Supreme Court Strikes Down Hajj Policy: Government Asked To End Subsidy Within 10 Years

The Supreme Court has struck down the federal government's policy of giving subsidies to Hajj pilgrims and directed that it be progressively "eliminated" within a period of 10 years. It said it will look into the functioning of Hajj Committee of India and it process for selecting people for Hajj pilgrimage.

The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by the government challenging a Bombay High Court judgment which had directed the Ministry of External Affairs to allow certain private operators (travel agents) to handle 800 of the 11,000 pilgrims earmarked under the VIP quota subsidized by the government.

On private operators, the Bench upheld the government policy for 2012, observing that it did not warrant any interference by the Supreme Court.

Citing “Verse-97 in Surah-3” of the Quran, the apex court stated that according to the verse, the Hajj pilgrimage is only permitted to those who can afford the expenses for “one’s conveyance and provision for residence” in Mecca.

Pilgrims and Travel Cost

Quoting statistics provided by the government for the past 19 years, the Bench pointed out that the subsidy had been increasing every year. This was on account of increase in the number of pilgrims and the travel cost.

In 1994, the number of pilgrims from India was as low as 21,035 and the subsidy amounted to Rs 10.51 crore. In 2011, the number of pilgrims went up to 1.25 lakh and the subsidy amounted to Rs 685 crore.

More than 1.5 lakh pilgrims performed Hajj paying for their own expenses without availing of the subsidy, the Bench pointed out.

The Bench, however, acknowledged that the air fare to Jeddah for the Hajjis was more than double the normal fare during other seasons due to regulations imposed by the Saudi Arabian authorities. In 2011, the two-way air fare for the Hajjis was Rs 58,800 against the normal air fare of Rs 25,000. On account of government subsidy, each pilgrim was charged Rs 16,000 as air fare.

Federal Government’s Plea

The bench while hearing the plea of the federal government had expanded the purview of the plea and decided to look into the legality of the government's policy on granting subsidies to Hajj pilgrims. During the hearing in the case, the government had defended the policy of giving subsidies to the Hajj pilgrims and had said it had framed guidelines so that people get subsidies only once in their lifetime.

In an affidavit, the government had told the court that it has decided to restrict Hajj pilgrimage at government subsidy to Muslims only as a "once in a lifetime" affair as against the existing policy of "once in five years." It had said the new guidelines have been framed to ensure that priority is given to those applicants who have never performed Hajj.

The government, however, had refrained from disclosing the amount of subsidy being incurred by it for 2012, saying, "The exact figure in respect of the travel subsidy to the pilgrims going through Hajj Committee of India for 2012 will be known after the Hajjis completed their Hajj journey and return to India."

The apex court had earlier expressed its dismay at the practice of sending official delegations to accompany the pilgrims and had asked the Centre to furnish entire details regarding Hajj subsidy, as also about the criteria adopted.

The court further observed: "These goodwill delegations need to be scrapped altogether. They are no longer relevant. Even a team of 9 to 10 persons is not required. The court had also pulled up the federal government's practice of ‘politicizing’ Hajj by permitting official delegations to accompany the pilgrims, for which the government offers huge subsidy, saying, It is a bad religious practice."

Welcome Decision

There was near-unanimity among the leaders of the political class in welcoming the verdict, with a few even demanding immediate scrapping of the subsidy and suggesting use of the money for the educational needs of Muslims.

Asaduddin Owaisi of the Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, an ally of the UPA said: “Why wait for 10 years to scrap it. It should be done away with this year itself, because it does not benefit the pilgrims. In the name of giving subsidy, the government has been fooling people till now, for, it has been investing the money in Air India.”

Senior BJP leader Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said: “The BJP welcomes the verdict but we are of the opinion that the government should continue to help out the pilgrims with basic services.”

There was no need to club the educational needs of Muslims with the Hajj subsidy. “The government should try to implement the schemes for providing scholarship to Muslim girls, which are not getting properly implemented in the first place.”

Communist Party of India leader D. Raja said giving subsidy to any community was a policy decision and the Central government needed to explain its position.

Raja said: “There have been several court verdicts against the policy decisions of the government and it is for the government to explain.”

Referring to Law Minister Salman Khurshid's reaction that the government was considering the Hajj subsidy and discussions had taken place for its rollback, Raja said this was a “vague” stand.

Zafarul Islam Khan, president of the All India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat, an umbrella organization of several Muslim groups, said: “The so-called Hajj subsidy is of no use to the pilgrims. We never asked for it.”

Left Parties Opposition To Nuclear Liability Bill Benefiting US

Left parties, which made an unsuccessful attempt to topple the government with the aim to stop the Indo-US civil nuclear deal, have appealed to all parties opposing the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill to get united. Left parties have said that the government is in a hurry to bring this bill in an attempt to provide relief to US nuclear companies. The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), Communist Party of India (CPI), Forward Bloc, and Revolutionary Socialist Party said that the government is taking this step under US pressure, and all parties would jointly oppose the same.

123 Agreement With United States
The Left Front had expressed the resolve to stop the 123 Agreement with the United States until the last moment. CPI-M general secretary Prakash Karat has continuously declared to use every political avenue for the purposes. In this situation, Karat has once again intensified the campaign to oppose the nuclear liability bill, which is considered an important stage before clinching the nuclear deal.

When Karat started counting his objections to the nuclear liability bill in the Left Front's press meet organized at the CPI-M headquarters, his intention was to prove the bill as anti-national, so that parties supporting it become uneasy.

Endangering People's Lives and Property
Karat said the government is in a hurry to bring this bill so that US companies supplying nuclear reactors do not suffer any financial burden in the event of a nuclear accident, as this burden would fall upon Indian taxpayers. Karat accused that the government was trying to give concessions to US companies in this clandestine manner, putting the burden on government exchequer. At the same time, CPI-M leader Karat and CPI leader A.B. Bardhan accused the government of trying to bring this kind of bill, endangering the lives and property of citizens of the country.

It is certainly shocking that the government is trying to bring in a legislation that absolves foreign reactor companies from the liability of compensation, but puts the burden on the government. This means that this bill puts the burden on the taxpayers' pockets.

Ignoring People's Interests
Finding fault with the bill, Prakash Karat also said that the provision for compensation in the bill is only for accident caused deliberately or due to carelessness. If an accident occurs because of manufacturing problem, there is no provision for any compensation in the bill. Karat said that it became clear from this that the government was keen on this bill to encourage private nuclear energy plants and to provide benefit to US suppliers, ignoring people's interests.

Karat said the government should send a delegation to Hiroshima and Nagasaki so that it came to know that even after six decades, how people were still suffering today. The government might understand something by looking at the condition of a sizable population of Japan suffering from genetic problems due to nuclear radiation.

Mixed Reaction
This bill is unholy, said Prakash Karat taking a dig at the Congress, which called the coming together of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Left parties against the bill as an unholy alliance. When asked about this Congress party allegation, Karat said that first this bill is unholy. This question was raised over his appeal to all parties to come together against the bill.

Otherwise also, during the Parliamentary budge session, the Left parties appear to be standing alongside the BJP on several important issues. The BJP and Left parties were together in support of the Women's Reservation Bill, and they also appear to be standing together against price rise. Now, the Left parties and BJP have joined their voices in opposing the nuclear liability bill.

Widespread Maoist Movement in India

After the Naxal (Maoist guerillas) firing on a police patrol party in Chhattisgarh, murder of 17 persons in Amose Bhiron village of Bihar, massacre of 19 policemen in Maharashtra, and killing of a police inspector Francis Induwar in Jharkhand, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said Naxals cannot be called militants and the possibility of use of military against them is also ruled out.

Earlier, he also said that the government would not bow before Naxals. The government will not remain a mute spectator toward activities such as extraction of money, looting, snatching, and violence by Naxals. Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram also commented, "Until the Naxals lay down their weapons, talks cannot be held with them."

The statements of the Prime Minister and the Home Minister fell on deaf ears of Naxals. On the contrary, they gave a call for closure in Bihar, Jharkhand, and West Bengal.

During the shutdown, the Naxals blew up railway tracks in Jhrandi area of Dhanbad, burned three trucks in Giridiah and damaged a bridge by triggering explosions. A telecommunication tower of a private company was set on fire in Burky Salia village of Bihar.

In West Bengal, a worker of an anti-Maoist committee was murdered. Two officials of the Punjab government and the Punjab State Electricity Board were killed at Amarapura in Pukur district of Bihar.

Naxal activities continued for the second day in Bihar and Jharkhand. They ransacked the railway station at Bansipur, set ablaze the divisional office of Sangrampur, and blew up a building of a school in Chatra village of Jharkhand. A polling booth was targeted at Garhchiroli in Maharashtra. It is astonishing that the prime minister is speaking in term of not using military against Naxals, saying that they are not militants.

Aim of Naxallites

The aim of Naxals is to grab power through the barrel of a gun in accordance with Maoism. Hence, it is futile to hope that they would join the mainstream of the country's democratic order.

Distressed over the turmoil triggered by Naxals, the Communist Party of India-Marxist-led West Bengal government is also appealing to the Union Government to wipe out Naxalism. It is worth mentioning that Maoism also influences the West Bengal Government. It was owing to this inclination toward Maoism that the Communist Party of India was divided a few years ago.

Central and State Governments Approach

After the capture of Lalgarh, etc. in West Bengal by Naxals, at the instance of the Bengal government, the central government rushed the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel there and freed Lalgarh. Viewing the gravity of the situation, Chief Minister Budhadev Bhattacharya called on the prime minister and the home minister recently to start a joint campaign for the elimination of Naxals. They suggested that an identical drive should be launched in neighboring Jharkhand state because Naxals fled to another state easily after carrying out an incident in one state.

In response to the appeal of Chief Minister Budhadev Bhattacharya, the union government agreed to deploy 17 companies in West Bengal. All this manifests the gravity of the situation and that it is beyond the capacity of state governments and their police to deal with Naxals. He has suggested that a similar drive should be initiated in the neighboring Jharkhand state. That is why Naxal-affected state governments are asking for deployment of more security forces to combat Naxal violence.

What Should Be Done?

Notwithstanding the deployment of the central security forces, the conditions there are not being brought under control because the CRPF has also its own limitations. The position of the police is such that its strength is not in proportionate with the rising population. It is, therefore, better to press the military into service in order to wipe out Naxals.

In Punjab, militancy was eliminated by deployment of military when terrorism was at its peak there. It was owing to the complacency of the government that forest smuggler of the South, Veerappan, could not be arrested for a long time. The image of India continues to be that of a "soft state," and China and Pakistan are exploiting our softness.

While the government persists with its policy of not using military against Naxals and offering to hold talks with them, they continue to intensify their activity and extend their area of influence. Although the government is using only the CRPF to counter Naxals, yet eventually it will need to press the military into action to wipe out Naxalism [Maoist movement] that is posing more and more threat to India's internal security.

Kashmir Issue and Dialogues

At a time when it was being expected that the dialogue on the Kashmir issue might resume and that separatist leaders may also be included in that India-Pakistan dialogue, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh described separatists "irrelevant." He has, thereby, given rise to a new debate.

Addressing the nation on India's 62nd Independence Day, his assertion that separatists have lost relevance made separatists greatly annoyed. Even pro-India leaders like former Chief Minister Mufti Muhammad Sayeed are surprised to a great extent and accused the Prime Minister of ignoring the ground realities.

Changed Attitude
They are expressing apprehension that the improving situation in the state may deteriorate yet again. Ever since Manmohan Singh resumed the Prime Minister's Office for the second term, he has changed his attitude and has been striving to prove himself to be a strong taskmaster. From his tone and tenor, it appeared that he feels that the separatist movement has been quelled for good, and his attitude was full of confidence.

Time for Permanent Peace
The Prime Minister claimed that there was no place for separatist ideology and separatists. It came against the expectation that he would invite separatists, during that address, for talks and would give the impression that with the situation improving in the valley to some extent, the Indian Government would utilize the time and strike for permanent peace.

Also, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah had conveyed precisely this impression that he had explained the importance of holding dialogue with separatists to New Delhi and measures would be initiated soon for the dialogue.

However, the Prime Minister, instead of adopting the path of wisdom, described separatists "irrelevant." At that very time, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah was addressing a gathering at the Bakshi Stadium. At that very time, Kashmir observed a total strike at the behest of these very separatists. The Prime Minister claimed that he was closely watching the situation in Kashmir, and that elections to the state assembly and to Parliament had successfully been held in the state, in which there was an overwhelming turnout of voters.

He said that all people and sections participated in these elections, which indicated that there was no place for separatist ideology in the state. He made that assertion at a time when on that very occasion, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah was extending an invite to separatists to shun violence, give up the path of militancy, and hold talks. It was only on the eve of the address by the Prime Minister that Omar Abdullah and his ministerial colleagues strongly advocated dialogue between New Delhi and the separatists. They had termed it the greatest need of time.

Union Government's Thinking
Reading between the lines, the Prime Minister's address conveys that New Delhi has mistaken the activities of separatists as improvement in the situation and everything has been set right. Further, he felt that there was no need for holding any talk with separatists. Yet, several pro-India leaders, including Omar Abdullah, former ministers, and former Chief Ministers Farooq Abdullah and Mufti Muhammad Sayeed differ with this kind of thinking of the union government.

Going by the attitude of his boss, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah somewhat changed his stance at his Independence Day speech, and stressed the need of dialogue between India and Pakistan instead of with separatists, which he had advocated a day earlier. Yet, Mufti Muhammad Sayeed categorically expressed his reservations on what the Prime Minister had said, and warned him not to close his eyes to ground realities in the state.

Prime Minister maintained that the union government was wrongly taking the peaceful holding of elections in the state as the final resolution to the Kashmir issue, and warned against the tendency. He called on the union government that taking peaceful holding of elections as a first step, it should move forward to find the final resolution to the Kashmir issue, failing which uncertainly would rear its head again and we may return to square one.

In another statement, Mufti Muhammad Sayeed said that there was lack of coordination between the state government and the union government, and by rejecting the chief minister's suggestion, the Prime Minister had deflated it. In his statement, Mufti Muhammad Sayeed asserted that while Omar Abdullah trumpeted dialogue between the union government and the Hurriyat Conference, the union government had rejected his suggestions of dialogue in toto. It is an indication that there is no coordination between the union and state governments.

Referring to fail separatist leaders like Syed Ali Shah Gilani and others, Mufti Muhammad Sayeed said that it was strange that leaders with whom the claim of holding dialogue was being made were languishing in prisons. Throwing a challenge to the government, Mufti Muhammad Sayeed said that if it had the power and the strength, it should come out and compete with separatists democratically.

By saying this, Mufti Muhammad Sayeed has recognized the stature and reliability of separatist leaders, and has said that not holding talks with them is a serious blunder.

Wrong Assertion
Mufti Muhammad Sayeed is not the only mainstream leader who has described the Prime Minister's assertion as a blunder. Several organizations have also expressed their annoyance with this, but in a subdued tone. The Communist Party of India (CPI) termed the assertion wrong, and held that separatists continue to be relevant. CPI National Secretary Shamian Faizi, rejecting the Prime Minister's statement, demanded at a press conference that the union government should immediately initiate action to hold talks with separatists. He added that the talks with Pakistan on all pending issues, including the Kashmir issue, should immediately be resumed. He termed the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act and other similar black laws in the state draconian, and demanded their immediate revocation. He maintained that separatism and separatists continue to be relevant in Kashmir and that dialogue with Pakistan be resumed immediately and unconditionally.

Unrest is also spreading in the National Conference on the issue, though the ruling party for the lust of power has quietly swallowed the bitter pill that the Prime Minister gave. It would not be out of place to mention that all National Conference leaders, including Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, had repeatedly said in their election campaign that the Kashmir issue has nothing to do with holding of elections. Instead, the process is being adopted only for formation of an administration.