Indian Supreme Court issues notices on Punjab River water's Law -- Move in Pak Assembly to buy Sutlej water
In a deliberate omission the Manmohan Singh government's Presidential reference omits to ask the obvious questions from Supreme Court
People of the Punjab being fooled on the SYL issue by the Manmohan Singh government with a phony Presidential reference
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - On Monday August 02, 2004, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Indian Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice, R.C. Lahoti, (and Justices N. Santosh Hegde, Y.K. Sabharwal, Ms. Ruma Pal and S.N. Variava) issued notices to the Center and the States of Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir on the Presidential reference to the court.This is the first act of an orchestrated 'drama' being played in India to cancel 'The Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004' (passed unanimously by the Punjab state Assembly and signed by the Governor on July 12, 2004) a state law which legally - under the Indian constitution - nullifies all unequal agreements on sharing of Punjab's river waters. (For a background on the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004' and all you want to know about the proposed SYL canal dispute, please click at: /home/khalistancalling/2004/july14.aspx and /home/khalistancalling/2004/june09.aspx)
On July 22, 2004, Indian President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, sought the Indian Supreme Court’s advisory opinion on the Punjab Government’s decision to abrogate water-sharing agreements (read understandings made under duress) with its neighbouring states after the Manmohan Singh Union government sought a Presidential reference on this issue under Article 143 of the Indian Constitution. The non-riparian states of Haryana and Rajasthan had earlier refused to move the Supreme Court knowing, as they do, that they have no legal legs to stand on. Article 143 (1) enables the President to act on the aid and advice of the Cabinet to seek the Supreme Court's opinion on any issue relating to such matters which have wide ramifications.
The Presidential reference was filed after the Centre had approached the apex court with an application for fresh directions on the construction of the incomplete Punjab section of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal, ordered earlier by a two judge bench (Justice Ms. Ruma Pal and Mr. Justice P. Venkatarama Reddi) of the Indian Supreme Court. The Presidential reference was actually trigerred by the unanimous passage by the Punjab State assembly of the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004' meant to stop the SYL canal. The legislation however, does NOT interfere or stop the current gratis (free of charge) syphoning of Punjab river waters which has been going on for decades by non-riparian states of Haryana and Rajasthan. Incidently a former President of Pakistan, now a member of the Pakistani parliament, Sardar Farooq Ahmad Khan Leghari, whose family was an ally of Maharajah Ranjit Singh in the ninteenth century, moved a motion in the Pakistan National Assembly on July 27, 2004, (http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_28-7-2004_pg7_27) demanding that Pakistan should start negotiations to buy Sutlej river water from India for Southern Pakistani Punjab which was facing an acute water shortage.
The Presidential reference, made on July 22, 2004, under Article 143 (1) of the Constitution seeks the Supreme court's advisory opinion on the controversial legislation. The Presidential reference reads;
1) Whether the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, 2004 and the provisions thereof are in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of India. The Presidential reference reads;
2) Whether the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 and the provisions thereof are in accordance with the provisions of Section 14 of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956, Section 78 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 and the Notification dated March 24, 1976 issued thereunder;
3) Whether the State of Punjab has validly terminated the agreement dated December 31, 1981 and all other agreements relating to the Ravi-Beas waters and is discharged from its obligation under the said agreement(s); and
4) Whether in view of the provisions of the Act, the State of Punjab is discharged from its obligations flowing from the Judgment and Decree dated January 15, 2002 and the Judgment and Order dated June 4 of the Supreme Court.
It would be obvious to even a school boy that the above points, drafted in legal language, mean nothing, and have been dishonestly drafted with larceny in mind. What is most painful is that the reference sent to the Supreme Court, via the President, is under the signature of Prime minister Manmohan Singh, a Sikh with roots and relatives in the Punjab, who is not an illiterate like Darbara Singh and Langowal, but an educated and experienced Sikh bureaucrat and a renowned economist who is known to go by the book. Where was Prime minister Manmohan Singh's integrity, he has been trumpeting, when he forwarded the reference to the President for transmission to the Supreme Court? (see Khalistan Calling headlined, "What did the Sikhs gain from Sonia Gandhi's appointment of a Sikh as a Prime minister" by clicking at: /home/khalistancalling/2004/june09.aspx)
As the river waters is a state subject, not a central subject, under the Indian constitution, which document supercedes everything, we agree with the very valid points raised by the Chandigarh-based Punjab River Forum recently. In a petition, on July 29, 2004, to Indian President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam, the Punjab River Forum requested that he also seek the Supreme Court’s advice on the following points:
1) Whether Sections 78, 79 and 80 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act 1966 are in consonance with the provisions of the constitution and its effect on the government’s order of March 1976?
2) Whether the verbatim incorporation of a political deal in the Interstate River Water Disputes Act 1956 is in accord with the constitution.
In point No. 2 above when the Punjab River Forum asks, " whether the verbatim incorporation of a political deal in the Interstate River Water Disputes Act 1956 is is in accord with the constitution," it is pointing towards the very first unequal 'agreement’ on water sharing, which was affected in a hush-hush manner by the Union Irrigation minister and two Deputy Secretaries from Punjab and Rajasthan on January 29, 1955. The 'agreement' deprived the Punjab of more than one half of a river (8 MAF of water). It was kept a closely guarded secret for several decades.
The 'political deal' mentioned in Point No. 2 above also, we believe, questions the following accords:- The 1985 Langowal-Rajiv Gandhi understanding between an Indian Prime minister and an illiterate private citizen, Sant Langowal; and, the unequal accord Prime minister Indira Gandhi forced an illiterate Punjab Chief minister Darbara Singh to sign with Haryana chief minister Bhajan Lal & Rajasthan Chief minister Shiv Charan Mathur on December 31, 1981.
The inclusion of Sikh-hating Justice Ms. Ruma Pal (a bigotted lady judge beholden to Haryana Chief minister Om Parkash Chautala, who has shown shown her bias and prejudice aplenty by issuing one sided judgements on the SYL issue for the past few years) in the five judge Constitutional bench of the Indian Supreme Court to hear the 'phony', nay dishonestly drafted, Presidential reference on the constitutional validity of the 'The Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004' (which nullified on July 12, 2004, some unequal understandings on river waters - read SYL canal - with the non-riparian state of Haryana) is indicative of what the attitude and judgement of the five-judge Supreme Court constitutional bench is going to be six weeks from now and after. We can safely predict the Supreme Court will decide against Punjab. Justice Ms. Ruma Pal's past conduct reminds one of a Punjabi saying; "Kuttee chor nal rallee hoi hai" - 'The watchdog is in cahoots with the thief".
Despite clear indications of what the Supreme Court is going to do with the Presidential reference the Punjab Chief minister, Captain Amrinder Singh, a scion of the Patiala family, keeps repeating by rote that, 'any Supreme Court decision will be final', 'the state will abide by any Supreme Court decision', 'I will obey any Supreme Court order etc., etc.' It is not his prerogative to issue carte blance statements. That decision belongs to the people of the Punjab not to any one individual as water is a matter of life and death for millions of Punjabis. The sad part is that the Indian media is trying its level best to breakup the unprecidented unity shown by the Punjabi leadership. According to a PTI report, headlined, "Amarinder rules out resignation," published in the Hindustan Times of August 02, 2004, Captain Amrinder Singh is reported to have started sniping at Mr. Parkash Singh Badal who played a major role in the Punjabi unity over the SYL issue. The Hindustan Times (http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_920723,000900010001.htm) quotes Captain Amrinder Singh as having said that, "Badal was "feeling desperate" because he felt his agenda had been "hijacked and the Akali leader was left with no issue to target him." Let us hope that the Punjab Chief minister Captain Amrinder Singh did not say this and that, this disinformation has been planted with the aim of breaking up the magnificent unity of the Punjab political leadership over the river water issue.
The unity of the Punjab leadership with the people of the Punjab, (as exhibited last Sunday - August 01 - during a Bharti Kisan Union seminar on 'River waters' for the village level opinion makers, attended by Punjab Chief minister Captain Amrinder Singh and Vice-Chancellors of Punjab Agricultural University, Punjab University and Gura Nanak Dev University) is needed more than ever now. Punjabis MUST be ready to come out in the streets to man morchas when the Supreme Court pulls a rabbit out of its hat to do Punjab in on the SYL canal issue based on - it will claim - on Prime minister's Manmohan Singh fraudulently drafted Presidential reference which has not asked the real questions.