Page 13«..10..12131415..2030..»

Category Archives: Federalism

Size Matters: Why Tiny Goa Needs To Be Heard More Often – Outlook India

Posted: February 19, 2022 at 10:04 pm

Just before 10 am on May 30 last year, my phone was set abuzz with messages about an extraordinary Statement to the People of Goa that had just been posted on Twitter by Dr. Palanivel Thiaga Rajan, the brand-new finance minister of Tamil Nadu. Switching screens to look, I found myself stunned, then chortling aloud with surprise and amusement. Id never read anything like it before. Many others went on to agree. A few days later, no less than Shashi Tharoor tweeted, Im delighted to say that in the annals of contemporary Indian political invective, this statement by @ptrmadurai has not been bettered.

PTRas he is often referred to by the publicposted his message two days after attending his first-ever meeting of the GST Council. Soon after the gathering, Goas notably hapless transport minister Mauvin Godinhowho represented Indias smallest statetried to grandstand and rally support for himself by alleging he was insulted by his counterpart: Thiaga Rajans case is that since he comes from a big state, he should have a bigger vote. Its like saying, I am the big brother, you shut up. I take strong offence to the way he conducted himself and expressed himself in the GST Council. I want [Tamil Nadu chief minister] Stalin to condemn his minister, and make him apologise.

ALSO READ: State Of The Union: How Centre-State Ties Have Fractured Over Time

In the normal scheme of things, everyone would have ignored Godinho as usual. But PTR responded directly in public, headlining his statement with two declarations: The hallmark of character is consistency in ones principles, even at a cost, and then, rather hilariously, Empty vessels make the most noise. He continued, I generally do not respond to noises emanating from sources that are unworthy of response. But I make this exception for two reasons. First, to counter the baseless lies uttered by Goas transport minister, stating that I have insulted the people of Goa and asking my leader & chief minister to condemn my behaviour during a press conference. Second, and more important, the whole nation of India should know how such individuals impact the quality and output of the GST Council.

With charmingly quirky syntax, the debutant minister explained that the One State = One Vote model of GST is fundamentally unfair and The Dravidian movement has long advocated local self-government as the logical extension of our core principle of self-respect and self-determination. As such, we are ALWAYS for states rights, and a truly federal governance model that devolves powers from the Union government to the lowest level practical. PTR clarified that every statement I made during the entire meeting was entirely consistent with these two principles. Even when the principle resulted in loss of future revenue to Tamil Nadu.

Goa may be infinitely smaller and less populous than Tamil Nadu, but both are dwarfed by the oceanvast forces that have embroiled India in its contemporary predicament.

Now the MLA from Madurai Central switched gears: The only question arising from your transport ministers press conference is whether he is limited in comprehension, in honesty, or both. But I am sure you are aware of his history and have drawn your own conclusions before this incident. If doubt lingers, I add that he was vociferously, and repeatedly, against lowering the GST on Covid-related drugs & vaccines from 5 per cent to 0 per cent on humanitarian grounds I found his statements during the meeting to be highly repetitive, largely vacuous, hectoring, mostly redundant to others inputs, supercilious, and devoid of the basic courtesy of assuming good faith in the comments of other states ministers. He spoke for many times the length of inputs from the honble minister from Uttar Pradesh, a state of over 20 crore citizens, and indeed EVERY other state. I leave to the public to decide whether that serves India, and democracy, well.

ALSO READ: Is Indian Federalism Reeling Under Burden Of One-Party Dominance?

He ended with this unerring coup de grce: I have no need to apologise to the people of Goa, for I have done you no harm. In fact, I have strongly advocated for your state governments rights. I do not require or expect any thanks for that, as my position was dictated by my principles of strengthening states rights & federalism with enhanced devolution. But I do offer you my sincere condolences, for having such a person as your minister. I also charge the honble CM of Goa with perpetrating a misdemeanour on Goas citizens, and the GST Council, by nominating him to represent your beautiful state. Finally, I sincerely request the BJP, even across the political divide, to impose some minimal quality control on its MLA acquisition procedure. If it had done so, Goa, and the nation would be saved a lot of pain.

Within minutes of being posted, this statement had social media ablaze with approval. The response from Goa was especially overwhelming, in part because the state was in the midst of suffering the worst throes of the second wave of Covid-19 infections, with dozens of unfortunate residents succumbing everyday due to flagrant mismanagement of oxygen. Just a couple of days afterwards, having waded in to try and reduce casualties and being thwarted by sheer inertia, the state high court issued an unprecedented apology, saying, We are very sorry. We failed collectively. We owe an apology to the people. Later on, talking about the unmitigated disaster, BJPs own governor Satya Pal Malik (he was eventually transferred to Meghalaya) admitted, There was corruption in everything the Goa government did [regarding the pandemic]. I probed the matter and informed the prime minister about it. Today people are scared to speak the truth in the country.

ALSO READ: Federalism And The Idea Of Regionalism

In this cesspool of misgovernance, PTRs statement was a thunderclap of clarity that resonated deeply with Goas beleaguered populace. They responded with unanimous appreciation, and, after dozens of requests, I finally wrote an open letter on behalf of the consensusit was signed from the people of Goain the century-old O Heraldo newspaper, once the longest-running Lusophone daily outside Brazil and Portugal. In those storied pages, by channelling sentiments being expressed all around me, and as a kind of homage to the tone and tenor of PTRs remarkable communiqu, I wrote to him that You should know it has been greatly dismaying for us, for many years, that Goas political cadre machinates almost exclusively in opaque, inexplicable and often indefensible ploys. Thus, you have done an excellent service by describing how your counterpart from Indias smallest state was vociferously, and repeatedly, against lowering the GST on Covid-related drugs and vaccines from 5 per cent to nil, on humanitarian grounds.

I also included this caveat: Please note the implications of Babasaheb Ambedkars unwavering dictum that rights for minorities should be absolute rights and should not be subject to any consideration as to what another party may like to do. He was speaking for all communities confronted by majoritarianism. Here it would be useful to remember that Goa may be infinitely smaller and less populous than Tamil Nadu, but both are dwarfed by the oceanvast forces that have embroiled India in its contemporary predicament. And this plea: You should know there is nigh-unanimous approval being expressed for your unusual, very welcome comments directed directly to the people of Goa, and the remarkable truth-telling therein. We are convinced the people of your great state are lucky to have you fighting for their interests. We hope that you will keep ours in mind as well.

ALSO READ: Punjab Haunted By The Past It Wants To Forget

This back and forth was joyously received in both parts of the country. I suddenly got 400 new Twitter followers from Tamil Nadu, most of whose bio details included the tell-tale DMK catchphrase, of Dravidian stock. Meanwhile in Goa, the response was overwhelming relief. Finally, there was at least one political leader who had an inkling of our plight, and it didnt really matter that his constituency is over 1,000 km away from our state borders. Looking back now, PTR tells me via email that I was indeed surprised to hear of how my letter was received in Goa, a place I have long admired but never visited in my life. At first, I chalked it down to the uniquely poor track record of the individual involved (Godinho). But I think there may be a larger rationale.

Tamil Nadu CM M.K. Stalin announced he was launching an All India Federation for Social Justice, made up of leaders of depressed classes from all the states.

That larger rationale is, of course, federalism. PTR and my public exchange was conducted in the spirit of interstate dialogue, which is so rare now that one respondent on Twitter actually called it a good beginning for our political-economic democracy. This is because, ever since 1947but with particularly egregious strong-arm tactics since the Modi-Shah combine rose to what seems like almost unlimited power in New Delhi in 2014the Centre has continually and relentlessly abrogated the means and channels of national communication for itself, closely mimicking the colonial apparatus that preceded it in power. Alexander Hamilton warned of precisely this in his all-important Federalist Papers, published in 1788: You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself. And as PTR put it succinctly in Outlook Business earlier this month, We are much less of a federal country than either the capitalist America or the communist China.

ALSO READ: Renegotiating Indias Federal Compact

Over email, he elaborated, Devolution of powers is infinitely greater in both the US and China. In the US, everything from policing to school administration is down to the village/town/city. Sales taxes are set ONLY by states and counties. Even income taxes are set by states and cities. In China, the local authority issues licences for industrial production. Cities run their own police forces. Banking licenses are only issued by the provinces. This devolution of powers ensures three superior outcomes relative to India: greater self-determination; policy and programme customisation to suit local areas needs/demands; and greater accountability because local elected representatives can be held to account by voters, much more than national officials.

PTR says, I believe many countries get federalism rightChina, US, Australia, Switzerland (even in this tiny country, immigration rules are set by the canton). India is the country that gets it absolutely wrong. And the consequences are devastating, when considering the scale of India, and the authoritarianism of the current regime. This is the crux of his argument: We do need to create an alternative narrative to the strongman narrative, which is the fast-track to fascism. But the reality is that the authoritarian model is simply incapable of delivering results, because Indias scale and complexity cannot be managed in that manner. So, the danger is that we are on the way to economic ruin and social strife, and the vicious circle of using divisions to distract from gross economic/growth/job failures will accelerate the destruction of value built up over seven decades as a democracy.

ALSO READ: Right In The Centre: The New Power Structure In Dilli Durbar

This is an inescapable analysis, with tremendous resonance for South India, as well as all the other statesthe entire north-east region comes to mindwhich are generally badly served by an imperial Centres focus on interests that are very different from theirs. Certainly, PTRs analysis reads like gospel truth in Goa, where grotesque servility to the Modi-Shah combine has become the most basic political currency. This explains why, on the campaign trail, when chief minister Pramod Sawant was asked which other CM he admired, he knew there was only one correct answer no matter how much it horrified his own voters. Pat it came: Yogi Adityanath. Similarly, there can be no surprise when the perennially bumbling Mauvin Godinhowho was in the Congress before being strong-armed into the BJP by Manohar Parrikar in 2016spares no bootlicking extreme in ostensible devotion to his Vishwaguruall important presidents and prime ministers are quoting Modiji. Why? Because he has got that leadership!

Does he, though? And by repeating it more and more loudly, while genuflecting even more slavishly, will it become so? Can an entire country be successfully bludgeoned into assent? Here, its important to acknowledge that Tamil Nadu and PTRs DMK provide an alternativeand highly persuasiveidea of federation that could easily gain enough traction to be an epochal course correction for India. Late last month, chief minister Stalin announced he was launching an All India Federation for Social Justice, made up of leaders of depressed classes from all the states on his partys Dravidian model of everything for everyone. His unspoken promise: our government works relatively well in Tamil Nadu, and everyone else deserves the same.

ALSO READ: Centre-State Relations: Has The Concurrent List Outlived Its Utility

PTR told me, The notion of inter-state cooperation is as old as the country. Wiser men than our current leaders created the Council of States, which has effectively been dismantled. It needs to be revived. The long run of coalition governments at the Union level may have dulled the need for such a forum. Both multi-state parties (I wont call them national because NO party really has a nationwide presence), but much more so the BJP than the Congress, may see their own organisations as a substitute for such a councilbut they are not. The trend towards cult leadership across all parties is also antithetical to the notion of inter-state dialogue. I think it is crucial for democracy that much more of this happens, frequently and regularly.

(This appeared in the print edition as "Eye of the Thiaga")

(Views expressed are personal)

Mumbai Muddle: Why Maharashtra And Delhi Are Frequently At Loggerheads

How Dravidian Politics Acts As Bulwark Against Centralism

Constitutional Federalism: State Of Exception In The Paradise Of Kashmir

Ladakh Battling Centralisation To Save Identity Culture

How Regional Parties Are Becoming The Voice Of Small Communities

Manipurs Love-Hate Relations With Delhi

The Coalition Instinct: Bihars Manual Of Survival

Behind The Veil: Why Muslim Students Are Fighting For Hijab

Shifting The Goalposts: A Young Politicians Battle To Save Goa And Its Way Of Life

Diary | How The Pandemic Disrupted A Teenagers World

Vivek Menezes is a writer and photographer, and co-founder of the goa Arts+literary festival

Continued here:

Size Matters: Why Tiny Goa Needs To Be Heard More Often - Outlook India

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Size Matters: Why Tiny Goa Needs To Be Heard More Often – Outlook India

Centre-State Relations: Has The Concurrent List Outlived Its Utility? – Outlook India

Posted: at 10:04 pm

On February 2, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi sparked outrage when he slammed the BJP, claiming that the party cannot see India as its kingdom because it is a union of states. Gandhi emphasised the necessity of cooperative federalism, claiming that India has only been ruled through dialogue for decades. Amit Malviya, the in-charge of the BJPs national information and technology department, took to Twitter shortly after, to say that the Congress MPs claim that it was not a nation but a union of states was very problematic and dangerous. He claimed that the Congress leader hasnt comprehended the Constitution.

The furore over federalism has also reignited an old debate around the distribution of legislative, executive and administrative powers between the Centre and states and the much-contested Concurrent List in the backdrop of the farm laws, NEET exams and health sector, among others. It is pertinent to mention that the Concurrent List includes subjects of common interest to both the Union and state governments. Education, including technical, medical, universities, population control and family planning, criminal law, animal cruelty prevention, wildlife, animal protection, and forests, are topics on the Concurrent List. The Concurrent List lists 52 items found in the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution. Union List, State List, and Concurrent List are the three lists that make up the legislative sector. However, education was earlier the states responsibility and put in the Concurrent List only during the Emergency (1975-1977).The NEET (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test conducted for granting admission in medical UG seats of India) has once again taken centre stage in Tamil Nadu with a high-pitched campaign for the urban local body elections centred around the Concurrent List. NEET has been a sensitive issue in the southern state since 2013 when all medical entrance tests were merged into a single national-level examination. The Tamil Nadu government had formed the Justice A.K. Rajan Committee to investigate the impact of NEET on medical admissions in the state. According to the report, NEET has obviously damaged socio-economic representation in MBBS and further medical studies, favouring primarily the wealthy.

The findings of the report also says that NEET harms Tamil-medium and students from rural backgrounds, government schools, students whose parents annual income is less than Rs 2.5 lakh. Also adversely affected are students from the Most Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes. Tamil Nadus healthcare system will be seriously damaged if NEET is not abolished, and there may not be enough doctors to be posted at primary health centres or government hospitals. The rural and urban poor may not be able to enrol in medical courses, the report mentions.

The furore over federalism has also reignited an old debate around the distribution of legislative, executive and administrative powers between the Centre and states and the much-contested Concurrent List.

NEET became a burning electoral issue in Tamil Nadu after Governor R.N. Ravi returned the governments Bill in the assembly to abolish NEET from the state earlier this month. One of the main focuses of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) campaign is the continuation of the NEET exam against the DMKs assurance of nixing it. During his virtual campaigns, chief minister M.K. Stalin has been spending quite some time refuting the claim made by leader of the Opposition Edappadi K. Palaniswami that NEET was implemented by the UPA government of which DMK was a part. Can Palaniswami show me one exam centre in Tamil Nadu where NEET was held during the previous DMK rule? Stalin asked, noting that the examination was only introduced in the state when Palaniswami was the chief minister. Former chief minister and AIADMK coordinator O. Panneerselvam has said that NEET is a problem that the DMK cannot solve. The Bill is merely a token gesture.

Commenting on the issue, Professor Faizan Mustafa, vice chancellor of Nalsar University of Law, says that the Bill on exemption of NEET by the Tamil Nadu government is merely a political statement and that practically it cannot pass the scrutiny of law. Constitutionally, education is on the Concurrent list, both the state and central government can form laws around it. However, if there is a dispute between the laws, the Centre can override the state law under Article 254, Mustafa tells Outlook.

Nevertheless, the Constitution also gives powers to the state under section 254(2) to bypass the Centre. It states that if the central legislation and a state statute are both on the same Concurrent List subject and have contradictory provisions, the President may approve the state law. In this case, even if the governor forwards the states Bill to the President, he will not approve it in consultation with the central government; hence the Bill passed by Tamil Nadu against NEET exams is merely a political statement, Prof. Mustafa adds.Earlier, the year-long farmers protest against three controversial laws introduced by the central government had also stoked a debate around the legal validity of the legislations. The laws were challenged in the Supreme Court before the government succumbed to pressure from the agitation and withdrew the three laws.

National parties want to strengthen the Concurrent List so that the Centre has a maximum hold over states. But in my view, there should be no Concurrent List, says KCR.

Earlier, there was talk about a Central government proposal to put agriculture under the purview of the Concurrent list before the Parliament passed the farm laws. On May 5, 2015, the government had told the Lok Sabha that the National Commission of Farmers (Swaminathan Commission) had recommended agricultural market to be added to the Concurrent List. However, the proposals had made it clear that foodstuffs under Entry 33 of the Concurrent List do not provide Parliament with the jurisdiction to legislate on agricultural markets. Nevertheless, the government told the Lok Sabha on March 27, 2018, that it had no plans to add the term agricultural market to the Concurrent List. Later, In September 2020, the President approved the contentious farm bills that the Parliament approved into laws.

More recently, there have also been talks about bringing health under the Concurrent List. In 2020, a high-level group constituted for the health sector by the 15th Finance Commission has recommended that health be moved from the State List to the Concurrent List. In a report given to the Finance Commission, the panel stated that health should also be on the concurrent list because medical education and family planning matters fall under the same.

Public health and related matters, such as dispensaries and hospitals, are currently the responsibility of the states under the Indian Constitutions Seventh Schedule. Preventing infectious and contagious diseases from spreading from one state to another, on the other hand, is included in the concurrent list. In practice, the Centre has always taken an active role in influencing public health policies. The Centre establishes national standards and a governance framework for issues, which are later implemented by the states.

In March 2021, the 15th Finance Commission chairman N.K. Singh said that health should be moved to the Concurrent List under the Constitution, and a developmental finance institution (DFI) specialised in healthcare investments should be established. Singh said that increasing government expenditure on health to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2025 should be a fundamental commitment of all States, with primary healthcare receiving at least two-thirds of such investment. The demand for health to be put under concurrent list gained momentum in the aftermath of the second wave of Covid-19 in 2021, when the health system crumbled in the country and states allegedly failed in dealing with the pandemic.

Amid all this, there are also demands from a section of politicians to abolish the Concurrent List altogether. After being re-elected as chief minister of Telangana in 2018, K. Chandrashekar Rao made it clear that his partys victory meant working for a new non-Congress, a non-BJP national consortium of regional parties. And that he would push for further state autonomy, suggesting complete abolition of the Concurrent List. National parties want to strengthen the Concurrent List so that the Centre has a maximum hold over states. But, in my view, there should be no Concurrent List, and state governments should be able to decide what is best for their states, he had said.

However, experts believe that doing away with the Concurrent List would not strengthen the states but cause chaos. Venkatesh Nayak, a transparency activist and legal expert with the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, believes that the states and the Centre work together on many subjects. And its not just about making or implementing legislation but also about generating enough resources to implement them. What KCR said after his victory in 2018 is not very new. Similar demands have existed since non-Congress governments were formed in states like Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir. Then N.T. Ramarao, Ramakrishna Hegde and others had floated a front for decentralising power. What KCR is suggesting does not seem very practical. There are issues and subjects where states and the Centre work together. All states cannot generate enough resources to implement the infrastructure for everything without support from the central government, Nayak explains.

(This appeared in the print edition as "The Sacred List")

View original post here:

Centre-State Relations: Has The Concurrent List Outlived Its Utility? - Outlook India

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Centre-State Relations: Has The Concurrent List Outlived Its Utility? – Outlook India

How Regional Parties Are Becoming The Voice Of Small Communities – Outlook India

Posted: at 10:04 pm

In 1991, when the then chief minister Mulayam Singh Yadav was wiped out by the BJP in the assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh, many political analysts had started writing the political obituary of the patriarch. But the seasoned and wily politician that he is, Mulayam Singh bounced back spectacularly. He formed his own outfit, the Samajwadi Party, in 1992 and a year later, contested elections in alliance with BSP to oust the BJP from power. Mulayam forming his own outfit was not an isolated incidentthe writing on the wall was clear. We needed to go beyond the established communities, says C.P. Rai, the then general secretary of SP. In the Indian federal structure, the time has arrived when smaller groups will manifest their power.

The SP leaders social engineering ensured a rainbow coalition as he wooed leaders of diverse castes and communities, recalls Rai. One such leader was Gulab Sehraa Congress leader, a two-term Dalit MLA and the leader of opposition. When Mulayam asked Sehra to join SP, Rai was the man who persuaded the Dalit leader to switch sides. And when Mulayam became the CM, he took Sehra on his official plane to Agra. The awakening after the Mandal Commission was harvested mainly by Yadavs and Kurmis in UP. But federalism had space for other smaller groups and castes. I persuaded Mulayam to appoint Sunder Singh Baghel as Ferozabad unit president of SP. He later went on to become minister. Today, Baghel is a very enlightened community in the Agra region, Rai adds.

ALSO READ: State Of The Union: How Centre-State Ties Have Fractured Over Time

The churning in Indian politics and society and the caste arithmetic of leaders like Mulayamand Laloo Prasad Yadav in Biharhad seen the emergence of smaller population groups to assert their claims over the political space. This in turn gave birth to smaller regional parties, sometimes representing minuscule communities often ignored or subsumed by larger political groupings. Though their populations varied from a meagre one to seven per cent, these groups were driven by the simple thumb rulethey may not win, but no one will without their support. Election Commission data show that the number of smaller parties had reached over 300 in 2017 compared to a double-digit number in 1989.

Mohammad Sajjad, a Professor at Aligarh Muslim University, sums up the trend succinctly. Formation of smaller parties which are community- and sub-region-based is a direct manifestation of the unique federal structure of India. This reflects division of power. When these social groups do not get the desired result from larger parties, they turn towards formation of their own party, he says. Numbers are important in a federal structure. Each vote counts and in government-formation, the number of MLAs/MPs becomes crucial. Due to the federal structure, these groups have significance in small regions owing to their proportionate numbers. But often their aspirations are not fulfilled as their leaders turn it into dynasty politics, so they turn towards another party, headed by another leader among them, he adds. However, Sajjad is also of the opinion that the same federal structure which gives rise to smaller parties, will soon see the next stage of class solidarity depending on the economic status of the regionthe demand for smaller states or autonomous areas.

ALSO READ: Is Indian Federalism Reeling Under Burden Of One-Party Dominance?

Professor Afroz Alam of Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad, has another theory for the emergence and success of regional parties. As we know, federalism is all about division of power between the Centre and states. This division of power is articulated prominently when the states are ruled by regional parties. In recent years, the creative manipulation of national parties to centralise power and dictate the terms to states has increased. The arbitrary style of working of national ruling parties while sidelining the local/regional interests is creating more fault lines for federalism to succeed, he says. As a result, India is witnessing thousands of minor/regional parties getting involved in the electoral process, putting serious competitive pressure on the dominant national parties and on occasion, influencing electoral outcomes with their consolidated social bases.

ALSO READ: Federalism And The Idea Of Regionalism

He points to the realignment of social groups for the ongoing assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh, reflected in the pre-electoral alliances between mainstream parties and constituency-specific minor parties. For instance, the BJP has allied with Apna Dal and Nishad Party while the SP allied with SBSP, RLD etc. Similar is the case in other states, he adds.

The arbitrary style of working of national ruling parties while sidelining regional interests is creating more fault lines for federalism to succeed. Afroz Alam, Professor Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad

Social transformation

The birth of caste-centric small parties also has much social impact. The backward castes and even Dalits had their share of tall leaders in the past. Many of them enjoyed influence in bigger parties. However, often the party projected them just as a face of a particular group without devolution of power. It was assumed that highlighting these faces was equivalent to giving representation to a particular community.

ALSO READ: Punjab Haunted By The Past It Wants To Forget

A more visible and rapid social transformation began after 1989 when the Congress was ousted from power in Uttar Pradesh. The leaders who had influence over their communities started expanding their bases. This is also due to a social awakening among their community and educated youth articulating their grievances more forcefully. The bigger parties realised that the time for dialogue had arrived. One of the best examples is of former bandit Phoolan Devi, who was taken into Samajwadi Party by Mulayam Singh Yadav and later given the party ticket for contesting the Lok Sabha polls. As she became an MP, her backward Mallah community rallied behind her in a big way. Such was her influence that she was invited as a guest to Akhilesh Yadavs marriage with Dimple, where she blessed the couple. On her death, even Mulayam Singh and late Amar Singh were present during her funeral. After her death, some of her supporters formed the Phoolan Sena to galvanise the community. Till date, she remains an icon for her community.

Another example of a community asserting itself is the emergence of the Nishads as a political force. Once represented by the Nishad Army headed by Arvind alias Raja Nishad, the community now has political representation through the NISHAD party headed by Dr Sanjay Nishad in UP and the Vikassheel Insan Party headed by Mukesh Sahni in Bihar. Political and social awareness has come to most of the communities. We see it as a good thing. All communities should have their leaders and parties. Ours is a social organisation, we aim at good representation and raising the voice of our community. We are no more ornamental pieces, Raja Nishad says.

ALSO READ: Size Matters: Why Tiny Goa Needs To Be Heard More Often

The glass ceiling has broken. These communities which were satisfied by getting representation in bigger political parties do not shy away from talking directly to these parties. They have dialogue, their demands and want their share of the bigger political pie. The NISHAD party is presently an ally of BJP in UP. Social media too has a role in projecting these smaller parties. The youths are now armed with smartphones and openly highlight the achievements of their community, even if it is about someone becoming a high-ranking official, a celebrity or a political leader. The awareness and the medium to spread words has been instrumental in making these communities aware of the importance of their votes.

(This appeared in the print edition as "Small Is Powerful")

Renegotiating Indias Federal Compact

Right In The Centre: The New Power Structure In Dilli Durbar

Centre-State Relations: Has The Concurrent List Outlived Its Utility

Mumbai Muddle: Why Maharashtra And Delhi Are Frequently At Loggerheads

How Dravidian Politics Acts As Bulwark Against Centralism

Constitutional Federalism: State Of Exception In The Paradise Of Kashmir

Ladakh Battling Centralisation To Save Identity Culture

Manipurs Love-Hate Relations With Delhi

The Coalition Instinct: Bihars Manual Of Survival

Shifting The Goalposts: A Young Politicians Battle To Save Goa And Its Way Of Life

(The writer is a Lucknow-based senior journalist)

See the original post:

How Regional Parties Are Becoming The Voice Of Small Communities - Outlook India

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on How Regional Parties Are Becoming The Voice Of Small Communities – Outlook India

A federalism issue, a political necessity – Deccan Herald

Posted: February 17, 2022 at 7:51 am

A federalism issue, a political necessity

A proposal made by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin and Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee to hold a convention of non-BJP Chief Ministers in Delhi has received much attention. Both Chief Ministers are pushing the proposal and trying to bring their counterparts from other states on a common platform. There are other CMs, too, moving on the same lines. Telangana CM K Chandrashekar Rao has been in touch with his Maharashtra counterpart Uddhav Thackeray and leaders of some non-BJP parties across the country. He is known to support a federal front of state parties and governments, and has recently become more critical of the central government and its policies. The initiative being taken by these Chief Ministers has to be seen at two levels. One is as a pushback against the central government, which is increasingly domineering over the states, and the other is as an attempt to put together a plan to counter the BJP politically.

Centre-state relations have been deteriorating steadily and the pressure on state governments has increased recently. There are several issues that have caused these tensions and fissures. The differences over the GST have continued and widened. Non-BJP states have complained that they are discriminated against. The partisan conduct of central agencies and the interventionist actions of Governors are other issues. The move to make arbitrary changes in the cadre rules of central service officers is the latest issue of discord. There have been complaints about financial and developmental matters. The states have felt that the BJPs idea of the country as a unitary state rather than as a union of states has influenced its policies toward states. They do not want their rights and powers to be curtailed and taken away by the Centre. The states have to defend themselves against an overbearing Centre now. The Chief Ministers move to make common cause has to be seen from that perspective. It is a move for self-preservation and strengthening of the federal system, which is a basic feature of the Constitution.Such initiatives become necessary and arise whenever the Centre becomes overbearing towards the states.

The political dimension of the move needs more clarity and is yet to develop. It may be considered as a rudimentary form of a political alliance against the BJP with the 2024 Lok Sabha elections in the sights of its movers. But the results of the Assembly elections in five states will have an important bearing on the plans. The roles of the Congress and some other non-BJP parties like the Biju Janata Dal (BJD) are still not clear. There is also the issue of leadership. So, the federal front as an electoral plan is still a faraway idea.

We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve user experience. This includes personalising content and advertising. By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies, revised Privacy Policy.

Read more here:

A federalism issue, a political necessity - Deccan Herald

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on A federalism issue, a political necessity – Deccan Herald

CPI(M) against TMC’s plan to forge alliance in fight against BJP’s ‘onslaught’ on federalism – Deccan Herald

Posted: at 7:51 am

Attempts by Mamata Banerjee and K Chandrashekar Rao to transform a proposal to forge a fight against ruling BJPs onslaught on federalism into a political alliance has attracted opposition from the CPI(M) even as it advocated the need for a joint struggle involving all non-BJP governments, including the Congress dispensations.

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata and her Telangana counterpart Rao have revived the talk about taking on the BJP on the federalism issue by ignoring the Congress and have reached out to non-Congress chief ministers, namely M K Stalin (Tamil Nadu) and Uddhav Thackeray (Maharashtra), for a meeting.

While welcoming the idea of a meeting of Opposition CMs, the CPI(M) has raised concerns over the platform taking a political colour, insisting that such a move would be counter-productive. The sole agenda of the meeting should be Centres onslaught on federalism, it said.

Also Read Twenty-four years since forming TMC, Mamata only grew stronger amid rebellions

One of the issues for the CPI(M) would be the presence of Mamata-led Trinamool Congress and it does not want to share space with its arch-rival on a political platform. It was also not comfortable with the position taken by Mamata, who had said, No regional parties share good terms with Congress. Congress will go its way, we will go our way.

Coming out in support of the Congress, the CPI(M) said in an editorial in its mouthpiece Peoples Democracy, said it was true that the Congress, while in power, had advanced centralisation drive. But at present, the Congress state governments in the opposition are also bearing the brunt of the centres onslaught on states rights. So, all non-BJP state governments must be mobilised for the joint platform.

It warned against Mamata seeking to conflate the proposed meeting of CMs with the forging of an alternative alliance of regional parties will only detract from the serious business of protecting the federal principle.

The editorial then went on to say that the talk of a Federal Front by Rao or Mamatas attempt to project herself as heading an alternative alliance are political matters, which should not be mixed up with the task of bringing all Opposition CMs together.

It said a conference of CMs should focus exclusively on federalism and states rights" and any attempt to utilise such a forum to cobble up political alliances will undermine the importance of the issue of federalism and states rights and end up being counter-productive.

According to the editorial, the need for a united stand of state governments in defence of states rights cannot be overstated and the Modi government has, in its second term, stepped up the drive to centralise and concentrate all powers in its hands; no sphere of centre-state relations has been spared from the depredations of the Centre. It cited the bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories as the most extreme step during this period.

Also Read Day after reaching out to KCR, Stalin, Mamata Banerjee says Congress can go its own way

The CPI(M) also claimed that there were also the "targeted attacks on specific states which represent a different political complexion, or, those that do not follow the writ of the Centre".

"When the centre amended the National Capital Territory of Delhi Act in April 2021 to declare that the Lieutenant Governor is the Government of Delhi and nullified the powers of the elected government and legislature, this was not just an attack on the AAP government but it was striking at the roots of the role of an elected state government under the constitution. It is imperative that all the democratic and secular forces take a joint stand in defence of federalism and states rights, it said.

It also referred to the now-repealed three farm laws, which encroached on the states rights, while the New Education Policy (NEP) reflects the centralising drive at various levels of education. Governors in non-BJP ruled states are increasingly becoming partisan and are acting as agents of the centre.The latest proposal of the Centre to amend the All India Service rules of IAS and IPS officers would lead to the centre having arbitrary powers to recall officers from the states to the centre bypassing the state government. The list goes on endlessly, it said.

Watch the latest DH Videos here:

See the original post here:

CPI(M) against TMC's plan to forge alliance in fight against BJP's 'onslaught' on federalism - Deccan Herald

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on CPI(M) against TMC’s plan to forge alliance in fight against BJP’s ‘onslaught’ on federalism – Deccan Herald

Education and Federalism in Myanmar – The Irrawaddy News Magazine

Posted: at 7:51 am

Schoolchildren smile for the camera at a school in Panghsang, the capital of the ethnic Wa region in northern Shan State in 2015. / The Irrawaddy

By Ashley South 11 February 2022

In federal systems, education is usually a state-level responsibility. The development of locally owned and delivered education can therefore be a model for federalism in Myanmar. Many impressive initiatives are already underway, including half a dozen Mother Tongue Based Multilingual Education school systems administered by Ethnic Armed Organizations and their education wings, known as Ethnic Basic Education Providers.

We are at an extraordinary period in Myanmars history, with key stakeholders working in real-time against a backdrop of an appalling crisis to re-imagine the union and its institutions. For the National Unity Government (NUG), ethnic armed organizations (EAO), Peoples Defense Forces and Peoples Administrative Bodies, civil society organizations (CSO) and others, there is an urgent need to re-negotiate state-society relations, the role and nature of the state and its institutions.

One of the opportunities of the crisis in Myanmar is to address issues which were or should have been on the previous political reform agenda and/or in the peace process, but were ignored or handled in ways which excluded key stakeholders and positions. With the Myanmar military now removed from consideration as a legitimate stakeholder in such discussions, now is the time to look at the issues without interference from these spoilers although spoilers hardly does justice to the inhumanity and idiocy of the junta goons.

One issue of concern to a wide range of stakeholders is education, and how this relates to federalism and the self-determination of ethnic nationality communities. A good place to start is examining EAO education provision, at a time when the state system of education is barely functioning and widely regarded as illegitimate.

EAO Education Departments (EBEPs)

Although terminology varies, EAO education systems are often referred to as Ethnic Basic Education Providers (EBEP). They serve about 300,000 children, in schools either directly administered by EAO education departments or [at least before the coup] in community-run and mixed schools, jointly administered by the governments Ministry of Education (MOE) and EBEPs. Since last years coup, the Civil Disobedience Movement has been very effective and many schools under junta control are not effectively functioning. Therefore, since 2021 there are far fewer mixed schools.

There are EAO-administered or affiliated schools in the conflict-affected areas of Karen, Mon, Kachin and Shan States and Bago and Tanintharyi Regions. Curricula range from those which largely mirror the MOE syllabus at middle and high school level, but are taught in the ethnic mother tongue [e.g. the Mon model], to those which have many separate elements to the governments curricula [e.g. the Karen school system]. In several ethnic education systems, curricula and other elements are under review and reform.

Key EBEPs include the Karen National Unions Karen Education and Culture Department, with 1093 schools and 90,000-plus students; the New Mon State Partys Mon National Education Committee, with 134 Mon National Schools and 10,324 students; the Restoration Council of Shan State Education Commission, with some 350 schools in southern Shan state and 11,000 students [and additional Shan schools administered by CSOs], the Kachin Independence Organisation Education Department, with 250-plus schools [and additional schools in government-controlled areas under the administration of Kachin education CSOs]; and the Karenni National Progressive Partys Karenni Education Department, with 60-plus schools [many administered in partnership with CSOs]. In addition, several of these groups often provide education services to children in refugee camps along the Thailand-Myanmar border.

These EBEPs variously use Mother Tongue Based and/or Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) teaching methods, with child-centered methodologies. Significant funding and technical assistance is provided by international donors, but much is supported by communities. Teachers often receive stipends, but are essentially volunteers. At present, EBEP schools are the only functioning basic education providers in the country.

Benefits of Mother Tongue-Based Education

There are two main reasons for promoting and supporting MTB-MLE in Myanmar: pedagogic and political. Regardless of the politics, children from minority communities achieve better learning outcomes if they can begin their schooling in their mother tongue. Children who are forced to learn in a language they do not speak at home are educationally disadvantaged and often never catch up with peers from the majority community, who find it much easier to understand whats going on in the classroom. MTB-MLE is acknowledged internationally as the most effective way for children who do not speak the national language to have a fair chance at achieving good learning outcomes. Evidence globally shows this to be the best way of teaching children from minority language communities. Transition to using the national language can occur in primary or middle school, depending on the specific model adopted.

Supporting ethnic education is also important for peace-building. One of the main grievances fueling ethnic conflicts in Myanmar is disregard for the identity and languages of ethnic minority/nationality communities in the state education and administrative systems, and ethnic peoples experiences of marginalization in the context of a dominant Bamar culture and language [Burmanization]. For these reasons, many ethnic nationality communities regard the national education system as a tool of assimilation, and state education has been seen as a driver of conflict. Therefore, EAOs and CSOs have set up their own MTB-MLE systems. These education initiatives owned and delivered by local actors are key elements in self-determination, and building a just and inclusive federal union.

Civil Society Education Actors

In addition to formal EBEP education systems, a number of CSOs provide informal, including after-school, and/or part-time education in local languages. Some of these work independently, while others work alongside either EAOs/EBEPs and/or with the MOE. Many are faith-based organizations.

Key Myanmar Education CSOs include Literature and Culture Committees, mostly working in government-controlled areas. In addition, several CSOs work in conflict-affected areas [often in partnership with EBEPs], as well as in areas of mixed administration and in fully government-controlled areas. Many private, often faith-based schools, follow the MOE curriculum [for example monastic schools]. Most of these activities have been unable to continue since the coup, for now at least.

Some Questions and Issues

In federal political/constitutional systems, education [especially basic education] is usually a state-level responsibility. Education provision can therefore be a model for federalism in Myanmar.

A fundamental issue to resolve is the relationship between the sub-national [ethnic state or EBEP/EAO] level, and the union level. Union-level roles for a federal government MOE can include: coordination; training and teaching resources development; finance (fundraising and distribution), and possibly also dispute arbitration, and some aspects of quality control. These issues need to be discussed, ideally through a structured process of dialogue and negotiation.

Most fundamentally, there is an urgent need for union-level recognition and accreditation of EBEP teachers and student qualifications. At present, EBEP systems are largely unrecognized by the state of Myanmar, meaning that many children find their educational achievements go unrecognized, greatly reducing their options after matriculation [and also limiting opportunities for students to move between EBEP and MOE systems].

This raises the deeper question of what is the most appropriate relationship between EBEPs and the MOE [meaning the NUGs Democratic MOE, any engagement with the juntas ministry being inappropriate]. The most useful approach might be to support parallel EBEP and MOE systems, with mutual recognition based on the elaboration of common standards, and shared learning outcomes [which can be delivered through diverse curricula and education administrations]. Another important set of questions include how to conceive of and support constructive relationships between EBEPs and state-level coordination bodies, which have emerged in a number of areas since the coup.

Focusing on the MOE [meaning the NUGs Democratic MOE], there is a need to Improve and extend MTB-MLE teaching in schools. Much-needed reforms can be based on those initiated by the ousted National League for Democracy (NLD) government through the Local Curriculum Content initiative. Under the NLD-led government, the MOE introduced ethnic language teaching up to Grade 3 in five ethnic states. Building on and learning from this experience, MTB-MLE approaches should be mainstream throughout the state system.

These issues need to be decided by Myanmar stakeholders. However, international supporters have a role to play. In general, and particularly during the last decade of reform in Myanmar, education and other initiatives were too often driven by external donor agendas. Its time to refocus this supply-driven approach, and shift towards a demand-driven agenda. Can donors get the balance right, between supporting EBEPs rather than imposing donor priorities while offering necessary advice and help to EBEP systems strengthening?

Finally, there are needs for more research and development including language-use mapping and devising teaching materials and supporting training for smaller ethno-linguistic groups, including minorities within minorities. How best to support the educational and socio-political rights of children from communities in areas where the local majority group constitute a minority across the union? These considerations may point towards a rights-based, rather than strictly ethnic-territorial, conception of federalism and self-determination.

There are many dimensions to federalism, especially in a complex and conflict-affected country like Myanmar. Although it wont be easy, exploring and supporting local ownership and delivery of education can be an important contribution to and help to learn lessons for the development of democratic federalism in the country.

Ashley South is an independent analyst, and a Research Fellow at Chiang Mai University, specializing in politics and humanitarian issues in Burma and Southeast Asia. His views are his own.

You may also like these stories:

Responsibilities and Opportunities to Save Myanmar

Myanmars Anti-Regime Protests Go On Despite Crackdowns and Detentions

Another NLD Member Dies While Detained by Myanmar Junta Forces

Here is the original post:

Education and Federalism in Myanmar - The Irrawaddy News Magazine

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Education and Federalism in Myanmar – The Irrawaddy News Magazine

Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin opposes one nation one registration, says BJP posing threat to federalism – The Indian Express

Posted: at 7:51 am

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin on Saturday accused the BJP-led government at the Centre of posing a threat to federalism by thrusting its agenda upon the nation and the latest being the one-nation-one-registration initiative.

Opposing the Centres One-nation-one-registration initiative announced by Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, recently, the CM said this latest move, like the new education policy and slogans like one-nation-one-country is nothing but an attempt to turn the country into a unitary state.

This will not benefit the people. That is why we are advocating state autonomy for India to flourish, he said and reiterated the DMKs catchphrase autonomy for the state and federalism at the Centre (maanila suyatchi, mathiyil koottatchi).

Addressing a virtual election rally at Tiruppur from here, Stalin said he would make this slogan on state autonomy and federalism at the Centre heard all over India.

Social justice and state autonomy are the great ideologies that the Dravidian movement gave to this country. I have committed myself to the task of ensuring social justice bloom throughout the country (through the All India Social Justice Federation, which he proposed to launch soon), he said.

He had already written to over 50 leaders to be part of the federation and several political parties including the Congress and many state organisations have expressed willingness to participate in the initiative, he said.

The next phase of action would begin once the election in the five states get over, Stalin said.

He said the Union Government must act in accordance with the federal spirit of the nation and empower states. But federalism is under threat today as the BJP-led government is creating an environment divesting all powers of the states, he alleged.

This, he claimed, is evident by the enactment of Citizenship Amendment Act and several anti-people policies.

Go here to read the rest:

Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin opposes one nation one registration, says BJP posing threat to federalism - The Indian Express

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin opposes one nation one registration, says BJP posing threat to federalism – The Indian Express

Federalism and the Nigeria of our dreams (III) – NIGERIAN TRIBUNE

Posted: at 7:51 am

(17) The greatest disservice of military regimes in Nigeria was the mindless and criminal centralization of government by the government led by General Aguiyi Ironsi. On assumption of power in January 1966, the military junta killed the soul of a virile, stable and progressive Nigerian nation by abolishing federalism and instituting a system of government that was meant to promote sectional interest. The promulgation of Decree No. 34 of 1966, the military arrested the countrys progress towards unity in diversity. It has been said that General Ironsi was pursuing an Igbo agenda when he failed to respond appropriately to the putsch that disproportionally massacred top politicians from the Northern and Western regions, when he proscribed all ethnic and cultural associations, dissolved representative assemblies, ignored the moratorium on promotion in the military and surrounded himself, exclusively, with advisers from his own Igbo ethnic group. The coup detat that ousted him was justified as a revenge strike to compensate for the human tragedies of the January coup.

(18) Despite the attempts to restore federalism in Nigeria by the succeeding regime led by General Yakubu Gowon, the deadly blows left on Nigerias national consciousness and identity by the coups, the pogrom against the Igbo in the Northern region and the needless civil war which lasted about 30 months were difficult to heal or remove. The introduction of constitutional and institutional modalities to heal the would were grossly inadequate and often times misapplied. The return to federalism and subsequent creation of states from twelve to thirty-six, introduction of military inspired constitutions and conduct of popular general elections created their own contradictions and challenges which were decisive enough to frustrate every effort to develop Nigeria into a flourishing nation state.

(19) Some policies that were put in place to address the problem of alienation of sections of the country and inequitable distribution of national resources miscarried and became counterproductive. For instance, the pursuit of federalism through atomization of constituent parts has produced insatiable demand for state creation even when they were frivolous and non-sustainable. The systems of federal character and quota system when they were introduced were meant to ensure national spread in the distribution of national resources. Unfortunately, these affirmative attentions were poorly conceived and they have turned out to be major sources of injustice in the allocation of resources. They have been interpreted as attempts to hold a section of the country down for the other to catch up and even surpass them. This allegation is most evident in admission policies into federal government institutions which have sacrificed merit and fairness on the platter of sectional consideration. The system of revenue allocation is equally a major source of friction among the constituent units of the Nigerian Federation. The principle of derivation which was adopted during the first republic federal system has since been abandoned as the present system is fraught with lapsed and slippages that question the good intention of government.

(20) In all progressive federal systems, equity, fairness and justice form the bedrock of relations among the constituent units. The electoral system in Nigeria is already compromised as the political class is more involved in the manipulation of the selection process and the prevention of the emergence of credible candidates. On 28th August, 2007, the President set-up a 22-member Electoral Reform Committee to examine the entire electoral process with a view to ensuring that we raise the quality and standard of our general elections and thereby deepen our democracy. After an exhaustive and comprehensive review of the electoral history of Nigeria spanning about 85 years, the panel observed a progressive degeneration of outcomes of sections conducted in the country, with the 2007 elections coming up at the worst since the first elections held in 1922. It further observed that elections conducted by the military tended to be more credible than those conducted by civilian authorities because of the political practice of winner takes all and therefore the need by politicians to perpetuate their hold on power at all cost. Over the years, the politicians have become more desperate and daring in taking and retaining political power; more reckless and greedy in their use and abuse of power; and more intolerant of opposition, criticism and efforts at replacing them. The electorate, seeing their hopes dashes with each set of elections, have come to believe that politicians lack the will to use state power to transform the lives of ordinary citizens. This loss of confidence in governments by the electorate constitutes a major threat to the democratic project in Nigeria.

(21) Another study on the electoral process and democratic consolidation in Nigeria found that defective electoral processes have resulted in the impositions of corrupt and illegitimate leaders who have no regard for the principles of democracy, good governance, rule of law, constitutionalism and fundamental human rights. It is however painful that in spite of the promise contained in the recommendations of the Uwais Panel on Electoral Reform, the 2010 Electoral Act with its amendments fell short of reasonable expectations. The gross inability of the Act to redress the imperfections and inadequacies of earlier electoral laws would confirm its uselessness as a tool for the transformation of Nigeria. Arguably, the average Nigeria is not only smart, but enterprising, making it possible for him to justify self-help and impunity. The electoral process must therefore be designed to produce readers who will be a couple of times smarter than the average Nigerian. A more secure future lies in an electoral system that could ensure the emergence of leaders who possess requisite intellectual and democratic credentials to rule. Products of this process must be allowed to accede to power irrespective of social, religious, ethnic or gender background.

(22) Leadership should not be determined on the basis of zoning, quota system or federal character, formulae that have all outlived their usefulness as power sharing paradigms. Such dubious affirmative actions have had the undeserved consequences of frustrating prospective and potential state and nation builders; making it totally impossible for persons of character and virtue to aspire to political offices. The obnoxious zoning formula smacks of unfairness in its application and would forever perpetuate unequal of differing access-to power within the context of politics in Nigeria.

(23) What is obvious and cannot be denied is the fact of mass frustration, if not despondency, at the nature, character and direction of the Nigerian Sate. The strident call for a discussion of the terms and conditions of Nigerias federalism can no longer be ignored or swept under the carpet as there are strong indications of general restiveness of the constituent units of the federal system. It is equally true that given the state of leadership and lts helplessness in the face of threats to the corporate existence of the country, the times are not auspicious for the convocation of a sovereign national conference with wide powers to re-position the country for development and progress.

(24) It would however seem that the proponents of a sovereign national conference might have lost sight of the calculations and interests of international capitalism. With a history of one whole century of being together as a country, the average Nigerians have established inter penetrating social, cultural religious and economic relations that the balkanization of the country would be as unprogressive as unrealistic. Nigerias high selling point or bargaining strength at the international level is its enormous human and material resources which are globally recognized.

(25) What is needed is a leadership that will maximize these potentials and add value for the transformation of the country. It may not be too farfetched to suggest an international gang up against Nigeria in all previous efforts at producing a leader with national-clout and impeccable credentials for leadership. We have alluded to one such instance above on the authority of Harold Smith who was a key actor in the unfortunate scheme. In 1975, International capitalism conspired to rob Nigeria of pragmatic leadership of General Muritala Mohammed and in 1998 Chief MKO Abiola the winner of the freest election in Nigeria was served tea and died at the hour of victory in the cold hands of agents of international conspiracy against the unity and progress of Nigeria.

(26) The Nigerian emancipation project that will deliver a more secure future should be anchored on a sovereign national conference that will have just one agenda; the formulation of a transformative electoral process. If elected or nominated representatives of all the ethnic nations in Nigeria will converge at a conference at which a new electoral process will be developed and a referendum in carried out for its adoption as the basis for all elections, the contentious issue of how leaders emerge would have been addressed. In recapturing Archimedes give me a place to stand and I will move the whole earth, Robert F. Kennedy said.

A young monk began the Protestant Reformation; a young general extended an empire from Macedonia to the borders of the earth, and a young woman reclaimed the territory of France. It was a young Italian explorer who discovered the new World, and the thirty-two-year-old

Thomas Jefferson who proclaimed that all men are created equal.

Kennedy then stated: These (persons) moved the world, and so can we all.

Today and louder than Endsars, young Nigerians should cry out; give us a credible and transparent electoral reform produced by a sovereign national conference and we will have the Nigeria of our dreams. Herein is our collective destiny, where our collective aspirations could be safely delivered and when we can begin to aspire to global reckoning.

Considering the nature, character and historical trajectory of the Nigerian state and inter-ethnic relationships, federalism remains the most viable model for the emancipation and rapid transformation of Nigeria from a mere agglomeration of states to a prosperous peaceful; and united nation state.

CONCLUDED

Originally posted here:

Federalism and the Nigeria of our dreams (III) - NIGERIAN TRIBUNE

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Federalism and the Nigeria of our dreams (III) – NIGERIAN TRIBUNE

Only BJP can save Punjab from the scourge of drugs, says Prime Minister Narendra Modi – The Tribune India

Posted: at 7:51 am

Tribune News Service

Aparna BanerjiJalandhar, February 14

Prime Minister Narendra Modi pitched the National Democratic Alliance on Monday as the only option that could help shut down mafias and resolve the states drug crisis.

Modi, who was addressing his first rally in Punjab this election season at Jalandhars PAP grounds, spoke fondly of his long association with Captain Amarinder Singh.

This is the first time in 25 years that Modis Bharatiya Janata Party will contest the election without their old ally, the Shiromani Akali Dal. This is also the first time in 24 years that Captain Amarinder Singh will fight an election without his former party, the Congress.

On Monday, Modis particularly acerbic swipes were reserved for rival Congress, in particular, for the Gandhi family. He accused the Congress of kicking out Captain Amarinder Singh because he upheld federalism and claimed the Gandhis ran the state government through remote control and as long as the family was in control, the party wont work for the states betterment.

Why did they remove Capt Sahib? Theyve themselves said at that time they didnt run the Punjab governmentthe central government was running it, he said.

That means all Congress governments are run by remote control. A family from Delhi runs them. The state governments dont work as per the constitution. If Capt Sahib worked on the principle of federalism with the state government and if the central government worked with the state government, wasnt it according to the constitution?

Congress leaders say Capt Sahib didnt listen to us. He put obstructions. And in the end, it rose so much that they ousted him. If a family runs the government by remote control and doesnt bother about the constitution then it will cause tensions in the country. Thats what this family is doing.

The Congress, he said, was carrying out an old vendetta against Punjab, Modi said invoking the anti-Sikh riots of 1984.

The family controls Punjab and has old enmities with the state. Its settling an old score.

The NDA, he said, was the correct choice.

The BJP wont allow the control of mafia on trade and business. Under the BJP government traders and residents will operate without any fear, he said.

He also took a jibe at rivals AAP, although he did it without directly mentioning them, in addition to the Congress.

Those without work talk about rooting out Punjabs drug problem. These people are experts at opening up alcohol shops on the streets and Mohallas. Punjab should be wary of such people. They want to hand over the state to drug mafias, he said. These are the same people who demanded proof that our military had conducted surgical strikes. And singing dancing to Pakistans tunes.

His appeal then went to women: Of what use is your gaadi and bungalow if your sons fall prey to the scourge of drugs?

His next jibe was for Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, whom he referred to as yuvraaj (crowned prince). He accused Gandhi of misusing the state machinery in 2014 while he was still a Member of Parliament.

During the 2014 elections, I had to come to Pathankot and had to go to Himachal Pradesh via helicopter. You will be surprised, Congress ke namdaar, unke yuvraaj vo simply ek party ke MP the. (Congresss Prince was simply a party MP then), he said.

He also had an event near Amritsar. My helicopter wasnt allowed to fly. I reached Pathankot late. My helicopter wasnt allowed to fly. Why? Because their yuvraaj was supposed to come to another part of the state. I was stopped. Thats how they misused power. I had to cancel two Himachal programmes.

The Congress, he said, was a party riven with infighting.

Today Congress own party is splitting. Congress leaders are opening up secrets of the party. I ask you, can those fighting amongst themselves can they give a stable government? Can they develop Punjab?

'Denied temple visit'

He accused the local administration of not clearing his visit to the Shakti Peeth of Devi Talab on Monday.

He said: I wanted to visit the Shakti Peeth of Devi Talab after this event but the police and administration said they were helpless. They asked to stick to a helicopter visit. This is the state of the government, he said. But I will return to 'Maa'. I will bow my head to her.

Punjab will vote for the 117-member assembly on February 20. Votes will be counted on March 10.

#capt amarinder singh #narendra modi

Read the original here:

Only BJP can save Punjab from the scourge of drugs, says Prime Minister Narendra Modi - The Tribune India

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on Only BJP can save Punjab from the scourge of drugs, says Prime Minister Narendra Modi – The Tribune India

How Federalism Settled States vs Federal Rights – HISTORY

Posted: February 7, 2022 at 7:11 am

When the 13 United States of America declared independence from the United Kingdom in 1776, the founders were attempting to break free from the tyranny of Britains top-down centralized government.

But the first constitution the founders created, the Articles of Confederation, vested almost all power in individual state legislatures and practically nothing in the national government. The resultpolitical chaos and crippling debtalmost sunk the fledgling nation before it left the harbor.

So the founders met again in Philadelphia in 1787 and drafted a new Constitution grounded in a novel separation of state and national powers known as federalism. While the word itself doesnt appear anywhere in the Constitution, federalism became the guiding principle to safeguard Americans against King George III-style tyranny while providing a check against rogue states.

READ MORE: How the United States Constitution Came to Be

The Articles of Confederation.

Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images

The Articles of Confederation were written and ratified while the Revolutionary War was still raging. The document is less of a unifying constitution than a loose pact between 13 sovereign states intending to enter into a firm league of friendship. Absent from the Articles of Confederation were the Executive or Judicial branches, and the national congress had only the power to declare war and sign treaties, but no authority to directly levy taxes.

As a result, the newly independent United States was buried in debt by 1786 and unable to pay the long-overdue wages of Revolutionary soldiers. The U.S. economy sunk into a deep depression and struggling citizens lost their farms and homes. In Massachusetts, angry farmers joined Shays Rebellion to seize courthouses and block foreclosures, and a toothless congress was powerless to put it down.

George Washington, temporarily retired from government service, lamented to John Jay, What a triumph for the advocates of despotism to find that we are incapable of governing ourselves, and that systems founded on the basis of equal liberty are merely ideal & fallacious!

Alexander Hamilton called for a new Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 where the Articles of Confederation were ultimately thrown out in favor of an entirely new form of government.

READ MORE: The Founding Fathers Feared Foreign InfluenceAnd Devised Protections Against It

When the United States cut ties with Britain, the founders wanted nothing to do with the British form of government known as unitary. Under a unitary regime, all power originates from a centralized national government (Parliament) and is delegated to local governments. Thats still the way the government operates in the UK.

Instead, the founders initially chose the opposite form of government, a confederation. In a confederation, all power originates at the local level in the individual states and is only delegated to a weak central government at the states discretion.

When the founders met in Philadelphia, it was clear that a confederation wasnt enough to hold the young nation together. States were scuffling over borders and minting their own money. Massachusetts had to hire its own army to put down Shays Rebellion.

The solution was to find a middle way, a blueprint of government in which the powers were shared and balanced between the states and national interests. That compromise, woven into the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, became known as federalism.

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights created two different kinds of separation of powers, both designed to act as critical checks and balances.

The first and best-known of the separation of powers is between the three branches of government: Executive, Legislative and the Judiciary. If the president acts against the best interests of the country, he or she can be impeached by Congress. If Congress passes an unjust law, the president can veto it. And if any law or public institution infringes on the constitutional rights of the people, the Supreme Court can remedy it.

READ MORE: How Many U.S. Presidents Have Faced Impeachment?

But the second type of separation of powers is equally important, the granting of separate powers to the federal and state governments. Under the Constitution, the state legislatures retain much of their sovereignty to pass laws as they see fit, but the federal government also has the power to intervene when it suits the national interest. And under the supremacy clause found in Article VI, federal laws and statutes supersede state law.

Federalism, or the separation of powers between the state and federal government, was entirely new when the founders baked it into the Constitution. And while it functions as an important check, its also been a continual source of contention between the two levels of government. In the final run-up to the Civil War, the Southern states seceded from the Union in part because of the federal government was unconstitutionally encroaching on their domestic institutions of slavery.

WATCH: The Legislative Branch

According to James Madison, a committed federalist, the Constitution maintains the sovereignty of states by enumerating very few express powers to the federal government, while [t]hose which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.

Article I Section 8 contains a list of all of the enumerated powers that are exclusively delegated to the federal government. Those include the power to declare war, maintain armed forces, regulate commerce, coin money and establish a Post Office.

But that very same Section 8 also includes the so-called Elastic Clause that authorizes Congress to write and pass any laws that are necessary and proper to carry out its enumerated powers. These powers are known collectively as implied powers and have been used by Congress to create a national bank, to collect a federal income tax, to institute the draft, to pass gun control laws and to set a federal minimum wage, among others.

Other than that, the Constitution grants almost all other power and authority to the individual states, as Madison said. While the Constitution doesnt explicitly list the powers retained by the states, the founders included a catch-all in the 10th Amendment, ratified in 1791:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Those so-called reserved powers include all authority and functions of local and state governments, policing, education, the regulation of trade within a state, the running of elections and many more.

In the United States, federalism has proven a successful experiment in shared governance since 1787 and provided the model for similar federalist systems in Australia, Canada, India, Germany and several other nations.

See the rest here:

How Federalism Settled States vs Federal Rights - HISTORY

Posted in Federalism | Comments Off on How Federalism Settled States vs Federal Rights – HISTORY

Page 13«..10..12131415..2030..»