Nikkei Asia has published an investigative report entitled "India's appetite for asbestos undaunted by global bans:Expert says 'commercial interests' drive the trade of deadly fibers in South Asian nation". India's insatiable appetite for asbestos has been undaunted by a global push to ban the deadly fiber and warnings from experts over the health risks to millions in the world's top consumer. It states: "Though India banned asbestos mining in 1993 by ceasing to issue new licenses, it continues to import more of the toxic mineral than any other country. In 2023, the country accounted for 56.7% of the world's asbestos imports, with Brazil and Russia as its primary suppliers, according to World Bank trade data."
Nikkei Asia story is linked to what Navin Chawla, said as the Secretary, Union Ministry of Consumer Affairs in 2004, when he was asked about his failure to ban asbestos laden consumer products. He said,"if his ministry had the power to ban asbestos ridden products, he would have banned it. Ministries of commerce, chemicals and health can ban it." Chawla passed away on February 1, 2025.
Notably, the Superintendent of Tihar Jail had deposed before the Justice J. C. Shah Judicial Inquiry Commission stating that Chawla had asked him to throw political prisoners in asbestos cells and “bake” them. He wanted him to construct asbestos roof tops in some cells, so that hardcore political leaders could be kept there during the hot summer.
The Shah Commission of Inquiry, led by retired chief justice of the Supreme Court of India, Justice Shah, was convened by the union government on May 28, 1977, under Section 3 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, to inquire into the transgressions, violations, and violence committed during the national emergency. The commission submitted its evaluative findings on the grave conditions during the emergency in three parts in August 1978. The Commission held 100 sittings in open session. It submitted two interim reports.
Photo:Shah Commission of Inquiry, Interim Report I, March 11, 1978, Chapter 1, "Ministry of Home Affairs Notification” (1978, Page 1)
At page no. 246 of the Commission's report, it is recorded:"Though Shri Navin Chawla had no position in the jail. hierarchy, he was exercising extra statutory control in jail matters and sending instructions on all matters including the treatment of particular detenus. Shri Chawla had suggested the construction of some Cells with asbestos roofs to 'bake' certain persons. (Para 11.47).
In the third part of its report, it observed: "The Commission has viewed with concern the evidence relating to the enormous power that was wielded by the lower functionaries like Shri R. K. Dhawan, Shri R. C. Mehtani, Shri Navin Chawla and some others; It is necessary for the Government to appreciate the need for defining the various functions and powers of the several lower functionaries who are in close proximity to the seats of power. The Commission views the developments in this regard with great concern, for power came to be exercised by some of these lower functionaries without the requisite authority and the accountability that goes with it. Power and responsibility must generally go together. During the emergency, the political component of Government in quite a few important cases came to be divorced from the channel of communication. The result was that powers came to be wielded by the Special Assistants or the Private Secretaries in the name of and on behalf of the Ministers, and the people at the receiving end of, the orders were left with no option but to carry out their orders without even having any facility or the desire to verify the authenticity and the authority of the orders emanating from the lower functionaries attached to the Ministers. This. style of functioning at higher level of the Administration has indeed taken a toll of the liberty and careers of countless people. The Government should define as precisely as it is possible, the circumstances under which the personal staff including Special Assistants and the Private Secretaries attached to the Ministers could convey orders. The Government should also provide checks and safeguards to ensure that in the event of doubt or difference of Opinion the levels receiving the orders from the Ministers are in a position to check back and satisfy themselves that the orders in, fact had emanated from the source in whose name the orders were issued. Unless every level of the Government starting with the political component and going down the line is animated by one and the only desire to function within a democratic set up with the ultimate aim and object being only to be able to look after the interest of the common man, there is no hope that we in this country will be able to graduate ourselves from mere words, to the real core of democracy". (p.230-231)
The
Shah Commission Report was presented to Parliament on August 3, 1978.
It suggested a periodic review of all laws by the legislatures to ensure
that the powers conferred on public servants are not abused or misused
as had happened during the dark days of the emergency. In its final
report presented to Parliament it has observed that unless public
servants work for and establish a reputation of "political neutrality",
the citizens will have no confidence in the impartiality and fairness of
the services.
No comments:
Post a Comment