Prime Minister Narendra Modi says red beacon symbols are out of touch with the spirit of new India as every Indian is special and a VIP..

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said, red beacon symbols are out of touch with the spirit of new India as every Indian is special and a VIP. Replying to tweets over the government's  decision to bar the use of red beacons atop vehicles, Mr Modi said, these should have gone long ago. The Prime Minister said, he is glad that a strong beginning has been made.

The cabinet had yesterday banned Ministers and officials in the Central and state government from using red beacons on their official vehicles from the 1st of next month.

The decision was taken in a Cabinet meeting chaired my Mr Modi in New Delhi.

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley told reporters that the government views red beacons as a symbol of the VIP culture which has no place in a democratic country.

Road Transport and Highways Minister Nitin Gadkari informed that the notification in this regard will be issued soon.

The expert panel’s recommendation to review the fiscal responsibility law is timely...

Thanking you for proving me extra energy to sacrifice myself for god.

The advice of the expert committee to review the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act of 2003 requires attention, given India’s track record. This is all the more so given the born-again political conviction that promises of random largesse to voters is just fine. Excessive and unsustainable borrowing by the government is obviously perverse as it entails a cost on future generations while crowding out private investment. In the past, fiscal irresponsibility has cost jobs, spiked inflation, put the currency in a tailspin and even brought the country to the brink of a default. The possibility of default may have resulted in the liberalisation of the economy in 1991, but the key trigger was irrational public spending on borrowed money in the late-1980s. Less than a decade later, with fiscal discipline faltering and the deficit shooting up to 10% of GDP, the FRBM law was enacted to ‘limit the government’s borrowing authority’ under Article 268 of the Constitution. But the target to limit the fiscal deficit to 3% of GDP (by 2009) was abandoned after the 2008 global financial crisis as a liberal stimulus reversed the gains in the fiscal space, creating fresh macro-level instability. The FRBM Act’s deficit target is now only likely to be met next year.

Such damage transmissions from the political economy to the real economy need to be checked forthwith. The committee’s proposal to maintain the 3% target till 2019-20 before aiming for further reduction is pragmatic, as the ‘extraordinary and unanticipated domestic development’ of demonetisation happened during its tenure. Such an event, the committee has said, could trigger an escape clause from fixed fiscal targets in its proposed rule-based framework. Instead of focussing purely on the fiscal and revenue deficit numbers, which should be brought down to 2.5% and 0.8% of GDP respectively by 2023, the panel has called for paring India’s cumulative public debt as a proportion to GDP to 60% by 2023 — from around 68% at present. The latter, a simpler measure for solvency purposes, should inspire confidence among rating agencies. Though this has put paid to the government’s hope that a fiscal deficit range could be targeted instead of absolute numbers, the Finance Minister has committed to the 3% target for the next two years, from the 3.2% target for 2017-18. A clear fiscal policy framework in tandem with the monetary policy framework already adopted could act as a powerful signal of commitment to macroeconomic stability. The Centre must swiftly take a call on the panel’s recommendations — including for a new debt and fiscal responsibility law, and the creation of a Fiscal Council with independent experts that could sit in judgment on the need for deviations from targets. It is equally critical that States are brought on board, as the 60% debt target includes 20% on their account. Their finances are worsening again even as the clamour for Uttar Pradesh-style loan waivers grows.

The inclusion of paper audit trails to the EVMs is costly but perhaps unavoidable, . . . . .

Thanks you God ,for providing me chance to elaborate my idea to all human being.

In the face of extreme and unreasonable complaints against Electronic Voting Machines by a number of political parties, the Election Commission perhaps had no choice but to have the working of the machines corroborated by a paper audit trail. To have such a facility ready for all constituencies by the 2019 Lok Sabha election is expensive (an estimated ₹3,174 crore) and also unnecessary (paper trails are at best required in a few constituencies to corroborate results). Itsrequest to the Law Ministry to release funds for the procurement of voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) machines for the 2019 Lok Sabha election should be interpreted in this context. As many as 16 lakh VVPAT machines will be required and only an urgent release of funds will allow the machines to be ready in time for 2019. It was possible for the EC to brush off the complaints from the Bahujan Samaj Party and the Aam Aadmi Party following their defeat in Uttar Pradesh and Punjab respectively, but it clearly became increasingly difficult for it to ignore the clutch of parties that joined the chorus, some demanding a return to paper ballots.

The EC has repeatedly assured voters that there are enough procedural and technical safeguards to prevent large-scale tampering or manipulation of EVMs. Since 2006, elections have witnessed the use of upgraded EVMs — Model 2 machines, with security features such as dynamic coding of key codes on ballot units and their transfer as messages to the control unit in an encrypted manner. EVMs feature encoded software that is burnt one-time on to programmable chips, enabling them to be used as stand-alone machines rather than computer-connected units, thus preventing any hacking by remote devices. Model 3 machines produced after 2013 have additional features such as tamper detection. The EC has laid down procedural rules of locking and storing EVMs before and after polling, besides functional checks and tests in the presence of representatives of political parties. The addition of the VVPAT machine to the process is to allow for cross-checking of EVM results through a paper audit, completing another layer of accountability to the indigenously produced machines (only the microchip is manufactured outside the country with the machine language embedded on it). Contrary to glib claims about tampering, studies show the introduction of EVMs has resulted in a drastic reduction in electoral fraud (rigging, stuffing of ballot boxes, etc.) and allowed for greater voter participation. Since reverting to the older paper ballot system will be regressive, the only option in the face of the protests is to have a back-up in the form of a paper trail — something that will hopefully put a quietus to the controversy.

Babri demolition case: After 25 years, and two more in the offing, there is no closure on this

The mills of the gods grind slowly but they grind exceedingly fine is a dictum meant to bring comfort for those who wait long for justice. But in the Babri masjid case, the course of justice while being excruciatingly slow has not been particularly productive so far. The Supreme Court’s decision to reopen the criminal conspiracy charges against senior BJP leaders such as LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharti – Kalyan Singh being a governor has immunity for the duration of his term – comes nearly a quarter of a century after the fateful day on which the ancient mosque in Ayodhya was razed to the ground by frenzied Hindu mobs. This singular act of violence changed India’s political landscape forever, deepening the faultlines of polarisation and communalisation. The deadly riots which followed Mr Advani’s rath yatra brought a militant Hindutva to the fore and claimed the lives of over 2,000 people.

Despite an overwhelming amount of evidence and various commissions, the most notable presided over by Justice Manmohan Singh Liberhan, which was set up 10 days after the event, justice has never been seen to be done in the case. The Liberhan commission clearly stated when it finally submitted its report seven years later that BJP politicians involved were to blame. Yet the case has dragged on and now the Supreme Court has given the proceedings another two years. Many of those named in the cases relating to the destruction of the mosque have died, others have been let off.

China renaming places in Arunachal is an old ploy to delegitimise adversaries

True to form, the Chinese have pushed up their claim over Arunachal Pradesh to another level. The English daily Global Times said in a news item today that “China’s Ministry of Civil Affairs announced on April 14 that it had standardised in Chinese characters, Tibetan and Roman alphabet, the names of six places in ‘South Tibet’, which India calls ‘Arunachal Pradesh’ in accordance with the regulations of the central government.

So, Bum La, the pass that marks the Line of Actual Control (LAC) north of Tawang has become Bümo La and Namka Chu, through which the current LAC runs and where the fighting first began in October 1962, has become Namkapub Ri and Menchuka, a small town in West Siang district, has become Mainquka.

China has long mastered the art of “lawfare” or the system through which legal claims are put forward to delegitimise adversaries. Renaming places is not something new. So the Chinese call the Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands in the South China Sea as the Xisha and Nansha islands or the Senkaku islands which they dispute with Japan as the Diaoyu islands. So Aksai Chin which India claims as being part of Jammu & Kashmir is occupied by China and is said to be the southwestern part of the Hotan Prefecture of Xinjiang.

According to the daily, the aim is to “reaffirm the country’s territorial sovereignty to the disputed region”. The paper cited a Chinese specialist Xiong Kunxin to say that the renaming and standardisation were part of “China’s growing understanding and recognition of geography in South Tibet.”

India’s claim on Arunachal Pradesh rests on the Simla Convention of 1914 which it arrived at with the Tibetan authorities which marked the border through what was known as the McMahon Line. The great monastery of Tawang thus became a part of India, though it was administered by Tibetan monks till 1951 when an Indian patrol team led by Major R. Khating sent them away. China says that its representative had not agreed to the Simla Convention, though the record says that he initialled it. Further in ensuring years, the Chinese authorities did not raise any issue with regard to the McMahon Line.

Even though China claimed a boundary on the foothills of the Assam plains from the outset, it did not press its claims. In 1962, following the defeat of the Indian Army, China occupied all of Arunachal Pradesh, but voluntarily withdrew thereafter.

Earlier in 1960, Premier Zhou Enlai offered to trade Chinese claims in Arunachal with India’s claims in Aksai Chin which China was occupying. This offer of a swap was repeated again by Deng Xiaoping in the early 1980s. However, since the mid-1980s, the Chinese have been saying that India should concede Tawang to them. And now, following the most recent visit of the Dalai Lama, which China warned would spoil Sino-Indian relations, Beijing has taken this additional step.

However, in 2005, in signing the agreement on the Political Parameters and Guiding Principle for the Settlement of the India-China Boundary Question, China accepted under its Article VII that “In reaching the boundary settlement, the two sides will safeguard due interests of their settled populations in border areas.” Indians assumed that the Chinese were willing to again forgo their claim on Tawang, but a year later China disavowed this as well.

Last month, Dai Bingguo who was Beijing’s top negotiator on the border dispute with his Indian counterparts between 2003 and 2013, said in an interview with the China-Indian Dialogue magazine that “The disputed territory in the eastern sector of the China-India boundary, including Tawang, is inalienable from China’s Tibet in terms of cultural background and administrative jurisdiction.” Indeed, he had the chutzpah to suggest that India was blocking China’s “reasonable requests” in not offering Tawang up as part of a border settlement. Indian negotiators have repeatedly told the Chinese that bringing up Tawang is a deal breaker.

Now, it is not just Tawang, clearly the Chinese are hardening their claim on the entire state of Arunachal Pradesh. And the prospects of a border settlement look remote. But this is not just something that affects India. Across their periphery, whether in the Senkaku/Diayou islands, or the South China Sea, China’s position on its borders has become more assertive and inflexible.

ASEAN-India summit

Association of South East Asian Nations or ASEAN is the 10 member block, it is one of the most successful regional block in the world. India started looking toward the group seriously from 1992 with the launch of 'Look East policy' and now it occupies the central position in India's policy Southeast Asia. From 2002 onward India and ASEAN started holding annual summit at the sidelined of ASEAN summit showing the growing level of engagement between the two sides.^[157][158]

At the 12th India-ASEAN summit, which was Modi's first appearance in an ASEAN meet, he called for greater connectivity with the Southeast Asian countries and mentioned that "India and ASEAN can be 'great partners'".^[159] Stressing on the importance ASEAN commands in India's foreign policy Modi has repeatedly remarked that his government has in the last 6 months made relation with ASEAN a top priority and turned India's two decade old 'Look East policy' into 'Act East policy' which reflects a renewed momentum in India's approach toward ASEAN nations. The two sides also discussed the scope of extending the existing free trade agreement on service sector as well and ways to increase India-ASEAN trade which is expected to reach US$100 billion in 2015. Modi also stressed on three 'C's to strengthen the relation and those are commerce, connectivity and cultural links.^[160]

In the sidelines of ASEAN summit Modi also held several bilateral meetings with his counterparts including Thai Prime Minister Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, Singapore's Prime MinisterLee Hsien Loong, Sultan of Brunei Hassanal Bolkiah, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak and South Korean President Park Geun-hye

The HIV/AIDS Bill provides a solid base for further empowerment and treatment access. . .

The HIV and AIDS (Prevention and Control) Bill passed by Parliament does not guarantee access to anti-retroviral drugs and treatment for opportunistic infections, but there is no denying that it is a good base for an active health rights movement to build upon. Understandably, HIV-positive people in the country, estimated at over 21 lakh, are disappointed that the Centre’s commitment to take all measures necessary to prevent the spread of HIV or AIDS is not reflected in the Bill, in the form of the right to treatment. The law only enjoins the States to provide access “as far as possible”. Beyond this flaw, though, the legislation empowers those who have contracted the infection in a variety of ways: such as protecting against discrimination in employment, education, health-care services, getting insurance and renting property. It is now for the States to show strong political commitment, and appoint one or more ombudsmen to go into complaints of violations and submit reports as mandated by the law. Here again, State rules should prescribe a reasonable time limit for inquiries into complaints, something highlighted by the Standing Committee on Health and Family Welfare that scrutinised the legislation.

Access to insurance for persons with HIV is an important part of the Bill, and is best handled by the government. The numbers are not extraordinarily large and new cases are on the decline, according to the Health Ministry. Data for 2015 published by the Ministry show that two-thirds of HIV-positive cases are confined to seven States, while three others have more than one lakh cases each. Viewed against the national commitment to Goal 3 of the UN Sustainable Development Goals — to “end the epidemic of AIDS” (among others) by 2030 — a rapid scaling up of interventions to prevent new cases and to offer free universal treatment is critical. Publicly funded insurance can easily bring this subset of care-seekers into the overall risk pool. Such a measure is also necessary to make the forward-looking provisions in the new law meaningful, and to provide opportunities for education, skill-building and employment. As a public health concern, HIV/AIDS has a history of active community involvement in policymaking, and a highly visible leadership in the West. It would be appropriate for the Centre to initiate active public consultations to draw up the many guidelines to govern the operation of the law. Evidently, the requirement for the ombudsman to make public the periodic reports on compliance will exert pressure on States to meet their obligations. In an encouraging sign, the Supreme Court has ruled against patent extensions on frivolous grounds, putting the generic drugs industry, so crucial for HIV treatment, on a firm footing. The HIV and AIDS Bill may not be the answer to every need, but it would be a folly not to see its potential to make further gains.