Human Rights is for all the people, at all the places and all the times

The recent news about Britain being criticized for making laws that is violative of human rights is very significant. Any operative mechanism to prevent the forces that are threat to the society and other values has to conform to basic standards of Human Rights. Otherwise the line between the terrorists and State gets blurred. Democracy is the best understanding we have that provides immense opportunities and freedom to all. Democracy provides individuals and groups to channelise and express their needs and aspirations. But this very democracy, which gave us the freedom, is also very fragile and can be turned into a threat. Because of its inclusive nature there is always a possibility that a group or individuals can easily sneak in and misuse this freedom. It is therefore very important to understand: What needed to be accepted and rejected by society. The benchmark for which can only be Human Rights. Any violation or threat to human rights in any form need not be accepted or tolerated. Quite clearly that applies to any definitions of “way of life”. Also there is nothing like our or their “way of life” as also presuming that our “way of life” is better than others so everyone should fall in line is a ridiculous understanding. To start with there is nothing like our or their “way of life”. Every “way of life” is overlapping since we are humans not set of different species or aliens whatever may be the social context. A common factor that can define “way of life” is adherence to respect for humans (and surroundings). This is a universal understanding. Any tradition or custom (which is classified as “culture”) has to necessarily adhere to this. Clearly the customs or traditions (in most case the capsulation or interpretation of dominant groups world view) that promotes regressive worldview, subjugates, objectify and coerce people, restricts their freedom should not be tolerated. These shouldn’t be mistaken for diversity. Diversities can only be different views and expressions of beauty. This is “multiculturalism”. There can never be a space for ugliness in this understanding of ‘culture”. What is done in Dark Ages cannot be carried into present age as Traditions. That will be an insult on people who sacrificed and strived to create a just society. This shouldn’t be allowed. There is no space for such “customs”(call it “culture”) in civilized society otherwise we need to redefine what is “civilized”, what is “human rights”. If these are tolerated in the name of Democracy then the society will have to pay a heavy price since ugliness can only breed and thrive on ugliness. Let’s not misuse the term “tolerance”. Tolerating ugliness in any form is not Tolerance, it is intolerance to Beauty. It is therefore important to NOT tolerate Human Rights abuses. It is important to NOT tolerate the intolerance to Democratic (necessarily civilized) values. Accepting these "culture" is not Tolerance, it is not being tolerant to Human Rights. Accepting these is not being responsible as a citizen of civilized society as also not respecting democratic values. Accepting these will be accepting tyrants who abuse people using religion (culture). Accepting these will be closing our eyes and covering our ears to screams of silence. So how many people who are now crying foul over State’s Human Rights abuses in Britain have raised their voice against Human Rights abuses that is being transported (and thriving thanks to imbecile understanding of “multiculturalism”) to the country for last so many decades now. They definitely will have to come clear. We at the “developing” world are appalled. This consternation is giving way to anger. Sometimes one wonders is this complacent “developed” world’s “traditional burden” of saving the world?. Tolerating and institutionalizing degrading practices and abuses will definitely sedate our senses into accepting it as some “exquisite” culture. It is not. And it will never be. Will they accept the heinous practice of Sati, which was practiced in this part of the world nearly a century back and classified as unique “exquisite” “way of life”. The dominant group during those times even threatened not to interfere in their “culture”. This is how uncouth people try to sneak in- the route of “way of life” and with a population to support their version of truth they also sneak into Parliament (and so casteism begin to look like some exotic culture). Once they are in, it’s difficult to dislodge them since they use all the opportunities provided by Democracy as a means to their dangerous ends. Democracy really is very weak from inside. It is crumbles quite easily by a threat from within. It is therefore important to plug the point of entry. And to severely deal with extra constitutional power centers and their authoritarian hold over the common people and individuals. It sometimes requires some ingenuity of local community to deal with such a threat. At least in India, sensibilities of majority in putting faith in democracy has weakened the hold of extra constitutional powers in their inability to “use” culture and tradition to consolidate their medieval worldview and has been definitive in preventing the institutionalizing of these "cultural" miseries. The rule of law is upheld albeit many of the regressive “way of life” still exist thanks to the indolence of elite or more appropriately, they allowed it to thrive since they stand to gain. Politicians play for the vote bank; the remorse is even the judiciary sometimes side with these exquisitiveness. “Cultural traditions” like sati is prevented since it amounts to murder what about practices that dehumanize and degrade humans?. There is horrible terror in some of these “peaceful” living in many of the societies which come to us as “ exquisite cultures”. For some it could be a source of get together for wine-dine-poem reading and other pervasive “hilarity” and back thumping photo sessions. But for many it’s a daily misery they have to live through. The misery that is transferred to next generation as hereditary legacy. Do we therefore associate heinousness only to killing like say for Dowry to point an example from India? The horror of peace has to be identified and in this “modern” world ignoring these is a collective shame. It’s a tragedy with no face. Its tragedy we see every day staring at us.
Quite obviously when abuses are accepted then the outcome will be emboldening of fundamentalist groups, whose undemocratic authoritarianism is now being accepted as part of “multiculturalism". This will lead to rise in reactionary groups within the “majority” people against the “minority” and so the cycle starts and then the “alienation” and so on. In such scenario the fundamentalists in “majority” group will also force traditional religion sanctioned abuses as “culture” and be accepted and their will be many to justify these even in the mainstream. The silent “majority” will then slowly but surely start to tolerate the Human Right abuses by the State on what they see as threat to their “way of life”. Hate crime will increase. Human right activists will become a joke. Democracy may very well be held hostage to the reactions in the societies, the paranoia of people will be capitalized by new sets of challenges. The cultures strongly influenced by religious concept of unknown “evil” force- the Satan, will be used by scoundrels to enter and consolidate their power. Local and immediate problem of people (like basic needs of food, shelter, infrastructure..) as also long term threats (like environmental degradations, note how Bush and cronies are trying to scuttle Kyoto) will be sidelined for spending the might on defeating the “evil”. At least Americans are prepared for this by some dubious neo con church leaders as also the Hollywood movies…mammoth insects,spiders, snakes,bats,humans,visible-invisible….multiplying cell masses,aliens,swarms of god-knows-what bend on destroying nice people(read Americans)….one wonders why UFO sighting happens only in America??!!. Enter Bush, enter dements like Robertson, enter all the warmongers, enter muck as culture…Democracy is thus successfully breached and so frustrated people will become cynical of democracy and then those who have “entered” will become new age icons, marketeers will jump in to cash the opportunity and so there will be more abuses and abuse becomes a common thing then it becomes culture then we will have another sets of saviors to protect this “exquisite” culture and so on…This breach therefore has to be stopped as early as possible before it’s too late. One sometimes wonders whether it’s already late. The other day I read a column by Mr. Hattersley in Guardian Newspaper. He writes, “….it is uncivilized to demand” anyone to abandon their “way of life”. Very true we completely agree with that. It is very crucial and civilized to demand what is right and severely condemn what is wrong. The wrong and right, the understanding of which we share, the understanding of which makes us civilized. The wrong and right we learn as we develop from centuries of barbarism into democratic values. The wrong and right in context to Human Rights and understandings that are universal. Therefore it is uncivilised and uncouth to tolerate a “way of life” which gives misery to people.
In parts of the world where democracy has not taken roots (not the kind Bush moron talks of, Nicaragua or south Africa could be a better example on initiating democracy) necessarily due to despotic few, actively supported by foreign powers who stand to gain from any system propagated, the regressive“way of life” is coerced on large section of population for ages so much so that they start to consider it as normal . This interpretation they carry abroad as “culture” and the society they leave behind gets capsulated in homes and ghettos. When we look back into the history of societies we learn that it is few enlightened people (thinkers) who helped in creating a system that is just and gives freedom to all. The thoughts that have provided individuals in societies to explore to their maximum. This is Development. This is culture. Respect for humans (extended to environment) being the lynchpin. Freedom for Expression and Equality….being just few of the rights people enjoy. Mr. Hattersley writes further “……at the beginning of the row over Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses, I told worshippers at the Birmingham Central mosque that they should be calm about their faith as most Christian are about theirs. A man …told me “you may not care about your religion, but that is no reason why we should not care about ours..”. Mr. Hattersley exclaims “..his logic was irrefutable…”. Note this, the “care for religion” here is supporting the killing of a writer. Also know this the Italian and Japanese translator of this book were killed. So “taking care” for religion is by “killing” others. So that means I can do anything(read anything) to “take care of my religion”(as I see it) Small query: Is it lawful?!!. Well if it is not they should be arrested. There are democratic ways of dealing with problems or grouse anyone has. Is this “way of life”?!!. The “irrefutable” fact here is that people like Hattersley are scoundrels and should be arrested for inciting violence. They don’t respect life and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to enjoy the benefits of civilised society, obviously they will feel "alienated". These people justify violence, which is seen as “different view” by sensational prone media and thus help them make a living from “writing columns” and other perks associated with intellectualism. Obviously the view from such world can nothing but ignorant. Ignorant in its condescending or patronizing nature, as may be the case. Ignorant in its complete lack of understanding of existential realities of people. Ignorance which no book nor any sophistication can remove. They also like to see the whole world out there as some kind of monolithic structure ready to be chiseled to their need. The people in it easily classifiable for whatever purpose. This kind of intellectual excursion immensely help them to prosper after all intellectualism is a cottage industry with a decent ROI !!. They really don’t have to loose anything. Its always a win-win game. More controversy means more public space, more columns to write, more talk shows, seminars to attend and that is how one becomes a “respectable figure” in society. These elites don’t realize nor do they have to ever experience the kind of misery the inhuman practices they endorse can create to common people, who are somehow trying to eke out a living. Such scum these. They use democracy (free society) to justify undemocratic norms (off course as exquisite culture). People like Hattersley might find it shocking that we can only “assimilate” (or integrate or whatever, English can really keep lots of people busy) what is beautiful. His idea of "taking care" is unacceptable. In more civilised societies such “alienated” people are send to reforming centers or put away in prison as social threat. Mr. Hattersley also mentions that it is this “…assault on islam-its culture as well as theology –that has alienated some muslim youth…”. One wonders where is this “assault on islam” in Britain in last few decades?!. There are more assault on other religion (as also on the weak within the religion) in many "islamic" states ("others" are kafir here), point me one church or temple in Saudi- the same nation that is giving huge amount of money to spread its kind of "religion and culture" to poorer part of the world (not that i am an admirer of building religious structures, there are other pressing problems) . There seem to be an attempt to channelise individual grievances as assault on a religion. If people from other Religions(or sect or group) are going to “take care” their religion then we will have serious problems or maybe they are not intolerant enough. So we have to appreciate intolerance and tolerate all muck that come as “culture”. In these pit holes germinate worms like Anjoum Choudhary (whose views I chance to hear in BBC Hard Talk as also CNN). He did his schooling in Britain so one can refer him as homegrown. His grievance and off course the reason for “alienation” is that “the sharia-as he interprets it- should be applied in whole world particularly America”. God knows (or probably Hattersley boy knows better) how is he going to “take care” this. And pray what is our role?. Is he alienated or is this fellow cause of alienation. What is the reason that such people are produced in Britain wherein there are many who have utilised the immense possibilities provided by the society to contribute to their best in the devlopment . Do such people have space in civilised societies??. If yes then violation of human rights by State is but expected. As mentioned earlier democracy is quite weak from inside. The muck (“religious” as also marketeer’s culture) has sneaked in. The lines of decency is blurred, dynamics of social dealing shifts. And when ideas of human rights are blurred disaster is breeding in the backyard.

Post script: The other day I was surfing TV channels and stopped on plachimada cokepepsi report this was followed by an interview with Zora teacher (as she is popularly referred to as) who migrated from iran some two decades back to settle in kerala and is working as a teacher in a school near thiruvananthapuram. Her views I thought were very significant. Women in kerala have no much freedom she says. Which is so very true when I was there I use to wonder where the women have vanished after sunset. There definitely is a sense of insecurity not only felt by women but also an average keralaite despite the so-called vibrant democracy, higher HDI and so on, feels very unsafe more unsafe than any crowded sometime lawless metros. So how do we define Freedom??. Do we need patronizing attitude towards “weaker” section so as to “allow” them to move freely and then refer to it as a better system?

Please condole the death of nearly 1000 Iraqis in a stampede today. The report says they were “shias”. Recently there has been a rise in sectarian violence in Iraq (as also by invaders). This is definitely the work of outsiders. People in this country have been living peacefully for centuries, offcourse democratic rights were curtailed but that struggle is different from what we see in TV these days. Innocent people are being massacred. Thanks to Bush moron the country has become rallying point for fundamentalists from all over the world. I feel very sorry for the people here. Bush is definitly responsible for this misery. He should have the guts to at least meet Ms. Cindy Sheehan.What a shame.

Post Script

Wherein a competent judge is expected to have a control over his/her emotions and analyse the situation in an objective manner (offcourse without social-environmental context it will be cruel joke) Lahotiji is found wanting. He is using his incompetence that is inability to control his emotions, to blackmail the Government. He is threatening the “Basic structure” of the constitution by demanding to “wind up the court”. This is a serious transgression. Nowhere in the Constitution of India there is a provision for the Chief Justice to demand the winding up of the Court. He is insulting the revered institution of Judiciary. If he cannot have a control over his tongue he must quit. His “incapacity and misbehavior” is proved beyond doubt. Such incompetence shouldn’t be tolerated. Supreme Court is not Lahotiji’s personal fiefdom. He should quit.
Further the Reservation of position of Chairperson of National Human Rights Commission for retired Chief Justice of Supreme Court need be reconsidered ( as also the Reservations in Commissions for retired judges). Competence in matter of Human Rights is not confined to retired Judges. This “exquisite” tradition need be stopped. Let us “wind up” this “hilarity”.

PS. The issue of providing Quota in "non-aided" colleges has nothing to do with highly contentious unfortunately divisive issue of Reservation. Some people in media are playing mischief by interchanging these words and trying to confuse the people, so as to polarise the discussion. The issue of Reservation is completely different and can be debated separately. Lets be cautious...

My God meonlylord please quit

Melord the Chief Justice of Supreme Court is extending his jurisdiction and intruding into the legislature and the dignity of the Parliament incidentally of world's largest democracy by choosing words randomly and out of context (in this case “confrontation”) and “severely” reprimanding the Government of India. The Legislature is supreme in a Democracy; its significance increases further when Market friendly, people unfriendly Courts are muzzling the aspirations of people. The elected legislature represented by Ministers forming the Government of India has the exclusive Right (and is bound by its responsibilty) to protect the voice of the people (particularly the poor and impoverished who came in millions to cast their vote and elect this parliament) as also the ideals of the nation builders encapsulated in the Constitution. Here one is not supporting that the rule of majority is always right nor am I supporting caste or religion based quota, income would be a better option but accept it: caste and class does overlap to a large extend. This is India honey!!. There is also nothing like “non-aided” colleges. They enjoy lots of benefit and subsidies , they therefore have to follow the laws of the land on social obligations. Please if it is making loss don’t enter into this “business”. Market friendly Court has allocated 15% quota for NRI, that is if you have money you can buy competence!!. Very strange!!(how about having an NRI quota in judiciary?!!. I gather judiciary is also short of cash!!). The SC also suggests that this money be spend by the “non aided” colleges on poor. How thoughtful. How cute. Thanks for patronizing but in this land where laws are rarely implemented, even the court verdict nobody gives a damn, take the example of Delhi HC verdict on giving seats to poor children in public schools which is enjoying all kinds subsidies by the government for many decades, not a single school has followed the verdict. I am sure SC “suggestions” will be specially implemented. Good joke. It is not that the SC is not aware of these but then who says judges don’t have sense of humor that too seven bench one!!. Market friendly humor. Too much to lick. Examples of Oxford and other beautiful world by Maketeers in TV discussions are only part of this elaborate “hilarity”.
The Supreme Court Chief justice Mr. Lalhoti today morning expresses his “very anger” on Government of India and apart from other words of wisdom, says “…. then wind up the Court and do whatever you want…”. Ouch !!. Now that sounds like a filmy dialogue: Jalaa kar rakh kar doonga or better still ma chamunda devi ki kasam namo nishan mitta doonga. Meonlylord is suggested not to watch too many dishum dishum movies. It can be infective!!.
Mr. Lahoti is nobody to give such a statement, which is nothing but an insult to Parliament, to Indian democracy, to one billion people who have put faith into it for more than six decades. This is contempt of judiciary. To ask to “wind up the Court” is exceeding his authority. He should learn to control his anger (deep breathing might help!!). He should also understand that as an individual he is bit too insignificant (melord might believe otherwise and feel next to God, off course). It is the Democracy of India via the Constitution (Chapter 4 Article 124-147 to be precise) has given him the power and privileges that comes with being a Chief Justice. Therefore it was not ordained to him, as he assumes. It is not meant to be misused. To call for the “..winding up of Court..” is a case of misuse of this Power and grossly undermining the Constitution of India, in effect to ideals it represents. This is an insult on people of India. He should therefore quit if he feels incompetent (believe me it could be true as also about many of his colleagues particularly in lower courts). There is a case for Parliament to remove him. Article 124(5) clearly provides for in case of “..proof of misbehaviour or incapacity…” both these conditions are fulfilled here.
There is also an immediate need to reform Judiciary. It is quite obviously, not representative enough nor does it has any understanding of realities of this nation and its people. It is clear from many of its verdicts in recent times. Take for instance the Kerala HC, in case of striking students, the Court even takes a suo moto case from the newspaper report and asks the police to prevent the scoundrels that is students (the word used by his honour was in malayalam "themaddi", "scoundrel" is a rough translation, in malayalam the import is much worse). They didn't question the brutal assault by police, which also was widely reported. Incidently the Judges who passed the verdict also wanted the media not report their name!!!. What you say to that!!. The hidden judgement!. These and many other verdicts are inflictions on civilized thoughts and values we idealise, some are even violation of human rights. These are definitely testing our collective patience.
We as sensible people respect our Constitution and Democratic Rights enshrined, we enjoy and cherish unlike many other people around the world who are still fighting for it. We realize the significance and are indebted to people who sacrificed their life to give us such a freedom. Therefore such moronish reprehensible statement “…of wind up the Court..” is shocking and highly irresponsible. Lahoti ji should quit. He is degrading the revered institution. Quit melord quit we dont have dearth competent people. Such incompetence is not and should not be tolerated. Actually Market friendly incompetence is supposed to be competence. So incompetence can be competence. Or is it competence incompetence. Geeeez I am confused. Help……..

We are hollow men

We are stuffed men

Leaning together

Head piece filled with straw. Alas!

........................

The eyes are not here

There are no eyes here

In this valley of dying stars

In this hollow valley

This broken jaw of our lost kingdoms

........................

The stuffed men

( A penny for the Old men; The Hollow men, T.S.Eliot)

So is this contempt?. I dare you.

Do we celebrate this Independence?.

Please very strongly protest the lathi charge on anti-coke activists on their march against exploitative coca cola water guzzling unit at plachimada, kerala on the Independence day, yesterday. Six people were injured and many arrested. The people in this village as also others have been peacefully protesting since 2002 against the exploitation of drinking water and environment-livelihood threat by this MNC. The luxury product meant for indulgents in metros. This untenable product has created untold misery to already marginalised in all the place where the coke-pepsi plant is located. It is a request to support the collective spirit for justice. It is a tribute to the staunch belief in non-violent action of impoverished people in a brutal and vulgar world of coke-pepsi. The belief we appreciate and need be institutionalised otherwise violence is a plausible option. In an increasingly frustrating, diminishing democratic support and mounting livelihood disparities and add to it insolence of “trustees of nation” violence sometimes is the only option. So we are actually precariously perched unless off course needed corrective actions are taken and democracy wins. But the recent happenings are ominous of things to come. The appalling verdict by Supreme Court paving way for crass commercialisation of Education is shocking. This is hitting at the roots of ideals on which this Nation was created, capsulated in the Constitution and very ironically meant to be protected by the Judiciary. Education is a social responsibility of the State and is NOT considered as a business venture. Yes privatization in certain manner on certain front is important and private involvement helps better the situation but this is not that case and that too in a country were disparities are acute. Yes professionalism is important but not at the expense of responsibility and expectations from the State to protect and safeguard social justice. This verdict is an attempt to buy competence. Or more accurately an attempt to deny job opportunity to the competent but poor. Now some apologist might say companies will not recruit incompetent people, so the Market will definitely take a corrective action. That’s hogwash. Firstly most of the jobs now available are service sector oriented so the competence is bit too superficial. It’s more about fitting in where class affiliated norms are sometimes the deciding factor. Further basic intelligence can always be chiseled into required competence. This verdict is denying that access. This verdict therefore is a death knell to egalitarian aspirations of the Nation builders, as also inhuman to the conditions and realities we live in. So now I guess we can have more air-conditioned English speaking run ultrasound clinics mushrooming in posh colonies and help the sophisticates to do normal things. The verdict is an assault on the foundation of the Nation for which scores of people have (and still are) sacrificing their life. This Nation is not for auction. Yes marketeers are important, so is a shit-pot. But shit-spot has a place that is toilet and not the drawing room. It seems that there is an attempt to beautify drawing rooms!!!. Since globalisation (nobody is against it unless offcourse one reduce it to product exchange only) all arguments, all system seems to be collapsing into Marketeer’s esteemed worldview. This is dangerous and will have serious repercussions in future. Nobody is denying that economic growth does fuel overall “development” but the socio-environmental sustainability is an important deciding factor. There is a thin line separating profit motive and exploitation. It is important that this thin line is not blurred. Transaction is not the only the way to define relations in society otherwise what is the “profit” in helping out people in need the latest case being that of some unselfish acts during mumbai flooding. Lets understand this: Marketeers are expendable and can be bought. Money is the all-encompassing worldview here. The importance given to Marketeers and their worldview in Media is not entirely unexpected. Media is here to make profit and marketeers help them. So media in most case is no different from Ramjibhai ki atta chakhi ki dukkan (udhar mang ke sharminda na kare!!)!!! It really is cynical, not denying that some spectacular people are still involved to prevail sanity. So all is not lost. The marketeer’s worldview is strongly resisted. This is not the characteristic, which defined people who participated in Freedom struggle or the ideals they wished to universalise. This is not the characteristic, which defined people who are doing some incredible work away from the media glare or more appropriately not tailored for the media event, so as to later claim rewards (this is what define small timers, they squat themselves next to power centers, waiting for falling crumbs. Success is a camera and glib easy confidence away these days!!. Ayn Rand’s capsulation of capitalism (essentially happiness) as extension of “selfish motive” is a gospel truth here). These are not what defines lets say Aruna Roy or Baba Amte to give few example from vast number of people we are aware of, that is if we make an effort to know and take time to appreciate rather than ogle at TV. Incidentally both of these people I had the opportunity to meet. Ms Aruna Roy when there was a jan sunwai on Education which also was one of the first public appearances of Amartiya Sen after he was awarded Nobel prize. Baba Amte I met on the way to Narmada valley. The contribution of these people to name few is significant to define Development, which should and need be understood by all. The Supreme Court verdict is therefore vulgar, mischievous and product of incompetent mind, out of touch with ground reality. This is a serious setback to civilised society. These lines of incredible Confucius:"If a State is governed by the principles of Reason, poverty and misery are subject of shame; If the State is not governed by the principles of Reason, riches and honor are subjects of shame”. Confucius is my all time favourite!!. The issue though is more than Reason (albeit we are dealing with unreasonable pompous people), it is about compassion and social justice. Being a significant branch that defines Democracy, Judiciary is bound by its commitments to society and therefore cannot shy away from this responsibility. This, it has is amply evident. The UPA government is fervently appealed to pass a legislation to bypass this verdict for the interest of majority of people in this country. This is also an immediate need to reform judiciary.

Another regretable Judge in the News is Nanavati mamu, who is so “competent” that he is omnipresent!!!. You name the Commission he there!!. It’s about licking the power honey!!. The more the better. The better the more!!. His report on Sikh massacre is hogwash, an attempt to remain in the good books of politicians. You never know where the next lick is!. There was another mamu who enquired into Sikh massacre and goes by the name Ranganath Mishra who quite hilariously accepted to help investigate into “allegation” of riots and not “nature” of riots. What riots?!. Who when where?. Never heard that?. He later was rewarded with a seat in the Parliament!!. One scoundrel who was involved in the killing: Tytler goon comes in TV (Aaj Tak with Prabhu chawala, who I thought did a pretty good job as an interviewer) was in his seditious best…prabhuji ….hoji…sunoji maje ki bath…Yah scoundrel it all a fun. He also has grouse against Ms. Shiela Dixit, Chief Minister of Delhi for being an “outsider”. Obviously at one point Sikhs were also outsiders. So outsiders should be kicked out or killed. Ms. Shiela Dixit incidentally is one of the highly efficient and admired CMs in India. Coming back to the main subject, the mamus have been not very competent, it is amply proved.
Essentially an enquiry of this nature is not entirely a judicio-legal enquiry subject. There are many issues involved. This narrow perspective of the Commission is one of the reasons why it has failed consistently. A judge need necessarily be one of the members of the Enquiry Commission, represented by various experts (like NCW, NCM), activists in different fields. It has to be multidimensional approach and essentially Open public enquiry. The people need to know how the investigation is proceeding. Ditto like the TRC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa) to give a success example. The Government should stop this farce of Commissions, essentially to feed some retired judges at the expense of public money. If you take the statistics of effectiveness of the Commissions set in last 20-30 years it will be a revelation. The judges are bit too incompetent to handle enquiry into events whose magnitude are much beyond their small anglicized world of hard bound law books arranged admirably on the rack. This will NOT do. There is a need to De construct the existing understanding on Commissions.

A case for Mother Tongue initiated bilingualism in early Education: Depalanovich Chomsky

For the last few days I have been listening (and reading) about the need to introduce English language in primary school (that is from first standard). The debate seems to be quite intense particularly in Karnataka state. As one goes through it one realizes that the issue is very serious and need to be taken in all its gravity. However at the outset let me make one thing very clear I am participating into this on the assumption of a standardized education system and not confined to government or municipality schools only otherwise I will be falling into the elitist discussion that is doing the round.

So lets start with the basics!!. As basic as trying to understand what is Language since I gather an overall understanding of the issue is very important. A general definition characterizes language as a system of arbitrary vocal symbols by means of which members of a society interact with one another. Language is not a cultural artifact that we learn the way we learn to tell time or how the Government works. Instead, it is a distinct piece of the biological makeup of our brains. Language is a complex, specialized skill, which develops in the child spontaneously, without conscious effort or formal instruction, is deployed without awareness of its underlying logic. According to the Behaviorist view, most clearly articulated by B. F. Skinner in Verbal Behavior, language learning is mainly a question of imitation, reward and habit formation. Children repeat the sounds they hear around them and are encouraged to do so by positive reinforcement. However, the work of Noam Chomsky in the late 1950s and early 1960s caused a reappraisal. Chomsky called attention to two fundamental facts about language. First, virtually every sentence that a person utters or understands is a brand-new combination of words, appearing for the first time in the history of the universe. Therefore a language cannot be a repertoire of responses; the brain must contain a recipe or program that can build an unlimited set of sentences out of a finite list of words. That program may be called a mental grammar (not to be confused with pedagogical or stylistic "grammars," which are just guides to the etiquette of written prose). Chomsky takes an innatist view of language acquisition, which maintains that we are biologically programmed to acquire a language, by means of some sort of language processing mechanism in the brain, variously referred to as the language acquisition device (LAD) or black box. All that is necessary is exposure to language. This in itself is sufficient to trigger the process of language acquisition through the generation of a set of rules for the production of acceptable sentences. So, rather than copying and memorising the speech of its parents and siblings, the child uses this input to develop rules for the generation of an infinite number of grammatically acceptable sentences. Chomsky and other linguists developed theories of the mental grammars underlying people's knowledge of particular languages and of the Universal Grammar underlying the particular grammars. So a distinction is made between Behaviourist learning and Chomsky’s innate acquisition of language. In a simple sense Learning is defined as a deliberate, conscious attempt to master a language. Acquisition is defined as a less deliberate, subconscious process of mastering a language, and is often associated with the manner in which children acquire their native or first language. In babies' brains, the experience of language itself actually molds the brain into what it will become. Otherwise further development of the necessary neural networks for linguistic competence is seriously impeded.

Having understood the significance of laguage in early development of brain lets now understand the significance of Mother tongue in learning. Mother tongue is a language shaped by shared genetic inheritance. A mother tongue is a language learnt before any other language has been learnt and is a person’s early language experience. The mother-tongue is the language that is naturally learnt by members of a community and employed by them as the first medium of vocalized communication. It could be seen as the language of a native community or group of people with common ancestory. Studies have shown beyond doubt that the experiences in the mother-tongue promote the cognitive abilities of the children. As the child interacts with his parents and immediate relations, he comes into proper understanding and grasping of his mother-tongue. He also learns through the naming of various objects around him and the immediate environment because he has acquired a proficiency in his mother-tongue, built up a vocabulary covering a lot of the objects of sense expression and his daily activities (Adetunberu and Oluwafoise 1992). According to Abiri (1976), native language plays a significant role in the psychosocial development of the individuals. By implication, the mother-tongue provides a more rewarding learning environment, as school learning and experience become a continuation of home experience, a condition that guarantees cognitive equilibrium. So it is quite clear that education in mother tongue is quite a significant understanding. Mohanlal (2001) is of the view that an important goal of education is to impart the universally recognized moral values to the individual and integrate these with the ethnic specific eco-centric values, cultural norms, and worldview. There is nothing as dangerous and damaging as giving people education that is not relevant to their lives or functional in their understanding and domination of their environment. While Fafunwa (1976) sees this as educating people out of their environment, Rodney (1972) views it as education for underdevelopment. Now these are quite strong views that one tends to agree in all its totality. This understanding is indisputable. However there is a problem and that is the theory has to face the fast changing contemporary reality. The reality of technological advancement, its advantages and means to acquire it needs to be taken into consideration. Denying such opportunities could itself be “education for underdevelopment” at least in its modernistic sense. “Development” I use here as opportunities to access technology for personal and societal sustainable benefit. English is now widely accepted as language of technology and commerce. And in the globalised world its significance cannot be denied. But before that we need to put certain things in perspective. It is important to understand why (and how) did English become an international language? English people colonized and exploited part of the world and its people (so did French). Not because “English” was smart. Any language is as beautiful as other. The Renaissance (essentially against the tyranny of church) fuelling industrial revolution was product of Age of Reason. Science then gave the advantage but the benefits were accrued by barbarians in majority who used religion to organize and discipline (moral). Nazis were the zenith. These barbarians are still very active whether its attack on Iraq or as recent as yesterdays attack in London. They use modern gadgets but are still in that pre-reason archaic mindset. They brutalized the world then, they brutalize it now, with the same impunity. This historical perspective is important to show that English speaking as it spread in this part of the world had a brutal past. Mother tongues were derogatorily referred to as(and still is in mainstream media-talk of self respect!!) Vernacular, apparently to show that indigenous languages did not have the attributes of modern languages. The local languages were in fact regarded as inferior to that of the colonial rulers. The emphasis on English Language in the school system did not only serve the needs of the colonial administrators, foreign traders, and missionaries, it projected the assumed superiority of the culture of the colonial masters. On the other hand, the lack of attention paid to indigenous languages in the curriculum did not only undermine the socio-cultural context of curriculum, it was a deliberate attempt to dismantle the existing socio-cultural infrastructure and heritage which are fundamental to human existence. This is an important benchmark for any discussion on English language. However as we move on we will make an effort to forget this past. Not denying that this is one major reason for resentment against English language and is being capitalized by the revivalists. Having understood and accepted the significance of English in “development” we now need to focus our attention to the political motive of Government in determining their linguist policies. As French author Louis-Jean Calvet puts it bluntly in his book La Guerre des langues et les politiques linguistiques (Hachette, 1999). “The war of languages is always part of a wider war,”. Governments are not always motivated by an impartial hope for empowerment for all. For example, if the ruling party wishes to ensure that a particular ethnic group does not get access to the power structure, it may wish to privilege a particular language and then deny access to that language through the schools(the reason for ethnic tensions in Sri Lanka, in particular). An apparently sound focus on the mother tongue as medium of education does not in itself provide a guarantee of enlightened education’. Because provision of mother-tongue education has been linked with denial of access to the privileged English. There is an overwhelming feeling that this is intended to keep the underprivileged at an inferior position. Many Dalit leaders have compared this denial of English language in government primary school, which is frequented by underprivileged that is generally dalits and other weaker sections, as reminiscent of denial of Sanskrit in ancient times. One cannot deny that whatever development we have achieved the situation is erringly similar. One aim of education is to empower all ethno-linguistic groups equally, but the empowerment of individuals should have primacy over the development of an individual’s mother tongue, and even over the preservation of a language (Antheas Fraser Gupta, 1985) . If language maintenance gets in the way of empowerment, then the individual’s language rights may be being maintained but the educational and social rights are not. An emphasis on the preservation of ancestral languages may be linked to a wish to give freedom to groups to express themselves, but also is linked (Crowley, 1996) to ideologies of purity, which need to be engaged with. Mother tongue education could further diminish access to power structures by underprivileged groups. If the privileged language is the language of the dominant group, then the skills of members of other groups in that language may suffer if they have mother-tongue primary education only, and they will also suffer from diminished personal contact with members of the privileged group.

Another problem in mother tongue education is the question of what is being referred to as mother tongue?. It is interesting to note here that there are around 1,650 mother tongues in India (1961 census) this is not including what is referred to as “unclassifiable” by linguists!!!. This raises the questions about the status of standardised languages. If the standard language (or dialect, if you prefer) is rarely spoken at home, can anyone really be said to be a native speaker of it? This still leaves a relatively small proportion of the population having the standard version as their "mother-tongue", and once the dialect has been standardised, the local dialect may drift away from the standard version. Linguistic varieties having different status. In some cases the written high status language is partly archaic and based on features, which are considered part of an ancient cultural heritage. Most people usually regard spoken languages as worth less, as being less correct and less efficient than written language. What is characteristic of spoken language is often regarded as deviations from "proper language", and proper usage is again that which is prescribed by written standards. Very strong "accents" (highly "deviant" geographical and/or social dialects. (e.g. Bereiter & Engelmann 1966), argued quite strongly that many colloquial dialects, e.g. Black English, were somehow deficient and lacking in grammatical structure, and that they reflected an unsystematic thinking, thus impeding further cognitive and cultural development on the part of the "linguistically deprived" children and youths. Of course, these preconceptions should by now be disproved (e.g. Labov's (1969) forceful arguments), but they provided yet another example of the common attitudes towards colloquial dialects as compared with standard (written) languages. The belief that formal elaboration, which is the ideal of certain written genres, would in itself lead to a more correct and communicatively more forceful language is of course a myth, but it is a myth which is very deeply rooted in our entire culture. That everyday spoken language is plain and poor, deficient, illogical, incoherent and ungrammatical is something, which has been part and parcel of school education for millennia. Children should for this reason receive a correct and decent language at school. For many centuries it was thought that this activity of cultivating and refining the pupil's language was naturally related to the civilizing correction of his crude and evil morals. School education served to emphasize the social barriers between the very few, who had access to the written language, and the vast majority of the people, those who were living in their everyday oral culture. A fact that spoken language belongs to cultural contexts of use, which are different from those of written language. The also brings us to the issue of insistence on “correct english” by the elite in our society(very much reflected in some of the Entrance Exams for best colleges). Lets make very clear we are NOT here to help English grow but to use English to serve our purpose. This with due apologies to colonial leftovers. Language for literary purpose is a different understanding and need be dealt separately. It is however not practical to expect that every language group, however small, can be provided for. Further in cosmopolitan cities (where product of a mixed marriages are high), most residents expect to speak several languages in the course of daily life. So in such scenario when a child is first admitted to school, who decides what that child’s mother tongue is? It is common to find mother tongue determined for a child by patrilineal ancestry. There doesn’t seem to be any educational justification for educating children in an ancestral language which they do not speak. If education in the mother tongue is promoted, there will be extensive separation of ethnic groups in the education system. . If a country wishes to promote social cohesiveness, it may be felt that this is best achieved by giving a common education to the children, which facilitates mixing of ethnic groups. This however may not be entirely true in our country since we are not in a strict sense “cosmopolitan”, except maybe few elites in cities. And our ethnic difference is not as divergent as that is seen in say London or New York. However one is very concerned about certain samaj schools and madrasas, which could be sectarian and pose a danger in future. Further should (expected) social cohesion have precedence over initial mental and emotional development of child(as we see in the example of studies in Nigeria, later on)?. There are also other reasons why mother tongue education is frowned upon. The most convincing of these is that there is a danger that students will come to rely on translation and mother tongue explanation when trying to acquire new language when they need to be more actively involved in working things out for themselves. This is certainly a real danger, but it isn’t sufficient in itself to ban all use of the mother tongue. There are two compelling reasons for making judicious use of the students’ own language. First, students (particularly adult students) bring with them to the classroom a lot of knowledge about (their own) language, and it would be foolish not to use this at times to make direct comparisons between what they already know and what they are learning. The second reason is affective. Especially with low-level students, exclusive use of English can be both tiring and alienating. While students may not be physically punished for speaking their mother tongue in the school (as they previously were in many countries), a strong message is communicated to them that if they want to be accepted by the teacher and the society, they have to renounce any allegiance to their home language and culture. The challenge for educators and policy-makers is to shape the evolution of national identity in such a way that the rights of all citizens (including school children) are respected, and the cultural, linguistic, and economic resources of the nation are maximized. To squander the linguistic resources of the nation by discouraging children from developing their mother tongues is quite simply unintelligent from the point of view of national self-interest and also represents a violation of the rights of the child (see Skutnabb-Kangas, 2000, for a comprehensive review of international policies and practices relating to linguistic human rights). By the time children become adolescents, the linguistic gap between parents and children has become an emotional chasm. Pupils frequently become alienated from the cultures of both home and school with predictable results. To reject a child's language in the school is to reject the child. When the message, implicit or explicit, communicated to children in the school is "Leave your language and culture at the schoolhouse door", children also leave a central part of who they are-their identities-at the schoolhouse door. When they feel this rejection, they are much less likely to participate actively and confidently in classroom instruction. In their contacts with the outside world, they recognize the implicit low status they and their parents are accorded, probably because of their low economic status. This sociolinguistic situation seems to contribute to a psychological setback for these children. This setback has certain consequences for their personality development. They become least interested in going to school. They develop non-cooperative behavior and attitude and become less communicative. Because there is no proper parental and social guidance to overcome such consequences, children often enrolled in the school system much after the normal age for school admission. Parents seem to wait until their children are capable of handling the school on their own in some sense. Dropout rate is much higher because of total incompatibility between the students and the use of language in the textbooks, language used by the teachers in the school, and the contents of the text that are often not eco-friendly. In other words, the contents of the textbooks do not have any relationship to the children. Child studies have shown that children's first experiences in school are traumatic largely because they do not see the school experiences as a continuation of home experiences (Iyamu and Omozuwa, 2004). The early introduction of foreign language contributes to learning difficulties and failure, which in turn could account for dropout as reported by Mohanlal (2001) in India and Abiri (1976) and Fafunwa (1975) in Nigeria. Early education in mother-tongue could help to mitigate these problems. The home support for the education of the child in the form of parents being able to supervise and direct their children's home study. Thus, they have alignment of perception on early education in mother-tongue as a way of making it possible for illiterate parents to be of educational assistance to the children at home. Their perceptions were also the same on mother-tongue education being effective in helping the child to understand his environment. To begin their school life in the mother tongue will make the break between home and school as small as possible. (UNESCO, 1951: 691). The ultimate rationale for the promotion of mother-tongue education is the empowerment of underprivileged groups

So what we gather from the study so far is

a) Learning in mother tongue has cognitive and emotional value.

b) English is an important language to access technology, information and employment opportunities.

So what is the way out from what seems to be mutually exclusive situations?

The answer is Bilingualism. Which is nothing new to Indians. Census studies have shown India to be vibrantly bilingual if not multilingual. Bilingualism is definitely one step forward. However the studies are categorical on the importance of bilingual children's mother tongue for their overall personal and educational development. The level of development of children's mother tongue is a strong predictor of their second language development. Children who come to school with a solid foundation in their mother tongue develop stronger literacy abilities in the school language. Also bilingualism has positive effects on children's linguistic and educational development. When children continue to develop their abilities in two or more languages throughout their primary school years, they gain a deeper understanding of language and how to use it effectively. They have more practice in processing language, especially when they develop literacy in both, and they are able to compare and contrast the ways in which their two languages organize reality. More than 150 research studies conducted during the past 35 years strongly support what Goethe, the German philosopher, once said: The person who knows only one language does not truly know that language. The research suggests that bilingual children may also develop more flexibility in their thinking as a result of processing information through two different languages. Transfer across languages can be two-way: when the mother tongue is promoted in school (e.g. in a bilingual education program), the concepts, language, and literacy skills that children are learning in the majority language can transfer to the home language. In short, both languages nurture each other when the educational environment permits children access to both languages. Bilingual children perform better in school when the school effectively teaches the mother tongue and, where appropriate, develops literacy in that language. By contrast, when children are encouraged to reject their mother tongue and, consequently, its development stagnates, their personal and conceptual foundation for learning is undermined. When this is not done, a gap between the education system and the society results, such as that which characterized colonial education in almost all the colonies in Africa. This gap is often a result of using a language other than the language of the society as the medium of instruction. The curriculum, syllabus, teaching methodology and content of the lessons not suited to the genius of the society contribute to this gap that could lead to learning difficulty and future poor performance/achievement.

Wherever bilingualism has evolved in India, because of given socio-political and demographic reasons, it always has remained vibrant. People acquire bilingualism in these contexts from their early childhood. They do not have to go to school to learn to use two or more languages. However, bilingualism relating to English is a different category altogether. It is a government-sponsored, institutional arrangement. It is driven by formal necessities, not an acquisition in early childhood. There is another problem that is very pertinent and need to be tackled and that is if the structural differences between the mother tongue and target language (that is English) were too great this would make learning more difficult, as there would be more linguistic habits to change or unlearn. However, while it seems reasonable to accept that a learner’s mother tongue will influence the learning of a second language, particularly when the language is as variant as kannada (tamil or sindhi) and english. It is unlikely that this is simply a matter of unlearning habits. As discussed earlier Chomsky’s notion of the language acquisition device has given way to the idea of a universal grammar. The claim is that all human beings are born with a universal grammar, which they use to process and analyse languages. A universal grammar consists of two parts: a set of principles and a number of parameters. The principles are said to be common to all languages. The parameters represent the different ways in which these common principles are expressed in different languages. It therefore follows that a learner’s interlanguage will be based on the general principles that apply to all languages. The degree of receptivity to comprehensible input will depend on the state of the affective filter. This refers to the emotional state of the learner at the time of exposure to comprehensible input. According to Affective filter hypothesis (Kristen), learners raise this imaginary protective filter when they are stressed, frustrated, embarrassed, anxious or bored. The reason why initiation in mother tongue is so very important is also to reiterate the fact that learning need be enjoyable and make child comfortable, stress free and not alienated. Further the syntax of a language is acquired rapidly and effortlessly by young children, but not by adults; hence there is a "critical period" for language acquisition. Children possess their greatest ability to absorb and retain languages until the ages of 12 to 13, when their brains start losing plasticity. Further during this critical period children are less self-conscious than adults and not as afraid of getting things wrong. This results in greater verbalisation, and thus children become fluent in a language much sooner than adults. A large body of research suggests that shortly after birth, infants can discriminate among a large number of sounds that occur in many languages, but they gradually develop a preference for the sounds of their mother tongue. Research have also shown that exposure to more than one language from very early childhood is definitely a benefit. It is best to start language training early. Research has shown that for children to learn how to use mathematics to organize, understand, compare, and interpret their experiences, Mathematics, Science and Technology (MST) must be connected to their lives. Such connections help students to make sense of mathematics and view it as relevant. This reiterates a very significant fact that if you want to learn a foreign language, you need to have good command of your mother tongue. A study also suggests that in order to bring about an improvement in the learning and teaching of mathematics and science, language learning should be investigated as a learning model...relationship between language and thought has to be explored. Language builds on a cognitive base, and concepts are regarded as prerequisites for subsequent language skills. The argument is that the way mother tongue is acquired provides a way to successful learning. Furthermore, language and MST share a number of common features amongst which is the complexity of their structures. These include features like the relationship between a) language and learning and b) language and thought. . The architecture of cognition, or at least that part of it that is peculiar to our species, lies within language, and human cognition has the properties it does have precisely because it came out of language, and not vice versa...language-thought relationship are important to the thesis in this work because it emphasizes the point that language is not to be seen only as a means of communication. There is more to it than that. It is a well-demonstrated fact that language is a tool for conveying knowledge and information... that language ‘is a mirror of the mind’ (Chomsky).... only through an understanding of language will we ever understand ourselves.... cognitive system is the basis for all mental behaviours. ...It becomes clear in this paradigm, that language is seen as part of what the mind has to work on, and not as constituting the mind. There exists a close relationship between language and learning in general. The relationship springs from the point that learning is closely tied to thought, thinking, the mind or cognition. This relationship goes deeper than the idea that language is used in learning. Brown (1994:84), reveals that what we do as we learn language is what we do and have to do when we learn other bodies of knowledge. It therefore becomes impossible to separate language from the process of learning. The connection between language and learning cannot be reduced to a functional level. Language is not a habit structure. It is innovative. This is one the many Chomskyan notions that have uncovered a lot of understanding in linguistics as a science...when a child learns a language he does not imitate, but create rules (formulas) which further structures .The child does not imitate what others produce, but generates own formations. Language is not imitative but creative and generative. Children generate rules that they use to generate intelligible utterances. This process is similar to what happens in knowledge formation in the pure sciences. As in language learning, what is available and known is experimented with in order to produce that which is novel. It has already been argued that language acquisition is generative. Children do have the capacity to grasp more than two languages what is needed is “necessary exposure to language”(chomsky) and not “poverty of stimulus”. So exposure to languages in “critical period” is very important. English therefore need to be introduced as a supportive language from first standard itself, considering significance of this language in day to day technological dealing which has seeped into our life.

When a child produces ungrammatical utterances informed users (of the language) know that it is only a matter of time before they will be corrected. The child cannot be judged as having ‘failed’ in learning his or her mother tongue. The same attitude should prevail towards alternative conceptions in the learning of MST. Learners should not be written off as it usually happens. A lot of learners drop out of science classes because they were never led successfully to develop principles that will lead to the creation of authentic knowledge, a process that allows for the formation of alternative conceptions and the remedying thereof. From language acquisition studies it is established that all normal children succeed in learning their mother tongue if given the necessary exposure, it is all-inclusive. The learning of MST does not have to be as exclusive as it has been made. In learning MST knowledge gaps that breed from insufficient exposure to scientific principles should be closed in a similar way as in language learning. The constructs of generativity, time, alternative rule formation and the remedy thereof, the formation of knowledge gaps and how they have to be filled are what should form a basis for the understanding of teaching and learning in MST. These considerations should inform any endeavour to provide for learning and teaching that is meant to achieve the highest level. They should also be used to analyse all the activities geared at such endeavours. The point on the place of mother tongue in the schooling process is best clarified by Fafunwa (1977) when he wrote about the Educational Anachronism in Africa. According to him, a child learns best in his mother-tongue. Yet, for most of Africa, formal education is offered in a language that is foreign to the child. This is unlike the practice in most other leading countries of the World such as England, France, Italy, Germany, India (to a great extent), China, Japan and so on where the child goes through his primary, secondary and university education in his mother-tongue. Unfortunately, we have continued to emphasise the use of a foreign language (English) as a major medium of instruction in our schools, perhaps as part of our colonial inheritance. It is the informed view of scholars including Fafunwa (1975) and Bamgbose (1977) that foreign language constitutes barrier to effective teaching and learning. This is an important case study to restrain people to blindly jump into the bandwagon of “English only”. Rootedness of culture is an important aspect of development. Early education in the mother-tongue expands the verbal facility and cognitive ream of the child. Early introduction of a foreign language distorts the accumulated vocal and verbal facility, thought process and cognitive equilibrium. Studies have shown that this accounts for a good proportion of primary school dropouts in Nigeria (Fafunwa, 1975) and India (Mohanlal 2001). An alarming rate of school drop out (even mid-day meal scheme may not help in the long run) in India these studies need be taken seriously. This example of Africa is very important for India. In most countries of Africa formal primary education is conducted in foreign language(English and French) but that has not helped to create a sound educational foundation (particularly in science and technology) in most of these countries nor do we see much presence of people from these region in international scene. Now one could blame this for corruption , nepotism, poverty….but these are present in India too. This is an important comparison since you will find that in India those who had their primary education in mother tongue have also done exceedingly well. If one student is able to get into lets say, IIT or PMT out of 500 it is a great achievement considering the limited opportunities under which the child did his/her schooling. And you can see the number is much much more than 1:500. Where I studied the ratio was as high as 60-70% and many I considered as above average if not brilliant(It was fun to do calculations in mother tongue or to translate difficult theories into Malayalam). This points out to the significance of mother tongue and the innate abilities it carried. If given sufficient primary education infrastructure, relevant and mother tongue oriented empathetic syllabus and teachers, these kids may over run the English-replaced-mother tongue kids (unless offcourse the Entrance is skewed to elitist needs). Even now despite all these hindrances India’s core competence seems to coming from this base, whether it is IT or Mr. Manmohan Singh or Mr. Abdul Kalam. This also puts up a question mark on the competence of most of those who are “convent” educated- the colonial left over, and the policies they pursued. It is quite clear from India’s presence in international scene and its contributions except maybe in circle where glib talk, proper accent and easy confidence carry the show. Even they are also proverbial frog in the well since world out there is not shallow they know the bluff. It is for no reason why they are referred to as “developed” nations. Also the outstanding development of countries like Japan and Germany from rubble is also to be noted. What sort of primary education did they follow?. Or is our Education System meant to produce battalions of slaves on market demand??. These things are not to be decided (or enforced on )by underprivileged. The state has role to play in protecting its linguistic heritage not for chauvinistic reason at the expense of poor but as a holistic approach to education applicable to all.

The constitution of India (via Article 350A) makes State liable to provide instructions in mother tongue at primary stage (one may add, with bilingual intentions). Mother tongue education and multilingualism are increasingly accepted around the world and speaking one’s own language is more and more a right. International Mother Language Day, proclaimed in 1999 by UNESCO and marked on 21 February each year, is one example. Encouraging education in the mother tongue, alongside bilingual or multilingual education, is one of the principles set out by UNESCO in a new position paper. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights (1993) provides more generally in section I, paragraph 19 that the ‘persons belonging to minorities have the right… to use their own language in private and in public, freely and without interference or any form of discrimination’. For the same reason punishing or any form of degrading attitude towards a child speaking mother tongue in school(particularly those run by missionaries) should be taken as a criminal offense and the guilty “teachers” severely dealt. An important goal of education is to impart the universally recognized moral values to the individual and integrate these with the ethnic-specific eco-centric values, cultural norms, and worldview. When this is not done, a gap between the education system and the society results. This gap is often a result of using a language other than the language of the society as the medium of instruction. The curriculum, syllabus, teaching methodology and content of the lessons not suited to the genius of the society contribute to this gap that leads to an increase in the school dropout rate among the minority linguistic and less-privileged communities in India. A nation that is inherently multilingual, multiethnic and culturally pluralistic must meet this challenge if the rulers wish to deliver justice to all (Mohanlal 2001).

Everything said and done although one realizes the significance of education in human development one cannot stop agreeing with what Oscar Wilde once said, "Education is an admirable thing, but it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught."

These lines of Sujatha Bhatt’s poem Search for my tongue (from Brunizem) are very relevant.

And if you lived in a place you had to
speak a foreign tongue,

your mother tongue would rot,
rot and die in your mouth
until you had to spit it out.
I thought I spit it out
but overnight while I dream,
it grows back,

a stump of a shoot
grows longer, grows moist, grows strong veins,
it ties the other tongue in knots,
the bud opens,

the bud opens in my mouth,
it pushes the other tongue aside.
Everytime I think I’ve forgotten,
I think I’ve lost the mother tongue,
it blossoms out of my mouth.