A push for gender equality

SC’S verdict on women’s right to property is a significant step forward

In a move that upholds gender equality under the law, the Supreme Court (SC) has expanded the rights of Hindu women to their father’s property under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, even if they were born before the change, or the father was not alive at the time of the amendment. If the woman died before the amendment came into force, her share can be passed on to her children. There have been several amendments to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, but none gave unconditional rights to women with regard to property.

The latest interpretation by SC removes male primacy over Hindu ancestral property. But it has taken the precaution of adding the caveat that registered settlements prior to December 2004, when the amendment was tabled in the Rajya Sabha, cannot be opened to avoid a deluge of litigation. It is a major push for women who lack economic resources and are often marginalised by male members of the family. The fact that a law — not just a will — decides women’s property rights is significant.

However, the challenge of ensuring that women are actually empowered by this legal provision remains; many progressive legal rights fall by the wayside as women do not know that they exist. This must be rectified. The SC’S provision gives women a level-playing field in legal rights over property, and is a gamechanger in the larger canvas of gender rights.

It has often been said that the only reason why the Indian information technology (IT) industry scaled the heights it did was because the government never quite understood how it worked, and, so, did not impose on it the sort of regulatory burdens that it did on other sectors. Unfortunately, this is no longer the case. Thanks to a series of misplaced policy choices, the government has systematically eroded the permitted operations of the Indian outsourcing industry to the point where it is no longer globally competitive.

Foremost among these are the telecom regulations imposed on a category of companies broadly known as Other Service Providers (OSPS). Anyone who provides “application services” is an OSP and the term “application services” is defined to mean “telebanking, telemedicine, tele-education, teletrading, e-commerce, call centres, network operation centres and other It-enabled services”. When it was first introduced, these regulations were supposed to apply to the traditional outsourcing industry, focusing primarily on call centre operations. However, it has, over the years been interpreted far more widely than originally intended.

While OSPS do not require a license to operate, they do have to comply with a number of telecom restrictions. The central regulatory philosophy behind these restrictions is the government’s insistence that voice calls terminated in an OSP facility over the regular Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) must be kept from intermingling with those carried over the data network. To that end, OSPS are required to design their networks so that they can demonstrate a separation between voice and data calls.

While these restrictions may have made sense a decade ago, when data wasn’t as ubiquitous as it is now, the insistence on maintaining such arbitrary distinctions between different types of calls in today’s world seems daft. Everyone I know prefers to call me over Whatsapp, Skype or any one of a number of data-based call services because the regular voice network cannot be trusted. To require IT companies that operate on the cuttingedge of technology to maintain this distinction when, just outside their gleaming campuses, the average man on the street can choose whichever service suits him, is incomprehensible.

Central to the enforcement of these regulations is the Electronic Private Automatic Branch Exchange (EPABX), a piece of telecom equipment that was once the central junction box through which all telecom connections into and out of an office flowed. The utility of an EPABX has dwindled in a world where the vast majority of telephone conversations happen over the mobile network, but, in OSPS, it remains a central fixture. In the early days, OSPS were required to maintain separate EPABXS for voice and data ensuring that the data network was kept physically separate from the voice network. These restrictions have since been relaxed and OSPS can now have a central EPABX through which voice and data calls flow so long as the EPABX maintains a logical separation between voice and data.

But even this is anachronistic. All global businesses today manage their call and data networks centrally using a single global EPABX located in any one country in which they have operations. This allows them to deliver the sort of converged user experience that customers have come to expect with modern service offerings. In addition, having data centrally managed allows businesses far greater control over their sales and customer conversion rates than is otherwise possible. However, since Indian regulations require OSPS to have an EPABX physically located in India, global businesses with operations in India are forced to re-engineer their networks to specially account for these restrictions.

For companies already operating in India, this is often treated as an additional cost of continuing to do business in here, even though clients I have spoken with have confirmed that we are the only country they have operations in that imposes these restrictions. For companies that are evaluating whether or not to use India as a base for new operations, this is, more often than not, viewed as an unreasonably onerous restriction that imposes an unacceptably high level of constraints on the way in which they can structure their operations. As a result, this is often the single biggest reason why they end up choosing some other less restrictive jurisdiction in which to establish their operations.

It is not clear to me why India continues to persist with this regulatory model. There was a time when the government had a legitimate concern that if they allowed voice and data networks to intermingle with each other, the resulting toll bypass would have meant a significant reduction in licence revenues. Given that today ordinary citizens regularly switch between voice and data on their mobile phones depending on the reliability of the available network, this is surely no longer the case. Why India continues to implement these antiquated regulations even after it has become evident that these restrictions are affecting its global competitiveness is simply beyond me.

The IT industry accounts for close to 8% of India’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). It is the metaphorical goose that lays golden eggs. Let’s try not to kill it.

Manoj Sinha’s appointment as the new Lieutenant Governor (L-G) of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) is a refreshing change. Sinha — a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader — has proven political and administrative skills, having been a part of the Union government in the railway and telecom ministries, where, by all accounts, he did a competent job. As a leader rooted in the complex politics of eastern Uttar Pradesh, he also brings to the table political skills in managing social groups, and an understanding of the intersection between politics, administration and law and order.

These skills will be essential in J&K — which has been stuck in a political stalemate ever since the effective nullification of Article 370. His appointment is a signal that the Centre now wants to break this impasse and move the political process forward.

But to understand how the stalemate deepened, one has to go back to developments in the aftermath of August 5. The constitutional changes were welcomed by citizens in the rest of India, and it was received with elation in Jammu and Ladakh. But the regional parties of Kashmir Valley and stakeholders in the Shia-dominated Kargil area were opposed to the changes. Anticipating a civil disobedience movement, particularly in the Valley, the Centre decided to impose the writ of the State through a set of hard measures.

This had three significant implications. The first was that democratic forces and anti-democratic forces were treated in a similar manner. And this led to a convergence in their opposition to the Centre’s moves, not physically on the ground, but in principle. Second, it led to a series of media reports, both within India and internationally, pointing to the debilitating impact of these restrictions on normal civilian life and democracy. And three, there was an international reaction. Pakistan predictably kicked up a storm — though its campaign to discredit India hasn’t worked. United States President Donald Trump offered to mediate, but Washington has gone back to its position of treating the issue as a bilateral one. And China became active in the Kashmir theatre — both by shepherding Pakistan’s efforts at the United Nations, and objecting to the changes in the administrative status of Ladakh. Many observers believe that China’s recent aggression across the Line of Actual Control could be traced back to the changes in J&K.

It is in this broad political-security context that Sinha has taken over.

The new L-G should not — even if this sounds counter-intuitive — get too bogged down in the minutiae of security operations in Kashmir. This is not to suggest that there aren’t security challenges. There is the everpresent threat from Pakistan, and more so now, since it could intensify its activity at the border in sync with China. There is also the emergence of a cadre of technologicallysavvy young, radicalised men of South Kashmir who are targeting all those associated with democratic institutions. And then, there are the terrorists sent in by the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-mohammad, Lashkar-etoiba and Al Badr who are limited in numbers, but high on resolve in inflicting terror.

But, over the years, the J&K Police has developed an effective response to threats emanating from terrorist groups. The army is capable of dealing with both the external fronts. And together, all the security system stakeholders — the army, state police, CAPFS, and the wider intelligence community — have the experience of working in sync. Sinha needs to, of course, be familiar with the overall security situation and provide direction when needed — but he need not make this the focus of his term.

What Sinha, instead, must focus on is creating a politically inclusive set-up for all sections of Kashmiris. He needs to be aware of a key grievance of the “pro-india” element of the polity. These segments rightly feel they have been treated at par with the propakistan and the pro-independence elements of the polity. For all their weaknesses, it must be recognised that these democratic forces have the support of a large section of citizens, and their assessment that status quo will only breed further alienation must be taken into account.

To tackle this, the L-G must personally meet all the leaders of both national and regional political parties of the Union Territory in general, but the Valley in particular — both in delegations as well as individually to establish a personal rapport with them. If Kashmiris feel they have a patient, attentive and sensitive listener, that itself will go a long way in bridging the trust deficit. He must also push for the release of all mainstream democratic leaders and drop charges against them — even as secessionist leaders remain under detention.

The L-G should also take into account recent policy actions — such as domicile certificates to non-residents and housing schemes for security personnel — which have not gone down well with the people of all regions. Sinha must also lead the effort to convince the Centre and the security apparatus to restore 4G connectivity. He must closely assess the detrimental impact of both government measures as well as the pandemic on normal everyday life — and seek to resolve it. Better connectivity, for instance, can enable more effective online classes across educational institutions. He must ensure that at the district level, Covid-19 is accorded the highest priority in terms of public health.

Once Sinha understands the political contours, establishes communication and trust with the Valley’s political leaders, and takes steps which improve everyday civilian life, he must come up with a political report on how to revive the electoral process in J&K.

It is time for all stakeholders to give Sinha time, and for Sinha to live up to the trust reposed in him by PM Narendra Modi.

SINCE INDIAN REGULATIONS REQUIRE OSPS TO HAVE AN EPABX PHYSICALLY LOCATED IN INDIA, BUSINESSES WITH OPERATIONS IN INDIA ARE FORCED TO RE-ENGINEER THEIR NETWORKS TO SPECIALLY ACCOUNT FOR THESE RESTRICTIONS