Wednesday, December 14, 2016

Royal s of Lakshadweep Island at NMML

Trade between India, China expected to be $65 billion for 2016

The bilateral trade volume between India and China is expected to be more than 65 billion US dollar for 2016. Wang Shicai, Commercial Counselor, Consulate General of The People’s Republic Of China informed this and said that the bilateral trade was 52.14 billion US dollar for January to September 2016.
Mr. Shicai said the mutual corporation between the two countries has been a win-win situation for both and will help increasing profitability in coming years.
He said that the important sectors in India which are of emphasis to China are financial, infrastructure, electronics and IT.

Cleaning system from black money

 There are various theories going on the legality and illegality of demonetization of currency declared by worthy PM Mr Modi on 8 Nov 2016 at 8 PM in which the currency notes of rs 500 and Rs 1000 are to be hereby null and void from midnight of 8 Nov,2016. This randomized announcement brought many shell shocked along with opposition political parties went in to huddle to call it fiscal policy announcements a positive or negative.
  • With people at large supporting with experts,intellectuals and economist corporate welcoming the move with poorest of the poor too holding the announcements as fiscal reform was the real accolade to the PM Modi announcement. The next best step was to get best out of the calibrated incoming old currency notes of said denominations and out going new currency of Rs 2000 and Rs 500 in such way to give feeble chance to the currency hoarders to not to give room for the currency to be dynamic and not be statically wasteful.Thus series of directives were issue by the bankers bank in order to check the movement of cash flow of the treasury in question.
    The entire episode is of 50 days as envisage by the PM to see how much duplicate series are in print and how much fake currency prevailed in the fiscal system. The process is on and the PM Modi is thus unable to give holistic view of the observation of the experts thus is shying away not the utter any statement which may be contradictory to the finding by the fiscal professional which need thorough observation investigation.
    However the fiscal strength of the nation when nose dive due to various reasons then demonetisation is right steps in the field of economics to sort our various fiscal parameters and to gauge the currency flow for speedy development and its utility with each circle it flows in yearly and is matter of paramount importance in order to check and balance for the betterment of economy.
    With banks NPA nosediving ,banks with flush of funds, taxes surge, black money with criminal dons and terrorist goes damp squib thus the terrorist are put on to hold with demonetisation the black marketers and benami and hoarding of wealth for ulterior motives by corporates and politically outfits the  currency is put to rest and is now calibrated.
    Prime Minister Narendra Modi today said, cleaning the system of black money and corruption is presently high on his agenda. Mr Modi was speaking after jointly inaugurating via video conferencing the Economic Times Asian Business Leaders Conclave in Kuala Lumpur along with Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak.
    Prime Minister said country is moving towards a digital and cashless economy. He said India is currently witnessing an economic transformation and the outcomes are visible from India’s global rankings on various indicators. He expressed happiness that the constitutional amendment for Goods and Services Tax has been passed and it is expected to be implemented from next year.
    Mr Modi said concerted efforts continued on major FDI policy reforms and conditions for investments have been simplified. He said total FDI inflows in the last two and a half years have touched 130 billion dollars. Mr Modi also said, licensing regime has been rationalised greatly and investor facilitation cells have been set up to guide prospective investors. He said, India has now become the 6th largest manufacturing country in the world.

Italian new PM wins confidence vote

Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni cleared a Lower House confidence vote on Tuesday with 368 in favor and 105 against.The newly formed cabinet was officially sworn in Monday evening, and it would seek a second confidence vote in the senate on Wednesday, in order to fully entering into force.
Addressing, Gentiloni appealed for support in order to address the most pressing issues, including the financial troubles haunting Italy’s third largest lender — Monte dei Paschi di Siena (MPS) — the migration crisis, and the reform of the electoral system.
The weak economic recovery, high unemployment, and the reconstruction in quake-hit central regions were also enlisted as priorities.
“We all are aware we will have to work on the rules that would bring the country to elections,”Gentiloni said.
The freshly nominated prime minister then focused much of his address on unemployment.
“The priority of all our priorities will be: job, job, and still job,” Gentiloni stressed.
“In a time when our economy has been showing timid signs of recovery, we certainly know we must boost such trend.”
Two different laws currently govern the election of the Senate and the Lower House of parliament, and Italian president Sergio Mattarella stressed they need to be “harmonized” before the country could possibly face early elections, as all opposition forces were asking.

Bhumi Adhikar Andolan (Land Rights Movement)

Bhumi Adhikar Andolan (Land Rights Movement)

March to Parliament –  15 December 2016 
Forest Rights Rally
 Jantar Mantar, New Delhi

Implement Forest Rights Act !   Intensify Opposition to Anti-People Land Policies !Stop illegal Land acquisition!       Land rights to landless , women and peasants

Sovereign Rights over natural resources in the forest region have always remained a core demand of forest dwelling communities since the colonial days when British colonial power imposed its forcible authority over all natural resources, thus denying the traditional symbiotic relationship between communities and forest resources. Once colonial power established its eminent domain to plunder all natural resources for its needs to expand the Empire, a conflict situation was created between the colonial state and the indigenous communities and unfortunately this plunder has continued in the post colonial era too. Innumerable heroic struggles were fought against the colonial state by the communities – led by exemplary courage and conviction by the subaltern leadership from amongst the Adivasi people with their indominatable  spirit, creating a glorious heritage of struggle. The struggle continued even in the post colonial era demanding justice from the independent and post independent Indian state, which however carried on with the system of eminent domain in the forest regions and the conflict continued. After about 60 years of Independence, under UPA1government , a progressive legislation, Schedule Tribe and other Forest Dwellers, Recognition of Forest Rights Act was enacted by the Indian Parliament on 15th December, 2006 which came to be  popularly known as Forest Right Act (FRA) to mitigate the conflict situation in the forest region, and ,  as the preamble of the historic act says, to end the ‘historic injustice’ on the forest dwelling communities. The act ensures individual tenure right over cultivable land and more importantly collective ownership right over all NTFP and on forest based resources to the Gram Sabhas, duly elected by the community members. But even after almost a decade the promised end to the historic injustice is yet to come. The government never showed the necessary political will for effective implementation of such a progressive act which is meant to bring about a structural change in forest governance. Rather, things are now moving in the opposite direction. The present NDA government is very much intent to change the basic feature of the act. In fact, the government has introduced dangerous moves by declaring a cut off date for claiming of rights, passing the CAMPA bill and again to involve corporates in plantation activities in degraded forest areas. All these steps are against the rules of FRA and would endanger the rights of communities. The state has also been mischievously trying to create divisions among the Adivasis and other forest dwellers pursuing the policy of divide and rule. Inevitably, this would create a situation where conflicts between people and the state will increase as organized communities with their emerging consciousness will resist any effort to dilute their rights. This may create a situation where we can see more state oppression and more open commoditization of resources. In this context forest right movement now has to be seen as a struggle against corporate driven state, necessitating a new alignment of social forces and especially of natural resource based primary producers.

Forest Right and specifically the implementation of forest right act is fundamentally a political challenge. Because ensuring implementation of  Forest Right Act is now actually  passed on to the people – the forest dependent people , something which will potentially alter the very balance of political economy in post colonial India cannot but be a political fight. It needs to be remembered that such rights have been restricted and obstructed by the existing political economic and social structures where dominant capitalist force rule over the resources.  And this process of restricting and then taking away rights of the forest dependent people started in colonial India has been continued in independent India. So by just asking for, pleading to the government to implement Forest rights  Act  to eradicate “ historic injustice” as envisaged  by this special act of the Parliament of India is not enough. The Indian political establishment has to be challenged through a democratic political movement by the forest dwelling communities with active support from other natural resource based  working peoples’ movements – whether it is the movements for land, water or minerals or fisheries .

It needs to be clearly understood that capital , though in deep structural crisis, is still dominant and governments, in this era of capitalism euphemistically called the era of neo liberalism, are subservient to capital and its allies in the region – landlord , land mafia, vested interest, which  also constitute the class basis of capital. And it is this class representing capital which has to be politically challenged.  It should be very clear to us that governments at the Center or in the States will not take up this challenge, even if constitutionally mandated, to destabilize these forces because they are politically dependent  on these class forces for their own political existence.Very recently, Indian state by imposing demonetization of higher level currencies is bent upon to extract whatever limited resources people have for benefiting corporate interest and thus uprooting common people from their livelihood and making them economic refugees . In such a situation the demand for Forest Rights has to be seen in the larger context, more holistically, along with the movements for Land rights, fisheries rights, mining rights and a co-ordinated and complimentary struggle has to be launched for achieving success; it is not possible for any such struggle to be successful separately. This is a political lesson which we should all imbibe and take as the basis of moving ahead in our struggles.

It is a decade since 2006 when the Forest Rights Act was passed. When we look at our successes and failures the biggest lacunae which comes across is the failure of the Forest Rights movement to attain political maturity barring a few exceptions, to challenge the political status quo. But the coming together of different political streams and mass movements to oppose the proposed changes in the Land Acquisition Act by ordinance and the success which it has achieved through this joint action by forming a platform of landless , poor peasants, agricultural workers, forest dependent working people ‘ Bhumi Adhikar Andolan (Land Right Movement), supported by all national trade unions and also by opposition political parties proves the necessity of moving on to a new era of political alliance at the mass movement level which  has the potential to alter the balance of political forces.

Collectively taking up this challenge should also inspire the progressive forces to join or at least support the peoples’ struggle. The determination and resolve shown by the Trade Unions in their united action  in making  general strike of 2nd September,2015 a successful struggle  and the  recent unrest of academicians, intelligentsia and professionals against intolerance  has again recreated  a space which had closed out  over the last two decades because the intelligentsia had distanced themselves from peoples’ movements. If such forces can provide active support then a great opportunity will be created for strengthening  Forest Rights / Land rights movements to take up the political challenge.
In this context , Bhumi Adhikar Andolan (BAA) a joint platform of landless , poor peasants, agricultural workers, forest dependent working peoples’ organizations – representing major mass organizations across twenty states have decided to observe 15 December  – Forest Rights Day, day of challenge and warning. This will indeed be a unique occasion when diverse  peoples’ movements, mass organizations  would come together  to declare a decisive struggle which would logically lead much beyond just Forest Rights. We appeal to all progressive, mass based, people centric organisations to join forces on 15 December 2016 in Delhi to give a clarion call to decide on comprehensive agenda to achieve sovereign rights over forest,land,water and other natural resources and to fight against forced land acquisition, agrarian crisis and fascist politics.
Venue: Jantar Mantar / Sansad Marg
Time: 11am to 4pm 

Press Invitation on the subject of Demonetisation on 15th December at CSOI Club

Why demonetisation notification is illegal and violates the Constitution? 

      One month after demonetisation, the Supreme Court is hearing several public interest petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the “demonetisation notification”, which declared that Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes would no longer be legal tender post midnight on November 8, 2016. 

      The preamble to the notification stated that its objective was to eliminate fake currency used for financing terrorism and to address the problem of “unaccounted money” in the economy. The notification permitted unlimited deposit of the now illegal Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes, and over the counter exchange of the notes up to a limit of Rs 4,000. The notification also imposed limits on ATM and bank withdrawals. Since then, the government has made many changes to the applicable limits. 

      According to some estimates, 86% of Indian currency was in the now illegal Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes. Since 68% of all transactions in India are cash transactions, drastically restricting the use of 86% of the currency has predictably caused chaos. Endless queues at banks, reports of slowdown of trade and more than 80 reported deaths have led many to question the wisdom of this move and its efficacy in achieving its objectives visà-vis the costs to the people and abridgement of their rights. 

      The Supreme Court will not entertain arguments regarding the efficacy of demonetisation since it rightly defers to government on matters of economic policy. It must, however, decide the legality of this move. The demonetisation notification is illegal because it goes beyond the scope of what is permitted under the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, (RBI Act), the stated source of authority for the notification. Nor is it saved by Section 35A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1935, as the government has argued in court. There is also a prima facie case of abridgement of fundamental rights to movement Article 19(1)(d); trade or business, Article 19(1)(g); livelihood and, in case of those dead, life (Article 21); equality (Article 14); and the constitutional right to property (Article 300A). 

      Section 26(2) of the RBI Act empowers the government to declare any series of notes as illegal tender. Twice before, in 1946 and 1978, the government demonetised to address the problem of “unaccounted money”. While the Banking Regulation Act empowers the RBI to issue directions to banks in the “public interest”, that stipulation cannot reasonably justify the continuously shifting restrictions on cash withdrawals and deposits that we have seen in the past month. Nor does it enable the RBI to discriminate between holders and non-holders of bank accounts, as the present notification has done. Such actions require an authorising legislation, either an act of Parliament or by ordinance. 

      Both in 1946 and in 1978, similar actions were authorised by an ordinance. The failure to issue an ordinance to provide the legal basis for the demonetisation notification this time renders the exercise illegal. 

      Three Wrongs 

      The demonetisation notification is also likely unconstitutional on three counts. First, it violates the constitutional right to property under Article 300A. In Jayantilal v RBI, in the context of the 1978 demonetisation, the Supreme Court held that demonetisation is not merely a regulation of property, as the government is presently arguing, but constitutes compulsory acquisition of a “public debt” owed to the bearer of the notes declared illegal. Under Article 300A, the state may deprive an individual of property only by “law”, and not by executive notification as the government has done here. The government’s failure to issue an ordinance (since Parliament was not in session at the time) to extinguish the RBI’s debt to the people impermissibly violates the constitutional right to property. However, even if the demonetisation had been sanctioned by ordinance, there is a strong claim that the rationing of currency constitutes a form of creeping expropriation for which there has been no compensation, which nevertheless violates Article 300A. Second, the extraordinary hardship caused by demonetisation has impacted fundamental rights to trade, business and livelihoods of vast sections of the population and the right to life of those who have died. 

      While the government may “reasonably” restrict fundamental rights in the interests of the “general public”, it bears the burden of showing that these restrictions are reasonable. The test of reasonableness is whether the measure was necessary to achieve the government’s objectives, and whether less risky, less harmful alternatives were available. The reasonableness of a measure must be assessed in terms of its “immediate effects” on the affected population. Unlike the 1978 demonetisation that impacted only 1% of currency held, the 2016 demonetisation insofar as it impacts an estimated 86% of total currency has had punitive effects on many sections of the population, including, daily wage earners, those without bank accounts and those dependent on the informal cash economy for their livelihood and business. The notification is unconstitutional for violating their fundamental rights under Articles 19 and 21. 

      Third, the notification also discriminates between holders and non-holders of bank accounts. While the government has argued that such a classification is necessary to achieve their objectives of eliminating unaccounted money, insofar as the government failed to ensure that 100% of the population had bank accounts prior to the issuance of this surprise notification, the classification may be assailed as arbitrary and violative of the right to equality under Article 14. 

      We live in a country governed by the rule of law, and not by the rule of men. The objectives of the demonetisation notification may be laudable, whether the notification will achieve those objectives is debatable. But, as it exists, the demonetisation notification is illegal and violates the Constitution. 

      The author is Fellow at Centre for Policy Research, Delhi.

CEA U-Turn On Coal Power - Case for a Professional LEADER 
December14, 2016 (C) Ravinder Singh

When India required 100,000 MW of Peak Power - considering 160,000 MW actual this FY, [Conventional Capacity online just 189,339 MW on December08, 2016] but includes 30% Transmission & Distribution losses and 30% inefficient consumption, installed capacity is already 309,000 MW – 186,000 MW of thermal power, 73,486 MW is Unavailable or more including 65,000 MW Thermal Power, Target to DOUBLE capacity to 554,000 MW by 2022

Piyush Goyal is Biggest SCAM Of India Next to Demonetization. He is Promoting 2000-4000 kilometer Transmission to Send Adani Power to Myanmar. Large Solar Parks are Rs.11 Cr Per MW Disadvantage Compared to Rooftops - Piyush Never Learn

I had been campaigning for Clean Energy and Multipurpose Hydro Power since 1980. It is a national tragedy India has promoted Coal Based power even close to Himalaya Mountains in case of Ropar, Rajpura, Yamunanagar, Dadri, Panipat etc when there is200,000 MW Hydro Potential from J&K to Arunachal in Himalaya – over 90% for Indian consumption. 

94% of Utility Power Plants commissioned under 12th Plan are Thermal Power Plant which are most polluting. 

CEA finally woke up even as 86,250 MW thermal capacity was added during 12th Plan and another 50,000 MW is already under commissioning. 

As Peak Demand hit record 160,000 MW FY2017 – Installed capacity is 309,000 MW and 73,486 MW [65,000 MW Thermal] was Unavailable due poor Maintenance. 

Piyush is Rs.20,00,000 Cr+ Public Liability –Professional Leader Could Be $4-$5 Trillion Long Term Advantage

Ravinder Singh, Inventor & Consultant, INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES AND PROJECTS
Y-77, Hauz Khas, New Delhi-110016, India. Ph; 091- 9871056471, 9718280435, 9650421857
Ravinder Singh* is a WIPO awarded inventor specializing in Power, Transportation, 
Smart Cities, Water, Energy Saving, Agriculture, Manufacturing, Technologies and Projects

Competitiveness, climate, security Finn’s priorities Ministry of Finance release Finnish road map of EU presidency. Finland i...