courts immune from removal except by impeachment. The Ramaswami case and subsequent attempts to impeach judges have demonstrated the total impracticality of that instrument to discipline judges. There has thereafter been persistent talk of setting up an independent National Judicial Commission, but it has been a non starter with the judiciary firmly opposing any outside body with disciplinary powers over them. However, the self disciplining mechanism suggested by the judiciary itself by way of an "In house committee" of judges to enforce a code of conduct nominally adopted by the judiciary in 1999, has also been a non starter in the face of a reluctance on the part of judges to inquire into the conduct of their own brethren. That is one of the reasons why the Parliamentary Standing Committee has rejected the government’s draft of the Judicial Inquiry amendment bill which proposes an "in house Judicial Council" of sitting judges to inquire into judicial misconduct. The bill would in fact make the removal of judges even more difficult than at present.

Compounding the problem further is the Supreme Court’s decree that no judge can be investigated for even criminal offences without the written consent of the Chief Justice of India. In the last 16 years since that judgement, no sitting judge in India has been subjected to a criminal investigation. And not because people have not tried. In a case, former Chief Justice of India refused to accord permission to register an FIR against the senior judge of Lucknow who had purchased land worth 7 Crores for 5 lacs from well known members of a land mafia in the name of his wife.

 

Independence of judiciary is "sacrosanct", and unless there are clear-cut allegations of misconduct, the gratification of any kind and extraneous influences, disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated merely on the ground that a wrong order has been passed by a judicial officer.

The Farm bills is a revolution towards making farmers Atmanirbhar

 “Revolutions are never created by poor people. They are actually created by middle-class people. They are created by people who are educated to have opportunities. But these opportunities are blocked by the political or economic system.” – Fukuyama

Recently Modi govt has succeeded in passing three farm Bills in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. The bills was passed in the current session of Parliament.

Agriculture in India is highly fragmented because of its small holding sizes. It highly depends on weather. There also exists production uncertainties and market unpredictability. Thus, agriculture is highly risky here and inefficient in input & output management. Thus, these bills has been introduced in order to transfer the risk of market unpredictability from the farmer to the sponsor.

What are the Newly Passed Agriculture Ordinance in 2020?

Bill 1 - Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill, 2020

This farm bill 2020 let the intra and interstate farmers produce even outside the premises of APMC markets without paying any extra market free, cess or levy as State governments are prohibited from levying any of those.

How does it help?

• Removal of barriers for Intra/ inter-state business of agricultural products.
• Farmers can sell their product to anyone coming from anywhere.
• Seamless electronic trade is supported here.
• Encourages ending the monopoly of traders.
• Increased competition among consumers or buyers.
• Farmers get better and return thus increasing income rate.
• Free movement of agro products from surplus to deficit regions.
• This farm bill 2020 creates a national market.
• End consumer gets better items at cheaper prices.

 

Bill 2 - Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price Assurance and Farm Services Bill 2020

This farmers bill 2020 aims for framing contractual farming between a buyer and farmer, through an agreement. This should be done before the production of any agro product. Three-tier dispute settlement framework is provided here – Sub-Divisional Magistrate, the conciliation board and Appellate Authority.

How does it help?

• This agriculture reform bill opens the window for farmers to enter into agreements with large buyers, retailers and exporters.
• Farmers get to know the price before starting sowing.
• The market risk gets transferred to sponsor from farmers.
• High-quality seeds, pesticides and fertilisers can be availed by the farmers.
• Private investors will be interested in farming.
• A door to the global market.

 

Bill 3 - The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill

This agriculture ordinance 2020 empowers the Government of India to control the supply of particular agro-food products under unusual situations like war. In case of a steep hike of price, stock limits can be applied on farm products.

How does it help?

• Many agro foods like pulses, onion, potatoes, oilseeds, cereals, and edible oils are removed from the essential commodities list by this farm bill 2020.
• Except under unusual circumstances, this newly passed agriculture bill does away with the imposition of stock limit.
• Business and traders get rid of harassment.
• With the improvement of storage facilities, the wastage rate is likely to get reduced.
• This latest agriculture policy aims for a stable price which will eventually help in raising farm incomes.

The bills are aimed at transforming agriculture in the country and raising farmers’ income and is to make way for creating the "One India, One Agriculture Market’. Also the law intends to end the monopoly of Agriculture Produce Market Committees (APMCs) in carrying out the trade of farm produce in the country.

But many opposition parties including the congress, are opposing the bills. And misleading the farmers by spreading misinformations. Let’s bust their myths with facts –

MYTH - The bill does not provide any price guarantee for farmers. The practice of procuring grains at MSP by central agencies like FCI will end.

FACTS -  The bill ensures a price guarantee for farmers under the agreement and provision for a penalty in case of payment failure. Further, MSP is an independent structure which will not be impacted by the bill.

 MYTH - The commission agents under APMC are verified and payment is secured. The bill doesn't safeguard farmer payments.

FACTS -  The Bill mandates every trader to make payment to the farmer on the same day or within maximum three working days.

MYTH - Farmers will be destroyed by the Government by getting them into contracts with big corporates.

FACTS - Contract farming has been implemented by many states in the past several decades. Other states have also passed separate Contract Farming Acts.

MYTH - The bills are anti-farmer without any protection to them.

FACTS - The safety net of MSP will remain. Also govt increased the MSP price for Rabi Crops. These bills will add to the options the farmers have Farmers will be able to enter into direct agreements for sale of produce with food product companies, etc.

MYTH - The Government wants farmers to sell their lands to capitalists.

FACTS - Farmers have been provided adequate protection in the bills. sale, lease or mortgage of farmers' land is totally prohibited and farmers' land is also protected against any recovery. Also effective dispute resolution mechanism has been provided for with clear timelines for redressal.

MYTH - Farm bills are a conspiracy to phase out the safety net of Minimum Support Price (MSP) to farmers.

FACTS - Farm bills are not going to affect MSP at all. The MSP system will continue. Farm bills are creating additional trading opportunities outside the APMC market yards to help farmers get better prices.

MYTH - The bill invades on the rights of state Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee (APMCS)

FACTS - The bill does not intrude into premises under the APMC Act and the same may continue to operate in the State.  Also the Bill allows for additional trade outside the APMC premises.

MYTH - Agriculture is a state subject & hence, the bill is illegal. Instead of farmers & the rural economy, it will only benefit corporates.

FACTS - The 7th Schedule & The Constitution of India mentions that the Union government can legislate in this domain in the national interest. Farmers under the agreement have multiple advantages including guaranteed higher income.

MYTH - The bill will block states to generate agriculture revenue which will lead to the closure of APMCS, eventually giving corporates monopoly on agriculture trade.

FACTS - The APMC market premises will continue to operate & attract farmers and generate revenue. The bill allows for the development of new mandi infrastructure closer to farm gate improving market access & reducing logistics costs for farmers.

MYTH - Central Government is nullifying the APMC law enacted by the various State Governments.

FACTS - The Farm Bills do not encroach upon in any way the APMC Act, which is an Act of the States.  Trade happening outside agriculture markets will be covered under the new law.

MYTH - The bill will lead to agriculture land acquisition by corporates and farmers will end up becoming labourers.

FACTS - The Bill prohibits sale, lease and mortgage of farmers land and ensures sponsors are prohibited from acquiring ownership rights or making permanent modifications on farmers' land.

MYTH - The bill does not provide a legal safety net for farmers against corporates.

FACTS - The Bill provides for dispute redressal mechanism where farmers can approach the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate for deciding any disputes under farming agreement. Also the bill ensures no action is initiated for recovery of any dues against the agricultural land of the farmers.

Conclusion

India has surplus agri-commodities in most of the cases, farmers still are unable to get better prices. It is because of poor investment in storage and processing facilities. The bills has been introduced to pull investment in cold storage and modernization of food supply chain.

Earlier, the farmers in India suffered from various restrictions while marketing their produce. Selling the agri-produce outside the notified APMC market yards were also restricted. They could sell the produce only to registered licenses of the State Governments. Further, flow of agriculture produces between various States under the APMC legislations was not barrier free.

Thus, this bill is a historic-step to unlock the highly regulated agriculture markets in the country. Farmers will be open up to more choices. Also It will empower farmers to engage with processors, wholesalers, aggregators, wholesalers, large retailers, exporters. It will also create a level playing field without fear of exploitation. It will also reduce marketing costs and double the farmers income. The legislation will also act as a catalyst to attract private sector investment for building supply chains. As a result, Farmers will get access to technology and advice for high value agriculture.  Farmers will be engaged in direct marketing.