newspaper

Founder Editor(Print): late Shyam Rai Bhatnagar (journalist & freedom fighter) International Editor : M. Victoria Editor : Ashok Bhatnagar *
A newspaper with bold, open and democratic ideas {Established : 2004}

27 अप्रैल 2012

Why they held Collector Alex : As Naxals explain


Why we held Chhattisgarh collector Alex Paul Menon hostage, explain Maoists




Even as the second round of talks between interlocutors was set to begin atRaipur, outlawed Communist Party of India(Maoist) circulated a three page note early on Friday morning, listing in detail their perception about the problems being faced by the tribals and incidents of alleged atrocities by the security forces in tribal Bastar region of Chhattisgarh. 

A three page note "why we detained the collector", issued by CPI (Maoist) South Bastar regional committee secretary Ganesh Uike said they were forced to issue such a statement to set the record straight after a group of so-called intellectuals, supported by vested interests, unleashed a propaganda to whip up sympathy in favour of the Sukma collector. 

"These people need to understand the reality on the ground and the manner in which the people are suffering state's repression and the role of district collector in it", Uike claimed alleging that it was during the tenure of Alex Paul Menon that a tribal youth Podium Mada was first tortured in police custody and later murdered. Later, this murder was passed off as a suicide in police custody, he alleged. 

According to the Maoist release, another youth Podyam Sanna was picked up from his house at Pollampalli on February 11. Before the formation of Sukma district, police in erstwhile Dantewada district picked up a woman Soni Sodi from village Jabeli and subjected to third degree methods. But the district collector Alex Paul Menon did not utter a word when the then superintendent of police of Ankit Garg was bestowed with the President's police medal on Republic Day, it alleged. 

Describing Chhattisgarh government's on-going "gram Suraj'-a village outreach programme-- as a farce, the Maoist leader alleged that such a campaign was being carried out at the behest of the World Bank. He said the CPI (Maoist) had earlier given a call for boycott of gram Suraj campaign. He also alleged that the government machinery, which also includes the district collector, were in fact trying to extend benefits to corporate houses by trying to hand over Bastar's rich natural resources to them. 

Alleging that nearly 2000 villagers were languishing in jails of Dantewada, Jagdalpur, Raipur, and Rajnandgaon, Uike said 700 people were stuffed inside the Dantewada prison, which has a capacity to accommodate only 150 inmates. Besides, the rebels also alleged that the police had slapped false cases against a large number of people and the security were continuously violating human rights in the tribal areas. 

Uike alleged that the security forces had launched an operation code named as "Operation Vijay " in Abujmarh in March this year and attacked the houses of villagers and destroyed their houses. He said the so-called intellectuals and others, demanding release of collector Menon, should first study whether the report submitted by the district collector at the meeting of "left wing extremism affected districts", organised by the Centre, was in the interest of the poor tribals of the region.

25 अप्रैल 2012

बोफोर्स का जिन्न : द हिंदू के संपादक रहे एन राम की सफाई


हमने अपने सूत्र को जोखिम

में नहीं डालाः एन राम

 बुधवार, 25 अप्रैल, 2012
एन राम का कहना है कि उन्होंने इस मामले से जुड़े दस्तावेजों को पूरी जांच पड़ताल के बाद ही प्रकाशित किया
बोफोर्स मामले में स्वीडन के पूर्व पुलिस प्रमुख स्टेन लिंडस्ट्रोम के रहस्योद्घाटन से एक फिर भारत में राजनीति गरमा गई है. लिंडस्ट्रोम ने बोफोर्स कांड में राजीव गांधी और अमिताभ बच्चन को तो क्लीन चिट दी है लेकिन 'हिंदू' अखबार पर सवाल उठाए.
लिंडस्ट्रोम का आरोप है कि 'हिंदू' ने इस मामले से जुड़ी जानकारी को अपनी सुविधा के हिसाब से प्रकाशित किया और अपने सूत्र की सुरक्षा और निजता का ख्याल नहीं रखा गया.

पेश है 'हिंदू' के संपादक रहे एन राम के साथ इस मुद्दे पर बीबीसी संवाददाता राजेश जोशी की बातचीतः  लेकिन एन राम का कहना है कि यह सही नहीं है कि उन्होंने अपने सूत्र की गरिमा को बनाए नहीं रखा और उसे किसी तरह जोखिम में डाला.
लिंडस्ट्रोम के रहस्योद्धाटन और आपके अखबार पर लगाए गए आरोप पर आपकी प्रतिक्रिया क्या है?
सबसे पहली बात तो यह है कि मैं पुराने चलन के मुताबिक अपने सूत्र को जाहिर नहीं करूंगा. इसलिए मैं न तो पुष्टि करूंगा और न ही इससे इनकार करूंगा कि हमारा सूत्र कौन था.
बोफोर्स का जिन्न फिर बोतल से बाहर निकल आया है
यह पहला मौका नहीं है जब लिंस्ड्रोम ने यह बात कही है. मैं कहूंगा कि इस मामले में सूत्र भले ही कोई हो, लेकिन पैसे का कोई लेन देन नहीं हुआ है. उसने नैतिक रोष के चलते यह जानकारी दी. जहां तक यह बात है हमने इसे मर्जी के मुताबिक छाप दिया और इस मामले में जोखिम का ख्याल नहीं रखा गया तो यह सही नहीं है. मैं साफ कर देना चाहता हूं कि हमारे पास इस मुद्दे पर बहुत से आंतरिक सबूत थे. डेढ़ साल तक हमने छानबीन की.
हम लगभग तीन सौ से ज्यादा दस्तावेजों के बारे में बात कर रहे हैं. इनमें से सभी नहीं लेकिन ज्यादातर हिंदू में प्रकाशित हुए. इसके लिए हमने अपने सूत्र से बात की ताकि उसकी सुरक्षा की जा सके. इन दस्तावेजों की पुष्टि के लिए कुछ जानकारी की जरूरत थी, खास कर हाथ से लिखी डायरी के लिए, क्योंकि हमें पता चला कि उसकी मूल प्रति पुलिस ने उस वक्त बोफोर्स के प्रमुख मार्टिन आर्डबो को लौटा दी थी. पुलिस के पास जो था वह उसकी फोटोकॉपी थी. इसलिए हमें बहुत ही सावधानी से काम लेना पड़ा. उनमें कई जगह कोड शब्दों का इस्तेमाल किया हुआ था. लोगों के लिए शायद राजीव गांधी के लिए नाम के शुरुआती अक्षर लिखे हुए थे. सबसे पहले तो हमें लिखावट की पुष्टि करनी पड़ी कि वह असली तो है ना. हमारे पास आर्डबो के हस्ताक्षर के नमूने भी थे. तो कुल मिलाकर यह बहुत मुश्किल काम था.
तो हम पागल नहीं हैं कि ऐसे विस्फोटक दस्तावेजों के ढेर पर बैठकर उस व्यक्ति को खतरे में डालते जिसके आधार पर हम स्टोरी चला रहे हैं. सूत्र यह जानकारी किसी को भी दे सकता था. इसीलिए हमने तो पत्रकारिता के उच्च मानदंड़ों का पालन किया. मुझे लगता है कि सूत्र ने खुद कुछ जोखिम उठाया.
बेशक आप अपने सूत्र की पहचान को जाहिर नहीं करना चाहते, लेकिन लिंडस्ट्रोम ने साफ साफ कहा है कि उन्हें और उनके परिवार को जो कुछ भुगतना पड़ा, हिंदू ने इससे कोई मतलब नहीं रखा. तो वह आपके अखबार का सीधे सीधे नाम ले रहे हैं.
मैं यह सब जानता हूं. लिंडस्ट्रोम पर जानकारी लीक करने के आरोप लगे लेकिन उन्हें इनसे बरी कर दिया गया.
जब मैं राजीव गांधी, केसी पंत और उस वक्त के सीबीआई के निदेशक मोहन कात्रे से मिला, तो किसी ने नहीं पूछा कि हमारा सूत्र कौन है. लेकिन ये बात मेरे दिमाग में थी कि उन्हें इस बारे में संदेह है. सिर्फ संस्थान के लोग ही जानना चाहते थे कि सूत्र कौन है. बेशक चित्रा सुब्रहमण्यम यह जानती थीं.
लेकिन यह रिटायर्ड अधिकारी कह रहा है कि जब अखबार सोचते हैं कि वे खबर से ज्यादा अहम है तो पत्रकारिता को उसका खमियाजा भुगतना पड़ता है. आप जाने माने संपादक हैं. अगर कोई इस तरह के आरोप लगाता है तो इस पर आपकी प्रतिक्रिया क्या है.
  • पूर्व प्रधानमंत्री राजीव गांधी को लिंडस्ट्रोम ने क्लीन चिट दी है
देखिए लिंडस्ट्रोम या किसी और से मेरा कोई झगड़ा नहीं है. लेकिन यह सही नहीं है कि हमने अपने सूत्र की गरिमा को बनाए नहीं रखा और उसे किसी तरह जोखिम में डाला. ऐसा भी नहीं है कि हमने जानकारी को दबाए रखा हो. कुछ कानूनी पेंच हो तो और बात है. मसलन सबूतों की पड़ताल करना, उनकी पुष्टि करना. राजीव गांधी जैसे लोगों के खिलाफ आरोप लगाना बहुत ही जटिल होता है. इस मामले में अमिताभ बच्चन का भी नाम आया लेकिन उनके खिलाफ हमारे पास कुछ नहीं है.
सबूतों की छानबीन में हमें डेढ़ साल का वक्त लगा. पता नहीं लिंडस्ट्रोम कैसे ऐसा कह रहे हैं कि जैसा हमें अच्छा लगा हमने वैसे प्रकाशित किया.
लेकिन जिस रिपोर्टर यानी चित्रा सुब्रमण्यम की खबर आपने छापी थी, उन्हीं को अब लिंडस्ट्रोम ने इंटरव्यू दिया है.
लेकिन वो अब हमारे लिए काम नहीं करती हैं.
लेकिन जब लिंडस्ट्रोम यह कहना चाह रहे थे कि हिंदू ने उनकी सुरक्षा और निजता का ख्याल नहीं रखा तो उस वक्त चित्रा सुब्रहमण्यम ने इस बात से इनकार नहीं किया.
जब यह मामला उजागर हुआ तो उस वक्त चित्रा हमारे लिए काम करती थी और स्ट्रिंगर थीं. बाद में वह हमारे स्टाफ में भी रहीं लेकिन अब वह हमारे साथ काम नहीं करती हैं. इसीलिए मैं उनकी तरफ से नहीं बोल सकता हूं.
लेकिन बात यह है कि ऐसा हमने कुछ नहीं किया जिससे सूत्र जोखिम में पड़े. जोखिम जानकारी को लीक करना था. किसी ने वह सामग्री देने के लिए सूत्र पर दबाव नहीं डाला था. कोई पैसे का लेन-देन नहीं हुआ. उसने सिर्फ नैतिक रोष के चलते यह जानकारी बांटी. ऐसे में यह कैसे कहा जा सकता है कि हमारी वजह से सूत्र जोखिम में पड़ा.
(बीबीसी से साभार)

Bofors : What N Ram Says now

I was the one who leaked the documents, former Swedish police chief Sten Lindström says in online interview
Sten Lindström, the former head of the Swedish police who led the investigations into the Bofors-India howitzer deal, has disclosed that he was the one who fed the journalistic investigation that was published on the pages of The Hindu in 1988-89. The identity of the source has been a detail that The Hinduhas steadfastly held on to for a quarter century. The “tell-all” interview that Mr. Lindström has now given Chitra Subramaniam-Duella, who was one of the journalists who had worked on the story while with The Hindu, from Europe, was published online on April 24 in ‘The Hoot.'
The latest development in the Bofors scandal comes a quarter century after Swedish state radio got it all going on April 16, 1987.
The one part of Mr. Lindström's interview that is likely to generate political heat is his comment on Rajiv Gandhi and Ottavio Quattrocchi, the Italian businessman who is accused of being a middleman in the deal: “There was no evidence that [Rajiv Gandhi] had received any bribe. But he watched the massive cover-up in India and Sweden and did nothing. Many Indian institutions were tarred, innocent people were punished while the guilty got away. The evidence against Ottavio Quattrocchi was conclusive. Through a front company called A.E. Services, bribes paid by Bofors landed in Quattrocchi's account which he subsequently cleaned out because India said there was no evidence linking him to the Bofors deal. Nobody in Sweden or Switzerland was allowed to interrogate him.”
Mr. Lindström is described in the interview as the one who leaked some 350 documents, which included payment instructions to banks, contracts, handwritten notes, minutes of meetings and Bofors Managing Director Martin Ardbo's diary that carried a lot of sensitive information.
Many of the documents, painstakingly verified and studied by The Hindu, were printed in facsimile form on its pages in 1988-1989.
Asked by The Hindu for his comments on the interview, N. Ram, who led the journalistic investigation behind the coverage of l'affaire Bofors in the newspaper at the time and who later became its Editor-in-Chief, said: “I'm old-fashioned enough to be very protective of highly sensitive, privileged sources. I'm not going to confirm or deny who the source was. What I can confirm is that I met the source on more than one occasion, along with Chitra Subramaniam, and also was in touch [with the source] on the phone.”
In ‘The Hoot' interview Mr. Lindström recalls the occasion when Mr. Ram went to his office and he handed over the documents, proceeding to say that The Hindu's role was that of a “medium of communication.” He speaks also of a sense of disappointment over the process as, “they published the documents as and when they wanted without any respect for the risks other people were taking to get the facts out.”
The former police chief added: “The most explosive documents that involved the political payments were Ardbo's notes and diary. The Hindu published them several months after they had them. In the meantime, there was a serious difficulty... There were consequences for me and my family. The Hindu seemed unconcerned.”
Mr. Ram, who stepped down as The Hindu's Editor-in-Chief earlier this year, had this to say on these points: “The privileged source was not willing to give the entire documentation in possession to us. So it was a process of negotiating over a period of about one and a half years with the source. The source was, for whatever reason, not willing to part with the document cache in one go, and would only give it in phased-out instalments over this long period.”
Mr. Ram added: “There was no question of the newspaper publishing the documents and other information arbitrarily, as and when we pleased. We were not fools to hold back material without due cause and incur the risk of letting others run away with our story! In a story with such big stakes, involving a great newspaper's credibility and people's reputations, there was a need for due diligence, for devil's advocacy, for making connections and drawing inferences, for being fair and just. We needed to translate — accurately — some of the material from Swedish. As for the Ardbo diary — which the police had seized and returned to him, preserving only photocopies — it presented a real challenge. Some of the handwritten diary entries made explosive suggestions but they were semi-coded, using initials and sometimes misspelling key names.”
Possibly for the first time, Mr. Lindström reveals how the Indian angle came into focus: “It was an accident. We were conducting several search-and-seize operations in the premises of Bofors and their executives. I have some experience in this area, so I asked my team to take everything they could find. In the pile were one set of documents to Swiss banks with instructions that the name of the recipient should be blocked out. An accountant doing his job asked why anonymity was necessary since the payments were legal. Bofors was unable to explain and then we found more and more documents leading to India.”
Mr. Ram said: “There were various inputs that were key to our investigation. For example, there was specific information made available through Malini Parthasarathy by a member of the JPC [the Joint Parliamentary Committee that went into the Bofors affair] that enabled the investigation to make a connection and draw a crucial inference from the documentation. On the cover-up aspect, we learnt a lot from confidential meetings I had, at their request, with Defence Minister K.C. Pant and Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.”
In the interview, Mr. Lindström aired his thoughts on the media's role in such contexts. He said: “There needs to be a free and fair discussion in the media about itself. The media is the watchdog of our society – but who is watching the media? Most whistle-blowers around the world leak information to the media because they feel they owe it to their country, their job or the position they are elected to. Genuine whistle-blowers also expect the media to be responsible and according to me this means that the media has to understand the motives of whistle-blowers. Not everyone is driven by the same motive. This is where investigative journalism comes in. Every role has its limits. I cannot become a journalist, a journalist cannot become a judge and a judge cannot become a politician. Who controls the media, what are their interests? What happens if a reporter is also part of the management? Do journalistic ethics compete with business and political interests of the media organisation? Can an ombudsman be the answer? If not, let us all work together globally to find a solution we all respect and understand.”
Speaking on his chosen role as whistle-blower in the affair, Mr. Lindström does say this: “My only option was to leak the documents to someone we could trust.” He adds: “The role of the whistle-blower is a part of democracy. When all official channels are clogged, you have to take a decision. We have a culture here that it is okay to blow the whistle. I have met other whistle-blowers. I knew what I was doing when I leaked the documents to you. I could not count on my government or Bofors or the government of India to get to the bottom of this.”
Then, in a cathartic finale, Mr. Lindström says: “False closures of corruption bleed the system. Every day has to matter. When something like the scale and violence of Bofors happens, you begin to question your own faith as a professional and a human being. When you start losing faith, you begin to lose hope. When hope is lost, everything is lost. We cannot afford to let that happen. Maybe we will get nowhere, but silence cannot be the answer.”

57% of boys, 53% of girls think wife beating is justified

NEW DELHI ><><


It's a shocking revelation in this day and age. Not just Indian men, but even adolescents - in the 15-19 age group - feel that wife beating is justified.

Unicef's " Global Report Card on Adolescents 2012", says that 57% of adolescent boys in India think a husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife.

Over half of the Indian adolescent girls, or around 53% think that a husband is justified in beating his wife. In comparison, 41% women inBangladesh and 54% in Sri Lanka harbour a similar feeling . In Nepal, however, the prevalence of both men and women justifying domestic violence is inordinately high at 88% and 80%, respectively.

According to the report, societal attitudes that convey acceptance or justification of domestic violence are making girls and women more vulnerable to abuse. It says, "Available data for developing countries show that nearly 50% of girls and women aged 15-49 believe that wifebeating is justified... girls aged between 15 and 19 years hold the same views as women in the 45-49 age group."

The report explains that because of reporting bias, this may be an under-estimation of the actual size of the problem in several countries. Many factors contribute to the incidence of domestic violence . For instance, in many places, child marriage, gender-based power relations, women's low economic status and traditional practices or social norms perpetuate it.

Mission director for India's National Rural Health Mission Anuradha Gupta said spousal violence takes place both in developed and developing countries "though the degree would vary" . She said, "When girls are brought up with the message that a woman's status in a family is inferior, she starts to accept whatever behaviour is meted out by her husband or in-laws ." She added, "When a boy grows up seeing his father assault his mother, he starts to accept such a behavior and repeats it."

Ranjana Kumari, director of Centre for Social Research, said, "Most women think this is their fate. Education or economic prosperity alone can't improve the situation."

24 अप्रैल 2012

underground girls school defies Taliban edict, threats



Every morning in this mountain village in eastern Afghanistan, four dozen girls sneak through a square opening in a mud-baked wall, defying a Taliban edict.
A U.S.-funded girls school about a mile away was shuttered by insurgents in 2007, two years after it opened. They warned residents that despite a new government in Kabul and an international aid effort focused on female education, the daughters of Spina were to stay home. For a while, they all did.
Then two brothers, among the few literate men in the village, began quietly teaching math, reading and writing to their female relatives in a living room on the edge of town. They wanted to keep the classes small, they said, to stay off the Taliban’s radar. That turned out to be impossible.
The United States and its allies have spent millions of dollars on female education in the past decade, and Afghan and Western officials have pointed to the issue as one of the most hopeful changes of the post-Taliban era. Female enrollment in public schools has risen from 5,000 under the Taliban to 2.5 million, according to the Afghan Education Ministry.
But Afghanistan is rife with places like Spina, where formal efforts to educate women and girls have crumbled. About 2 million Afghan girls do not attend school.
Those who do sometimes face threats. Last week, suspected militants poisoned more than 100 schoolgirls in northern Afghanistan, according to Amanullah Iman, a spokesman for the Education Ministry, who said an investigation into the incident was ongoing. The girls are recovering.
Because of threats, several schools in eastern Afghanistan have been closed in the past few months, reversing what had been a positive trend, said Vidhya Ganesh, the deputy country representative for UNICEF.
The insurgency had already forced the closure of dozens of girls schools beginning in the middle of past decade, when insurgents started to return to Afghanistan. Many of the schools were built and funded by the United States, and many never reopened. In some villages, the schools have gone underground, hidden in living rooms and guesthouses, as they were during the Taliban’s reign.
“It’s risky for the teachers and it’s risky for the students, but these underground schools show the thirst people have for education under the Taliban,” said Shukriya Barakzai, a parliamentarian who ran her own underground school when the Taliban held power in Kabul in the 1990s.
“It doesn’t feel much different from those years,” said one of the brothers in insurgent-infested Spina. “We live in a community very far from democracy and freedom.”
‘Something from nothing’
When the insurgency arrived in this patch of Paktika province in 2005, it did so with great force and little resistance. The absence of Afghan or American security forces meant fighters could wield weapons freely and threaten residents without consequence. The warning to girls went unchallenged.
But word soon spread about the underground girls school — part of a shadow education system developed in places such as Spina to elude the Taliban. The full extent of the system is not known, but American and Afghan officials say such underground networks are not uncommon in places with a large insurgent presence.
First, young students — between 5 and 12 years old — would trickle into the home of the two brothers, who for security reasons insisted that their names not be published. Then, teenagers started arriving, the brothers said, a particularly rare and controversial development in eastern Afghanistan, where females are expected to remain home upon reaching adolescence.
The brothers could hardly believe the turnout, which at once worried and excited them. They named the school after their great uncle, Namizad, a religious scholar.
“The girls just kept coming.” one brother said. “They were so eager, like they were starving.”
When a U.S. army platoon made a rare visit to Spina this month, soldiers saw the school as an example of resilience in the face of a failed development project, a sign of hope in a dismal place. In recent months, according to U.S. officials, the Taliban in Paktika have robbed teachers of their salaries to buy an 82mm mortar and shells.
“I want to thank you for your courage,” U.S. Army Lt. Col. Curtis Taylor told the brothers and their students after ducking through the family’s living room doorway.
The girls at the Namizad School sit on carpets, beginning each class with a recitation from the Koran. A chalkboard rests on the floor. Less than half the class has textbooks, which have made their way from Kabul. As in the rest of Spina, there is no electricity.
“These students are learning something from nothing,” one of the brothers said.
The brothers have pleaded for more resources. They have prayed to remain outside the Taliban’s reach. But the district’s education director claimed he had no money for the education of girls, the brothers said, in an account confirmed by local officials. And the Taliban have crept ever closer.
A few months ago, insurgents posted a letter on the brothers’ door. “We will not allow the education of girls,” it read, calling the practice “un-Islamic.” The letter warned of a violent punishment.
The brothers talked about what to do. Should they end the classes? Should they leave Spina?
The two willowy men in their early 30s have bright eyes and long brown beards and wear flowing white salwar-kameez, the traditional dress here. Their backgrounds are strikingly similar to those of the insurgents who threaten them. Like the Talibs of western Paktika, the brothers were educated in Pakistani madrassas, or religious schools. They, too, were raised to believe in a strict adherence to the Koran, Islam’s holiest book.
“I was so close to joining the Taliban,” one said. “The men haunting us, they are men we know well.”
‘I want to learn everything’
The brothers tried to make the case to the Taliban that they would teach only religious material to their students. They warned their students of the risk of attending classes, and they were surprised again when the girls kept coming. There’s now a morning class for young children and an afternoon class for teenagers. The brothers beam when talking about recent graduates, eight of whom are now trained midwives.
“I liked the other school better. We had desks and books,” said Baranah, 11, who was in first grade when the Taliban closed the U.S.-funded school. “But this place is still good. We still learn here. I want to learn everything.”
The insurgency has not followed through with its threat. The brothers wonder if it ever will — if the Taliban’s recent silence signifies its tacit approval or is merely a prelude to violence.
In some cases, the Afghan government and international organizations have been able to reach compromises with insurgents to keep schools open.
“We’re beginning to find ways to negotiate with anti-government elements,” said UNICEF’s Ganesh.
Some here worry that women’s rights are being sidelined as the United States prepares to leave and the Afghan government attempts to satisfy a hard-line constituency. In March, top religious leaders on the country’s Ulema Council ruled that men are “fundamental” and women “secondary,” barring women from interacting with their male counterparts in schools or the workplace.
In Spina, only boys are educated in the U.S.-funded, one-story yellow building constructed five years ago to educate girls. Most of the windows are broken, and the paint is chipping.
“That place seemed perfect,” one brother said. “But we knew it wouldn’t last long.”

==========

By  (for The Washingtonpost) 




23 अप्रैल 2012

Wal-Mart Stock Falls Nearly 5%

April 23, 2012



Wal-Mart’s stock fell almost 5 percent on Monday, accounting for about one-fifth of the losses in the Dow Jones industrial average, as investors reacted to a bribery scandal at the retailer’s Mexican subsidiary and a report that an internal investigation was quashed at corporate headquarters in Arkansas.


फ्रांस : राष्ट्रपति चुनावों से जुड़े अहम सवाल


ओलांड और सार्कोजी
ओलांद                                    सारकोजी
=================================

फ्रांस में चुनावों के पहले चरण में ओलांद सारकोजी से आगे रहे
फ्रांस में राष्ट्रपति चुनावों में राष्ट्रपति निकोला सारकोजी जहाँ दूसरी बार मैदान में उतरे हैं वहीं उन्हें पहले चरण में ही सोशलिस्ट पार्टी के फ्रांस्वा ओलांद ने पछाड़ दिया है. फ्रांस में हो रहे चुनावों से संबंधित कुछ

अहम तथ्य:

भारत-फ्रांस के राष्ट्रपति चुनावों में समानता:

फ्रांस में राष्ट्रपति चुनाव की प्रक्रिया कुछ हद तक भारत के राष्ट्रपति की चयन प्रक्रिया से मेल खाती है.

फ्रांस में राष्ट्रपति चुनाव के उम्मीदवार

जनता के चुने हुए प्रतिनिधि पहले राष्ट्रपति पद के उम्मीदवारों का चुनाव करते हैं. इसके बाद मतदान होता है. पहले चरण में यदि किसी उम्मीदवार को 50 फीसदी या उससे ज्यादा मत नहीं मिलते तो दूसरे चरण का मतदान होता है.

दूसरे चरण में पहले चरण के दो अव्वल रहने वाले उम्मीदवारों के बीच मुकाबला होता है. जीतने वाला उम्मीदवार एलसी पैलेस यानी फ्रांस के राष्ट्रपति भवन में शपथ लेता है.

भारत में राष्ट्रपति नीतिगत निर्णय केंद्रीय मंत्रिपरिषद की सलाह पर लेता है जबकि फ्रांस में राष्ट्रपति सबसे ज्यादा अधिकार संपन्न होता है. वह संवैधानिक, वित्तीय और सैन्य निर्णय ले सकता है.

इस बार फ्रांस का चुनाव क्यों सुर्खियों में है?

फ्रांस में पहले चरण के चुनाव हो चुके है. सोशलिस्ट पार्टी के फ्रांस्वा ओलांद ने राष्ट्रपति सारकोजी पछाड़ दिया है.

अब दूसरे चरण में इन दोनों का मुकाबला छह मई को होगा. दूसरे कार्यकाल के लिए चुनाव लड़ रहे फ्रांस के राष्ट्रपति निकोला सारकोजी बजट घाटा कम करने की बात कर रहे हैं और उन्होंने अर्थव्यवस्था के मुद्दों पर अपने प्रतिद्वंद्वी के साथ सार्वजनिक बहस की चुनौती रखी है.

यूरोप की बिगड़ी हुई आर्थिक स्थिति के चलते फ्रांस के राष्ट्रपति चुनाव में इस बार बेरोजगारी, कर्ज व्यवस्था और पेंशन प्रमुख मुद्दे बनकर उभरे हैं.

चुनाव का फ्रांस के बाहर क्या महत्व?

यूरोपीय कर्ज संकट से निबटने के लिए बनी आर्थिक योजना में फ्रांस का अहम योगदान है.

संकट के हल पर जर्मनी सहित कई यूरोपीय देशों से मतभेद के बावजूद फ्रांस के मौजूदा राष्ट्रपति निकोला सारकोजी की भूमिका को नकारा नहीं जा सकता.

फ्रांस का अगला राष्ट्रपति यूरोपीय संकट पर कैसा रुख अपनाएगा, इस पर सभी की नजर है. फ्रांस का रुख न केवल यूरोप की आर्थिक नीतियों बल्कि भारत और अन्य उभरती अर्थव्यवस्थाओं के लिए अहम है.

Polls see clear win for Hollande in French runoff


PARIS >>><<<
Francois Hollande (C), Socialist Party candidate for the 2012 French presidential election, walks on the tarmac as he arrives at Brive La Gaillarde airport after results in the first round of the 2012 French presidential election April 22, 2012. REUTERS/Stephane Mahe
Francois Hollande (C), Socialist Party candidate for the 2012 French presidential election, walks 
on the tarmac as he arrives at Brive La Gaillarde airport after results in the first round of the 
2012 French presidential election April 22, 2012.
-================================================
French Socialist presidential candidate Francois Hollande will beat incumbent President Nicolas Sarkozy in the May 6 second-round ballot with about 53 to 56 percent of the vote, according to polls conducted after the close of Sunday's first round.
Hollande won the first round with 28.46 percent of the vote to 27.06 percent for Sarkozy - with 95 percent of the votes counted - making it essential for both to win over voters from eliminated candidates in order to emerge triumphant in runoff in two weeks.
Battling to convince voters he is the best man to lead France to economic recovery after four years of crisis, Sarkozy faces an uphill battle for a second term against Hollande, a mainstream social-democrat who has never held a cabinet minister job.
Far-right candidate Marine Le Pen injected an unexpected dose of uncertainty into the final round by securing a record 18.23 percent of the first-round vote.
Despite the strong showing of the far-right, a CSA poll found that Hollande would beat Sarkozy with a comfortable lead, securing as much as 56 percent of the votes in the second round.
Pollsters Ifop-Fiducial gave Hollande 54.5 percent while Ipsos and Harris Interactive found he would get 54 percent. A BVA poll put Hollande at 53 percent.
Pollsters Ipsos found that as much 60 percent of Le Pen's supporters would vote for Sarkozy in the second round, while Ifop-Fiducial found only 48 percent would, although 21 percent would either not vote or not say what they would do.
Most voters for hard-left candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon, who came in fourth place in the first round with 10.9 percent, are set to back Hollande.
People who backed centrist Francois Bayrou, who came in fifth with 9.2 percent, had a slight preference for Sarkozy over Hollande, according to the Ifop and BVA polls.
However, the CSA poll found that 40 percent of Bayrou's voters would back Hollande in the runoff and only 25 percent would vote for Sarkozy.
The first-round results leave Sarkozy in the tricky position of having to conduct a campaign aimed at winning over voters on the far-right and in the centre who could be tempted by Hollande.
All the polls were conducted for various French media shortly after the results of the first round were made public.

22 अप्रैल 2012

How will French elections be decided ?


NEXT ROUND ON MAY 6

STORY HIGHLIGHTS       

After April 22 eight candidates eliminated; two candidates with most votes go into runoff May 6

  • Top issues are unemployment and purchasing power; and immigration to lesser extent
  • Polls give Socialist candidate Francois Hollande victories in both the first and second rounds
  • News media will call election when polls close at 8 p.m. local time on Sunday
Paris (CNN) -- French voters have been voting in the first round of the presidential election. CNN's Senior International Correspondent Jim Bittermann explains what the main themes of the election are, how the system works and who is likely to win.
What are the issues?
The economy, economy, economy. Basically, for months now the top issues have been unemployment and purchasing power. To a lesser extent -- and for some candidates, a greater extent -- immigration figures in the debate. On the extremes -- both left and right -- Europe is an issue that relates to the economic problems.
Who are the front-runners? Who is expected to win?
The polls at the moment are giving Socialist candidate Francois Hollande victories in both the first and second rounds of the voting. President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has been gathering support in the past few weeks, was slipping back in the most recent polls. There are three other candidates in double digits: Jean-Luc Melenchon on the extreme left; Marine Le Pen on the extreme right and Francois Bayrou, a centrist.
How does the election system work?
In French presidential elections there are two rounds of voting, with a two-week break between the two votes that take place on Sundays. There are at the moment 10 candidates. After the first round of voting on April 22, eight candidates will be eliminated with only the two with most votes making it into the runoff election May 6.
When will we know the result of each round?
France has a fairly accurate system of exit polling that permits the news media to call the election at the moment the polls close at 8 p.m. local time. But these are exit polls and if the race turns out to be close, the media has been known in the past to start slipping into the French conditional tense, ie. "the winner might be..."!
How much interest is there in France in the election?
That depends entirely on how much of a political junkie one is. In many ways this is one of the most interesting races in decades: a sitting president fighting for his political life is the underdog while extremist candidates at both ends of the spectrum appear to be on the verge of collecting a third of all the votes cast in the first round.
On the other hand, one thing parties across the political spectrum worry about is turnout. The issues have been thoroughly debated and one reason the extremists are doing so well is that voters are not perceiving a clear distinction between the programs of Sarkozy and Hollande, even if the two main candidates have worked hard to make their differences clear.
What implications are there for the rest of Europe?
France and Germany have been at the heart of the drive to keep the European single currency sound and Europe on course. Both Sarkozy and Hollande are committed Europeans, but if either has to turn to the extremists on the right or left for help in winning the second round of the election, then all bets are off.
How has this election differed from previous ones?
In everyone's mind is 2002. Everyone presumed Socialist Lionel Jospin and the center-right incumbent president Jacques Chirac would be the two candidates to go into the runoffs. But when the first-round ballots were counted, extreme right candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen faced off against Chirac, who won in the second.
If such a surprise were to happen again this time -- most likely provided by Melenchon on the left this time -- then there could be dramatic implications. It's hard to imagine he could end up being the president of France, but if he did, he is definitely against Europe the way it is constituted at the moment.

Hollande claims victory


-setting up runoff with Sarkozy for French presidency

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  •  An adviser to Le Pen urges her supporters to "abstain" and not vote in runoff
  •  His far-right candidate placed third; Hollande and Sarkozy will face off on May 6
  •  Hollande narrowly leads the incumbent Sarkozy, with 75% of the votes counted
Paris  -- Socialist candidate Francois Hollande declared victory Sunday in the first round of France's presidential election, setting up a showdown with incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy in May.
The proclamation, made to a crowd of supporters, is consistent with exit polls detailed on French television. Results from France's interior ministry show the same placement, albeit in a very tight contest.
With about 75% of votes counted late Sunday, Hollande had 27.9% support, followed by Sarkozy at 26.7%. Far-right candidate Marine Le Pen garnered 19.3% of this early vote, Jean-Luc Melenchon on the extreme left had 10.8% and centrist Francois Bayrou had 9.8%.
The gap had tightened appreciably from earlier results, when Hollande held a 6-percentage-point lead with just less than half the votes counted. Still, the order was consistent with exit polls that showed Hollande finishing with 28.4% of the vote, Sarkozy at 25.5% and Le Pen at 20%.
"I want to thank warmly the voters who, through their votes, have placed me in this position," Hollande told supporters in Paris on Sunday night. "This is an act of trust of confidence in my (positions) that I have presented to the French people."
The results set the stage for a May 6 runoff between Hollande and Sarkozy. Under French law, if no candidate wins an absolute majority, the two top candidates faceoff.
The results appeared to be historic, and a bad sign for Sarkozy. Several high-profile Hollande supporters told CNN that a French president running for re-election has never not placed first in the first round of the vote.
In his speech Sunday night in the capital, Sarkozy thanked citizens for voting during what he called "a time of crisis" -- saying "I know (their) worries, and I understand them."
He proposed three debates over the next two weeks, focused on the economy, social issues and foreign policy.
"The French people have the right to truth and clarity," said Sarkozy, who has been an outspoken leader on the global scene even as he has presided over a period of significant economic challenges since taking over in 2007. "Everyone will be able to make their choice with full knowledge."
Yet Aurelie Filippetti, an adviser to Hollande, said Sunday there would only be a single debate on May 2.
"There has always been one debate, and there's no need for (that) to change," she told CNN.
Sunday's turnout was 81%, with more than 12.5 million votes cast, according to the Interior Ministry. That marks a drop from 2007, when 84% of the nation's voters went to the polls, though key players from both Hollande and Sarkozy's camps described it as a "strong turnout" indicative of citizens' high interest in the race.
Especially with neither of them close to a majority, who assumes the presidency hinges on what support Sarkozy or Hollande can get from those who didn't back them Sunday. In his speech Sunday night, Melenchon urged his supporters to "fight against Sarkozy" -- noting that he's not "asking for anything in exchange" from Hollande for siding with him.
"I'm asking you not to drag your feet," Melenchon told his backers. "I just ask you to mobilize."
The 43-year-old Le Pen, though, did not specifically direct her own supporters to rally behind or against anyone in the runoff. In her own speech Sunday night, Le Pen described Sarkozy as "the outgoing president" and characterized her party as "the only opposition."
"We have never been as high as this," she said, pointing to her candidacy's vote tally. "This is only the beginning. Let us continue to fight."
Her National Front party -- founded and, until last year, led by her father -- has been known for anti-euro, protectionist policies, its stringent positions on curbing immigration and other more right-wing stances that would appear to jive more closely with the views of Sarkozy than Hollande. French Trade and Tourism Minister Frederic Lefebvre, a Sarkozy supporter, acknowledged to CNN on Sunday, "Now, we have to listen to the expectations of the far right."
Yet Ludovic Dedanne, a Le Pen adviser, accused Sarkozy of breaking promises during his five years in office and said people "do not trust" him. He recommended that his candidate's supporters "abstain" in the runoff.
Even as France has played key roles in international hot-spots in places like Libya and Syria, not to mention during the pan-European debt crisis, the domestic economy has been a prime focus of the election. France is struggling in the face of sluggish economic growth and a 10% unemployment rate.
A chief contrast in the two remaining contenders' economic approaches is that Hollande generally supports "more government action to stimulate the economy" whereas Sarkozy favors policies such as lowering some taxes and possibly repealing the mandated 35-hour work week, said Michael Leruth, who teaches a course about the election at the College of William & Mary in Virginia.
One year ago, Hollande wasn't even considered by many as the Socialist party's best hope. That distinction belonged to then-International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who polls suggested could challenge and possibly beat Sarkozy.
But Strauss-Kahn's political prospects floundered in the wake of a sexual assault charges -- later dropped -- after an incident at a New York hotel, as well as accusations he participated in a prostitution ring in France. That helped propel the 57-year-old Hollande, who has never formally held any national elective office, to become his party's presidential choice.
He is now aiming to become France's first left-wing leader since the late Francois Mitterrand left office in 1995.
Lefebvre described Hollande as "the choice of the past," with other Sarkozy backers playing up the fact that Mitterand didn't select him as one of his ministers during his 14 years as president.
Yet Filippetti said that Le Pen's strong showing suggested that Sarkozy couldn't get those more philosophically aligned with his views to support him, despite his "aggressive" efforts. That will leave the incumbent hard-pressed to unite all French, she said.
"The people ... don't trust Nicolas Sarkozy any more," Filippetti said.