INDIA LEGAL: Stories that count Edition: 13 February 2017

InvitationPrice
`50
NDIA EGALL STORIES THAT COUNT
February13, 2017 ` 100
www.indialegallive.com
Jallikattu:
Opening a Judicial Pandora’s Box
I
WILL IT WITHSTAND LEGAL CHALLENGES? ALARM BELLS OVER H-1B VISA BILL
GLOBALNIGHTMAREDonald Trump’s immigration crackdown creates chaos and misery

TARTING with this issue of India Legal our
fortnightly takes on a new avatar—we go
weekly. The transition, long in the making, is
logical and necessary. In the three years that
the relaunched version of our publication has been
on the stands and in your homes, the exigencies of
news gathering and presentation have palpably alte-
red. Thanks to a proliferation of digital news, the
news no longer waits for the next edition of your
newspaper, the newswire bulletin, or the evening or
early morning TV programme… or a fortnightly.
It breaks here and now on your mobile phone,
your app, your desktop. India has not only kept pace
with these worldwide media trends but has also
shown path-breaking enterprise in many instances.
As an integral part of the Indian media scenario,
India Legal does not believe in playing catch-up ball.
We like to lead from the front in our chosen area of
endeavour—legally-oriented news and analyses—in
order to continue to “make the difference with the
stories that count” as our public tagline says.
We started out as a fortnightly because bringing
out a “politico-legal” magazine with regularity
seemed at the time to be an onerous chore. Would
there be enough new stories every two weeks to fill all
those pages? Essays, legalistic briefs, case studies,
debates, and the like, yes. But then, we did not set
out to be a law journal or a text-book type tome
intended for law students or scholarly rumination.
What we set to become was a hard-nosed hard news
magazine with current events and court- and lawsuit-
driven breaking stories ruling our editorial pages.
As we trudged on, we discovered that the courts
and our organs of governance were a gold-field of
stories just waiting to be mined by editors who could
focus on them and reporters who could ferret them
out. And these stories touched every aspect of
the lives not only of the legal and judicial
community but also of every Indian citizen.
Touch any story making the headlines
and a legal angle simply jumped out at you—
but you had to have the editorial dexterity to latch
on to it and tailor it to fit the niche perspective of
your endeavour. Take any story that comes to mind—
the National Judicial Appointments Committee, the
behaviour of governors, BCCI, the allocation of coal
blocks and broadcast spectrums, rape laws, juvenile
justice, case pendency, decisions of the Election
Commission, cyber censorship, cleaning up the
Ganges, qualification of electoral candidates, the fight
for party symbols, the death penalty, public interest
litigation, Green controversies, demonetisation, dates
for presentation of the Budget, cases of judicial mis-
conduct… Jallikattu….You get the idea.
The courts, especially our Supreme Court with its
changing justices, have been on an overdrive.
Understaffed, overworked, and bearing the brunt of
public criticism, the courts have, nonetheless, been a
critical balancing mechanism trying as best as they
can to maintain the constitutional checks and bal-
ances which keep this Republic and its government
of the moment from going into a tailspin.
I
t was obvious that having created a niche prod-
uct —along with sister concerns like APN News
and our three major websites along with a social
media team —and an editorial squad now fully able
to grasp the niche focus—a fortnightly would simply
not be able to keep up with all the news stories we
wanted to break. It is frustrating to have a great
exclusive legally-oriented story on your hands and
then to have to wait for another fortnight to break it
because the current issue cannot accommodate it.
Also, when the Supreme Court is in session and issu-
ing rapid-fire decisions by the minute from all its
courtrooms, you’ve got to match that speed with your
own editorial prowess which can become frustrating
unless you’re doing it on a weekly basis.
A weekly has its own energy, its own electricity
and if produced with editorial finesse, panache—it
quickens the reader’s pulse. As I am sure this issue
will do. Our cover story is an American story which is
a world story and an Indian story with massive inter-
national legal and constitutional implications for
global politics. Donald Trump’s Executive Order on
immigration has caused a global explosion whose
shockwaves have spread from Somalia and Iraq to
America’s Silicon Valley and Bangalore’s IT hub. Our
coverage includes contributions from some of the
best writers across the world—the human, legal,
political, economic fallout.
And we bring you this package in our first weekly
edition within the very week that these earth-shatter-
ing geopolitical events have begun to unfold.
S
THE WEEK THAT IS
Inderjit Badhwar
Letter From The Editor
editor@indialegalonline.com
3| INDIA LEGAL | February 13, 2017

Contents
IT’s Big Test
India’s Options
India’s Silicon Valley must remodel itself to
survive the impending H1B visa crisis
Lobbying may be the only means left for the
Indian government to counter Trump’s order
24
26
OWNED BY E. N. COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD.
A -9, Sector-68, Gautam Buddh Nagar, NOIDA (U.P.) - 201309
Phone: +9 1-0120-2471400- 6127900 ; Fax: + 91- 0120-2471411
e-mail: editor@indialegalonline.com
website: www.indialegalonline.com
MUMBAI: Arshie Complex, B-3 & B4, Yari Road, Versova, Andheri,
Mumbai-400058
RANCHI: House No. 130/C, Vidyalaya Marg, Ashoknagar,
Ranchi-834002.
LUCKNOW: First floor, 21/32, A, West View, Tilak Marg, Hazratganj,
Lucknow-226001.
PATNA: Sukh Vihar Apartment, West Boring Canal Road, New Punaichak,
Opposite Lalita Hotel, Patna-800023.
ALLAHABAD: Leader Press, 9-A, Edmonston Road,
Civil Lines, Allahabad-211 001.
Editor Inderjit Badhwar
Senior Managing Editor Dilip Bobb
Deputy Managing Editor Shobha John
Executive Editor Ajith Pillai
Contributing Editor Ramesh Menon
Associate Editors Meha Mathur,
Sucheta Dasgupta
Deputy Editor Prabir Biswas
Staff Writers Usha Rani Das,
Karan Kaushik
Senior Sub-Editor Shailaja Paramathma
Art Director Anthony Lawrence
Deputy Art Editor Amitava Sen
Senior Visualizer Rajender Kumar
Graphic Designer Ram Lagan
Photographers Anil Shakya, Bhavana Gaur
Photo Researcher/ Kh Manglembi Devi
News Coordinator
Production Pawan Kumar
CFO
Anand Raj Singh
VP (HR & General Administration)
Lokesh C Sharma
Advertising
Valerie Patton
Mobile No: 9643106028, Landline No: 0120-612-7900
email: marketing@encommunication.org
Circulation Manager
RS Tiwari
Mobile No: 8377009652, Landline No: 0120-612-7900
email: indialegal.enc@gmail.com
PublishedbyProfBaldevRajGuptaonbehalfofENCommunicationsPvtLtd
andprintedatSuperCassettesIndustiesLtd.,C-85-86&94,Sector4,Noida,Distt.
GautamBudhNagar,UP-201301. Allrightsreserved.Reproductionortranslationinany
languageinwholeorinpartwithoutpermissionisprohibited.Requestsfor
permissionshouldbedirectedtoENCommunicationsPvtLtd.Opinionsof
writersinthemagazinearenotnecessarilyendorsedby
ENCommunicationsPvtLtd.ThePublisherassumesnoresponsibilityforthe
returnofunsolicitedmaterialorformateriallostordamagedintransit.
AllcorrespondenceshouldbeaddressedtoENCommunicationsPvtLtd.
VOLUME. X ISSUE. 13
Managing Editor (Web) Parsa Venkateshwar Rao Jr
Editor (Content & Planning) Sujit Bhar
Senior Content Writer Punit Mishra
(Web)
Technical Executive Sonu Kumar Sharma
(Social Media)
Technical Executive Anubhav Tyagi
FEBRUARY13,2017
4 February 13, 2017
Barely Lawful
Is Trump’s immigration ban legally tenable? It
has been drafted to evade a clash with statute
20
Bully-in-Chief!
The US president’s Executive Orders have shown him lacking understanding of
global issues. Despite this, he forges ahead, leading to chaos and uncertainty
19
Death of the American Dream
Donald Trump’s order banning travel from seven predominantly Muslim nations is
separating families who have made every effort to follow US immigration law
16
LEAD

Meghalaya’s
Shame
The involvement of a powerful
politician in the repeated rape of
a minor has exposed a thriving sex
racket in this hill state and
embarrassed the government
42
People’s Power Wins
With the top court refusing to stay the new Jallikattu law, the
Tamil Nadu government and its people have got an upper hand
28
SPOTLIGHT
Singur
Redux
Though Mamata Banerjee once
stopped the Nano plant from coming
up in West Bengal, she herself is in a
bind over a power project in Bhangar,
but there is a way out
46
LEGALEYE
REGULARS
FollowusonFacebook.com/indialegalmedia
andTwitter.com/indialegalmedia
Quotes ..............................6
Ringside............................7
Courts ...............................8
Dilli Durbar......................13
Briefs...............................14
Media Watch ..................49
Satire ..............................50
Cover Illustration & Design:
ANTHONY LAWRENCE
Cover Picture:
UNI
In a shocking answer to an RTI query,
the DGCA said it has lost all data
related to planes and pilot licenses in
August 2015. Will this compromise
security and the lives of passengers?
44
Anatomy of a Protest
The Marina Beach stir was a reassertion of Tamil pride and a
platform for releasing pent-up anguish over a gamut of issues
30
Respect the Constitution
When a court order is violated by people and a state bent on
pleasing the electorate, upholding the law is a lonely battle
32
“Skeptical but Hopeful”
Dr Chintan Chandrachud, who has carved a niche for himself
in law at an early age, analyses important judgments
34
INTERVIEW
Did some journalists receive pay-
offs to influence the government in
the AgustaWestland deal?
38
PROBE
Price of
Honesty
By transferring four SPs, the MP
government has violated apex court
guidelines which say IPS officers
should have a fixed two-year term in
field postings
40
STATES CRIME
AVIATION
Flight Safety
at Peril?
Media in Murky
Waters

6 February 13, 2017
QUOTE-UNQUOTE
I would have been
happy to lose too, to
be honest. There’s no
draw, but if there
was going to be
one, I would
have been very
happy to accept a
draw tonight and
share it with Rafa
(Nadal).
—Tennis star Roger
Federer, after winning the
Australian Open
Jao tum jeet jao, sarkar banao,
hum ab party banayenge (You
win and form the government,
I will now make a new party).
—Former state SP chief Shivpal Yadav,
after filing nomination from
Jaswantnagar in Etawah for UP polls
They are hiding behind the dazzle of a
number called the GDP which is being
questioned. But the people of India are not
dazzled by that number.
—Former finance Minister P Chidambaram, on the
latest Economic Survey, in The Times of India
Age should not be a criterion for deciding the
utility of a person. There is a way of getting
rid of political leaders, and the Congress
should learn to be graceful in what they
do…. No party where age and experience is
not valued will have a great future.
—Former External Affairs Minister SM Krishna,
resigning from the Congress, in The Indian Express
I stand with the people
gathered across the country
tonight defending our values
& our Constitution. This is
not who we are.
—Former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton, reacting to the ban on
immigrants and refugees from seven
Muslim nations, on Twitter
It does not matter what you say or do,
attack me physically or verbally, I will
voice what I feel. You mobs don’t scare
me, my voice will always rise over your
screaming and shouting….
—Film-maker Anurag Kashyap,
countering trolls, on a Facebook post
I pray that Trump also stops visas for
Pakistanis as I believe that it will help us
develop our own country…. Nawaz Sharif
goes abroad even for the treatment of
headache. If the US imposes ban (on
Pakistanis) he too will focus (on)
Pakistan and develop it.
—Pak Cricketer-politician Imran Khan, at
a party rally in Sahiwal

VERDICT
Peoplecrushedbylawshavenohopebuttoevadepower.Ifthelawsaretheirenemies,
theywillbeenemiestothelaw;andthosewhohavemosttohopeandnothingtolose
willalwaysbedangerous.
—EdmundBurke,Britishparliamentarian,1729-1797

The Supreme Court sought within
four weeks a report from home
secretaries of all states on the existing
vacancies across all levels of the police
force and what the governments had
done so far to fill them.
The Court asked them to furnish the
information in affidavits and warned
that in case they failed to do so, the
secretaries would be summoned before
the Court. The centre was told to pass
on the direction to the respective state
home secretaries.
The order came in response to a PIL
that sought the Court’s intervention on
the abysmal strength of the force.
The fact that many states had not
taken its earlier direction—to update it
on vacancies—seriously was not taken
kindly by the Court. The bench dealing
with the petition discovered that it was
only in January 2015 that the Court
was informed about existing vacancies
by the centre—close to five lakh. The
PIL claimed that going by the 2015
numbers, 24 percent of the sanctioned
strength was still to be filled up.
Submit report on
police vacancies
Courts
The Supreme Court expressed con-
cern that a national policy was yet to
be evolved to compensate the families
of farmers who committed suicides due
to crop failure. The Court observed that
the issue was of national import. It was
responding to a plea filed by an NGO,
Citizens Resource and Action Initiative,
on the matter.
The petition also drew the Court’s
attention to the Gujarat High Court dis-
missing a writ petition seeking relief for
around 600 farmers who had ended
their lives between 2004 and 2012. The
High Court had ruled that as a policy
matter it was up to the government to
take a call.
Considering the importance of the
matter raised in the plea, the Court
transferred the petition into a PIL suo
motu and demanded a response from
the centre, states and the union territo-
ries within four weeks. It insisted that
all must come together and come up
with a national policy.
A national
policy on
farmer
compensation
It was probably the first time that a
court in the country quoted Bob
Dylan in one of its verdicts. On January
12, a Kerala High Court judgment on
the state’s liquor policy was noticed for
its erudition and witty references.
The order was delivered by Justice
Dama Seshadri Naidu with Justice PR
Ramachandra Menon concurring with
him. The petitioner, Anoop, had chal-
lenged the liquor policy of the govern-
ment, leading to the shutting down of
DylanQuotedinKerala
As long as these are sensible,
the judiciary should not inter-
fere in the policy decisions of the
government, the Supreme Court
ruled. The Court’s observation
came while it was adjudicating
the fairness of the verdicts given
by Delhi and Madras High Courts.
Both had struck down the cen-
tre’s policy that made a distinc-
tion between the physically handi-
capped candidates in the General
and OBC categories, for reservation
benefits in the civil service exams held
in 2007. While the physi-cally handi-
capped examinees in the General cate-
gory were allowed to appear in the
exam seven times (up from four
chances earlier), no such provision was
given to those in the OBC category.
The Court found that the policy deci-
sion was fair enough and there was
nothing to show that it was unreason-
able or arbitrary. It observed that the
high courts should have stayed away
from the matter. The judiciary could
pitch in only if the policy decision viola-
ted Article 14 of the constitution, the
Court observed.
Do not interfere in
policy decisions
8 February 13, 2017

retail outlets in a phased manner.
The judgment begins as follows:
“To drink or not to drink. That is the
Hamletian dilemma of Anoop, the
appellant. He has chosen to drink. He
rails at the rules that obstruct his pas-
sion for the pint, his right to choose, to
be let alone, to privacy, and, of all, his
right to life. He claims that the laws
prohibiting alcoholic drinks fall foul of
the fundamental rights guaranteed to a
citizen, to him. Do they? Our answer:
No.”
It even goes on to talk about alcohol
and its evolution. “The ripest fruit is the
sweetest, the most calorific; the sweet-
est fruit is the closest to getting rotten,
fermented. So, the tell-tale scent of fer-
mentation was the surest way to a food
at its most calorific. That is how the
journey began.”
The Court dismissed the case and
offered solace to Anoop through Dylan’s
lines: “[A]nd don’t speak too soon/For
the wheel’s still in spin/And there’s no
telling who that it’s naming/For the loser
now will be later to win/Cause the times
they are a-changing.”
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) was given the
additional responsibility by the Supreme Court to
keep a close a tab on untreated sewage being relea-
sed into the river Ganga. The apex court had earlier
asked the green panel to inspect steps taken by the
centre to check the flow of industrial effluents and
municipal solid wastes.
It took into account the fact that the entire issue of
Ganga cleaning was being handled by NGT. The NGT
was directed to submit a report on the progress made
on both counts and the problems it faced.
The Court’s decision came in after petitioner
MC Mehta alleged in his PIL that the centre had done
virtually nothing despite numerous claims being made
by it on keeping Ganga pollution free. The top court
has been checking the centre's efforts for more than
30 years now.
Ganga cleaning
issue now with NGT
Convinced on the face
of it that former CBI
chief Ranjit Sinha did
misuse his power and
position, the Supreme
Court asked the new CBI
chief Alok Verma to investigate alle-
gations that Sinha tried to derail the
coal scam probe.
This is the first time that India
will see the top investigation body
looking into corruption charges
against its former chief. The Court
also asked Verma to set up an SIT
in this regard and ordered that he
will head it. Two other officers of
CBI will also be part of the SIT.
It was proved earlier that Sinha
had met suspects in the coal scam
at his home several times, who rep-
resented private firms that had got
access to coal blocs out of turn,
during UPA-I.
Last year, the visitors’ book from
Sinha’s official residence was pre-
sented to the judges and they had
authenticated it.
The Court, while passing the
order, said: “Prima facie, a case is
made out against Sinha for allegedly
conniving with certain accused in
the coal scam.”
On the impartiality of the CBI
investigating its former chief, the
Court said that there was no need
for an outside team as there has
been a change of guard in the CBI.
However, Sinha pleaded against
the apex court’s direction and want-
ed it to be recalled. He drew a
parallel between his case and the
Birla-Sahara diaries’ case in which
the apex court had dismissed the
proof submitted that revealed the
names of prominent politicians who
had allegedly received pay-offs.
His lawyer argued that the top
court could not have a different
criteria for entries mentioned in
Sinha’s diary.
The apex court finally agreed to
hear the matter again.
CBI chief to
head SIT
against
Ranjit Sinha

The Supreme Court dismissed a PIL req-
uesting the postponement of the Union
Budget in view of assembly elections in five
states, starting from February 4. The Bud-
get has been advanced to February 1 from
the earlier February 28, starting this year.
A three-judge bench dealing with the
petition against presentation of the Budget
before assembly polls concluded that since
it was a Union Budget, it would not affect
the assembly polls. The PIL was filed by
advocate ML Sharma.
The bench ruled that “state is state...
Central Budget is very different from state.
It has nothing to do with the state election.”
It observed that if Budget postponement
was granted on the plea of affecting assem-
bly poll results, then Union Budget would
never see the light of the day, considering
that assembly elections were held through-
out the year. According to the Court, there
was no case made out and the petition was,
therefore, dismissed.
No need to postpone
Union Budget
In continuing with its earlier stand, the
Supreme Court refused to overrule the
October 2016 verdict of the Allahabad
High Court, ordering Noida Toll Bridge
Company Ltd (NTBCL) not to collect toll
tax from people using the DND Flyway.
The flyway connects Delhi with Noida.
The Court, however, made it clear that
the ruling was valid only till the time the
Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG)
ascertained whether NTBCL had actually
recovered the cost of constructing DND
Flyway and submitted a report. The CAG
had pleaded for eight weeks’ time to
respond and the request was granted.
Earlier too, in November 2016, the
apex court did not grant any relief to
NTBCL against the Allahabad High Court
order of October. A PIL was filed by
Federation of Noida Residents’ Welfare
Association in the Allahabad High Court
objecting to the toll tax that was being
charged as user fee. NTBCL had app-
roached the apex court challenging the
judgment of the Allahabad High Court.
No DND toll tax
as of now
In a stern order, the
Supreme Court direct-
ed the centre to fill the
post of the director
general of National
Human Rights
Commission (NHRC) within seven days.
It also ordered that members of NHRC be
appointed within four weeks.
Earlier, the Court had agreed to look
into the legality of whether a full-time
politician could become a member of
NHRC. The selection committee had
zeroed in on BJP vice-
president Avinash Rai
Khanna’s name as a
member but a PIL had
been filed in the apex
court against the move.
However, Khanna with-
drew his name from the
post and the Court was
spared from taking a
stand on the issue.
But in the latest verdict, the Court
pulled up the centre for its laxity and cau-
tioned that it “will be in trouble” if the
matter is heard and an order passed sub-
sequently. “Why don’t you appoint some-
body? You have to do it” the Court said,
coming down hard on the centre.
Appoint
NHRC
members
Cangovtdoleoutreligious
landtoanycommunity?
The Supreme Court will examine whether
it is proper for a government to give out
land to a particular community for religious
purposes. The case in point was the deci-
sion taken by the Tamil Nadu government in
September 1986 to allot free land to a
Muslim cultural association in a village near
Chennai, for building a mosque. The state
government had approved the recommen-
dation of the land administration commis-
sioner in this regard.
A petition had been filed by the
Federation of Chennai Suburban (South)
Welfare Association in the Supreme Court
against the decision. Earlier, the Madras
High Court had rejected a separate petition
Courts
10 February 13, 2017

Church courts granting divorce to catholic
couples is not legally tenable, the
Supreme Court ruled while dismissing a peti-
tion by an advocate from Bangalore. The
petition was awaiting a decision for the last
four years.
An upshot of the verdict is that a divorce
awarded by a church court must be ratified
by a legal court verdict following the tenets
of the Christian Divorce Act, 1869.
Clarence Pais, a Catholic advocate, had
pleaded that it was the Catholic Church that
decided on matters relating to marriage and
divorce as per the Christian Marriage Act and
the Code of Canon Law, respectively, but the
law does not sanction this. He contended
that as a result, persons who had remarried
were subjected to legal proceedings under
bigamy charges. He also argued that Canon
law falls within the realm of personal laws of
Catholic Christians.
The petitioner pleaded that “hundreds of
spouses will have to face prosecution, jail
and fine” in the absence of any legal sanc-
tion. However, the centre contended that
divorce was not an area which the Church
Courts could decide upon.
More than 25 famous sportspersons
pleaded for the Supreme Court’s
intervention in cleaning up national
sports bodies. The petitioners included
hockey player Ashok Kumar, former
athlete Ashwini Nachappa, former crick-
eters Bishen Singh Bedi and Kirti Azad,
among others.
The joint petition talked about mis-
management, corruption and nepotism
in many national sports federations and
wanted the top court to order reforms
on the lines of those suggested by the
Lodha Committee be implemented in
other sports bodies as well. The National
Sports Development Code of India,
2011, needs to be amended to instill
integrity and ensure transparency, the
petition pointed out.
The bench dealing with the petition
sought a response from the centre, the
Sports Authority of India and the Indian
Olympic Association on the issue.
PIL for cleaning up
sports bodieson the issue and supported the state govern-
ment on the ground that a mosque needed
to be built considering that more than 100
families in the area had to offer their prayers
at a mosque in faraway Alandur.
The bench dealing with the petition let it
be known that it will take a decision in
everyone’s interest and asked the apex court
registry to slot all the pending petitions in
this regard for hearing on March 20.
Divorce by Church
Court invalid
In a significant decision,
the Chief Justice of India
(CJI) Justice JS Khehar
annulled the removal of
Justice MB Lokur as
the chief of the national
E-Committee. The commi-
ttee, set up in 2004, is
responsible for computeri-
sation of all judicial work
and framing of an IT policy
for the sector. Justice Lokur
was shunted out of the E-
Committee by the then CJI
TS Thakur and Rajasthan
High Court Chief Justice
(retd) Sunil Ambwani J was
given charge.
Justice Lokur was
appointed the top judge of
the committee in July 2012.
It was under his steward-
ship that a National Judicial
Data Grid was set up for all
district courts in India.
Earlier, after taking
charge as CJI, Justice
Khehar had brought back
the social justice bench,
removed by the former CJI.
Batting for tougher laws for flouting of
traffic rules in the Capital, the
Supreme Court stood by a Delhi High
Court verdict slapping an additional fine
of `500 for offences. This is over and
above the fine mentioned in the Motor
Vehicles Act for each challan issued by
the traffic police. The High Court had
given the verdict in March 2007.
The top court dismissed a petition
that had challenged the High Court
order. The centre apprised the Court that
the Motor Vehicle Act 1988 was in the
process of amendment. And the Court
held that only parliament could address
the concerns of the petitioner.
CJIbringsback
JusticeLokur
Stiff penalty justified

The Supreme Court recently
announced a four-member panel of
administrators for the Board of Control for
Cricket in India (BCCI). Headed by former
Comptroller and Auditor General of India
Vinod Rai, the panel also includes histori-
an and cricket-buff Ramachandra Guha,
former skipper of the Indian women’s
team Diana Edulji, and Infrastructure and
Development Finance Company CEO
Vikram Limaye. The head of the panel will
report to the apex court.
With the ICC executive meeting sched-
uled for the first week of February in
Dubai, where the BCCI is required to send
its representatives, the apex court
appointed BCCI officials Amitabh
Choudhary and Anirudh Chaudhry, as
well as Limaye for the job.
Both Amitabh and Anirudh’s names
were suggested by BCCI. The Court said
that their role was only restricted to
attending the ICC meeting on behalf of
the BCCI.
As per the Court’s instructions, the
four-member panel appointed by the
board will find out whether Lodha
Committee recommendations had been
implemented by BCCI—and to what
extent—and submit a report to the Court
within four weeks.
Originally, nine names were proposed
by the amicus curiae panel of Gopal
Subramaniam and Anil Divan. The Court
thought this was too many and had
deferred—at the insistence of Attorney
General Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the
government—the final decision to
January 30. Rohatgi had argued that the
BCCI and the government should also
be allowed to submit their own choice
of names.
VinodRai-headed
paneltomanage
theBCCI:SC
SC relied on a mix of administrative ability and accountability,
historical authenticity, cricketing ability and fiscal discipline
The apex court ordered an FIR
and probe against godman
Asaram Bapu for submitting a false
document on his health status. He
had been pleading for bail in a sexu-
al assault case on medical grounds
but was not granted relief. Asaram
himself accepted the document was
fabricated. A report from the AIIMS
medical board also ruled that his
health condition was normal.
The Court slapped a fine of `1
lakh on Asaram for filing a “frivo-
lous petition”. It stood by its earlier
verdict and dismissed his interim
bail petition. It further said that the
probing officer must initiate criminal
proceeding against anyone found
guilty of misleading the Court.
FIR against
Asaram Bapu
Two petitioners were banned from
filing any PIL in the apex court
in future unless they were “person-
ally grieved”. The Court was livid
as they had made CJI JS Khehar,
former CJI TS Thakur and President
Pranab Mukherjee as parties in
their case.
Anindita and Anirban, involved in
a criminal case in Mumbai, had
challenged the Bombay High Court
decision in the apex court. But they
could not get a favourable verdict
from a bench headed by Justice
Khehar in 2016. Even the review
petition was rejected. The Court felt
that their action was “an assault on
the Constitution” and the PIL was “
absolutely malicious”.
Petitioners
banned from SC
The counsel for the Gujarat govern-
ment informed the National Green
Tribunal on February 1 that the state
will oppose the ban on manja—
cotton thread coated with glass, used
in kite flying.
The state counsel claimed that the
game has been enjoyed for genera-
tions and doesn’t affect the environ-
ment. The counsel further submitted
that if allowed, he will bring the glass
coated thread before Tribunal and
break it without suffering any injuries.
The Tribunal was hearing a plea
filed by PETA, seeking a nation-wide
ban on all forms of sharp kite-flying
strings as they are lethal to humans
and animals. It adjourned the matter
for February 6.
NGT defers
hearing on manja
Courts
— Compiled by Prabir Biswas; Illustrations: UdayShankar

Delhi
Durbar
An inside track on happenings in Lutyen’s Delhi
There’s panic and anxiety
among the bureaucracy and
police officers with the crack-
down on corruption now a pri-
ority with the NDA govern-
ment. In the last two weeks,
three senior officials—two IPS
and one IAS—have been
sacked, ostensibly under the
head of “non-performance’’, a
euphemism for allegations of
corruption. The two IPS offi-
cers dismissed were Mayank
Sheel Chohan (1998 batch)
and Raj Kumar Dewangan
(1992 batch). A day later, a
senior IAS officer, K
Narasimha, was similarly dis-
missed. He is facing a CBI
inquiry for allegedly possess-
ing assets more than his
known sources of income.
The centre is clearly intent on
sending a message that a
Damocles Sword hangs over
the heads of these officers,
regardless of their rank or
years of service.
THE DAMOCLES SWORD
Anyone looking to get in touch with Gandhi
son-in-law Robert Vadra can find him in
one of the capital’s exclusive watering
holes—the Delhi Golf Club. Known for his
obsession with working out, Vadra seems
to have discovered a new way to keep fit—
golf. He can be found there on specific
days of the week, learning the finer
nuances of the game from buddies who
are members. The foursome usually take
a break and head to the terrace pub over-
looking the 18th hole for lunch. That seems
to suggest that Vadra will not have much of
a role in the upcoming UP elections where
his wife, Priyanka, is playing a leading role.
HOLE IN ONE
Ratan Tata seems to be going all out to woo the
ruling regime. Ever since his spat with Cyrus
Mistry, Ratan has been actively wooing the pow-
ers-that-be and also lending the
government a generous helping
hand. Apart from his sudden
dash to Nagpur to meet RSS
chief Mohan Bhagwat, where he
also garlanded a statue of RSS
founder KP Hedgewar, at least
three Tata companies—TCS, Tata
Teleservices and Tata Business
Support Services—are supplying
free phone line capacity for the
new government helpline—Cash-
Mukt Bharat Abhiyan. This is the
brainwave of Niti Aayog boss
Amitabh Kant; it educates callers
on how to switch to digital payments. This is a
major change from the days when the Tata
group kept a safe distance from politicians.
TATAS GET POLITICAL
Capt Amarinder Singh, scion of the Patiala
royal family, has made peace with his party's
high command, a factor for stability in the
often fractious state party unit. Captain Saab
has had a love-hate relationship with the Dilli
Durbar ever since he quit Congress after
Operation Blue Star and joined the Akalis, only
to rejoin and become CM for a term. For one
thing, Delhi usually kept him guessing about
how deeply Congress chief Sonia Gandhi
supported him against his party rebels. For
another, Amarinder, a favorite "nephew" of
Indira Gandhi, and a school buddy of Sanjay
and Rajiv Gandhi, considered the young
Rahul an upstart in politics and couldn’t rec-
oncile himself to the position bequeathed to
him by Sonia. But Amarinder is now said
to be better disposed to Rahul, whom
he thinks has matured politically. He
is even accepting his advice on
some Congress candidates and seat
allocation for the upcoming elections,
including Navjot Sidhu, which bodes well
for the party’s performance.
AMARINDER MAKES PEACE

Briefs
The Central Board of Investigation
has arrested seven former officials
of IDBI bank ltd, along with four for-
mer executives of Kingfisher Airlines,
in connection with the Vijay Mallya
loan default case. Among those
arrested are former chairman of
IDBI, Yogesh Aggarwal, and former
CFO of Kingfisher Airlines, A
Raghunathan. Three former execu-
tives of the defunct airlines have also
been taken into custody. The investi-
gating agency has alleged that the
officials had approved loans of over
` 900 crore without the required
sanctions. The agency registered a
case against Mallya and others after
receiving a complaint from the State
Bank of India, which is one of the 17
banks that gave loans to Kingfisher
Airlines.
The Election Commission
(EC) and the Reserve
Bank of India (RBI) were
involved in a rare clash
after the EC asserted its
constitutional mandate and
insisted that the RBI
should enhance the cash
withdrawal limit for candi-
dates in the upcoming elec-
tions. The RBI had com-
municated that it did not
think that increasing the
cash withdrawal limit was
desirable or possible, after
which the EC wrote to the
bank saying: “It appears
that the RBI had not
realised the gravity of the
matter.” Article 324 of the
Constitution gives the elec-
tion watchdog the power to
issue a directive to RBI to
ensure compliance under
the Central Bank Act.
Meghalaya Governor
V Shanmughanathan has
resigned after employees of the Raj
Bhavan wrote a letter to the Prime
Minister, Union Home Minister and
Chief Minister, accusing him of turn-
ing the prestigious office into a “ladies
club”. In the letter, the employees
alleged that the 67-year-old governor’s
activities hurt the decorum and pres-
tige of the Raj Bhavan as well as the
sentiments of those employed there.
Among the 11 allegations that were
made in the letter, the most grave one
was that the employees had to go
through severe humiliation, mental
stress and torture since the time
Shanmughanathan had taken over.
They alleged that the governor hired
only women. Only female candidates
were called to interview for the post of
Public Relations Officer in November
2016 and later, as a formality, five
men were called for interviews.
EC, RBI clash
over cash
Govt-SC collegium
tussle continues
The tussle between the govern-
ment and the Supreme Court
Collegium over the appointment of
judges to the Allahabad High Court
has still not been resolved as the
centre has skipped a list of at least
24 recommendations made by the
collegium once again. However, the
government appointed 20 judges for
two high courts in three separate
notifications, dated January 13 and
14. Sixteen additional judges of
Allahabad HC, whose terms were
coming to an end, were made per-
manent and four new judges were
appointed for Andhra Pradesh and
Telangana HC. The government,
however, deferred with the recom-
mendations made from the bar of
Allahabad and Lucknow benches.
Kejriwal booked for
bribe remark
The Goa police filed a non-cogniz-
able case against Delhi Chief
Minister Arvind Kejriwal after the
Election Commission directed the
Goa chief electoral officer to take
necessary legal action against him
for instigating the public to accept
bribe for voting. The Aam Aadmi
Party convener at a rally at Mapusa
told voters to ask for `10, 000 when
rival parties offer `5, 000, but vote for
AAP. Kejriwal’s party has questioned
the EC and stated that it was
harassing its officials on the orders
of other political parties.
Meghalaya Governor
steps down
IDBIofficialsheld
inKingfishercase

US President Donald
Trump has signed
an executive order, for-
mally withdrawing
America from the Trans-
Pacific Partnership
(TPP) trade deal. It was,
in fact, one of the prom-
ises he had made during
his presidential cam-
paign. The deal had
been negotiated by for-
mer President Barack
Obama’s administration.
Fulfilling another of his
campaign promises, he
instructed the
Department of
Homeland Security to
commence immediate
construction of a 1,900-
mile long wall along the
southern border with
Mexico. Another execu-
tive order aims to tackle
the issue of undocu-
mented immigrants
through deportation and
tripling resources for
enforcement with
10,000 additional immi-
gration officers.
Trump withdraws
from trade deal
On his first full day as com-
mander-in-chief, US President
Donald Trump tweeted the follow-
ing from his old Twitter account: “I
am honered to serve you, the great
American people, as your 45th
President of the United States!”
Twelve minutes later, he deleted the
said tweet and reposted it from his
new @POTUS handle, this time
spelling “honored” correctly.
The deletion of the tweet raised
questions about whether Trump
can do that now as he is president
or if that violates the Presidential
Records Act that requires all commu-
nications from or received by the presi-
dent to be preserved.
Trump’s tweet disaster
sets off a debate
Russia softens
domestic violence law
An official statistic shows that a
quarter of murders and serious
assaults in Russia take place at home.
However, a new bill drafted by MP
Olga Batalina decriminalises some
forms of domestic violence. It has
been passed by Russia’s lower house
of the parliament but still needs the
approval of the upper house and of
President Vladimir Putin. It reduces
the punishment for first-time offend-
ers to 15 days from the earlier two
years in jail and decriminalised
aggression against strangers, whereas
aggression within the family will be
considered a criminal offence. Also,
assaults causing serious injury or
repeat offences within a year would
still be a criminal offence and will
carry potential jail term.
—Compiled by Karan Kaushik and
Shailaja Paramathma
Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur
has been acquitted with
seven others in the 2007 RSS
pracharak Sunil Joshi murder
case by a Madhya Pradesh
court.
“The contradictory evi-
dences by police and NIA in
the case raised serious doubts,”
first additional district and
sessions judge of Dewas Rajiv
Madhusudan Apte said. Joshi,
once a close aide of the sadhvi,
was shot dead on December
29, 2007.
Thakur, also an accused in
the 2008 Malegaon bomb
blast case, is in judicial cus-
tody, undergoing treatment in
Bhopal. The others acquitted
include Harshad Solanki,
Vasudev Parmar, Anandraj
Kataria, Lokesh Sharma and
Jitendra Sharma.
Sadhvi acquitted in
murder case
Renewing its efforts to fight
obesity and diabetes, the
French government has banned
unlimited refills of sugary drinks.
The measure was adopted in April
2015, incorporated into the
Health Act of January 2016, and
came into force end of January
2017. The number of overweight
or obese people in France is below
the European Union average but
it is on the rise. France had
already slapped a tax on sweet
drinks in 2012. Now, the latest
decree makes it illegal to sell
unlimited amounts of drinks with
sugar or sweetener at a fixed price
or for free.
France crackdowns
on soda refills

Hamad was born and raised. It is tradi-
tional in Sudanese culture for a new
mother to be surrounded by her own
mother and family after giving birth.
Hassan stayed behind to work.
O
n January 30, Hamad and
Alma were supposed to land in
Detroit after being away for
three months. But on January 29, even
though the baby is a US citizen and eli-
gible to fly back, Hamad was stopped at
the airport in Qatar and prevented from
traveling under an executive order that
bars foreigners from Sudan, Iran, Iraq,
Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Syria from
entering the US for 90 days. (Citizens
and permanent residents are allowed in
— but about 90,000 visa holders,
including those with tourist visas, are
not.)
“I cannot leave to join my family,
and my family, they cannot come back
to join me,” Hassan, 36, said. “It’s a rea-
lly difficult situation. Frankly we don’t
know what to do.”
The first reports about the executive
order, signed by Trump on January 27,
were about foreigners hoping to travel
to the US for job opportunities, includ-
ing interpreters who had worked for
American forces. Now, it is becoming
clear that the order is separating fami-
lies of ordinary people whose mistake
was to pick the wrong dates to travel.
Since January 27, ProPublica has
been chronicling the travel ban’s effects.
As part of that effort, we’ve asked those
impacted to get in touch. So far, nearly
150 people from all seven countries
affected by the ban have written in....
Even people outside of those seven
countries—Mexico, Malaysia and
Pakistan, for example—wrote in to
express worry that their visas or green
cards would be challenged at some
point in the future, though no such plan
has been discussed publicly.
Submissions came from people here
legally that were visiting their home
countries and now are unable to return
to the US; people here legally that are
Lead/ Trump/ Executive Order on Immigrants
TheorderbanningtravelfromsevenpredominantlyMuslim
nationsisseparatingfamilieswhomadeeveryeffortto
followUSimmigrationlaw
by Charles Ornstein, Terry Parris Jr and
Marcelo Rochabrun
RESIDENT Donald
Trump’s travel ban has
torn apart Dr Abubaker
Hassan’s family. A few
months ago, his wife, Sara
Hamad, took their infant
daughter Alma from their Detroit home
to visit relatives in Qatar. Hassan is in
his second year of an internal medicine
residency program at Detroit Medical
Center, an inner-city hospital that
serves a low-income and minority com-
munity. He and his wife are citizens of
Sudan and they’re both in this country
on visas—Hassan on a J-1 for work-and
study-based exchange visitor programs
and his wife on a J-2 for dependents.
Together, they came to Detroit, where
Hamad gave birth in September, mak-
ing Alma an American citizen.
When the baby was a month-and-a-
half old, Hamad took her to visit her
family in Qatar, the country where
P
The US President’s
Travel Ban Wreaks
Havoc on Families,
Especially Those
with Valid Visas

thing airport officials did was to pass
on a necklace their mother had brought
as a gift. Darani said her sister has
been wearing it every day since as a
reminder of what happened and of her
mom’s love.
“She said that the moment that she
was in Philadelphia and knew my sister
is there to pick her up, but the security
didn’t let them meet was the worst
part. She said she felt heart-broken, des-
perate and devastated,” Darani wrote in
her email.
Darani’s mother’s visa was canceled.
To come back, she would have to apply
for a new one once the ban is lifted.
now afraid to leave the US and not be
able to return; and dozens of stories in
which families are being torn apart.
A
mong them was Shadi Darani,
who had left Iran to pursue a
doctorate degree in mechanical
engineering in Michigan and hadn’t
seen her 68-year-old mother for two
years. Obtaining permission for her
mother to travel to the US had taken
nine months.
Darani’s mother, Fatemeh Sheikhi,
left Iran aboard a Qatar Airlines flight
about 13 hours before Trump signed the
order. When she reached her first desti-
nation, Doha, in Qatar, she texted
Darani and her sister, who is studying
for her doctorate at the University of
Delaware, asking them to have a jacket
ready for her when they met in
Philadelphia.
Darani’s sister was waiting with the
jacket at the airport. But when her
mother landed at 7:45 a.m.on January
28, it was too late.
“My sister was crying and begging
the security to let her meet or call my
mom so she could at least explain to her
what is happening and calm her down,”
Darani wrote in an email to ProPublica,
explaining that her mother doesn’t
understand English well. “But they
didn’t allow it. Just feet away from one
another, after years, after so many days
and nights dreaming this moment.”
An airline employee told Darani’s
sister that they would be returning her
mother to Iran, but didn’t allow her to
have any direct contact with her mother
and didn’t disclose what flight her
mother would be put back on.
“They took her phone, and we could-
n’t even see her,” Darani said. The only
SHAKEN AND STIRRED
There were widespread protests in the
US against the executive order to ban
immigrants and refugees from seven
Muslim countries
UNI

Batoul Elamin’s mother didn’t get as
far as the US. For four years, Elamin, a
Sudanese citizen, and her brother, now
a US citizen, worked to get a green card
for their mother. Elamin has been in
the US studying since 2006 or 2007
first preparing for examinations, then
as a pediatrics resident in Oklahoma
City, and then as a neonatology
fellow at Georgetown University in
Washington, DC.
Elamin is now working as a neona-
tologist in Virginia, serving an area out-
side DC that doesn’t have enough doc-
tors, in a program that enables her to
remain in the country.
The visa for Elamin’s mother,
Bumsur Zain, finally came through a
few weeks ago and she was visiting
Elamin’s other brother in Saudi Arabia
before heading to the US. Now she can’t
continue her planned trip. “It’s just very
frustrating,” Elamin said. “She missed
out on my wedding here in the United
States” in 2015 because her visa appli-
cation was pending.
Elamin said her mother’s visa is
valid for three months but next month
she will need another medical checkup,
a prerequisite for receiving a green
card. “A lot of things are in the air,”
Elamin said. “Part of me believes that
things will go away in a week or 10
days, and that people who already have
a visa and have a lawful reason to come
in can come in. Part of me thinks that
it’s not going to get any better and she
will lose her opportunity to come to the
US and I don’t know whether it will be
safe for me to go back home. It’s really
very upsetting.”
“I feel suffocated because I feel like
I’m a prisoner. I can’t leave because if I
leave, there’s a good chance I wouldn’t
be able to come back,” Elamin said.
F
or Hassan, the Detroit medical
trainee whose wife is in Qatar,
the problems are piling up. Since
his daughter is an American and not a
citizen of Qatar, she can only get a one-
month visit visa, renewable once. As a
result, Hamad and Alma have already
had to travel to a neighboring country
and come back to ensure the baby’s stay
remains legal. They will have to do so
again, Hassan said.
Hassan also notes that he’s missing
important moments in his daughter’s
life. He knew he would miss some with
his wife away for three months, but he’s
worried he will miss more.
“She’s passing through the mile-
stones and I need to watch that. … The
simple things: When you start to smile,
first crawl, now she’s transitioning from
formula to solid foods. These simple
milestones, there’s no coming back.”
Hassan noted that he works at a fed-
eral hospital run by the US Department
of Veterans Affairs and his brother, now
an American citizen, is in the US Army
reserves in basic training in Louisiana.
The whole situation is distressing, he
said. “My mind is not clear,” Hassan
said. “I’m very distracted. I’m thinking
about taking time off to focus on trying
to solve these issues and to be safe with
my patients.”
Courtesy ProPublica
IN HAPPIER DAYS
Dr Abubaker Hassan with his wife Sara
Hamad, who was stopped from flying to the
US at an airport in Qatar with the couple’s
infant daughter. Both are Sudanese citizens
AGONISING WAIT
Fatemeh Sheikhi, planning to visit her
daughters, flew from Iran to Philadelphia,
where she was turned away from the airport
and flown back to Iran
RIGHT PLAN, WRONG TIMING
Bumsur Zain, a Sudanese citizen, had
planned to visit her daughter in the US
before the travel ban went into effect,
putting paid to her dream
(Photo Courtesy: Abubaker Hassan) (Photo Courtesy: Shadi Darani) (Photo Courtesy: Batoul Elamin)
Lead/ Trump/ Executive Order on Immigrants

have had their lives thrown into chaos
and uncertainty because of these actions
taken and proposed. Chaos and uncer-
tainty. The words are negative and sug-
gest a serious problem.
To Trump and the people closest to
him, this is perceived as a “positive”.
Trump made it clear in his campaign
and public pronouncements over the
past decades that he believes in revenge.
Twitter is littered with incontrovertible
evidence of just how thin-skinned he is.
The proposed changes in H-1B are
couched in terms that exaggerate the
problems, if there are actually any big
problems. “The overwhelming consen-
sus in the economics academic literature
is that immigrants add more to the
economy than they take. They create
Lead/ Trump/ New Diplomacy
TheUSpresident’sexecutiveordershaveshownhimlackingin
understandingofglobalissues.Despitethis,heforgesahead,
leadingtochaosanduncertainty
By Kenneth Tiven in Washington
RITICS are correct to sug-
gest that US President
Donald Trump has an ext-
remely limited vocabulary
and, in parallel, a limited
understanding of complex global issues.
However, his supporters hear this as
his plain speaking and applaud.
The immigration ban on Muslims
from seven nations and suggested
changes to the H-1B visa system are
designed specifically to appeal to the
20 percent of American voters who are
hardcore Trump supporters. Almost all
of them are not directly or indirectly
affected by any of this—it makes them
feel as though campaign promises are
being kept.
But millions in the US and abroad
“Big Bully of the World”
more jobs for Americans, and they are
a net benefit to the American economy,”
said Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration
policy analyst at Cato Institute, a liber-
tarian think tank.
Trump’s immigration proposal man-
ages to aggravate immigrants who are
lawfully in the US and worry hi-tech
managers and owners who, he per-
ceives, had supported Hillary Clinton,
his Democratic rival in the presidential
race, in the majority. It also notifies
foreign governments that he is the
biggest bully on the world scene today.
T
he point to understand is that all
of Trump’s “rapid-fire-executive-
order” operational style is a fea-
ture, not a bug, caused by inexperience.
This is the norm, not an anomaly—get
used to it. Even knowing this, opposi-
tion to the changes in H-1B will be huge
because the companies employing for-
eign workers need them as there are
no Americans with the skills and work-
place attitude to fill those jobs. If the
cost of these workers is increased, it will
be passed on to American consumers as
higher prices.
When the outrage of Americans—
Women’s March, airport demonstra-
tions against the Muslim ban, outrage
about immigration requirements—gets
out of hand and the president decides
to declare martial law or something
between that and democracy, he has
advanced his domination of American
politics through the sham act of these
executive orders.
The writer has been a journalist in
American media for more than 50
years, including stints at
The Washington Post, TV network news
with NBC, ABC and CNN and was
involved in the start up of Aaj Tak
and continues to work with
several Indian news channels
C
PUBLIC OUTRAGE Protests against the travel ban at the US consulate in Hong Kong

Lead/ Trump/Constitutional Challenge
ThoughtheUSPresident’sExecutiveOrderseemstoviolatetheconstitutionwhichsaysthat
onecannotdiscriminateonthebasisofnationalityorplaceoforigin,ithasbeendrafted
cleverlytoevadeaclashwiththestatute
By Sujit Bhar
The Best Legal Arguments
against the Ban
UNI

RESIDENT Trump’s
Executive Order on the
visa ban has triggered
outrage and chaos in
equal measure.
Specifically, it bars entry
into the US of all refugees for 120 days;
bars citizens (even non-refugees) of
Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya
and Yemen for 90 days and bars Syrian
refugees indefinitely.
Even as millions of refugees, stu-
dents, green card holders and immi-
grants with permanent residency
remain in limbo, legal and constitution-
al challenges to the ban are mounting,
apart from the spontaneous protests
that have erupted across America.
ACLU LAWSUIT
The American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU), the largest pressure group in
the US with over 7,50,000 members,
and other activist groups filed a class
action lawsuit seeking to challenge the
President's order. The temporary
restraining order was achieved. Lee
Gelernt, deputy director of ACLU’s
Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in a
statement: “This ruling preserves the
status quo and ensures that people who
have been granted permission to be in
this country are not illegally removed
off US soil.”
A US district court judge in
Brooklyn ruled to halt the enforcement
of Trump’s Executive Order (See box)
the day after he signed it. At least four
other state courts have done the same.
The essence of the New York judge’s
order on the petition by Hameed
Khalid Darweesh and Haider Sameer
Abdulkhaleq Alshawi is as follows: “IT
IS HEREBY ORDERED that the
respondents (who include Donald
Trump, President of the United
States)….are enjoined and restrained
from… removing individuals with
refugee applications approved by U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services
as part of the U.S. Refugee Admissions
Program, holders of valid immigrant
and non-immigrant visas, and other
individuals from Iraq, Syria, Iran,
Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen
legally authorised to enter the United
States.”
Against this backdrop, experts have
been looking into the credibility of the
Executive Order and trying to decide
how legally binding it could be or
whether it could even be anti-constitu-
tional. Steven Mulroy, a law professor in
constitutional law, criminal law and
election law at the University of
Memphis, has written that deciding
whether it’s legal or not is “a surprising-
ly tricky question”.
There are several aspects to this
Order that need extreme scrutiny. The
sheer ethical and humanitarian angle
apart, the first question is whether this
Order finds any footing at all in the
legal world. It originated in Trump’s
election campaign rhetoric when he
declared that he wanted to impose a
temporary ban on the entry of all
Muslims into the country.
Now that it is an Executive Order, a
closer scrutiny shows that it has been
drafted very cleverly. While it bars entry
of refugees and even visa holders from
seven Muslim countries, it does not
mention “Muslims” specifically. That is
how the Order, possibly, evades a clash
with the US constitution. Mulroy
writes: “In explaining why those seven
countries were chosen, the order itself
cites the (Barack) Obama-era law stat-
ing that persons who in recent years
have visited one of these seven terror-
ism-prone nations would not be eligible
under a ‘visa waiver’ program.” That is
AcloserscrutinyoftheExecutive
Ordershowsthatithasbeen
draftedcleverly.Whileitbars
entryofrefugeesandevenvisa
holdersfromsevenMuslim
countries,itdoesnotmention
“Muslims”specifically.
P
Immigration
Acts
The Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1952 says:
“Whenever the President finds
that the entry of any aliens or of
any class of aliens into the
United States would be detri-
mental to the interests of the
United States, he may by procla-
mation, and for such period as
he shall deem necessary, sus-
pend the entry of all aliens or any
class of aliens as immigrants or
non-immigrants, or impose on
the entry of aliens any restrictions
he may deem to be appropriate.
Whenever the Attorney General
finds that a commercial airline
has failed to comply with regula-
tions of the Attorney General
relating to requirements of air-
lines for the detection of fraudu-
lent documents used by passen-
gers traveling to the United
States (including the training of
personnel in such detection), the
Attorney General may suspend
the entry of some or all aliens
transported to the United States
by such airline.”
The Immigration Act of 1965,
which amends the 1952 Act,
says:
“Except as specifically provided
in paragraph (2) and in sections
1101(a)(27), 1151(b)(2)(A)(i),
and1153 of this title, no person
shall receive any preference or
priority or be discriminated
against in the issuance of an
immigrant visa because of the
person’s race, sex, nationality,
place of birth, or place of
residence.”

where the sleight of hand
has happened.
Mulroy adds that “the
defining characteristic here
is terrorist danger, not reli-
gion. That’s why only seven
of more than 40 majority
Muslim countries are
affected.” The Obama-era
rule, he says, isn’t based on
nationality, but rather on
whether someone of any
nationality visited the dan-
ger zone since 2011—a cri-
terion not outlawed by the
1965 statute. But taking a
leaf out an Obama action
and using it to his own ben-
efit was certainly a wily
move by Trump.
OTHER VIOLATIONS
The order arguably violates
both a federal statute and
one or more sections of the
constitution—depending on whether
the immigrant is already in the US,
according to Mulroy. He says that “in
the end, opponents’ best hope for undo-
ing the order might rest on the separa-
tion of church and state”.
Another legal expert, David Bier,
wrote in cato.org that the Immigration
Act of 1965, which replaced an earlier
1952 statute, clearly prohibits discrimi-
nation in the issuance of an immigrant
visa based on national origin. (See box).
Bier, incidentally, is an immigration
policy analyst at the Cato Institute’s
Center for Global Liberty and
Prosperity. He is an expert on visa
reform, border security, and interior
enforcement. He says that Trump may
have used the earlier executive order
out of context and, then part of the
1952 statute (8 U.S.C. 1182(f), 1952),
also out of context, and mixed them to
form a humongously explosive order.
How does the order violate the
statute? The 1965 amendment is clear
in saying: “…no person shall receive
any preference or priority or be
discriminated against in the issuance of
an immigrant visa because of the per-
son’s race, sex, nationality, place of
Lead/ Trump/Constitutional Challenge
Section 1. PPurpose.
The visa-issuance
process plays a cru-
cial role in detecting
individuals with terror-
ist ties and stopping
them from entering the
United States...
….Deteriorating condi-
tions in certain coun-
tries due to war, strife,
disaster, and civil
unrest increase the
likelihood that terror-
ists will use any
means possible to
enter the United
States…
...The United States
cannot, and should
not, admit those
who... engage in acts
of bigotry or hatred
(including “honor”
killings, other forms of
violence against
women, or the perse-
cution of those who
practice religions dif-
ferent from their
own)…
Sec. 3. Suspension
of Issuance of Visas
and Other Immigration
Benefits to Nationals
of Countries of
Particular Concern...
(c) …pursuant to sec-
tion 212(f) of the INA,
8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I
hereby proclaim that
the immigrant and
nonimmigrant entry
into the United States
of aliens from coun-
tries referred to in sec-
tion 217(a)(12) of the
INA, 8 U.S.C.
1187(a)(12), would be
detrimental to the
interests of the United
States, and I hereby
suspend entry into the
Here are selected sections from President
Trump’s Order:
TheExecutiveOrder
STOPPING TRUMP The NY
Court ruling (left) stayed the
President’s Executive Order a
day after it was signed

birth, or place of residence.”
The earlier one, though, deals with a
Presidential order, which lays out that
the President can deny entry, to “any
class of aliens if he finds” that such
entry “would be detrimental to the
interests of the United States”. Here,
Bier cuts a prevalent argument that
“this (earlier) provision allows President
Trump to simply ignore the ban on dis-
criminating based on national origin”.
He adds: “But a basic rule of statutory
construction holds that in the case of a
conflict, the statute enacted most
recently wins. In this case, that would
be the 1965 amendments banning dis-
crimination in the 1952 Act.”
LAW DISTORTED
Jonathan Turley, Constitutional
Attorney, George Washington
University, in an interview in PBS
Newshour goes deeper into the issue.
He said: “There’s no question that the
law says that you cannot discriminate
on the basis of nationality or place of
origin. And that certainly helps the
challengers. But like much else in this
debate, much of that law has been dis-
torted. It only takes you so far. First of
all, the law doesn’t apply to refugees. It
applies to immigrants. It’s used when
you have visa issues. Also, it doesn’t
cover religious discrimination. Also, in
1990, the act was amended to exclude
procedural changes as a form of dis-
crimination. And that reduces the use
of the 1965 law, I think, as a serious
challenge. And also it means that much
of that order, as they challenge, doesn’t
fall under the law.”
That confuses matters further.
Mulroy reveals another pitfall, saying
that if due process issues are not con-
sidered “the order arguably violates
both a federal statute and one or
more sections of the constitution—
depending on whether the immigrant is
already in the US”.
The recent court orders halting
enforcement of the Trump order relied
on a legal argument that it violated due
process or equal protection under the
constitution. Due process means that
people get procedural safeguards–like
advance notice, a hearing before a neu-
tral decision-maker and a chance to tell
their side of the story–before the gov-
ernment takes away their liberty.
Equal protection means the govern-
ment must treat people equally, and
can’t discriminate on the basis of race,
alien status, nationality, and other irrel-
evant factors.
Mulroy adds: “The Supreme Court
has said that even immigrants who
are not citizens or green card holders
have due process and equal protection
rights, if—and only if—they are
physically here in the US. That’s
why the recent court orders on due
process and equal protection help only
individuals who were in the States
at the time the court ruled.” That
clears the case of separation of
the church and state, too, because
reference in the constitution incorpo-
rates due process.
Clearly, the legal challenges will be
like entering a minefield. It will be a
bloody and lengthy battle, which means
that millions of unfortunate families
and individuals will be trapped in a hell
of one man’s making.
With Special reports from the US
STRATEGICAL STRIKE? Anti-travel ban protestors outside Philadelphia Airport
United States, as immi-
grants and nonimmi-
grants, of such persons
for 90 days from the date
of this order ….
(e) After the 60-day
period described in sub-
section (d) of this section
expires, the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in con-
sultation with the Secretary
of State, shall submit to the
President a list of countries
recommended for inclusion
on a Presidential proclama-
tion that would prohibit the
entry of foreign nationals…
Sec. 5. Realignment of
the U.S. Refugee
Admissions Program for
Fiscal Year 2017. (a) The
Secretary of State shall
suspend the U.S. Refugee
Admissions Program
(USRAP) for 120 days.
During the 120-day peri-
od, the Secretary of State,
in conjunction with the
Secretary of Homeland
Security and in consulta-
tion with the Director of
National Intelligence, shall
review the USRAP applica-
tion and adjudication
process to determine what
additional procedures
should be taken to ensure
that those approved for
refugee admission do not
pose a threat to the secu-
rity and welfare of the
United States….
(c) Pursuant to section
212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(f), I hereby proclaim
that the entry of nationals
of Syria as refugees is
detrimental to the interests
of the United States and
thus suspend any such
entry until such time as I
have determined that suffi-
cient changes have been
made to the USRAP to
ensure that admission…
(d) Pursuant to section
212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(f), I hereby proclaim
that the entry of more than
50,000 refugees in fiscal
year 2017 would be detri-
mental to the interests of
the United States…

Lead/ Trump/H-1B Visas
WithfearsofanExecutiveOrderhittingIndia’sSiliconValley,
insiderssaytheonlywaytosurvivethestormisto
redeployandrecast
By Imran Qureshi in Bangalore
years ago and the US economic crisis
which led to multi-skilling of the Indian
coder. Despite campaigns during US
elections urging hiring of locals, India’s
software power has become akin to
China’s manufacturing power.
MINIMUM CAP
The presidential order, if it comes
through, will raise the minimum salary
cap for H-1B visas from the present
$60,000 to $1,30,000. Insiders admit
that the costs of the Indian IT sector
will go up, impacting margins but this
will also depend on the speed with
which they can “reinvent’’ their out-
sourcing model.
There is no doubt that such an order
would hit IT companies. A CEO of a top
IT company said on condition of
Reinvent, New
Buzzword in IT Sector
M
ore than the US ban on Muslim
refugees, the Indian government
is concerned about the executive
order drafted by the Trump administration
which imposes severe restrictions on the
issue of H-1B visas. It is this non-immi-
grant visa that allows US employers to
temporarily employ foreign nationals in
“speciality occupations” including the
computer and software sectors. Any
curbs on H-1B visas severely impacts the
Indian IT industry as well as these profes-
sionals.
“The executive order, if signed, has
to be seen in conjunction with the Zoe
Lofgren Bill tabled in the House of
Representatives on January 20,” a
source in the Ministry of External Affairs
(MEA) told India Legal. “Should the bill
be passed, it will change the way H-1B
visas are issued in the long term. Indian
software professionals and companies
which have operations in the US would
be severely hit by the new law. Our con-
cern is primarily about the health of the
IT sector.”
Of the 65,000 H-1B visas issued
every year, 70 percent are cornered by
IT professionals from India. US media
reports put the number of Indians
employed in the US on H-1B visas as
anywhere between 3,00,000 to 3,50,000.
The visa allows employees to work for a
maximum period of six years and was
S President Donald
Trump has left many
Indians uneasy. News of
him likely to sign an
executive order aimed at
H-1B visas, 70 percent of
which are cornered by Indians, has
unnerved many. It also led to stocks of
India’s top IT companies such as Tata
Consulting Services, Infosys and Wipro,
plunging to 4 percent and leading to a
loss of around Rs 33,000 crore in their
market valuation.
However, in India’s Silicon Valley, a
different picture emerges of the dire
prospects of this presidential order. It
brought back memories of the chal-
lenges faced by the IT industry during
the last two decades and surmounting
them. These include the Y2K crisis 18
U
LobbyingOnlyOptionforIndia
The government has realised that Trump is in no mood to relent on
implementing his campaign promises
UNI

introduced in 1990.
According to the official, the Indian
government has already communicated
its concerns to the US administration as
confirmed by the Ministry’s spokesper-
son Vikas Swarup. The MEA is also
preparing a special dossier reiterating
and listing the anxieties of the IT industry.
India Legal has learnt that the MEA is
not taking any “aggressive posture” as it
did in March last year when it dragged
the US to the WTO over imposition of
increased visa fees for temporary work-
ers on H-1B and L-1 visas. There is a
realisation within the MEA that there is
nothing the government can do other
than lobby through diplomatic channels
and influential NRIs.The strategy seems
to be to gather support against the Bill in
the House of Representatives or covertly
back those legally challenging the legis-
lation.
As for the presidential executive
order, it has been informally conveyed to
IT companies that it would be counter-
productive to launch any offensive now.
Says an MEA source: “The issuing of
visas is the prerogative of a sovereign
country and it would be unwise for the
government to question that. Moreover,
there is one view that it would be point-
less stopping the President when he is in
no mood to relent on implementing his
campaign promises.”
However, it will be part of the govern-
ment initiative to impress on the US
authorities that Indian talent was actually
helping US businesses grow and it
would be against American interests to
impose curbs. The US may now no
longer be the favoured destination for
Indian students who look forward to
landing jobs there after completing their
studies.
Gentle persuasion seems to be the
option that will be exercised. At least
for now.
By Ajith Pillai
PRESIDENT UNPOPULAR
Protests in Washington against
Donald Trump’s policies

anonymity that raising the
minimum salary cap would be
difficult for any company. “It
is physically not possible for
any company to pay this kind
of a salary. The current model
of sending skilled profession-
als will not work. Companies
would have to recruit locally.’’
V Balakrishnan, former
CFO, Infosys, said: “Doubling
the wages will have a huge
impact on IT services. It can
be managed by reducing
onsite deployment. For
instance, currently, Indian
companies have 70 percent
work offshore and 30 onsite.
This will have to be brought down to a
ratio of 80:20 or even 90:10. Strictly
speaking, with the new digital way of
doing business, we do not require so
many people onsite. New technologies
that are being deployed are not man-
power intensive. They are innovation
intensive. Models will get re-invented
because everyone knew it was coming.
The centre of gravity will move towards
India.’’
Models will have to change to retain
growth. Rostow Ravanan, CEO of
Mindtree Consulting, said that the
industry would have to prepare for
slower growth. “The current model of
sending Indians to the US will not
work. Companies would have to recruit
locally in the US.”
Kris Lakshmikanth, CEO of Head
Hunters India, goes a step further to
say that the very nature of engagement
would change. “Companies will begin to
send only those professionals who are
very critical. They will hire more from
temporary companies (where services
are given for, say, a project) or individ-
ual contractors locally in the US. Given
the technologies available, it will be
more appropriate to deploy non-techies
who can market and deal with the busi-
ness of software.’’
Manish Sabharwal, chairman,
Teamlease Services, said: “Over a period
of time, about 10 percent of the head-
count in the US would come down to
five percent if the visa order is pushed
through. But, the advantage is that
Indian companies will develop new
competencies as they have done earlier.
It will force us to increase headcount in
India and develop processes. The wind
is at the back of the software industry.
The current number of 3.7 million IT
professionals will only grow to 7 million
in the next five years. But it is not a job
crisis from any perspective.’’
So can the US survive without
Indian IT professionals? Sandeep
Ladda, Leader-Technology and e-
Commerce, PricewaterhouseCoopers
(PwC), said: “There is a huge demand-
supply at play.’’ But the challenge, he
said, was how Indian companies deal
with issues in the immediate future if
the order goes through. “There may not
be simple solutions to negotiating pric-
ing, for instance. Or, there could be
some delay in who needs to be replaced.
They may not have the machinery to
hire people, and of course, not at
$1,30,000.’’
That is not all. Indian companies
will have to “accelerate technological
innovations and look at acquisitions in
the US,’’ said Raja Lahiri, Partner at
Mumbai-based consultancy, Grant
Thornton India.
Of course, everyone agrees that
Indian IT professionals already in the
US will not be impacted. But, just in
case that also happens, Sabharwal
quotes his 12-year-old daughter, Noor,
who said: “It is good Trump got elected.
All the Indians who made America
great will return to help build India.’’
PricedH-1BVisas
Of the 65,000 H-1B visas issued every
year in the US, 70 percent are cornered by
Indian IT professionals
The number of Indians employed in the
US on H-1B visas is between 3,00,000 to
3,50,000
A bill in the US House of Representatives
calls for the minimum salary for an H-1B
visa to be doubled to around $1,30,000 per
annum from the present $60,000
The H-1B visa allows employees to work
for a maximum period of six years
It was introduced in 1990
Export value of Indian IT services in 2016:
$110 billion
Annual growth of exports in 10 years:
16 %
Export share: US: 62%; UK: 17 %;
Central Europe: 11%; Asia-Pacific: 8%;
Others: 2 %
Sources: ICRA and MEA
Lead/ Trump/H-1B Visas
VBalakrishnan,
ex-CFO,Infosys,says
thatIndianITcompa-
niescanmanageby
reducingonsite
deployment...current-
ly,Indiancompanies
have70percentwork
offshoreand30
onsite.Thiswillhave
tobebroughtdownto
90:10.
RostowRavanan,
CEOofMindtree
Consulting,saysthat
theindustrywould
havetopreparefor
slowergrowth.The
currentmodelofsend-
ingIndianstotheUS
willnotworkand
companieswillhave
torecruitlocallyin
theUS.
KrisLakshmikanth,
CEOofHeadHunters
saysthatthenature
ofengagementwill
changeandcompa-
nieswillbegintosend
thoseprofessionals
whoareverycritical.
Theywillhiremore
fromcompaniesor
individualcontractors
locallyintheUS.
SandeepLadda,
Leader-Technology
ande-Commerce,
Pricewaterhouse
Coopers,saysthere
isahugedemand-
supplyatplay.
Butthe
challengeishow
Indiancompanies
woulddealwith
theissues.

NO HOLDS BARRED
NDIA EGALEEL
December 15, 2016 `100
www.indialegalonline.com
NI STORIES THAT COUNT
DANGEROUS
GAMBLEA comprehensive analysis and prediction
of the social, political and economic
consequences of the single most
draconian step taken by a prime
minister since the Emergency
Professor Arun Kumar
Inderjit Badhwar
Dilip Bobb
Ajith Pillai
Kalyani Shankar
Devinder Sharma
Justice Chapalgaonker
=PT)0VT)BTg)
0SSaTbb)

2Xch)BcPcT)?X])
?W^]TATb)UUXRT)TPX[)
4]R[^bTS332WT`dT=^)3PcTS)3aPf])Uâ`)
2PaS=^)BXV]PcdaT)
5â^dcbcPcX^]RWT`dT_[TPbTPSS`$
332WT`dTc^QTSaPf]X]UPe^daÛ4=2^d]XRPcX^]b?ec;cS
C^QTbT]cc^)4=2^d]XRPcX^]b?ec;cS0(BTRcâ%'6PdcP1dSSW=PVPa=830D?! (
CTabR^]SXcX^]bP__[h?[TPbT_aêXSTdb#fTTZbc^bcPach^dabdQbRaX_cX^]
SUBSCRIBE TO INDIA LEGAL GET FABULOUS DISCOUNTS
For advertising subscription queries
editor@indialegalonline.com
HTb8f^d[S[XZTc^bdQbRaXQTc^8=380;460;PVPiX]TUâcWTÛUTaX]SXRPcTSQT[^f
Don’t miss a single issue of this independent, scintillating new weekly magazine
and get special discounts for yourself and your friends
CXRZ^]T CTaHTPab =^Û8bbdTb 2êTa?aXRT` H^d_Ph` H^dbPeT` BPeX]V
HTPa $!8bbdTb $! !% !% $
!HTPab #8bbdTb # # % %!# %
NDIA EGALEEL
December 31, 2016 `100
TheGatheringStormInsiders fear the tables may be turning as Modi’s 5O-day deadline approaches
Jaya’sTroublingLegalLegacy
STORIES THARIES THAT COUNTT COUNTSTORIES THAT COUNT
SSddee
January 15, 2017 `100
STORIES THAT COUNT
NDIA
January 15,y , 2017 `100y ,
EGAL
J
EEEL
NI
INDIA
LEGAL
THE BEST OF
January 15 2017January 15 2017JJ
Y E A R - E N D S P E C I A L
2016
GAL
NDIA EGALEEL STORIES THAT COUNT
Disappearance
of Delhi’s lakes
Court architechture
from India and abroad
A petition to
Golu Devta
January23, 2017 ` 100
NI
Our country’s record of corruption is dismal and doesn’t auger well for the future.
Unless there is political will and laws to fight this scourge, governance is blighted
WAITING FOR
A CLEAN INDIA
STORIES THAT COUNTSTORIES THAT COUNT
err
ovv
RRRR
II NDIA EGALEEL
January 30, 2017 `100
Thedigitaldriveisalsoanopportunityfor
cybercriminals.Howsafeisyourmoney?
SupremeCourt
goesonoverdrive
RBIHow far has the legal and structural autonomy
of the Bank been choked by the Central Government?
H f h th l l d t t
underSiege
STORIES THAT COUNTSTORIES THAT COUNT
ra
enn
SS
NDIA EGALEEL STORIES THAT COUNT
Exciting legal
careers
Judges who shaped
legal history
Narasimha Rao
and the Babri
February6, 2017 ` 100
NI
Even as
Indians
complain about
racism abroad,
it is alive and
kicking here
too. see the
way we
colored
people treat
those who are
dark-skinned,
whether they
are our own
or from other
countries
India’s Malicious
Melanin Factor

Spotlight/ Jallikattu/SC Order
InahugerelieftotheTamilNadugovernmentanditspeople,theSupremeCourtrefusedtostaya
billpermittingthissport.Thishasactedasadampenerforanimalrightsactivists
By R Ramasubramanian in Chennai
HE Tamil Nadu gov-
ernment received a
huge relief from the
Supreme Court on
January 31 when it
refused to stay a new
act permitting
Jallikattu. The act, passed by the state
government, was challenged by a clutch
of petitions filed by the Animal Welfare
Board of India (AWBI), NGO Compa-
ssion Unlimited Plus Action and others.
A division bench headed by Justice
Deepak Misra, however, agreed to
examine both the constitutional and
T
People’s Power Wins
ulgated on January 21 by acting gover-
nor C Vidhyasa Rao after the presi-
dent’s ascent. The ordinance was neces-
sitated as the Supreme Court, in a May
7, 2014 order, completely banned
Jallikattu by stating that the sport was
inherently cruel in nature. A review
petition by the Tamil Nadu government
in this regard was also dismissed by the
Supreme Court on November 16, 2016.
After every legal avenue was
exhausted and week-long protests were
held at Marina Beach, the state govern-
ment was forced to choose this path
and amended a few sections in the
A MATTER OF
CULTURE
A Jallikattu fight
in progress
legal validity of the act and ordered no-
tices to the centre and the Tamil Nadu
government returnable in six weeks.
The Supreme Court also expressed dis-
pleasure over the massive protests in
Tamil Nadu against the ban and remin-
ded the state government that its pri-
mary duty is to maintain law and order
and ensure rule of law.
ORDINANCE REPLACED
Amidst these protests, the assembly on
January 23 had passed a bill paving way
for conducting Jallikattu. The bill
replaced an ordinance which was prom-
Jallikattu.in/Balakumar Somu

Karnataka: Chief Minister
Siddaramaiah has stated that the gov-
ernment is in favour of hosting Kambala
and is ready to issue an ordinance to
legalise it. Union Law Minister Ravi
Shankar Prasad has also said that the
Union government will extend the same
support to Karnataka as it did to Tamil
Nadu on its Jallikattu ordinance
Punjab: Organisers of Kila Raipur
Games, also known as Rural Olympics in
this state, have moved the apex court to
revisit its 2014 order banning bullock cart
races. Former race participants insist
concerns over the safety of bulls
are misplaced
Maharashtra: As the state goes to cru-
cial zila parishad and panchayat samiti
elections next month, the Shiv Sena has
demanded an ordinance to circumvent
the 2014 ban on bullock cart races
Assam: The annual bulbul fight, which
is organised in January, was banned in
2016. However, the chief priest of
Hayagrib-Madhab Temple in Hajo, a
pilgrimage centre, has said that like
Jallikattu, this fight is part of the state’s
heritage. Activists claim the birds are
trapped and fed a combination of herbs
and intoxicants to fight
Andhra Pradesh: Kodipandayam
(cockfight) was banned by the High
Court of Judicature at Hyderabad to stop
cruelty to birds and the gambling associ-
ated with it. Roosters with sharp blades
on their feet fight to death before a
crowd. This year, the police filed more
than 1,500 cases of illegal cockfights.
BJP leader KR Krishnam Raju has
moved the SC to contest the ban.
After Jallikattu was held in various parts of Tamil Nadu on January 22, other
states have demanded resumption of their traditional sports too. These are:
OtherStatesFollowSuit
nal perspective, what emerges is that
every species has an inherent right to
live and shall be protected by law, sub-
ject to the exception provided out of
necessity. Animal has also honor and
dignity which cannot be arbitrarily
deprived of.... Jallikattu is an unneces-
sary suffering as against killing an ani-
mal for meat which is an essential act.”
Suman asks that if this was the clarity of
the earlier Supreme Court order, how
could this ruling be overturned by a new
law? He said the 2014 judgment estab-
lished beyond doubt that bulls were sub-
jected to torture in Jallikattu.
Another jurist said that there were
strong reasons to believe that the pres-
ent SC bench may have a different take
on the issue of culture. “Interestingly, in
the 2014 judgment, the SC said while
dismissing an argument that Jallikattu
is a cultural event: ‘Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 is a welfare
Act and it was a settled position in law
that if there is a clash between an acti-
vity connected with culture and a
welfare Act, it is the latter which shall
prevail.’ But now the SC says it will
examine the issue. Jallikattu lovers are
now better placed.”
For now, the Tamil Nadu government
can breathe easy.
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act
1960. The bill was passed unanimously
in the assembly.
Usually an amendment to a central
law can be brought in only through the
parliamentary route. However, if the
subject of the legislation is on the con-
current list, then the state government
too has jurisdiction over it. As the sub-
ject of prevention of cruelty to animals
is the 17th item on the concurrent list,
the state government has powers to
amend it and this is precisely what the
Tamil Nadu government has done.
SHIFTING STAND
Legal observers say that there is a sub-
tle but perceptible shift in the Supreme
Court’s attitude towards Jallikattu and
it became visible after it refused to stay
the new Jallikattu bill. “Yes, to me it
seems like that there is a shift. Even in
the last hearing on November 16, 2016,
when the apex court dismissed a review
petition, the same bench observed that
the country cannot import Roman
Gladiator type of sports in this modern
age and suggested that if anyone wants
to play the game of bull-taming they
can do it in computer games,” Yashwant
Sundararajan, an advocate in the
Madras High Court told India Legal.
He added: “The bench also asked the
animal rights activists the ‘basis’ of
their challenge to the new law. It also
pointed out that the declared object of
the new legislation is the preservation
of a particular breed of bull and they
call Jallikattu a culture. This has to be
debated and the bench added that it
would examine if Jallikattu can be
allowed on cultural grounds.”
However, animal rights activists are
saddened by the development. P
Suman, an activist, quotes the following
passage from the May 7, 2014, judg-
ment: “International community should
hang their head in shame, for not rec-
ognizing their (animals) rights all these
ages, a species which served the
humanity from the time of Adam and
Eve….When we look at the rights of ani-
mals from the national and internatio-
Sincethesubjectof
preventionofcrueltyto
animalsisthe17thitemon
theconcurrentlist,the
stategovernmenthaspowers
toamendit.Andthisiswhat
TamilNadudid.

Spotlight/ Jallikattu/A People’s Movement
TheprotestsatMarina
Beachwerenotjustabout
thebanonthissport.It
wasareassertionofTamil
rightsandaplatformfor
releasingpent-upanguish
andfrustrationoverother
issuesaswell
By Ajith Pillai
HOSE not aware of the
complex socio-cultural
dimensions of Tamil
identity politics may find
it difficult to compre-
hend how the protests
against the Jallikattu ban could have
metamorphosed so fast into a mass
movement of sorts. Of course, it did not
sustain long enough for it to have a last-
ing impact, but it sent out a strong and
larger message to the central and state
governments that the genuine concerns
of the common citizenry cannot be dis-
missed or ignored. It was, as some com-
mentators put it, the voice of the people
T
Tamizh Pride
and Prejudice
that resonated from the Marina in
Chennai and other cities in the state.
It is now apparent that the protests
were not just about Jallikattu. In fact,
many who thronged Marina Beach may
perhaps never have witnessed a bull-
taming event or undergone the pilgrim-
age to Alanganallur in south Tamil
Nadu, famous for hosting the sport
every year during Pongal, the harvest
festival. The apex court order banning
the sport merely provided the trigger
and the platform for raising several
other concerns and for pent-up public
anguish and frustration to be expressed.
DIVERSE ISSUES
The protesters were not activists of
political parties. They were students,
professionals, retired folk…and they
seemed angry. They were agitated about
the adverse drought situation and farm-
ers’ distress, unemployment, demoneti-
sation, the state being repeatedly slight-
ed by Delhi, atrocities against Lankan
Tamils and what have you. Some even
A QUESTION
OF HERITAGE?
Students and
youth staging a
demonstration at
Marina Beach,
Chennai,
demanding
lifting of the ban
on Jallikattu
UNI

culture and tradition? Aren’t we being
taken for granted?”
VIGOROUS CAMPAIGN
Equating the ban on Jallikattu as an
affront to Tamizh identity and pride was
not initially a spontaneous construct,
although the protests were an impulsive
reflex. In fact, a vigorous campaign was
first launched in the local press and soc-
ial media against the court order which
had the blessings of the economically
and politically powerful Thevar commu-
nity who own the pedigree Kangayam
bulls and organises the events.
An SOS was sent out that Jallikattu
had to be protected to preserve Tamil
pride. The Supreme Court ban would
have to be opposed, not by employing
legal process but through mass protests.
The line between Thevar self-esteem
and Tamil honour soon blurred with
popular movie stars like Kamal Hassan
and Rajnikanth opposing the ban. Very
soon, it became politically correct to be
with the protestors than be left defend-
ing animal rights activists who were
quickly labelled as “American agents”.
More than anything else, the protests
reminded old-timers of the 1965 anti-
Hindi agitations and rekindled interest
in the Dravida movement. For others, it
was a reassertion that non-violent
protests still remain a powerful tool in
the hands of the people.
expressed anguish and insecurity fol-
lowing the death of Jayalalitha. Their
take: there was no powerful leader left
to stand up to the centre and fight for
the rights and honour of Tamils so the
people had no choice but to come out
on the streets.
Jallikattu acted as a lightning rod
that attracted various shades of disaf-
fection and dissent. Actor Kamal
Hassan articulated the general mood
that prevailed on the Marina: “There is
an accusation against students that they
protested only for Jallikattu. This move-
ment is not just about Jallikattu.
Jallikattu is only a symbol of a much
larger discontent. This agitation came
after decades of various kinds of anger.”
However, not all demands of the
protestors can be endorsed, including
the call for Tamil Nadu to secede
from the Indian Union. The protest
and its success in revoking the
Jallikattu ban, some fear, might revive
Tamil chauvinism and the dangerous
and divisive identity politics with its
inherent anti-North India texture. The
prevailing public sentiment also runs
the risk of being politically exploited by
vested politicians.
INFLICTING CRUELTY
But how could banning of a sport
unleash so much frustration and anger?
Jallikattu, to say the least, inflicts cruel-
ty on an animal, in this case the bull,
which is allegedly teased and provoked
by being prodded with sticks and
scythes and force-fed alcohol before
being released into a crowd. A team of
participants are then supposed to sub-
due the enraged animal and bring it to
the ground.
That Jallikattu is cruel cannot be
denied whatever its supporters may say
about the veneration in rural Tamil
Nadu of the Kangayam breed of the bull
used in the sport. Neither is it an inno-
cent Eru (bull) thazhuvuthal (hugging)
festival as it is projected to be. There is
overwhelming photographic and video
evidence which proves the contrary.
Earlier, bans imposed on the sport
did not provoke the scale of public out-
cry seen this time. So, what was differ-
ent now? Many believe that the
Jallikattu ban came too close to
Karnataka refusing to release Cauvery
waters to Tamil Nadu despite an apex
court order. This agitated many and the
big question on the minds of many a
protestor was this: “What did the centre
or the Supreme Court do when
Karnataka refused our drought-hit
farmers water? So, why should we
Tamizhs take it lying down when it
comes to Jallikattu? Why should we
allow anybody to mess around with our
RAGING DISCONTENT
(Clockwise from above left) Buses torched
in protest against the SC’s verdict on the
Cauvery water issue, in Bengaluru; actors
Kamal Hassan and Rajnikanth
UNI

Spotlight/ Jallikattu/ Opinion
HE Supreme Court had
last month deferred its
order on Jallikattu, fol-
lowing a furore from the
people of Tamil Nadu.
This postponement fol-
lowed an application for a stay of its
own order, which had quashed a notifi-
cation of the Union government allow-
ing Jallikattu on certain conditions.
Meanwhile, the governor of Tamil
Nadu promulgated an ordinance per-
mitting this sport on January 22. While
various places in the state celebrated it,
some demanded a permanent solution
by an act of the legislature.
The Tamil Nadu legislature prompt-
ly enacted a law as demanded. The state
machinery had not shown such prompt-
ness in discouraging the demonstra-
tions in favour of Jallikattu. When the
new law was again challenged, the
Supreme Court reminded Tamil Nadu
government of its duty to maintain law
and order. The Court also conveyed to
the government through its lawyers:
Whatistobedonewhenacourtorderisviolated
bypeopleandastatethatisbentonpleasingthe
electorate?Theconstitutionandindependence
ofthejudiciaryshouldberespected
By Justice Narendra Chapalgaonkar
ask people to be restrained and accept
the verdict even if it is against the pop-
ular wish.
Courts cannot be forced to decide
any matter in a particular way. Morchas
are often taken out as a way of protest
to urge courts to convict or acquit
someone. This is certainly not a happy
situation for the judge. If we have
to work under the constitution, we
must respect the independence of
the judiciary.
No doubt the media has many times
unearthed crimes and improper deeds
of people in high offices. But at times, it
too enthusiastically oversteps and
expresses opinions about the merits of a
pending case. Biographers of some
eminent judges of yesteryears have
revealed that these legal luminaries
refrained from reading the newspapers
so as not to be influenced by them in a
case. But in today’s world, one cannot
escape from the cacophony of the elec-
tronic media.
Following the way shown in the
T
INVIOLABLE ASSET
(Clockwise from top) An exhi-
bition of paintings by in
“When the Supreme Court, the final
arbiter of the Constitution, is seized of
the matter; there should be complete
obeisance and compliance.” Sanctity of
the independence and orders of the
Court should always be protected by the
state power. It is not a discretionary or
optional function. Avoidance would be
dereliction of conductional duty.
CALL FOR RESTRAINT
As to whether Jallikattu amounts
to cruelty or unethical treatment of ani-
mals is, no doubt, an important ques-
tion. But this episode also raises more
important questions concerning judicial
independence. When a matter is pend-
ing before a court, can demonstrations
and morchas be justifiable ways of
expressing an opinion? There are
lawful ways to appear before court and
submit one’s point of view. Courts
should be permitted to decide matters
in a cool atmosphere and without exter-
nal influence.
Politicians should be courageous to
A Lonely
Battle
Photos:UNI

Jallikattu case, some other states are
likely to demand a restoration of simi-
lar sports there which were banned
by courts.
Cart race and Nag puja (snake wor-
ship) were objected to by courts on the
ground of cruelty to the animals and
reptiles. If any sport is scheduled on a
particular day of the religious
calendar, it acquires a cultural status. If
any religious practice, including a sport,
is objected to on the ground of public
safety and cruelty to human beings or
animals, there is a public outcry that
this is interference in culture or reli-
gion. Few see merit in the objection.
SOCIAL REFORMS
A state run by the representatives of
people is naturally shy to take action
and the courts have to step in. There is
a long history of social reforms in India
which were opposed by the majority of
vocal people. When people do not
accept a reform, the law remains on the
statute book as a dead word. Despite
the Child Marriage Restraint Act being
in operation for more than 80 years,
such marriages are common in some
parts of the country. Similarly, human
pyramids in the Dahi-Handi sport in
Maharashtra have left dozens crippled
for life. Even then, it is difficult to
regulate it.
When a crowd commits an act
which violates directions of a court,
what is to be done? No court order can
be enforced unless the state power sup-
ports it. Governments normally avoid
earning the displeasure of their elec-
torate. If reforms touching the religious
or cultural life of the society are desired,
public education prior to such reform
by law is necessary. In the 19th century,
social leaders performed the unpleasant
duty of bringing in reforms. In the
recent past, leaders appeased voters,
not educated them. Courts, acting in
defence of the constitution, were left to
fight a lonely battle.
Now the Supreme Court is again
seized of the matter. It has refused an
interim stay to the new law, rightly so,
since there is a presumption about the
validity of a statute. The Court will have
to decide its constitutionality. Parties
will have to wait and respect the verdict
when it comes.
If any order of the court is defied
and people act openly against it, it is
disrespect to the constitution. It natu-
rally saddens everyone who loves con-
stitutional governance. One may differ
with the propriety of a court’s order,
but to justify the disobedience is more
injurious.
The writer is a former judge of
Bombay High Court
Politiciansshouldbe
courageousenoughtoask
peopletoberestrained
andacceptthecourt’s
verdictevenifitisagainstthe
popularwish.
NOT A SPORTY MATTER
(Left) Protestors at Marina Beach, Chennai,
expressing their anger at the court order on
Jallikattu; (above) Dahi-Handi sport during
Janmasthtami celebrations in Mumbai

Interview/ Dr Chintan Chandrachud
“I Am Highly Sceptical of
Some of the Recent Judgments
of the Supreme Court”

INDIA LEGAL: Stories that count Edition: 13 February 2017

INDIA LEGAL: Stories that count Edition: 13 February 2017

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to INDIA LEGAL: Stories that count Edition: 13 February 2017

Similar to INDIA LEGAL: Stories that count Edition: 13 February 2017 (20)

More from ENC

More from ENC (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

INDIA LEGAL: Stories that count Edition: 13 February 2017