Prabhat Kunwar

Kolkata: In a recent development from Guwahati, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has articulated a newfound clarity following the implementation of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA). This clarity has set the stage for the commencement of unlocking biometrics that were frozen during the update of the National Register of Citizens (NRC).

The Chief Minister’s statement comes as a beacon of hope for approximately 27 lakh individuals whose biometrics were locked, rendering them unable to obtain Aadhaar cards and, by extension, access to various services. The unlocking process is expected to alleviate the difficulties faced by these residents in obtaining ration cards, securing employment, and accessing other government services.

The CAA, which aims to grant Indian citizenship to persecuted non-Muslim migrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan who arrived in India before December 31, 2014, has been a subject of intense debate and scrutiny. In Assam, the act takes on additional significance due to its interlink with the NRC, a Supreme Court-monitored exercise that excluded 19 lakh out of 3.4 crore applicants.

Chief Minister Sarma has reassured the public that the CAA will not lead to an influx of new applicants into Assam, stating that only those who had previously applied for the NRC will be considered for citizenship. He emphasized the need for the populace to rely on sound logic rather than emotion when discussing the CAA and its implications.

The Assam government’s approach to resolving the biometric lock issue involves discussions with the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU) and other stakeholders. The Chief Minister expressed optimism that a solution would be reached soon after the elections, marking a significant step towards resolving a long-standing issue that has affected millions.

The NRC update, a fallout of the Assam Accord signed in 1985, was aimed at identifying illegal immigrants in the state. However, the process has been fraught with controversies and challenges, leaving many genuine citizens in a state of limbo. The CAA’s implementation and the subsequent unlocking of biometrics are expected to bring some resolution to the matter.

The Chief Minister’s announcement has been met with mixed reactions. While some view it as a positive move towards rectifying the issues stemming from the NRC update, others remain sceptical about the CAA’s impact on the demographic and cultural landscape of Assam.

As the state prepares to unlock biometrics, the focus is on ensuring that the process is smooth and that the rights of genuine citizens are safeguarded. The Assam government’s handling of this sensitive issue will be closely monitored by both national and international observers.

The situation in Assam is a reflection of the complexities involved in addressing citizenship and migration issues. The state’s experience serves as a case study for the rest of the country, highlighting the need for policies that are fair, transparent, and sensitive to the concerns of the local population.

The unfolding events in Assam post the implementation of the CAA will have significant implications for the state’s future. The Chief Minister’s commitment to unlocking the biometrics and providing clarity on the NRC process is a step towards resolving the anxieties of many residents. The nation watches with keen interest as Assam navigates through this pivotal chapter in its history.

In the heart of India’s bustling capital, a movement is stirring—a call to action that resonates with the vibrancy of the Ganga and the steadfastness of the Himalayas. The National Awakening Campaign, spearheaded by the esteemed thinker Mr K.N. Govindacharya, is not just a campaign; it’s a revolution of consciousness, a plea for the protection of what defines India: the cow, the Ganga, the villages, and the majestic Himalayas.

Govindacharya’s voice boomed across the gathered crowd, a voice of reason amidst the cacophony of modern life. “Nature conservation is no longer a choice; it’s a necessity,” he declared, urging every individual to become a steward of the environment. His message was clear: human involvement in nature conservation must increase, not as a mere participant but as an active contributor.

The campaign emphasizes the need for new efforts in nature conservation, highlighting the pivotal role of societal collaboration. Govindacharya’s vision is one of unity, where every segment of society, from farmers to policymakers, from students to spiritual leaders, comes together for a common cause. He praised Ms Subuhi Khan for her significant contributions, a testament to the power of individual action fueling collective change.

The event witnessed substantial youth participation, a hopeful sign of the times. Young minds engaged in earnest discussions on nature conservation, exploring the intricate web of human interrelations with the environment. They are not just participants but the torchbearers of a sustainable future, ready to carry forward the legacy of conservation.

Dr. Mahesh Chandra Sharma, the event’s chairman, provided insightful leadership, guiding the discussions towards actionable outcomes. His expertise and experience served as a beacon for the attendees, illuminating the path towards a greener tomorrow.

The National Awakening Campaign is gaining momentum, with its message echoing across the nation. It’s a movement that transcends boundaries, uniting people from all walks of life in a shared mission to safeguard nature’s bounty for generations to come.

As the sun sets on an eventful day, the message of the National Awakening Campaign lingers in the air, a reminder that the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step—a step towards conservation, collaboration, and collective awakening.

The National Awakening Campaign is more than just a series of events; it’s the beginning of a new chapter in India’s environmental narrative. With leaders like Govindacharya and Sharma at the helm, and the passionate involvement of the youth, the campaign is set to leave an indelible mark on the nation’s consciousness. It’s a clarion call that beckons every Indian to rise and act, to embrace nature not as a resource to be exploited but as a sacred trust to be cherished. The time for action is now, and the National Awakening Campaign is leading the charge.

Anil Malviya  

Lucknow: In the political cauldron of Bihar’s assembly, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) finds itself navigating through turbulent waters of seat-sharing negotiations. The recent announcement by Pasupati Paras of his candidacy from Hazipur on his party’s symbol has stirred the pot further. This move comes amidst unresolved discussions within the alliance, highlighting the underlying tensions that have been simmering since the 2019 elections.

Paras, alongside Prince Paswan from Samastipur and Chandan Singh, who seeks to defend his 2019 victory, represents a faction within the NDA that is prepared to assert its position. The declaration by Paras that he will not abandon Hazipur, regardless of the final seat-sharing agreement, underscores a resolute stance that could shape the alliance’s dynamics.

The NDA, a coalition of six parties, has been grappling with the challenge of appeasing each member’s aspirations while striving for a consensus that benefits the collective. The seat-sharing talks have been protracted, with each party vying for a significant share of the 40 Lok Sabha seats in Bihar. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is poised to contest on 17 seats, the Janata Dal (United) on 16, and the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) led by Chirag Paswan on five seats.

The Rashtriya Lok Janshakti Party (RLJP), helmed by Union minister Pashupati Kumar Paras, faces the prospect of being content with a Rajya Sabha seat instead of a Lok Sabha berth. This development has been a source of contention, particularly for Paras, who has a vested interest in the Hazipur seat, a stronghold once held by his late brother Ram Vilas Paswan.

The seat-sharing conundrum has been further complicated by the ambitions of other NDA constituents like Upendra Kushwaha’s Rashtriya Lok Morcha (RLM) and Jitan Ram Manjhi’s Hindustani Awam Morcha Secular (HAMS), each eyeing a piece of the electoral pie.

The unfolding scenario in Bihar is a testament to the intricate balance of power and negotiation that characterizes coalition politics. As the NDA inches closer to finalizing its seat-sharing formula, the spotlight remains on Hazipur, where Paras’s unwavering resolve poses a significant test for the alliance’s unity and adaptability.

The past tensions over seat-sharing have been a recurring theme in the NDA’s narrative, often leading to eleventh-hour resolutions that barely conceal the fractures within. The current impasse is not just about the allocation of seats; it’s a reflection of the broader struggle for political relevance and survival in the ever-evolving landscape of Bihar’s politics.

As the NDA partners continue their deliberations, the outcome will not only determine the electoral prospects but also set the tone for the alliance’s future. Will the coalition emerge stronger from this trial, or will individual ambitions pave the way for a realignment of forces? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain: the road to consensus is fraught with hurdles, and the journey is as consequential as the destination itself.

Electoral boundaries, often seen as mere lines on a map, hold within them the power to shape political landscapes and reveal intricate truths about societies. The unveiling of these boundaries exposes hidden dynamics, shedding light on issues of representation, demographics, and political power distribution.

One of the primary revelations of electoral boundaries is the nuanced portrayal of demographic diversity within a region. By dissecting electoral districts, we uncover the intricate tapestry of communities, each with its own social, economic, and cultural identities. Through this lens, electoral boundaries become mirrors reflecting the mosaic of society, showcasing the richness of diversity that often goes unnoticed in broader political discourse.

Furthermore, electoral boundaries serve as a lens through which we can examine issues of representation and equity. How districts are drawn can either amplify or mitigate disparities in political influence. Gerrymandering, the practice of manipulating boundaries to favour a particular political party or group, can distort democratic principles, disenfranchise marginalized communities, and perpetuate unequal representation. By scrutinizing electoral boundaries, we expose the mechanisms by which power is wielded and reveal the fault lines of fairness within our political systems.

Moreover, the revelation of electoral boundaries can expose historical injustices and systemic inequalities. In many cases, boundaries are remnants of past policies and practices that have shaped the social and political landscape. From redlining to segregation, the echoes of historical discrimination are often embedded in the very lines that define electoral districts. By examining these boundaries, we confront the legacies of oppression and confront the ongoing struggle for equality and justice.

Additionally, the unveiling of electoral boundaries can highlight the influence of special interests and political agendas. Behind the seemingly arbitrary lines lie strategic calculations aimed at maximizing electoral advantage. Lobbying, campaign financing, and partisan manoeuvring all play a role in shaping these boundaries, often at the expense of democratic ideals. By peeling back the layers of electoral boundaries, we expose the hidden forces at play and confront the realities of power and privilege in our political systems.

The electoral boundaries are far more than mere cartographic divisions; they are windows into the soul of society. Through their revelation, we confront issues of representation, equity, historical injustice, and political influence. By understanding the truths revealed by electoral boundaries, we empower ourselves to advocate for fairer, more inclusive political systems that truly reflect the diversity and aspirations of the people they serve.

Amit Pandey

India’s electoral process is a colossal undertaking, reflecting the vastness and diversity of the nation. The Election Commission of India (ECI), an autonomous constitutional authority, orchestrates this democratic exercise. However, the logistics of conducting elections in the world’s largest democracy are complex and resource-intensive.

The decision to conduct elections in multiple phases is often a subject of intense debate. The opposition parties, particularly the Trinamool Congress, have raised concerns about the necessity of a multi-phased election, suggesting that it could be a strategy to manipulate the outcome. A group of representatives, including four sitting Members of Parliament, approached the constitutional authority demanding a single-phase election with the deployment of central forces. Their rationale remains undisclosed, but it is speculated that they believe a single-phase election could reduce the potential for electoral malpractice. West Bengal and Odisha have different mindsets of voters who are interested in keeping a single-party government for a long time. When TMC was in opposition they often asked for multiple phases of elections because they believed that rigging was made by the Left Party. Now they are in power they urged the same what narrated by Left leaders at that time.

The stand of autonomous agencies has never changed by the demands of any political party so why do the political parties try to direct their demand? It is nothing but an eye-wash game or an agenda that will be used by them in their election campaign. False voters pose the biggest threat to democracy and challenge for commission to stop but how is it possible while such practices are tutelage by politicians? The Election Commission has an office in every state to listen to the problem regarding vote-related problems if any occur. They have different kinds of forms to enrol the voters in their list but they don’t have any machinery that categorises the person’s truth.

The ECI’s challenge in managing elections is exacerbated by its limited staff and resources. Initially, the commission lacked sufficient personnel, necessitating the borrowing of workers from various government organizations and even the deployment of advocates from the High Court. Despite the passage of time since India’s independence, lawmakers have not enacted legislation to provide the ECI with a dedicated workforce, making it difficult to meet the demands for a single-phase election.

The legacy of T.N. Seshan, a former Chief Election Commissioner, looms large over the current electoral process. Recognizing the issues plaguing Indian elections, such as the presence of ‘bogus’ voters, he implemented the voter ID card system to enhance the integrity of the polls. This move was aimed at curbing electoral fraud and ensuring that each vote cast was legitimate.

The ECI operates with constrained resources, which affects its ability to implement various measures necessary for a robust democracy. Despite these limitations, the commission has made significant strides in ensuring fair and transparent elections. However, the demands for a single-phase election remain a contentious issue, with the ECI needing to balance efficiency, resource allocation, and the integrity of the electoral process.

As of now, the partiality of the Election Commission (EC) has been a subject of heated debate and speculation, although no official declaration has been made regarding its partiality. Several instances and allegations have raised concerns among various political parties and the general public about the impartiality of the EC in conducting elections.

One aspect that has come under scrutiny is the handling of electoral processes, including the registration of voters, distribution of voter ID cards, and the management of polling stations. There have been reports of irregularities in voter registration, such as the inclusion of ineligible voters or the exclusion of eligible ones, leading to questions about the fairness of the electoral rolls.

Additionally, concerns have been raised about the EC’s enforcement of election rules and regulations. Some critics argue that the EC has shown leniency towards certain political parties or candidates while being strict or biased against others. Allegations of favouritism in the interpretation and application of electoral laws have further fueled suspicions of partiality.

Furthermore, the EC’s response to complaints and grievances filed by opposition parties and candidates has been a point of contention. Critics argue that the EC has been slow or unresponsive in addressing concerns raised by opposition parties, leading to a perception of favouritism towards the ruling party.

Despite these allegations and concerns, it is important to note that the EC operates within a complex political and legal framework, and accusations of partiality must be thoroughly investigated and substantiated before any definitive conclusions can be drawn. Until an official declaration is made regarding the partiality of the Election Commission, these allegations remain speculative and subject to further scrutiny and debate.

The debate over the number of phases in which elections should be conducted in India is emblematic of the broader challenges faced by the ECI. While the commission strives to conduct free and fair elections, it must navigate the complexities of India’s political landscape, resource constraints, and the enduring quest for electoral integrity. The path forward requires a nuanced understanding of these dynamics and a commitment to strengthening the pillars of democracy.