The Union Government has appointed a committee to review the Indian Constitution. It is to be headed by a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and will consist of other eminent judges, legal luminaries and some distinguished people in public life. The terms of reference for the committee are still to be set, but it could obviously be expected to undertake an assessment of the working of the present Constitution and suggesting changes with a view to enabling it to become a more effective instrument for the fulfilment of the objectives of the Constitution and the aims of the Constitution makers.

It is not totally free from legal doubt whether a revision of the Constitution which is similar to the framing of a Constitution has to be done only by the elected representatives of the people. There have been effective arguments on either side. Some political parties and other institutes as well as eminent individuals have seriously questioned the wisdom as well as the legality of going about the task of amending the Constitution in this manner. It was felt that the action of the government in appointing this Committee was motivated by two political objectives namely, to facilitate the change-over from a Parliamentary to a Presidential form of government through the back door, and in the guise of providing a stable Parliament to enable the present Government to continue power for a fixed term of five years, irrespective of the political fortunes and buffetings in Parliament. Fears were also expressed that an opportunity was being sought to interfere with the basic features of the Constitution and to change the format of Parliamentary democracy.

Thinking that their original objective might be scuttled if these fears of the opposition became very local the government beat a hasty retreat and clarified that there was no intention while appointing a committee to review the Constitution or to abrogate the Parliamentary system of government or to interfere with the basic features of the Constitution.

To dispel the suspicions expressed in several quarters that the committee would be packed with political favourites of the National Democratic Alliance the government clarified that only legal luminaries and distinguished men in public life would be appointed. However in actual practice three persons have been appointed, whose credentials do not coincide with the declared intentions of the government. These three members are P A Sangma who is the secretary of the Nationalist Congress Party but those appointment has been justified on the ground of his pre-eminence as a leader from the North-East and as a very prominent representative from the Christian Minority, Subash Kashyap who is aligned with the Bharatiya Janata Party but whose appointment has been justified on the grounds of his having been a very distinguished general secretary of the Lok Sabha and also a distinguished author and theoretician on Parliamentary practice and Sumitra Kulkarni who is actively associated with the Bharatiya Janata Party.

Without entering into the legal question whether the Parliament or a Constituent Assembly alone can review or formulate an amended Constitution but bearing in mind that a committee to review the Constitution has already been appointed, it would be wise to consider whether consistent with the sanctity of the Constitution and the sovereignty of the people and their representatives, an alternative procedure could be adopted. I’m outlining below the format of such an alternative procedure.

A Constituent Assembly was elected to formulate the Indian Constitution and it therefore stands to reason that a similar body should have been set up to formulate an amended Constitution. Since this has not been done, whatever the reasons, and since a regularly elected Parliament and regularly elected State Legislatures are in position, the next best alternative would be to entrust the task of reviewing the Constitution or formulating an amended Constitution to the Parliament and the State Legislatures. For this purpose a special session of Parliament to last five to six working days should be called. The only agenda would be to discuss the Constitution in all its details and formulate suggestions for its modification. The session should be a joint session of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. Discussions must be arranged in such a manner that, depending upon the strength of political party in Parliament, adequate representatives from each party should be given an opportunity to make their observations. In addition, representatives from independents and nominated members should also be given a similar opportunity. All these suggestions should be properly documented so that the views of the members of Parliament could be known.

Similarly, each State Legislature i.e. the Legislative Assembly and wherever it exists the Legislative Council should be summoned for a joint session which could last for at least 3 to 4 working days. As in the case of Parliament, an opportunity for discussion in detail and for expressing their views must be given to the representatives of the various political parties as well as to the representatives of independent and nominated members. Though the discussions in the State Legislatures on all aspects of the Constitution should be permitted, emphasis should be on matters affecting the State and Centre-State relations. As in the case of the debate in Parliament, the discussions in the State Assemblies should be properly documented, so that the views of the members of the legislature might be known.

On the conclusion of the debate in Parliament and the State Legislatures, the documents containing the suggestions should be placed before a joint Parliamentary committee consisting of 10 members of the Lok Sabha and 5 members of the Rajya Sabha to be selected jointly by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha in such a manner that representation is given to the major political parties. This committee could be appointed immediately after the debate in Parliament is over. This committee will take on the form of a Mini-Constituent Assembly, it will have the advantage and the opportunity of knowing the views of Parliament and the State Legislatures on the question of how the Constitution should be formulated/modified without touching its basic features and without jettisoning the Parliamentary form of Democracy. At this stage, it might be necessary to make available to the joint Parliamentary Committees the assistance of a team of legal luminaries including judges of the Supreme Courts and the High Courts, eminent practitioners of Constitutional law and some important and knowledgeable people in life. Such a team could consist of about 10 persons. If there is no objection these representatives could be included as members of the joint parliamentary committee but if there is any Constitutional objection to this, they could be appointed as standing invites with or without the right to vote.

In order to help the committee in its deliberations and to submit a comprehensive report, the committee might invite the views of the public within a time frame and take into consideration such views expressed by the general public as may be relevant for the purpose of submitting its report.

The report of the joint Parliamentary committee should be finalised within a period of one year at the most after its appointment. Thereafter its report should be discussed at a special joint session of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. The decisions of the joint session of Parliament on the report of the Parliamentary committee on the Constitution should form the basis for bringing Constitutional amendments to the existing Constitution. The Constitution as amended when passed by Parliament will form the New Constitution of India.

The advantage of the procedures set out about are:

1. Since Constitution formulation is essentially the prerogative and a task for the representatives of the people, the discussions in Parliament and the State Legislatures will take care of this requirement.

2. The appointment of a joint Parliamentary committee will provide a compact body on the lines of the Constituent Assembly for drafting the New Constitution.

3. The association of legal luminaries and important men in public life will provide expert opinion and suggestions to enable the joint Parliament committee to formulate its views.

4. The invitation to the public in expressing its views on this matter will give a feed back to the joint Parliamentary committee on public opinion in this matter.

5. The placing of the report of the joint Parliamentary committee before Parliament for final decisions will set the seal on the procedure and make it conform to the proper views with regard to the formulation of a Constitution i.e. that the Constitution of India should be formulated by a body akin to a Constituent Assembly.

Since the present government has made up its mind on the review of the Constitution, it is doubtful whether the procedure for the formulation of a new Constitution or the revision of the existing Constitution suggested above would be agreed to in full.

In that case, the best alternative would be that the report of the review committee should be placed for detailed discussion not only in the joint session of Parliament but also in the joint session of the State Legislatures. On the basis of these discussions in Parliament and the State Legislatures which should be fully documented, a joint parliamentary committee could be appointed. The further procedure after the appointment of this Parliamentary committee could be on the lines of the suggestions made by me above with regard to the formulation of an amended Constitution. However, the association of legal luminaries and eminent men in public life with the joint Parliamentary committee would become redundant because the review committee now appointed by the government already includes such legal luminaries and important men in public life. The report of the joint Parliament committee could thereafter be placed before Parliament and the procedure suggested earlier by me could be followed for the formulation of an amended Constitution

The present Indian fears are born out of the Pakistan’s tendency to exploit the Clinton stopover as an endorsement of the army regime in that country. President Clinton has spelt out that "it would be a grave mistake for people to think that my going represents some sort of endorsement of a non-democratic process which occurred there. That is not true." A White House spokesman has repeated that Gen. Musharraf is "wrong" in putting the endorsement interpretation on the Clinton stopover.

The US thinks that the President’s visit would go a long way in reminding the army regime that they are on the wrong track and unless the military rule is ended, giving way to the return of democracy by holding elections, Pakistan is in for more trouble. Gen. Musharraf’s calculations begin and end with short-term gains. He hopes that the Clinton visit would get him a reprieve from the World Bank and IMF and new economic assistance may start, so that Pakistan may be saved from immediate economic collapse.

What would be the impact of the Clinton trip on cross-border terrorism? If what the President has said during the Kargil war still applies, the army regime has to "respect" the Line of Control and vacate all aggression, including the present mercenary terrorist invasion of Kashmir.

President Clinton and Prime Minister Vajpayee would so guide the talks between the two as to address the main concerns of both the countries. And cross-border terrorism remains one of India’s chief concerns and the President recognises it as an international issue, since the President has taken a lead role in making countries realise that terrorism is no solution.

No one in India expects any decisive breakthrough in Indo-US relations during the Clinton visit. But from the changing US perceptions after the Jaswant Singh-Strobe Talbott (US deputy secretary of state) talks on India’s nuclear security concerns and the US preoccupation with global non-proliferation, possibilities have emerged for some kind of reconciliation, though no specific framework could be proposed for such a reconciliation.

However, intensive and purposeful engagement between the two countries on substantive issues can be expected during the visit. From the size of the business delegation accompanying the President, it is almost certain that the Indo-US business and industry relations will get a big boost.

Social development should not be ignored. It is essential that India should take a stand on labour relations and labour laws. The kernel of the argument should be that each country must make use of its advantages in the early phases of industrialisation. Without sacrificing the legitimate interests of the working class, US should be told that the abundance of labour is one of India’s strong points which the country has to put to the best use. Child labour has to be tackled in India’s own interests.

"There is no approved project. However, some preliminary discussions have taken place between ISRO engineers and Indian scientists on the feasibility of a lunar mission," the spokesman said. Studies on a possible rocket have focussed on the Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV), which is already capable of carrying a 1,250-kg payload 1,000 kilometres above the earth. "A lunar mission can provide impetus to science in India, a challenge to technology and, possibly, a new dimension to international cooperation," said an upbeat ISRO chairman K. Kastururangan. "It can also serve as a test bed for future missions which could be undertaken by India to explore outer space in the new millennium."

Indian scientists have been debating the voyage since 1997 and last October they held their first public brainstorming session on "scientific objectives, trajectories, conceptualisation of spacecraft and the capability of Indian launch vehicles to undertake the mission," an ISRO source said. Spokesman Krishnamurti said either of India’s two launch vehicles could be modified to reach the moon’s orbit, but scientists who have worked with the rockets sounded a note of caution. "It would be a tall order," said a former senior ISRO systems scientist who had worked on the GSLV — a rocket designed to put a 2,000-kg satellite some 36,000 km in space.

The national agency has put into orbit five communications satellites, four remote-sensing satellites and three experimental satellites in the past 25 years. Most of them rode piggyback on either Russian or French satellite launch vehicles — a trend that continued after the PSLV’s maiden flight in 1994 met a watery end in the sea.

ISRO, however, took its first step towards the multi-billion-dollar commercial satellite launch market on May 26, 1999 when a PSLV carried a South Korean and a German satellite into orbit. The GSLV was slated to take off last year, but a glitch in its locally-built engine in February forced the agency to postpone testing of the deep space rocket until 2001.

The analysts were taking part in a discussion following the release of the book "IC-814, Hijacked: The Inside Story", written by Flight Engineer, Anil Jaggia, who was in the aircraft and journalist Mr Saurabh Shukla.

Despite the Kandahar episode the panellist were of the view that the government has learnt little and persons have not been made accountable nor contingency measures have been taken to prevent such incidents in future.

While ruling out the storming of the aircraft at Amritsar as a possible in the given time, the analysts were of the view that the plane could have been delayed and disabled in Punjab.

"The text book rule in such circumstances is to delay the aircraft and effort should be made to disable it," Mr K Subramaniyam, defence analyst and author of the Kargil report said.

However, the Director-General of the Punjab Police, Mr Sarabjit Singh, said "disabling of the plane is a technical matter and they do not have the manual on the subject."

Explaining the ground reality at Amritsar airport, Sarabjit Singh said "the plane was always on the move, the pilot was informing them of low fuel level and the killing of passengers by the hijackers."

"At that time we felt that the situation was not conducive for commando action. Moreover, the control tower was in touch with the aircraft and we were waiting for the trained negotiator to arrive," he added.

The former Director-General of Police K. P. S Gill, however, felt that "enough was not done to stop the plane from taking off from Amritsar."

An assessment about the motivation of the hijackers could have been carried out by the people on the ground, which would have given an idea for taking future action, he said.

Mr. Gill said "there was lack of initiative from those who were supposed to act. The Deputy Commissioner of the district, who was supposed to carry-out the negotiation did not utter a single word and all the talking was being done by control tower officials."

Mr. Subramaniyam said "little seems to have been learnt from Kandahar or Kargil. We address them as incidents while ignoring the persons behind them and how to tackle it."

"Unless we look at the issue in a holistic perspective of who is responsible for these incidents, how to address the threat posed by them, there would be many more Kargil and Kandahar," he added.

The book provides answers to many question and raises many more. Did the government drift from its own contingency plan. Did the officials at the Amritsar airport goof up and let the aircraft go. Was there any coordination at Amritsar at all?

 The Union Government has reports that Pakistan’s Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) is extending all kinds of support to Naxalite (leftist ultras) groups active in Bihar, Orissa, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, Home Secretary Kamal Pande said.

‘We have definite indication that ISI is not lagging behind in taking advantage of the situation. I can’t give you any evidence but we have reports that ISI is supporting Naxalites in the affected states,’’ he said at a press conference.

Asked to elaborate on the kind of assistance the ISI was giving to Naxalites, he said it could be in any form—from money to arms and ammunition and training.

The Home Secretary, however, identified Peoples War Group (PWG), Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) and CPI-ML (Liberation Front) as having links with the ISI as observed by the mode of their operations.

He said the Union Government was in constant dialogue with the Nepal government and had stepped up vigil along the porous Indo-Nepal border and along the North-East.

The Home Secretary said the PWG had an estimated membership of about 5,000, MCC about 2,050 and CPI-ML (Liberation Front) roughly 40,000. This was based on the data provided by the affected states.

On the possibility of some extremists being trained to use modern weaponry and guerilla warfare, he said police forces would have to be trained and equipped in smashing such training centres.

 A comprehensive website on terrorism has been launched in the Capital. "It has often been said that if you wish to change the world, you must first accept and understand it as it is," former Punjab police chief and president of the Institute for Conflict Management K.P.S. Gill, said while launching the site.

The website, www.icm-satp.com, is a portal having data, research and opinion on terrorism in South Asia and provides critical new inputs for the counter-terrorism efforts. The site, launched by the institute has nearly 2000 pages of information, analysis and data at the time of its launch.