India's awards lose honorable luster
By Sudha Ramachandran
BANGALORE - India's highest civilian awards have kicked up a storm. Among those
who have been honored with the Padma award this year is a man who ran a militia
and has cases of attempted murder and extortion against him, and a United
States-based lobbyist with a dubious financial record.
The Bharat Ratna (Jewel of India) is India's highest civilian honor. It was not
conferred on anyone this year. Then come the Padma awards - the Padma Vibhushan
is the highest, followed by the Padma Bhushan and the Padma Shri. While the
Padma Vibhushan is awarded for "exceptional and distinguished service", the
Padma Bhushan is given for "distinguished service of a high order" and the
Padma Shri for "distinguished service" in various
fields including the arts, sports, education, industry, public affairs and so
on.
Several recipients of these honors richly deserve it. They are people who have
not only excelled in their field but whose personal integrity is above
question.
But there is little "distinguished" in the achievements of some of the awardees
this year. Take 61-year-old Ghulam Mohammad Mir, alias Muma Kana, a resident of
Jammu and Kashmir awarded the Padma Shri. Reports in the media allege that he
was a terrorist who then surrendered and helped the Indian security forces
combat militancy in the Kashmir Valley. Home Ministry sources deny Mir was ever
a terrorist and describe him as an "Indian nationalist" who helped security
forces fight terrorism in Kashmir.
What they do not say is that Mir ran a "pro-government militia", which, while
helping the forces identify and eliminate militants, also struck terror in the
hearts of civilians.
In the early 1990s, hundreds of militants who were caught or surrendered to the
armed forces, subsequently helped the latter in counter-insurgency operations.
These pro-government militants or Ikhwanis as they were called played an
important role in breaking the back of the militancy and turning the tide in
favor of the government. They were provided with weapons, which they used not
only against militants but also civilians. They became notorious for
intimidating civilians, extorting money, even killing them to settle personal
scores.
Mir is reported to have run a militia of surrendered militants. He admits to
having "helped eliminate and arrest 5,000 militants and separatists". He has a
complaint filed against him in a case of attempted murder. He is accused of
extortion, illegally occupying land and engaging in timber smuggling. Police
describe him as a man with "below average reputation in the area".
And he has been honored now with the Padma Shri.
As shocking as an award for Mir is the defense of the decision by senior
officials. By honoring Mir the state has announced that defending the Indian
state is all that is important, never mind the means, even if it violate human
rights and undermines the very founding principles of this democracy.
Then there is Sant Singh Chatwal, a New York-based Indian-American hotelier,
who was an important fundraiser for the Clintons. He faced five cases of
financial fraud and cheating banks in India and even spent time in jail in
1997. He has been awarded the Padma Bhushan. The government has defended its
decision to honor Chatwal on the ground that he has promoted India's interests
in the US and that the cases against him were closed. But established procedure
was not followed in investigating the cases. Few are convinced that a
businessman with a shady reputation, even if he boosted India-US relations,
deserves the honor of a Padma Bhushan.
Another seemingly undeserving Padma awardee this year is Bollywood actor Saif
Ali Khan. Khan is a moderately successful actor. His work is hardly
outstanding. What is more, Khan has cases pending against him in court for
killing black buck, a protected species of antelope, 10 years ago. His father,
a former Indian cricket captain, was a fugitive from the law for a week when he
too was caught killing black buck. His mother, also a Bollywood actor, heads
the Censor Board. It is believed that the family's proximity to the ruling
Congress party won Khan his award.
Also on this year's list of Padma awardees are several industrialists, very
successful at their business perhaps, but offering little contribution to
society. Several doctors figure in the list, some known for having apparently
"revolutionized health care in India". What they did achieve is setting up
super-specialty hospitals that only the super rich can afford. Several of these
hospitals are known for engaging in unethical practices.
More often than not, doctors from the private corporate sector have been
selected for Padmas rather than those engaged in primary health care for
millions in rural India. A surgeon who conducted the bypass surgery on Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh last year has received the Padma Vibhushan this year.
In 2001, a New York-based surgeon who operated on the knees of the then prime
minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee received the Padma Bhushan. Operating on prime
ministers seems a sure way of being thanked with a Padma award.
Controversy has always clouded the Bharat Ratna and the Padma awards. Last
year, the controversy was over awarding the Padma Shri to Hashmat Ullah Khan
from Jammu and Kashmir. Khan was given the Padma Shri for his role in reviving
the weaving of Kanni shawls, known for their intricate designs. It turned out
later that Khan was no master weaver, only a shawl exporter.
While a screening committee decides the Padma awards, the Bharat Ratna is the
prerogative of the premier. The process and criteria of selection is shrouded
in secrecy. Aspiring awardees are known to engage in hectic lobbying.
Interestingly, prime ministers have not shied away from honoring themselves
with the Bharat Ratna. Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi were still in office
when they received this award.
Sometimes, one can receive India's highest civilian awards by accident.
That was the case with a “Ms Lazarus”. The then-president Rajendra Prasad
nominated Ms Lazarus for the Padma Shri. Officials informed Ms Lazarus, who was
an educator. The Ms Lazarus the President had recommended was a nurse, who had
apparently taken care of him. That year two Ms Lazaruses figured in the Padma
list.
Much drama accompanies the run-up to and following the announcement of the
awards. In 2008, politicians engaged in undignified lobbying in public for the
Bharat Ratna. Nobody got it that year.
Once the awards are announced, there are angry outbursts from those who failed
to make it to the list. Some of them are indeed far more deserving than those
who are given the award.
Several awardees have turned down the Padma awards. Some do so because a rival
in their profession was honored with a higher award. Others do not want to
accept an award from the state. "Accepting awards from the government you are
writing about is equivalent to an external auditor taking a gift from a
company," said P Sainath, a noted journalist who turned down the award last
year. Some have returned the award after receiving it. These include noted
writer Khushwant Singh who returned his Padma Bhushan after the anti-Sikh riots
of 1984.
The controversy over this year's awardees has prompted two senior journalists,
Vir Sanghvi and Pritish Nandy, to file a Right to Information application to
find out how Chatwal's name figured on the list.
Many are now calling for the scrapping of the Padma awards. They have become
associated in public perception with favoritism and incompetence. In colonial
times and under royal rule, titles were conferred on those who were loyal.
Today the Padma awards are distributed to those who have friends in positions
of power.
Sudha Ramachandran is an independent journalist/researcher based in
Bangalore. (Copyright 2010 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights
reserved. Please contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
