Pulwama...

In response to a question about Pakistan demanding proof of Jem’s involvement, he said, “We urge Pakistan to fully cooperate with the investigation into the attack and to punish anyone responsible.”

In a phone call to national security adviser Ajit Doval last week, his American counterpart John Bolton recognised India’s right to self-defence amidst mounting calls in India for retaliatory action ranging from a military strike to diplomatic and economic measures to isolate and punish Pakistan.

The United States has also promised to help in putting Jaish-e-mohammad founder Masood Azhar on a UN Security Council list of terrorists, which has been blocked by China on Pakistan’s behalf. JEM has been on that list, along with other Pakistan-based terrorists groups, since 2001.

After the failure of three previous attempt at designating Azhar — all blocked by China — France is leading the fourth, with the support of other countries as French officials told India on Tuesday.

The states department refused to comment on fresh efforts to list Azhar. A spokesperson said in a statement that deliberations of the sanctioning committee, set up by a UN Security Council resolution, are “confidential, and as such we do not comment on specific matters”.

But, the spokesperson added, the United States “fully support(s) actions to prevent them from conducting future attacks”, and renewed the call to Pakistan to “uphold its responsibilities pursuant to UN Security Council resolutions to deny safe haven and support for terrorists and to freeze without delay the funds and other financial assets or economic resources of individuals and entities” on the UN sanctions list.

Some experts have argued that the US has not been doing as much as it should. “The United States should step up its diplomacy in a visible way to help manage what could be a major crisis between India and Pakistan,” wrote Alyssa Ayers, a former state department official, on Twitter.

A former South Asian diplomat, who did not want to be identified, said the US has been “firm but not as harsh as some Indians might have wanted”. Then, the diplomat argued, “If the US has given nod to Indian retaliation, it makes sense for it to not make too much noise.” National Savings Certificate (NSC) — two such schemes — was 7.7% in 2018.

“EPFO has kept significant amount as surplus, which should be ideally distributed among the subscribers. The money belongs to the workers. Now, it is the election season, hence a higher interest rate can be offered to the subscribers,” a former CBT member said. Labour and employment minister Santosh Kumar Gangwar told the Rajya Sabha on February 6 that investments in equities were allowed by the Central Board of Trustees (CBT) since 2015-16 with an eye on higher returns.

Initially, only 5% of the “incremental funds were invested in equities and a related investment, but gradually the exposure was raised to 10% in 2016-17 and 15% in 2017-18,” he said. Currently, EPFO invests in equities through subscribing to so-called exchange-traded funds (ETFS). The former CBT member added that the returns on equities this year have not been very good. Mint reported this week that the returns on two ETFS, CPSE ETF and Bharat 22 ETF, both a basket of stocks of stateoowned companies — the investment was made to help the government meet its disinvestment target — were lower than expected. The two returned just 1.89% and 0.48% till end December, the Mint report said. “EPFO is custodian of workers’ savings and it must pass on the entire benefit in the form of interest rate to its subscriber,” Ashok Singh of INTUC and a former member of CBT said.

Another former CBD member said,“in principle, EPFO should be an independent organisation, but in practice, interest rates and other important affairs of the fund are greatly influenced by the government through labour ministry”.

Virjesh Upadhyay, national secretary of Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) and a member of the board, said EPFO is an autonomous body and it takes its decisions independently. “It is controlled by us, the workers.”

According to a report published in HT on February 18, the BMS at its national executive meeting held last week demanded to address the shortcomings in the Employee Provident Fund pension scheme. “Till such a decision is taken, a minimum ₹5,000 per month should be declared as pension for EPF contributors,” it said. NEWDELHI:THE Supreme Court has asked the governments of 17 states to evict an estimated one million tribal and other households living in forests after their claims of the right to live in forests were rejected under the Forest Rights Act.

The court has asked the evictions to be carried out by July 12 and directed the Dehradun-based Forest Survey of India to submit a satellite-image based report on the encroachments removed.

According to affidavits filed by the states in the top court, about 11,72,931 (1.17 million) land ownership claims made by scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers under the Forest Rights Act have been rejected on various grounds, including absence of proof that the land was in their possession for at least three generations. The law provides for giving land rights to those living on forest land for at least three generations before December 31, 2005. The claims are examined by a committee headed by the district collector and having forest department officials as members.

The Forest Rights Law itself has been criticised by both wildlife activists and those fighting for the rights of tribespeople and forest-dwellers, albeit for different reasons. The former believe giving people rights to live in forests will eventually harm the forests themselves and also wildlife. The latter believe that the implementation of the law is far from perfect and that deficiencies in this have resulted in many valid claims being rejected by the states. The latter also allege that the government didn’t exactly put up an effective defence in the case, which was brought by wildlife NGOS and activists.

The rejections—madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Odisha have the biggest numbers—comprise 20% of the total claims for land ownership submitted by those residing in forests across India under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. The law was enacted by the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government to undo the historic injustice done to forest dwellers under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, which termed them “encroachers” on the land they had been tilling for generations.

In an order uploaded on its website on Tuesday evening, the apex court specifically issued directions to the chief secretaries of each of the 17 states to ensure that in all cases where land ownership claims have been rejected, eviction is carried out on or before the next date of hearing (July 12, 2019).

In cases where verification/ re-verification/review is pending, the state must complete the process within four months and submit a report, the court said. “Let the Forest Survey of India make a satellite survey and place on record the encroachment positions and also state the positions after the eviction as far as possible,” it said. The court order came a few days after Congress president Rahul Gandhi wrote to chief ministers of party-ruled Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, asking them to reopen the rejected cases and help claimants to secure their rights under the Forest Rights Act. “We must honour the people’s mandate by effectively implementing the Forest Rights Act,” Gandhi said, in similar letters written to the three chief ministers. He pointed out that several environmental NGOS have challenged the constitutional validity of the Forest Rights Act and the legislative competence of Parliament to enact it. “Given the significance of the case, I request you to ensure competent legal representation for the above-mentioned matter and to review the implementation of the Act,” the letter read.

Kishore Rithe, one of the petitioners who runs Nature Conservation Society, a wildlife protection non-government organization, said the court has rightly asked state chief secretaries to evict encroachers. “If the chief secretaries fail to implement the court order due to political reasons, only God will be able to save them. The order has nothing to do with elections,” he said, referring to Gandhi’s letter to the three chief ministers. Campaign for Survival and Dignity, a network of NGOS working for the welfare of those living in forests, said the Forest Rights Act contains no clause for eviction of rejected claimants and, in fact, section 4(5) specifically prohibits eviction until the process of implementation of the law is fully complete in an area.

“But this order can become a pretext for forest officials to attack lakhs of forest dwellers and do another historic injustice to tribals and other forest dwellers,” the NGO said in a statement on Wednesday. According to the 2011 census, there are an estimated 104 million tribespeople in India. But civil society groups estimate there are around 200 million people from the scheduled tribes and other forest dwellers living in 1,70,000 villages in forest areas, which cover about 22% of India’s geographical area.

TREASURE OVERSEAS