Spirit of Democracy and its animations in India....................... Divya Gurnay.

Democracy is not a form of Government, but a form of Social Organisation

The bedrock of the Indian legal system i.e. our Constitution was framed by the Constituent Assembly after many rounds of fiery debate and razor sharp rhetoric bandied about by the members. The grand Parliament Building stood a silent witness to this spirited and critical exercise of defining what exactly our young democracy would look like.

One of the most perceptive observations made during these Constituent Assembly meetings was by the man behind the Drafting Committee, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. He stressed that the making of new laws is not enough, the real challenge is to establish democracy at grassroot level. He observed that in our country, “Democracy is like a topsoil, artificially layered on the Indian sub-stratum which originally is essentially undemocratic.” This observation is vindicated by the fact that although we have democratic elections right from Panchayat level to the Parliament, yet the use of money and muscle power has become a big deciding factor in winnability of candidates. A recent article in TIME magazine revealed that in India, candidates with serious criminal background are  twice as likely to win as compared to candidates with no criminal background. Why does it happen or is likely to happen? Is it that the indian collective conscious is still plagued by slave mentality induced by fear and intimidation so firmly embedded in the common man's mind first by the rajvaras and then by the british to serve their narrow ends ? Or is it that the democracy came in when the average indian was not quite ready for it and has resulted in it being hijacked by capitalists and criminals.  Thus the real challenge still is to put the spirit of democracy into the hearts and minds of all Indians. This challenge has not received enough attention until now.

Over the decades the Sansad Bhavan has witnessed many grand (and not so grand) moments during the Parliamentary proceedings, but the zealous debates of the Constituent Assembly are yet to be surpassed. Attending the recently concluded Model Youth Parliament at International Youth Centre, New Delhi, gave me hope. I realised that with the youth of this country taking initiatives to debate on policy making, learning about the process of Parliament, and speaking their hearts out on how they wish to have a more participative democracy, democracy may finally be progressing beyond being a mere topsoil and actually take roots. Our Demographic Dividend might just serve us with energy and hope to be the final push we need to make our democracy truly participative.

History tells us that we are basically a democratic sort of people. In ancient India, about 1000 BC, our Janapadas and Mahajanapadas had a republican form of governance with no hereditary passing of the tribal chief’s title. It was the ablest man who got the job in the tribal republic ranging from its highest chief to its lowest menial. Therefore, democracy is not some foreign concept that we have imported or need to adapt ourselves too. It is there in our ancient roots and in our spirits. Now, more than ever before, the democracy in our hearts is rebelling against the undemocratic social institutions around us. This rebelliousness is only natural in a young nation like ours with 65% of its population under the age of 35.

In the Youth Parliament proceedings I saw a glimpse of our constituent assembly, with nuanced and highly informed arguments advanced by the ruling party as well as the dynamic opposition. It was what our Parliament ought to look like, young and highly representative with members from all corners of the nation. I saw the usual cynicism about politics in our country melting away as the youngsters took to the role of representing their constituencies with gusto. Perhaps as our democracy takes roots, the unfulfilled dreams of a great nation and its many a freedom fighters who laid down their  lives for it, will also finally take wings.

...Divya Gurnay. Ba Hons, Psychology,  M.A. Journalism and Mass communication, a student of LLB.

To Sin or not to SinTax

The Punjab Government has withdrawn sin tax on cigarettes that it had levied in the 2013-2014 budget. The idea behind imposing the sin tax was to fund the treatment of poor cancer patients and set up drug de-addiction centres with the revenue collected. However, the result has been a the growing menace of smuggling of cigarettes from neighbouring states, coupled with a decrease in sale of cigarettes in the state resulting in decreased revenues. This is because no other states in North India have imposed sin tax on cigarettes other than Uttar Pradesh. But is the government justified in acting disappointed at the outcome or should it really have known better? After all sin tax does have a reputation for coming with inevitable collateral damage. 


Is sin tax by very nature defective? To examine this we must examine the moral, administrative, medical and financial arguments for and against sin tax.

Sin tax is a kind of sumptuary tax, i.e. a tax specifically levied to reduce transactions involving something that society considers undesirable. Common targets are alcohol, tobacco, gambling, soft drinks, fast food, candies etc. The revenue generated by sin tax is usually used for special projects to benefit the 'sinners' and other members of society. For instance Sweden uses its gambling sin tax to help people with gambling problems while some American counties use such taxes to build more sports facilities for residents.

The rough idea behind sin tax is to prevent certain behaviours. Raise the cost of certain products to make people stop using them or at least use less of them. After all most smokers and alcoholics are in a constant struggle to quit and making the ‘sinful’ behaviour financially painful may be the ultimate push they need to stick to their decision of quitting.

Taking the medico-economic  perspective, it is argued that consumers of tobacco and alcohol cause a greater financial burden on society by forcing others to pay for medical treatment of conditions stemming from such consumption, especially in many first world countries where government funds health-care costs. They should be taxed extra to pay for the cost of their treatment. All these arguments seem valid but the dynamics of sin tax in real life are usually very different.

Sin tax has had a bad reputation ever since it was first implemented. It has historically triggered rampant smuggling and black markets, especially when it creates a large price difference in neighbouring jurisdictions. It is also a regressive tax in nature which means that it is imposed in such a manner that the tax rate decreases as the amount to be taxed decreases. A regressive tax imposes greater burden on the poor, relative to their resources, than on the rich. So if a man earning 10,000 rupees a month has to shell out 1000 rupees for monthly alcohol rather than 600 rupees which he was earlier paying, that would be a jump from 6% to 10% of his total income. Whereas for a man earning a minimum 200,000 per month which would put him in the strata of ‘well off’ in this age, even if he was paying 6000 per month for alcohol and is now to pay 10,000 it is only a jump from 3% to 5% of his income. Thus the burden on poor man is much greater. For the poor man, the extra 400 rupees he pays as sin tax would have meant the complete school fee for one of his children, stationary and all, but for the high earner the increase of 4000 rupees is peanuts.

Sin tax impacts consumer behaviour in a most damaging manner. For instance it increases the smoker’s propensity to smoke high tar, high nicotine cigarettes which are cheaper but far more harmful. This causes increase in diseases like cancer, which is exactly opposite to the objective of imposing sin tax. On administrative and humanitarian grounds this is unacceptable and from an economic perspective, it increases costs of healthcare for residents. What is the point of collecting more revenue to help smokers and alcoholics if you are at the same time automatically increasing the number of sick and diseased persons who would be eligible for such aid. For instance alcohol consumers will buy cheaper distils and the really poor would be forced to consume moonshine produced illegally which has high likelihood of damaging their liver very fast and may even poison them as many cases have been reported in India. That it would create a spurt in law and order problems related to illegal production of moonshine is obvious.

Sin tax has a propensity to not only change the consumption patterns of the ‘sinners’ but also the priorities of the government. We cannot forget that government is always only as good as the people who run it. They may become reliant on the revenue from sin tax and would then have to encourage the ‘sinful’ behaviour in question to maintain the stream of revenue.

History has shown that sin tax is not an effective method to curb bad habits of members of society and rather creates a range of other complications that put unnecessary pressure on the police, medical facilities as well as the regular law abiding tax payer. Therefore alternative methods must be used such as mass communication efforts and counselling camps to help people kick the bottle and the get rid of the smoke in their lives.

Verdict- Governments must not commit the sin of imposing sin tax.

                                                                                                                   ...Divya Gurnay

Great Himalayan National Park Gets Heritage Status

A UNESCO world heritage site is a place that has been listed as one due to its special cultural or physical significance, with outstanding universal value to humanity. The list is maintained by the international World Heritage Programme administered by UNESCO World Heritage Committee. This committee is composed of 21 State Parties which are elected by its General Assembly.

Once a country has some sights inscribed on the World Heritage list, the resulting prestige often raises higher awareness among citizens and governments, resulting in a general rise in the amount of importance given to heritage properties. A country may also receive financial assistance and expert advice from the World Heritage Committee to support activities for the preservation of its sites.

 The World Heritage Programme was founded in 1972 with ‘The Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage’ adopted by UNESCO, and since ratified by nearly all countries of the world. Today there are 1007 World Heritage sites all over the world. Of these, 779 are cultural, 197 are natural, while 31 are mixed.

There is a well laid out criteria for Cultural and Natural Heritage Sites to be included. Firstly, the nominated site must be of outstanding Universal Value. Secondly, it must meet at least one of the ten criteria listed below.

Cultural criteria

1. Represents a masterpiece of human creative genius.

2. Exhibits an important interchange of human values, over a span of time, or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning, or landscape design.

3. To bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared.

4. Is an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural, or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates a significant stage in human history.

5. Is an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture, or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change.

6. Is directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance.

Natural criteria

7. Contains superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance.

8. Is an outstanding example representing major stages of Earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features.

9. Is an outstanding example representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems, and communities of plants and animals.

10. Contains the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation

 India has 32 World Heritage Sites recognised by UNESCO. Of these 25 are cultural and 7 ar natural. The latest addition is the Great Himalayan National Park in July 2014.

The 7 Natural World Heritage Sites are:

1.      Kaziranga Wildlife Sanctuary

2.      Manas Wildlife Sanctuary

3.      Keoladeo National Park

4.      Sunderbans National Park

5.      Nanda Devi and Valley of Flowers

6.      Western Ghats

7.      Great Himalayan National Park

The 25 Cultural World Heritage Sites are:

1.      Mahabodhi Temple Complex, Bodh Gaya, Bihar

2.      Humayun’s Tomb, Delhi

3.      Qutb Minar and its monuments

4.      Red Fort Complex

5.      Churches and Convents of Goa

6.      Champaner, Pavagarh, Archeological Park, Gujrat

7.      Group of Monuments at Hampi

8.      Group of Monuments at Pattadakal

9.      Buddhist Monuments at Sanchi, Madhya Pradesh

10.  Khajuraho, MP

11.  Ajanta Caves

12.  Ellora Caves

13.  Elephanta Caves

14.  Chattrapati Shivaji Terminus, Maharashtra

15.  Sun Temple, Konark

16.  Jantar Mantar, Jaipur

17.  Great Living Chola Temples, Tamil Nadu

18.  Group of Monuments at Mahabalipuram, TN

19.  Agra Fort

20.  Fatehpur Sikri

21.  Taj Mahal

22.  Mountain Railways of India- Darjeeling; Nilgiri; Kalka-Shimla

23.  Hill Forts of Rajasthan

24.  Rani ki Vav, Patan, Gujrat

25.  Rock Shelters at Bhimbetka, MP

The Great Himalayan National Park will benefit from the World Heritage Status as it would boost tourism potential and bring in much needed impetus and funds to help protect the rare and endangered species of birds, animals and plants present there. The decision was taken after a meeting of International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in Doha. The park in Kullu district had staked claim under the natural scenic beauty category as it has 203 species of rare birds, 50 species of mammals and over 400 species of rare plants. The Great Himalayan National Park Conservation Area includes the Sainj and Tirthan Wildlife Sanctuaries.

Some threatened animal and bird species there include Western Tragopan, Chir Pheasant, Snow Leopard, Himalayan Musk Deer, Asiatic Black Bear, Himalayan Tahr, Blue Sheep Serow.

Some of the large mammals that are characteristic of the park include Goral, the Himalayan Tahr and Bharal or Blue Sheep. These mammals are prey for leopards in the forest zone and snow leopards above the tree line. Himalayan black bears inhabit the forests, while Asiatic brown bears are on the alpine meadows. Among birds, the western Tragopan, Monal, Lammergeyers, Himalayan Griffon Vultures and Golden Eagles are prominent.

Though the World Heritage has pepped up authorities and researchers with the prospect of more tourism and added funds, the heritage tag has created a discord among villagers who are campaigning for the settlement of their rights to grazing, collecting firewood, medicinal herb and morel mushrooms. The expected increase in tourism would also have to be sensitively managed as the boost to the economy cannot come at the expense of excessive human intervention and as a result environmental degradation. The involvement of the local community can be an asset if managed properly because they are the most directly affected stakeholders.

                                                                                                                                ...Divya Gurnay.