Corruption vs Poverty – the misunderstood connection!

Complaining about corruption is just the thing everybody does. But is it the root cause of poverty or a symptom of it or something else altogether? No doubt a nation that is poor with great inequality is likely to have high level of corruption. But often it is assumed that corruption is the root cause of poverty and therefore attacking corruption would somehow remove the poverty. Is that really true?

Transparency international has a Corruption perception Index and as per that, the world’s no.1 economy, the US, is on a rank 19 and the no. 2 economy, China, at rank 80. India is ranked 94 and the lowest rank I think is Afghanistan.  Small prosperous and homogeneous countries like Denmark and New Zealand are ranked 1. Even a very poor country like Rwanda is ranked 53, perhaps because it has a committed and clean leadership of Paul Kagame.  Singapore, known for its great law and order and very high per capita income is ranked 5. So there are factors at play beyond poverty and inequality. Large heterogeneous nations might be more corrupt. The leadership plays a role too and could it also be a cultural issue? All corruption indices measure corruption in the political class, police system, bureaucracy etc. but in my experience the common man is also corrupt in countries with high corruption perception index. So purging corruption need not just be a top clean up act. If societies are to rid themselves of corruption, a general awakening among people is just as necessary, but is a factor often overlooked.

But the key point here is that the connection between poverty removal and corruption removal is tenuous at best. Poverty removal seems to have greater dependence on market reforms, industry friendly environment and infrastructure development. Of course if corruption is way too high, it would hamper the business environment but within tolerable levels, it may not be such an impediment. So many times armies take over countries or new parties launch themselves claiming they’ll remove corruption and hence poverty. That may not happen as corruption is just one of the symptoms of poverty, not the main causal factor.

In India too there were huge protests by Anna Hazare, Kejriwal and team against corruption but in reality India’s corruption index has not gone up, rather is down slightly. There is a lot of residual corruption (among the common man as well) but like it or not, it is not on the rise. Making noise about it is generally a good thing but India’s GDP growth is hampered more by active opposition to industries outside the metros as well as poor infrastructure which the voter does not give any weight to while voting. Now, don’t mistake me, it would be a good thing to attack corruption but the point I’m making is that it is neither the root cause of poverty nor going up as is generally presumed.

In contrast, China has scored high on GDP growth by investing in infrastructure over 2 – 3 decades as well as setting up industries in SEZs. People were opposed to it there also but then CPC doesn’t give a damn as it doesn’t have to win elections every 4-5 years. So it could simply go ahead with the development agenda and hence poverty was reduced greatly despite corruption remaining same as ever. As a different example, Russia, owing to its petro resources and small population base has a high per capita GDP but is ranked 133 on corruption, just slightly ahead of Nigeria and Pakistan at rank 139.

So corruption purges will not alleviate poverty as development depends upon other aforesaid factors. We may not like to hear this but countries can grow rich without attacking it also and countries can remain poor despite attacking it (if they don’t do other things).  

Now, now, don’t mistake me, corruption is a bad thing, a very bad thing. It would be good to bring it down as that would help the progress of a nation socially and economically! So yes down with corruption but I thought I’d just put it in perspective.

Nature of our ‘Intelligence’ Agencies – So Intelligent!!

Now in one of India’s most high profile cases, that of Aarushi’s murder, a verdict has been passed and parents convicted of Honor killing. But for a full analysis do read Outlook India’s complete factsheet on it showing how flimsy has been the investigation. It is their cover story this month – ‘Everybody killed Aarushi’. And if this is the kind of investigation on such a high profile case, what is one to speak of the rest?

So, 26 points have been laid out for the conviction and each one can be doubted (in brackets).

But, but but…

“Sau baat ki eik baat” (or should one say 26 baat ki eik baat), can the CBI answer just one question:

CBI conducted a narco analysis on assistant Krishna in which he confessed to the crime and even recalled a song he and Hemraj were listening to while discussing Aarushi lustfully. (The TV Channel confirmed on this song). Then they went to her room and she protested to the molestation and he killed her and later Hemraj because they had an altercation. Why was Krishna not the prime suspect? Why do the damn Narco analysis if you are going to ignore it simply because it does not fit your ‘pet and preconceived theory’?

Sure the Talwars have been found in mitigating circumstances – I mean their daughter and servant were murdered in the house in the night while they were sleeping in their bedroom in the same house. But I’m not sure why this is being made out to be an open and shut case – it is anything but. There is a classic term for such things – ‘circumstantial evidence’. Countless cases exist round the world of people being wrongfully convicted when their only problem was being in the vicinity of the crime scene. But in this case particularly there is an alleged criminal with a clear motive and who has confessed to the crime under narco analysis – we can just pretend that is not important? It is shocking. 

Anyhow, read on..

Reasons that led to the conviction (and why each one can be doubted too)

1. Irrefragably on the fateful night of May 15 and 16, 2008, both the accused were last seen with both the deceased in flat no. (Obviously.. you see they live in the same house!!Family members are last seen together and then a thief enters and kills one of them and gets away..)

L- 32, Jalvayu Vihar, Noida, around 9.30 pm by Umesh Sharma, the driver of Rajesh Talwar.

2. On the morning of May 16, 2008, around 6 am, Aarushi was found murdered in her bedroom, which was adjacent to the bedroom of the accused and there was only a partition wall between the two bedrooms. (Yes and a team proved in a mock test that no sound could be heard from the adjacent room)

3. The dead body of the servant, Hemraj, was found lying in a pool of blood on the terrace of the flat on May 17, 2008, and the door of the terrace was found locked from inside.

4. There is a proximity between the point of time when both the accused and the deceased persons were last seen together alive and the deceased were murdered on the intervening night of May 15 and 16, 2008, and as such the time is so small that possibility of any other person(s) other than the accused being the authors of the crime becomes impossible. (Repeat of point one)

5. The door of Aarushi's bedroom was fitted with automatic clickshut lock. Mahesh Kumar Mishra, the then SP (City), Noida, has deposed that when he talked to Rajesh on May 16 morning, he had told him that in the preceding night around 11.30 pm he had gone to sleep with the key after locking the door of Aarushi's bedroom from outside.

Both the accused have admitted that the door of Aarushi's bedroom had an automatic click- shut lock like that of a hotel, which could not be opened from outside without key but could be opened from inside without a key. No explanation has been offered by the accused as to how the lock of Aarushi’s room was opened and by whom. (Servants would have the key and so also their accomplices like Krishna if they had designs on the girl)

6. The Internet remained active on the night of the gory incident suggesting that at least one of the accused was awake. (Internet was active on the subsequent night also when neither of the accused were using it – unreliable data?)

7. There is nothing to show that an outsider(s) came inside the house on the said night after 9.30 pm. (I thought people freely walked in and out of the crime scene before any Investigation even started; so we don’t know this)

8. There was no disruption in the supply of electricity on that night. (So??)

9. No person was seen loitering near the flats in suspicious circumstances during that night. (So?? You don’t have to loiter outside esp after committing the crime.. you would simply take off)

10. There is no evidence of forcible entry of any outsider(s) in the flat on the fateful night. (Need not have been forceful – Hemraj could have allowed him in. This could prove the criminal was known to Hemraj)

11. There is no evidence of any larcenous act in the flat. (?? Come again..)

12. On the morning of May 16, 2008, when the maid came to the flat, a false pretext was made by Nupur Talwar that the door might have been locked from outside by Hemraj although it was not locked or latched from outside.  (So??)

13. The house maid, Bharti Mandal, has nowhere stated that when she went inside the flat both the accused were found weeping. (The maid’s ideas about grieving might be very different from that of Talwars’)

14. From the testimony of Bharti it is clear that when she reached the flat and talked to Nupur the latter had not complained about the murder of her daughter and rather she told the maid that Hemraj might have gone to fetch milk from Mother Dairy after locking the door from outside. This lack of spontaneity is relevant under Section 8 of the Evidence Act. (People respond curiously under shock!!  To my mind if they had done the crime, they should have done the weeping etc. to hide it.. Obvious.. duh)

15. The clothes of both the accused were not found soaked in blood. It is highly unnatural that parents of the deceased Aarushi did not cling to and hug her on seeing her murdered. (The clothes were not ‘soaked’ – sure, they weren’t murdered. There must have been stains; I’m betting on this)

16. No outsider(s) will dare to take Hemraj to the terrace in severely injured condition and thereafter look for a lock to be placed in the door of the terrace. (Exactly, Hemraj went to the terrace after Aarushi’s murder and post an argument, the criminal murdered him too. It has been proven that Hemraj’s body was not dragged up)

17. It is not possible that an outsider(s) after committing the murders will muster courage to have Scotch whisky knowing that the parents of the deceased Aarushi are in the nearby room and his top priority will be to run away from the crime scene immediately.  (oh ya, ‘criminals’ .. one couldn’t say for sure if they had whisky outside and simply brought the bottle in..)

18. A single person cannot take Hemraj’s body all the way up the stairs to the terrace. (uff.. the body was not taken up.. there are no stains/ dragging signs. Hemraj went up .. maybe with Krishna)

19. The door of the terrace was never locked prior to the occurrence. It was found locked on the morning of May 16, 2008, and the accused did not give the key of the lock to the police despite being asked for the same. (Yes, leaving their house to servants, they may not have had the key nor known a body is upstairs.. If you want to hide a body, you’d go and dump it somewhere in a nullah – you won’t dump it on your terrace..duh Particularly then you can claim the servant killed her and ran away - see so plausible. Why dump it on your own terrace?)

20. The accused have taken plea in the statements under Section 313 CrPC that about 8-10 days before the murders, painting of cluster had started and the navies used to take water from water tank placed on the terrace of the flat and then Hemraj had started locking the door of the terrace and the key of that lock remained with him. If it was so then it was not easily possible for an outsider to find out the key of the lock to the terrace door. (ya, you see this proves Hemraj opened the door to the terrace and both he and the criminal went up and then only the criminal came out, put the same lock and made off)

21. If an outsider(s) committed the crime in question after locking the door of the terrace and had gone out of the flat then the outer most mesh door or middle mesh door must have been found latched from outside. (why lock them from outside.. you don’t want people to think some outsider did it..)

22. The motive of the commission of the crime has been established. (No evidence ‘ever’ of this couple having regressive views.. Motive could be lust as Krishna confessed in his narco analysis test)

23. It is not possible that after commission of the crime, an outsider( s) will dress- up the crime scene. (Dunno)

24. Golf club no. 5 was thrown in the loft after the commission of the crime and the same was produced after many months by the accused Rajesh. (It need not have been the golf club and anyone else could have used it too. The criminal won’t be thinking of taking permission to use it)

25. Pattern of head and neck injuries of both the accused persons are almost similar in nature and can be caused by golf club and scalpel, respectively. (can be also caused by a khukri – found in Krishna’s house)

26. Accused Rajesh was a member of Noida Golf Club and golf clubs were produced by him before the CBI and scalpel is used by dentists and both the accused are dentists by profession. (He never denied the golf clubs belonged to him. But no telling whether it was used and more importantly who did use it)

I’m at a loss..

Really in this country thousands of honor killings take place and most cases aren’t booked despite a full village bearing witness to the brutality but somehow Talwars seem to have gotten the CBI’s goat. Is it some bruised egos as the investigation seems hackneyed meant to ‘somehow’ nail this couple. The nature of investigation seems ‘shoddy and biased’ at best. It can perhaps be summed up as "if facts don't fit the theory, ignore those facts".

Yes so I’m not sure justice for Aarushi is served if her killer is still at large. And, if the parents are wrongly accused, then this is double tragedy!

Do Ends justify Means?

This is an age old debate between moralists and the pragmatists. I personally do not think ends justify means because to my mind, wrong means are often used for wrong ends. And corrupt processes will lead to corrupt results anyway.

Recently the Supreme Court of India has passed an order that every time a grievous crime is reported to the police station, the police “has to” file an FIR regardless of what the officer in charge ‘feels’ or his personal ‘hunch’ is regarding the victim or her moral character. This is a great order because very often women, dalits and poorer sections can not get an FIR lodged for a crime they have suffered. Unless you have some sort of ‘influence’ or media steps in, usually filing an FIR (an official complaint) is a privilege for the ‘haves’ and the mighty in India. Particularly women victims are often treated as suspects or liars out to lodge false complaints. Despite the high level of crime in India against women, this pathetic attitude continues. Hence bringing some discipline and focus on the ‘right processes’ is key and Supreme Court’s order is laudable. I hope it is implemented in some earnestness.

Here again, Indian police anyway suffers from very poor reputation and their inability or reluctance to follow decent processes is a cause for concern. But low and behold, the buck doesn’t stop there. Many would be amazed to know what sort of processes India’s Corporates follow in response to women’s complaints.

Recently  a woman faced harassment post divorce from ex husband’s corporate friends by way of professional and personal mudslinging and lodged a complaint with the Chairman of this top notch iconic corporate of India. The response was no different from what a UP police station would follow. They decided to blank out the woman and instead made the harassers and their best friends and the ex husband in charge of a shady behind her back enquiry. The net result was as corrupt as the process followed. This coterie of culprits came back and reported that the woman is making false complaints and in fact she is not divorced at all and they are happily married and living together. (This despite the fact that divorce was legally filed in a Bangalore court). Further they claimed that she is just a loser out to harass us as she is jealous of our success. Well, the woman at this point had become a writer on International Affairs and published a book and several articles in the US. So, to call her a loser the culprits claimed that the so called ex husband is actually doing all her writing because he is so doting. Then they used their wide network of corporate friends and South Indians (the woman is a Punjabi and the guy South Indian) to spread further nasty gossip. They hacked her computer and phone and started stalking her. When she lodged a police complaint they made false complaints against her now also calling her a terrorist and drug addict. This much damage was done to her purely using their corporate as well as South Indian gossip network of which a church was also a part of. So if this is the state of top notch global corporates in India and elite educated members of the society, what is the future of women in India?

Pretty bleak at this point of time!

Commonwealth Summit and the Hypocrisy

So, Sri Lanka has faced the ire of the world over hosting the Commonwealth summit. There is widespread international demand for speedier trials and justice over abuses done by its army in the 37 years long civil war. Now coming to the ironical part; several nations including ‘India’ have boycotted the summit over this issue. Has India forgotten its own problem / track record over Kashmiri separatists? How is LTTE separatism any different from that and why should we support it?  To some extent Sri Lanka has at least managed to end this deadly civil war somehow whereas we are yet to even chalk out a plan for resolving the conflict. Also, why is the world shy of demanding an equal trial including the excesses done by LTTE and its supporters? We lost our beloved Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi to a terror strike by LTTE. So, while Western countries like Canada may oppose this sort of a summit, I’m not exactly clear what is India’s position based on.

Anyhow, that is not the moot point of this blog. What is Commonwealth really? It is a bloc of nations who were the erstwhile colonies of the British Empire and hence figuratively the head is Queen Elizabeth. Nobody has a problem with this? Is the colonial era something to be celebrated or looked back upon with nostalgia? Are we even proud to be part of Commonwealth Nations bloc? This bloc was also created by the London declaration in 1949 as if independence is some kind of alms we received.

I do not understand why the Commonwealth nations don’t object to the existence of this bloc – it kind of looks like they totally lack any form of self respect. To my mind Commonwealth summit is a celebration of the colonial past and not something to be proud of or to be a part of - 65 years on since independence, it is time to unshackle those chains.

India 2G Spectrum Allocation Scam – Fuzzy logic

Now featuring among the world’s list of scams, the India 2G spectrum allocation scam is not all that clear cut a case. While the CAG report must be alright in the irregularities in spectrum allocation, there is a flipside to the story.

First and foremost what is the core issue? Instead of auctioning the spectrum, it was given on a First come first served basis and this allegedly cost the government a whopping sum of Rs 1.76 Trillion. This figure itself has been challenged by several bodies because it is a hypothetical scenario figure and somewhat fictional. But, more importantly what is the net result of selling the spectrum cheap? Have all the Telecom companies in India made a killing of profits out of it? No. Given the intense competition, all this benefit has been passed on to the consumers, slashing mobile charges to such bare minimal levels that people who do not have food to eat have mobile phones today. So, the cheap pricing of the spectrum has gone to the Aam Aadmi (the common man) actually. There is no loss “as such” to the nation.

DOT  has revolutionized communications in India and in A Raja’s tenure cheap 2G technology really helped lower the communication price to the customers (again I mean the Aam Aadmi). So, alright he may have used a method different from auction but it is not the first time in the world such a method is used. There are various alterations of spectrum allocation policies in the world. So, whether or not this is criminal as such is doubtful as A Raja himself has claimed. That his views were not part of the final report is a sort of blasphemy.

Furthermore, there have not been too many takers for the expensive 3G technology – and it has not seen the success that 2G did making mobile an everyday product for the common man. And to put not too fine a point to it, the mobile service companies have low margins and are suffering from cash flow problems due to intense competition and price cutting. So, no telling what the 2G auction may have fetched and if indeed expensive technology would have prevented so many poor people from using mobile phones - and we are talking about daily wage laborers, maids, drivers rickshaw pullers etc etc. who today all use a mobile though some of them can't afford 3 meals a day.

Some small points of the report also don’t cut ice. For instance, one anomaly reported is that FCFS was not strictly followed to allocate to those who first applied but to those who were first eligible. Well, I think there is no point in awarding contract to those not eligible, just because they “first applied”. Duh!

Now coming to part II of the story- because the Government of India decided to follow a FCFS policy and not auction, the licenses issued were cancelled in retrospect! Especially after they had made huge investments and some of these companies’ international partners particularly would have had no idea how the system is supposed to work in India. I think that is a bit unfair to the companies. It was not their decision!!!

I think there is a bit of jumping to conclusions involved in the way this scam has been investigated or reported in the media. Though I’m not denying that they have found some irregularities but the whole scale and intent seems grossly exaggerated and not balanced.