31 arguments for and against airing December 16 gangrape documentary

India’s Daughter, a documentary on the December 16 Delhi gangrape, has triggered debates everywhere — from dinner tables to televisions screens.

The documentary by British filmmaker Leslee Udwin shows an interview with one of the six men who fatally raped a 23-year-old woman in a moving bus in 2012. The government has served a legal notice to the BBC in connection with the documentary, which has been uploaded on video sharing website YouTube by several individuals.

Despite a ban by the government, the BBC aired the documentary in the UK on March 5. The documentary was also to be telecast on Sunday in seven countries, including on NDTV in India.

While the government and the BBC are trying to remove the documentary videos from YouTube, its clips have reached corners of the internet the government would find tough to control.

In an effort to capture some of the conversations regarding the documentary, Hindustan Times asked its readers to share their opinions.

CLICK HERE to read further

 

Advertisements

Government constitutes National Institution for Transforming India (NITI) Aayog

The Union Government has replaced Planning Commission with a new institution named NITI Aayog (National Institution for Transforming India). The institution will serve as ‘Think Tank’ of the Government-a directional and policy dynamo. NITI Aayog will provide Governments at the central and state levels with relevant strategic and technical advice across the spectrum of key elements of policy, this includes matters of national and international import on the economic front, dissemination of best practices from within the country as well as from other nations, the infusion of new policy ideas and specific issue-based support.

CLICK HERE to read complete report

via Press Information Bureau

Climate Agreement – India needs to take the lead

Without Indian leadership, there will be no climate change agreement. The country should improve its own energy efficiency

The latest marathon negotiations on climate change recently finished in Lima, Peru. Many outside observers feel that the centerpiece of Lima, the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), neither to be reviewed nor externally monitored, are too weak to have any real impact on climate change.

Despite this, the Indian delegation expressed satisfaction over the result. So has the U.S, which is understandable since little is really being asked of it in terms of commitments. But what is India seeking?

Let’s look at the situation. India is a warm and primarily subtropical country where agriculture and drinking water depend on the monsoons. Northern India depends on river systems which are sustained by melting Himalayan glaciers. The country has a long coastline. It is also regularly exposed to extreme weather events — floods, droughts and hurricanes — and suffers from the presence of mosquitoes and other vectors that can carry infectious diseases.

CLICK HERE to read further

via The Hindu

Saudi Arabia is playing chicken with its oil

In August 1973, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat paid a secret visit to the Saudi capital, Riyadh, to meet with King Faisal. Sadat was preparing for war with Israel, and he needed Saudi Arabia to use its most powerful weapon: oil.

Until then, King Faisal had been reluctant for the Arab members of OPEC to use the “oil weapon.” But as the October 1973 Arab-Israeli war unfolded, the Arab oil producers raised prices, cut production and imposed an embargo on oil exports to punish the United States for its support of Israel. Without Saudi Arabia, the oil embargo would not have gotten very far.

Today, Saudi Arabia is once again using its “oil weapon,” but instead of driving up prices and cutting supply, it’s doing the reverse. In the face of a global slide in oil prices since June, the kingdom has refused to cut its production, which would help to drive prices back up. Instead, the Saudis led the charge to prevent OPEC from cutting production at the cartel’s last meeting on Nov 27.

The consequences of Saudi policy are impossible to ignore. After two years of stable prices at around $105 to $110 a barrel, Brent blend, the international benchmark, fell from $112 a barrel in June to around $65 on Friday. “What is the reason for the United States and some U.S. allies wanting to drive down the price of oil?” Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro asked rhetorically in October. His answer? “To harm Russia.”

That is partially true, but Saudi Arabia’s gambit is more complex.

CLICK HERE to read complete story

via Reuters.com

The state and Islam: Converting the preachers

SAUDI ARABIA has long used a simple method to regulate mosques. The oil kingdom lavishes clerics with money and perks that can suddenly vanish if their preaching goes astray. If that does not work they are fired or parked in jail. Now Saudi preachers face a new constraint: starting next year authorities will install centrally monitored cameras in every mosque to record what goes on inside. The move is ostensibly meant to prevent theft and regulate energy use, but few doubt the real intention is to tighten the state’s grip on Islam, part of a trend across the Middle East.

Critics have long reviled Saudi Arabia for its sponsorship of a rigidly puritanical brand of religion. The ruling Al Saud family, whose legitimacy rests in part on a 270-year-old pact with the Wahhabi school of Sunni Islam, has tended to shrug off the complaints. But in recent months it has worried about a backlash from conservatives angered by the government’s enthusiastic support for the crackdown against the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, as well as its participation in the American-led military coalition against Islamic State (IS) in Syria and Iraq. Apparently fired up by IS propaganda, radicals in the kingdom have lately targeted “infidel” Westerners and “deviant” Shias in a string of small but deadly terror attacks.

CLICK HERE to read complete story

via The Economist

Essay – Corporate Social Responsibility

The evolution of the concept and definition of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has an impressive history associated with it. During the 1960s and 1970s, meaning of CSR was further expanded and. In the 1980s, more empirical research and alternative themes began to mature. These alternative themes included corporate social performance (CSP), stakeholder theory, and business ethics theory.

One of the most frequently asked questions is: what is the meaning of “Corporate Social Responsibility” ? There are various definitions provided by various organisations. The most appropriate and common definition is: Corporate Social Responsibility is that exercise which helps the companies to have a positive impact on the society in the process of managing their business.

According to the book “Making Good Business Sense” by Lord Holme and Richard Watts, “Corporate Social Responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large”.

CLICK HERE to read complete Essay

India has more than 14 million people living in slavery

Almost 36 million people are living as slaves across the globe, with India having the greatest number of more than 14 million victims of slavery, ranging from prostitution to bonded labour.

Releasing its second annual index, Walk Free increased its estimate of the number of slaves to 35.8 million, saying this was due to better data collection and slavery being uncovered in areas where it had not been found previously.

The Walk Free Foundation, an Australian-based human rights group, estimated in its inaugural slavery index last year that 29.8 million people were born into servitude, trafficked for sex work, trapped in debt bondage or exploited for forced labour.

The index lists Mauritania, Uzbekistan, Haiti, Qatar and India as the nations where modern-day slavery is most prevalent..

CLICK HERE to read complete story

via Hindustan Times.