NITI Aayog’s shift away from five-year plans requires more substance. . . . . . . .

Narendra Modi is not the first Chief Minister to have gone on to become Prime Minister. But given his well-known disdain for the erstwhile Planning Commission’s control-and-command approach towards States and his oft-repeated emphasis on ‘cooperative federalism’, there were great expectations from the successor organisation, the NITI Aayog. The Five Year Plans — the last one ended on March 31 — were relegated to history, to be replaced by a three-year action plan. This was to be part of a seven-year strategy that would in turn help realise a 15-year long-term vision. When the Aayog’s Governing Council that includes the Prime Minister and all Chief Ministers met, it was hoped that the fine print as well as the big picture of the new planning approach had been worked out. However, all that was handed out was a draft action agenda for the three years till 2019-20, with 300 specific action points. This agenda is meant to be the first step towards attaining the envisioned outcomes by 2031-32. This ‘New India’, as NITI Aayog Vice Chairman Arvind Panagariya put it, will ensure housing for all, with toilets, LPG, power and digital connections; access to a personal vehicle, air conditioner and white goods for ‘nearly all’; and a fully literate population with universal health care.

Assuming that the economy grows at 8% annually hereon, the Aayog has presented estimates about the size of the economy and per capita incomes by 2031-32, though juxtaposing these with China’s performance in the last 15 years is a bit odd. India’s GDP will rise by ₹332 lakh crore in the next 15 years, the Aayog reckons. The bare details of the 15-year vision that have been shared seem like motherhood statements with some optimistic numerical guesswork. But even that is more than we know about the seven-year strategy. Without the larger strategy and vision in place, the three-year action plan is likely to be more of an abstract wish list that Chief Ministers will now evaluate and revert on. Effectively, till it is ratified by the Council, there is a vacuum in India’s policy framework — similar to the delayed starts of past Five Year Plans. It is not yet apparent if the 12th Plan’s innovation of painting alternative scenarios (of actions and outcomes) — a more useful tool for longer-term planning — has been adopted. Meanwhile, the PM’s message to States to speed up capital expenditure and infrastructure development is important as pump-priming the economy is not only the Centre’s task. All the same, asking the States to take the initiative on switching India’s financial year to match the calendar year is unusual as it requires the Centre to take the lead by making public the report of the committee that has recommended this. To make cooperative federalism truly effective, the Council, or Team India as Mr. Modi calls it, must meet more often — a nearly two-year gap in doing so is a recipe for communication breakdown.

Russia's Aeroflot airline accused of 'sex discrimination'. ... . .

Russia's flagship carrier Aeroflot is fighting a legal battle with several of its female flight attendants who say it favours slim and attractive cabin crew.

A Moscow court on Tuesday rejected a sex discrimination claim by stewardess Irina Ierusalimskaya.

She plans to appeal, and is backed by a top Russian human rights and trade union official, Boris Kravchenko.

The company argues that every extra kilogram of weight forces Aeroflot to spend more on fuel.

Its application form for would-be flight attendants requires details of height, weight and clothing size.

Staff have to meet a minimum height requirement because they need to store hand luggage in the overhead lockers, Aeroflot says.

The court will soon consider a similar claim from another Aeroflot flight attendant, Yevgenia Magurina.

"A heavy physical build makes it harder for a flight attendant to move around the cabin and provide a smooth service for the passenger," an Aeroflot official told the court.

A company statement said "stewardesses are the face of any airline, and the national carrier's stewardesses are the country's business card".

"One's first impression of Russia, and attitude towards Russia, depends on the stewardesses' appearance and customer service."

Image copyrightAFP

Image captionAeroflot has invested in many new airliners and high-profile global marketing

This week Brand Finance, a major international consultancy, rated Aeroflot as Russia's "most powerful brand".

It beat strong competition for the accolade from Russian business giants like Gazprom, Sberbank and Rosneft.

A Brand Finance report on Russia said Aeroflot "has the youngest fleet of any major airline and is investing heavily in marketing promotion, particularly in Asia".

The airline's brand promotion includes sponsorship of Manchester United FC, "which helps Aeroflot reach a vast audience across East Asia in particular", the report says.

Trade union warning

Aeroflot has improved its customer service since the Soviet period, when it was often the butt of jokes about grumpy stewardesses and unappetising food.

But Boris Kravchenko called Ms Ierusalimskaya's case "an unprecedented case of sex discrimination". He is a member of President Vladimir Putin's Council for Human Rights, and chairs the Russian Labour Confederation.

"The trade unions in this sector have teeth," he said, warning of possible strike action "if such discriminatory behaviour persists". He was speaking to Russia's RBC news website.

Image copyrightAFP

Image captionThe Russian state has a controlling stake in Aeroflot, founded back in Soviet times

In court, the Aeroflot representative said every extra kilogram of weight meant spending an extra 800 roubles (£11; $14) annually on fuel.

He also said a survey carried out for Aeroflot showed that passengers preferred attractive flight attendants and agreed that an airline had a right to stipulate weight limits and clothes sizes for its staff.

Aeroflot says it has "several hundred" stewardesses aged over 40 on its international routes.

'Not a 43kg girl's job'

Ms Ierusalimskaya, aged 45, wants Aeroflot to pay her 1m roubles (£14,000; $17,750) in compensation, Russia's Kommersant news reports. Her clothes size is 52 (XL, under the international system).

She said the airline had transferred her to domestic flights, cutting her income. She complained that Aeroflot's rules required stewardesses to be at least 160cm (5ft 3ins) tall and have a clothes size no larger than 48 (L; 16 in UK; 42 in Germany; 14 in US).

A decorated, veteran Aeroflot pilot, Oleg Smirnov, told BBC Russian that the build of female flight attendants "is an issue for every country's airline".

"Of course a stewardess must be quite elegant, to move between the seats, attend to passengers," he said.

But they also need to be strong enough to handle a heavy inflatable slide in an emergency, he said.

Mikhail Markov, another top pilot, said stewardesses have to be strong enough to lift heavy suitcases quickly. "It's no job for a 43-kilogram girl," he said.

Justice C.S. Karnan’s continuance as a judge makes a mockery of the rule of law

He  has brought the judiciary into disrepute, flouted all norms of judicial conduct and thrown an open challenge to the Supreme Court. His continuance as a judge makes a mockery of democracy and the rule of law. The case of Justice C.S. Karnan is no longer just strange or curious; it is disgraceful and intolerable. The Calcutta High Court judge’s ‘order’ summoning the Chief Justice of India and six judges of the Supreme Court to his ‘residential court’ to face punishment under the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is yet another unacceptable affront to the apex court’s authority. Justice Karnan’s conduct goes against the assurance he gave the Chief Justice of India last year that he would foster a “harmonious attitude towards one and all”. At that time, he had expressed regret for passing a suo motu order staying his own transfer from the Madras High Court to the Calcutta High Court, admitting that it was an “erroneous order” passed due to “mental frustration, resulting in loss of mental balance”. The latest instance of his misconduct is in response to thecontempt proceedings initiated against him by the Supreme Court for denigrating the judicial institution by making sweeping allegations, in a letter to the Prime Minister, against several judges. He had appeared in person before a seven-judge Bench on March 31, and was given four weeks to respond to the charge of contempt of court. It is quite apparent that he is only further damaging his own case.

The recalcitrant judge has a long history of alleging corruption among other judges, accusing some of caste discrimination against him, and often invoking his caste identity to take complaints against his peers and even Chief Justices to the National Commission for Scheduled Castes. In the past, he has passed judicial orders on matters pertaining to the selection of judges, even after being barred by a Division Bench from hearing them. He had once barged into a court during a hearing, and on another occasion into the chamber of the Madras High Court Chief Justice, “hurling a volley of invectives”. Public criticism, transfer to another High Court, being hauled up for contempt and being denied judicial work — nothing seems to restrain him. The only option left is impeachment, but it is a political process involving Parliament and is something he himself may want so he can give full play to his alleged grievances, including those based on his caste. Justice Karnan’s case vividly exposes the inadequacies of the collegium system of appointments. Nothing makes a better case for the infusion of greater transparency in the selection of judges than his current presence in the High Court.

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

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 Army must act quickly on reports of the use of a human shield by its personnel

The ports of Army personnel using a young man as a human shield in Jammu and Kashmir’s Budgam district must not only invite a swift inquiry and justice, but also compel the Army and the government to issue clear statements on the unacceptability of this shocking practice. A short video clip that went viral on Friday showed a man tied to the bonnet of an Army jeep being driven through the streets, as it escorted election officials on polling day in the Srinagar parliamentary constituency. Heard in the clip, on what appears to be the public address system of the vehicle, are the threatening words, “Paththar bazon ka yeh haal hoga (this shall be the fate of stone-pelters).” The man has subsequently been identified as Farooq Dar, a 26-year-old who embroiders shawls, and the Army personnel are said to belong to the 53 Rashtriya Rifles. There is a lack of total clarity on exactly what happened, including how long Mr. Dar was tied to the bonnet — he says he was subjected to this humiliation as the vehicle passed through 10 to 12 villages, while Army sources have been quoted as saying it was for just about 100 metres. But such questions relating to distance are hardly the issue. The larger point here is that if he was indeed forcibly strapped on to the bonnet, it amounts to an instance of gross human rights violation, and must officially be called out in clear terms.

Human shields have often been used cynically by terrorist organisations — theIslamic State uses civilians as shields in its battles, and the LTTE used them in the closing stages of the civil war in Sri Lanka. To use a person as a human shield is to abduct him, to hold him hostage, and to potentially put him in harm’s way. There is no argument that the Army, which is caught in a situation in which terrorists attempt to blend in with the civilian population, is fighting a difficult and unenviable battle. But the difficulties in fighting a hybrid war do not constitute a justification for the use of human shields, which is categorised as a war crime by the Geneva Conventions. Only a couple of days before the human shield video surfaced, another one — which showed CRPF personnel exercising admirable restraint as they were pushed and beaten by youth in Kashmir — had gone viral. It is ironic and hypocritical that some of those who commended such self-control are now defending the indefensible use of a human shield. It is true that the polling in Srinagar was held in a hostile environment, the abysmally low 7% turnout being a reflection of local alienation as well as intimidation by militants to keep people away from voting. But the security bandobast was aimed precisely to reassure the people and not to force an ‘us vs them’ binary. The Army must expedite the inquiry and act against the erring personnel where warranted. Its response must also publicly affirm its Code of Conduct vis-à-vis civilians, which includes the clause, “Violation of human rights… must be avoided under all circumstances, even at the cost of operational success”. To do any less would amount to being a party to rights violations

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

Theresa May appears to hold all the cards as she calls a snap election in the U.K.. . . .

Thanks god For giving me enough time to do something for the common people,

I respect all intelligence and scientists rather than soldier who upgrade our country by their intellect,respect and support to the intelligence.

Seven that she had ruled out a snap election on several occasions, British Prime Minister Theresa May’s announcement on Tuesday caught most people by surprise. As the House of Commons a day later endorsed the advancing of the election, due in the normal course in 2020, by a thumping 522 votes for, and just 13 against, she appeared to have everything going for her. It was very different last summer when Ms. May was chosen by the Conservatives to occupy 10 Downing Street after Prime Minister David Cameron stepped down after the ‘Brexit’ referendum. The Tories were smarting from internecine battles. Some of these feuds in fact were so brutal that she was not spared personal attacks relating to her health and family, matters wholly unrelated to her politics and suitability for being head of government. But since then Ms. May has come a long way, establishing a firm hold over the party apparatus. The few remaining members of Parliament from the pro-Europe camp have been further marginalised. Potential troublemakers among eurosceptics have also been kept in check. Ms. May now feels it is time to erase the perception that she is an unelected Prime Minister. The only real hurdle she had encountered to her Brexit plan was the legal challenge demanding a formal parliamentary authorisation of the U.K.’s withdrawal from the EU. But what little resolve remained in the two Houses to secure guarantees for immigrants from the bloc and a demand for legislative approval of the final deal was met with strong resistance from the government. The announcement by the Scottish National Party of a second referendum on independence only delayed by a few days the start of the formal process of withdrawal from the EU.

The scope for the U.K. to bargain for a reasonable deal with the other 27 countries in the EU appears to be extremely limited. As the 2019 countdown has begun, there is now greater appreciation in London of this emerging scenario than there was a few months back. Chances are that EU law will continue to operate in several areas, long into a transition period after London formally leaves the bloc in March 2019. A possible extension of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, or further inflows of EU immigrants, will test eurosceptic silence. It is likely that the advantage of facing the electorate ahead, rather than in the immediate aftermath, of the conclusion of an uncertain final Brexit deal influenced Ms. May in taking the decision to hold a snap poll. The timing is not all bad from her point of view. At the hustings on June 8, the voters face a choice between a demoralised and directionless opposition and a government obliged to deliver on their referendum decision last year to leave the EU. As the latter is now a fait accompli, a voter rethink on the question is almost of little consequence. For Britain’s Labour Party, the challenge could not have been stiffer.