|
EDITORIAL
Call Of The Wild
What next? Taliban's jaziya tax for the Hindus in Afghanistan?
 Short
of imposing the jaziya tax, the Taliban has done everything to take Afghanistan's
tiny community of Hindus and Sikhs back to medieval tyranny. A decree
just put into effect makes a distinctive dress code mandatory for Hindus
and Sikhs. It asks them to display a two-metre yellow cloth outside their
homes, bans Muslims and Hindus from staying in the same building and outlaws
the construction of temples. Not since the Nazi persecution of Jews-when
wearing the Star of David meant signing your death warrant-has barbarism
been reduced to such stark symbolism. Three months ago, the destruction
of the Buddha statues at Bamiyan was mourned as hastening the death of
Afghanistan's rich but former culture. By turning its bayonets on a terrified
few, the Taliban has now become the world's leading brand name for civilisational
genocide.
Passionate prose, protracted sessions of hand-wringing
and petitions to the United Nations apart, there is little India can do
to prevent Afghanistan's descent into the sort of place that makes Enver
Hoxha's Albania seem Disneyland. There is of course perfunctory and sporadic
support for Ahmed Shah Masoud and the last of the mujahideen-no paragons
of virtue themselves-fighting the Taliban. That aside, India is a cipher
in a war zone that should fall within its sphere of influence. The Government
can blame Partition-the geographical alienation of India from the Durand
Line-or a Nehruvian mindset that saw forward policy as imperial indulgence
rather than national imperative. While it sorts out its existential crises,
Delhi would be well advised to approach international human-rights agencies
and seek the creation of safe havens for minorities in Afghanistan. Those
hapless Hindus and Sikhs are India's wards-if not as a legacy of history,
then as a people entitled to living as they want to.
Part Payment
Removing the ceiling on interim maintenance for divorce
leaves a loophole
 Union
Law Minister Arun Jaitley has, by removing the ridiculously low ceiling
of Rs 500 per month on interim maintenance for women facing divorce proceedings,
made a move which is politically correct and ethically justified. The
limit on maintenance is in accordance with Section 125 of the Criminal
Procedure Code (CRPC), which stipulates the amount to protect women deserted
by their husbands from being driven to destitution. In the famous Shah
Bano case of the late 1980s, the court had granted her an interim maintenance
for that very purpose. The idea behind it is to give the estranged wife
temporary protection against sudden penury, which is crucial if the woman
has to pick up the pieces of her life. A limit of Rs 500 is so small that
it defeats the purpose of the financial protection. Now the Union Cabinet
has also made it compulsory for the courts to grant the interim maintenance
within 60 days of issue of notice. The time limit should minimise the
legal cost of divorce and the removal of the financial ceiling will let
the court link the maintenance amount with the husband's capacity to pay.
This will be one more of the many pro-women
laws that India has. However, one has to be wary of the abuse statutes-even
exemplary ones-are subjected to. A case in point is Section 498A of the
CRPC, which makes pre-trial detention of husbands mandatory when wives
complain of dowry-related torture. The provision is often misused by wives
wanting to settle a score. Instead of the courts being pushed by women
for higher maintenance by exaggerating their husbands' incomes, it would
have been better if the limit had been raised ten times or so. An interim
award need not err on the side of generosity.
|
METRO TODAY
Web
Exclusives
