Budget: An Obituary to People of India

Rolling Budget Rolled Over The People as M-Squared Economics Continues

Indian policy maker often appear obsessed by China’s double digit growth for the last decade or so. In fact, prior to eruption of global financial volcano, under Manmohan & Montek Singh (known as M– Squared Economics) polices backed by World Bank bandwagon (led by Dr Reddy, Dr Suresh Tendulkar, Dr Panagaria, Dr Chaudhary and others) predicted double digit growth for the Indian economy. Their misdirected policies of globalization and divestment had taken India into double digit inflation. In fact, contrary to election promises, last year’s budget offered nothing more than an obituary to people of India and the recommendation of the 13th Finance for a Rolling Budged has rolled on the people of India.

The current budget, once again has added an insult to last year’s obituary to people of India as India is already well ahead of double digit inflation (over 18% increases in prices of basic consumption goods). In the Union Budget 2010-11, the prices of petrol and diesel would go up by about Rs. 3 a liter as a result of the hike in basic duty and this was in addition to the increase in import duty on crude oil. Further, contrary to the Finance Minister’s promise that the agriculture sector would be redeemed from the crisis he had cut the subsidy on fertilizers and there are proposals for dismantling the public distribution system and privatization of FCI warehouses. Given a decline in agriculture production and essential consumption goods last year, no economic theory could justify the hike in fuel prices and cut in subsidies. No doubt the Budget would further accelerate price rise and privatization which in turn would have adverse impact on agriculture production and would increase hardship on the common man.

Further, the Union Finance Minister had stated that the recommendation of the Kirti Parekh committee for lifting of price control on petroleum products was under consideration of the government. This meant that worse is yet to come following the Budget.

In attempt to overcome the deficit the Union government proposed to raise Rs. 25,000 crores through disinvestment. The disinvestment of public sector units was the policy of the UPA government, and that was being speeded up. Despite the slow down in housing sector there is increase in cement prices and levied service tax on rail shipments (without the knowledge of Rail Minister) and on constrcution in the budget that would hit the housing sector. Although the Finance Minister appear to give some relief by way of increasing income tax band from Rs. 160,000 to 500, 000 which is a drop in the ocean and will be more than offset by nearly 18% rise in prices of essential commodities. Hence, there is nothing to stimulate demand in already ailing housing sector. In India rollout started with 0.4% of GDP, which increased to 5% of GDP in the annual budget of 2009. The focus of the stimulus package is limited to fiscal measures to stimulate Industrial production and consumption demand by tax cuts and subsidies. Clearly, India hopes to ride out economic slowdown without a major stimulus package.

In sharp contrast, the size of China’s stimulation package is over 4 trillion Yuan ($586 billion) or 13.3 percent of 2008 GDP over time frame of November 2008 to end of 2010. Rollout began in fourth quarter and strategic focus of the stimulation is 37.5 percent on roads, rail and water; 25 percent on post-earthquake reconstruction; 10 percent housing; 9.25 percent on rural infrastructure; 9.25 percent on economic upgrading; 5.25 percent on environmental protection; 3.75 percent on health and education. Although senior officials are pleased with initial impact; will watch data before deciding whether more is needed, there is a plan 2.

Regardless of conflicting claims about the ambitious growth rate, India’s growth is going nowhere as it is driven by growth of energy intensive consumer durable goods and financial sector and very little growth in other sectors (e.g., agriculture) leading into emergence of two India, rich and poor. Mechanism which is causing this is: (i) output growth is higher than the growth in employment, (ii) efficiency, i.e., productivity growth, (iii) sensitivity of financial sector due to uncertainties of financial markets, and (iv) increasing disparities between profits and wages. Hence India’s growth strategy continues to accentuate inequalities of income and creating a unique demand pattern (a black hole). History of past financial crises has witness that some of the reasons for the period of financial turmoil included huge debt-servicing expenses and an inequitable distribution of wealth, as most of the wealth remained in the control of a few elite. Unfortunately, some consciously and the so-called left unconsciously caught into the Neo-Classical and Keynesian cobweb. Clearly, Budget 2010-2011 would further accentuate the inequalities and would widen the gap between the rich and poor India. Hence, M2 – Economics seems to work against Rahul Gandhi's dream for poor India.

In conclusion, the sign of any real boost for stimulating the economy from the quagmire of worldwide recession is nowhere near a real recovery as there are no signs of stimulation in either investment or consumption demand. To add insult to plight of common recently Dr Choudhary, a Member of the Indian Planning Commission told the media that the medicine (a mere 5% fiscal stimulation) has cured the problem despite Bank of Scotland’s Chairman’s statement that, "UK economy is bumping along the bottom". One wonders readers how India could make such exaggerated claims? In defence of this criticism, Dr Manmohan Singh & Dr. Montek Singh (M2- M Squared Economics), in a joint enterprise, relied upon the external help in case a further stimulation was needed, without realizing that the developed countries themselves are heading for a deep crisis.

Justice Underhill - Over the Hill

Justice Underhill - Over the Hill on Bias

Justice Underhill Gets Honour for his Service to Zionist Labour Party Mafia. This was not a good day for Mr. Justice Underhill in the High Court since he was appointed President of EAT (a beneficiary of Labour Party) and the Racist mafia of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) & Trevor Phillips who is more popularly known in the media for "Cash for Racism Scandal". EHRC and its former and present bosses, Mr Phillips, Mr Gurbux Singh were represented by Mr. Allen QC, Head of Cloister Chambers (Labour Party Associated Chamber) and Mr John Hendy, QC represented Prof. Deman. At the very outset, Mr Hendy, QC very eloquently outlined an application for Mr. Justice Underhill's recusal due to unresolved complaints to Judicial Ombudsman for his professional conduct and racial bias. Mr. Hendy shown a great deal generosity when he told Mr Justice Underhill that last night Dr Deman had faxed him his grounds for recusal outlining both facts and law and that he didn't have to add anything unless there are any questions on facts and law. However, Mr Justice Underhill did not rule on recusal application until afternoon after he had sorted out a way to get himself off the hook. He ruled as follows:

1. As to assessor's point and amendment he directed that Appellants Notice should have been lodge in the Court of Appeal as this was the intention of HHJ Collins although there is nothing in the Order or reasons except tick mark. Of course, we will have to lodge a fresh Notice of Appeal. Mr Hendy says, most likely Cour of Appeal would allow as HHJ Collin's got it wrong;

2. On the second limb of permission to appeal on substantive ground, there was some technical problem whether he could refer this to Cour of Appeal (CA).

To overcome, the CPR he granted permission to appeal on second limb and referred the entire case to Court of Appeal for a full hearing. It is worth noting that since then Dr Deman appeared before HHJ Collin's and he was seen behaving like a calf, i.e, he was in best of his behaviour. At the outset Mr Hendy, QC asked Mr Justice Underhill to make above two Orders which he had done like a good boy despite opposition by the Defendants' leading counsel, Mr Allen, QC. Due to high profile nature of the case, a number of observers including, Mr C Kumar, Coordinator of CEM, Dr. Antony Tambyrajah, Ms T.O.Olaleye-Oruene, the CEO of the Olabisi Olaleye Foundation, Ms Jackqueline Challenger, A. J. Graham attended the court. Hearing continued for 4 hours and throughout the hearing Mr Justice Underhill's chin was down as this was for the third time an application was made by leading counsels (earlier Ms Karon Monaghan, QC and Mr Barton of counsel) for his recusal, which we consider shocking to judicial conscience. There is well known saying, "Imperialism changes its face but never its nature". We don't know how far it is true but we know for sure, "Racism changes its face but never its nature".

17 September 2009 from the High Court sitting in London.

Posted by News&Views on Racism at 13:07 0 comments
Labels: Justice Underhill Rewarded for favours to Zionist Labour Party Mafia

Last Red Salute to Joyti Basu

Demise of Jyoti Basu – End of Era
of Bhadralok Domination

Prof Devendar Kaushik, M.A., LL.B. Ph.D. (USSR),

Emeritus Professor at JNU, Expert on Central Asia,
Russian Studies First Non Russian  to receive
the 'Order of Friendship', the Highest Honour from
and Russian President Vladimir Putin for his
great contribution to the development of friendship
and cultural cooperation between

the people of Russia & India.

 

The death of comrade Jyoti Basu, CPM Patriarch from West Bengal and longest serving state Chief Minister in India has left a great void in the communist movement which is not likely to be filled. Jyotida, as he was fondly called, had the rare distinction of a democratically elected communist head of state government who guided the destiny of West Bengal over a long period of 23 years. True, before him another communist leader, E.M.S.Namboodripad too served as chief minister of Kerala state for a brief period of less than two years. But E.M.S., the first communist leader to become Chief Minister of a state in India through ballot was dismissed by the Union government of Jawaharlal Nehru at the instance of his daughter Indira Gandhi who was then President of the Indian National Congress. Before her 1971 massive electoral victory Indira Gandhi stayed in power as Prime Minister from 1969 to 1971 with communist support. Again the first UPA government led by the Congress Party ruled the country with the support of the communist parties. Jyoti Basu along with Harkishen Singh Surjeet, was the architect of the UPA (one) Congress led coalition government which the left parties supported from outside. Basu, in fact was known to disfavor the course of withdrawal of communist support for the UPA government over the issue of civil nuclear deal with the US resulting in the debacle of the Left at the last parliamentary poles.

Unlike E.M.S., a home-spun communist with a rural background who evolved into a Marxist from the ranks of the Indian National Congress as a prominent leader of the Congress Socialist Party functioning within the INC, Jyoti Basu was the son of US educated medical doctor who himself was educated in England. Returning home as a communist Basu became a trade unionist elected to the West Bengal Assembly four times from a constituency dominated by railway workers.

A sahib clad in immaculate white bhadralok (educated middle class Bengali elite) dhoti, Jyoti Basu was equally at home with both Shakespeare and Tagore. This Bengali bhadralok communist proved to be a great survivor in the rough and tumble of Indian parliamentary politics. Besides his charismatic personality and great oratorical skill he was helped in this by his unmatched pragmatism. He grew in stature mastering the intricacies of coalition politics. Graduating with distinction from the West Bengal school of practical politics which he joined as Deputy Chief Minister in 1967 as a partner of the Congress rebels, he rose to become the Chief Minister of West Bengal in a CPM – led Left coalition in 1977. In 1996 he missed becoming the Prime Minister of India through the ‘historic blunder’ of his less pragmatic party colleagues who did not allow him to accept the assignment.

I had an opportunity to meet this ace practitioner of pragmatic parliamentary communism in 1967 when as Deputy Chief Minister of West Bengal he dropped unexpectedly at the place of Muzaffar Ahmad, a Comintern-era communist veteran and one of the founders of communist movement in India. I was discussing with Muzaffar Ahmad the Tashkent episode of the formation of the CPI in 1920 at the initiative of M.N.Roy. The documents throwing light on this were discovered by me in the Party Achives in Tashkent. I was deeply impressed by the urbane manners of Jyotida and the humane concern of this upcoming state communist leader about the health of an aged party stalwart. Muzaffar Ahmad introduced me to him and we had tea together. I told them about the bitter infighting and personal rivalries of the Indian revolutionaries in Tashkent and Moscow. I wonder how things would have been quite different if there had been a skillful realpolitik man like Jyoti Basu to build bridges between the various groups of Indian revolutionaries and communists fighting with each other and often at odds with the Comintern. It seems Jyoti Basu was a frequent visitor at Muzaffar Ahmad’s place. CPM Politburo member Brinda Karat recalls having met Jyoti Basu for the first time in 1969 at Muzaffar Ahmad’s place. However, the bhadralok communist practitioner of pragmatism is also known to be a regular evening caller at the Raj Bhawan in Calcutta to sip scotch whiskey with Governor Dharam Vira whom during the Assembly proceedings in the day he accused of being a reactionary agent of the centre.

The report card of Jyoti Basu’s long term of more than two decades in power in West Bengal is a mixed one. On the positive achievement side he is credited with operation Barga resulting in substantial land redistribution among the landless peasants and acquisition of rights by the share-croppers as well as empowerment of village panchayats – he was a pioneer in this field. Keeping west Bengal free from communal riots is also among his notable achievements. On the debit side, the practice of cader-cracy under him led to the flight of industry from the state which because of its high level of excellent modern education system and presence of a large English educated middle class had all the potential to become India’s industrial and IT hub. But under Basu’s regime business was hounded out by the communist cadres, computers were barred from government offices and English was abolished in government primary schools. Thus, the one time thriving Calcutta became a backwater of economic and cultural stagnation. Nor did bhadralok communism banish poverty from rural West Bengal. Of the 18 districts of the State, 14 figure in the list of most poor 100 districts of the country.

Even with his not so bright record of achievements in the field of governance and development, the sahib communist leader through his superb skills in managing coalition politics succeeded in keeping his party as one of the important players in the political arena of Indian politics. It is doubtful if his maverick successors in CPM leadership will be able to continue with this success. Already they have been cut to size in the last parliamentary elections and are apparently on their way out of power in West Bengal as the results of local elections have shown. Basu’s death, one is afraid, may turn out to be an obituary for the parliamentary path of the Communist Parties in India leaving the political space for the extremist Naxalites.

Overtly Racist Judiciary - HHJ McMullen's comments Struck out

Lord Sadly and Lord Wall Struck out HHJ McMullen QC's Racist Comments

Dr. D'Silva v UCU, Michael Scot, & others ( A2/2009/0258, A2/2009/0275, & A2/2009/0276 )

On October 2009 Court of Appeal headed by Lord Justice Wall and Lord Justice Sadly struckout HHJ McMullen's stereotype racist comment about the Council for Ethnic Minority (CEM) from his Order. It was an unusual hearing in which first permission was granted and then the appeal was heard on full merit. Although the University College Union & others request an oral hearing they did not have much to say or oppose Appeal Court's decision to struck out HHJ McMullen's Racist nonsense from his Order. At the end of the hearing their Lordships complimented the skeleton arguments on bias by prepared by Dr Deman saying that, "you should become lawyers".

Prior to making their judgment Lord Wall informed Dr D'Silva, Dr Deman (a McKenzie friend) and others present that Lady Smith who was initially scheduled to hear his appeal recused herself because she was Chancellor of the Manchester Metropolitan University although his appeal was against UCU and its Labour Party mafia. Therefore, it no longer safe not to step down even if there was remote possibility of conflict of interests Although Mr Justice Underhill, Mr Justice Elias, HHJ McMullen, HHJ Peter Clarke, etc have been flouting this very principle for a fair hearing for a very long time.

On the 29th August 2008, the CEM sent to Pauline Donleavy, Registrar EAT, Dr Suresh Deman and Mr Andrew J. Graham's affidavits in support of his grounds of appeal on bias. In the penultimate sentence the CEM expressed its view about the conduct of the tribunals as follows:

"In view of above background we strongly urge you disclose members of the Judiciary and your connections with Zionist Labour Party mafia and employers.”

HHJ McMullen gave racist interpretation to CEM's request and said as follows:

“ Before I make orders in this appeal I will expressly dismiss the applications made by the Council for Ethnic Minority for disclosure of Judges’ interests. I reject as repugnant the unspecified stereotypical racism in their letter of the 29th day of August 2008 concerning Zionism and party politics”

CEM’s request in regard to the disclosure of Judges interests and connections with the Labour Party Zionist mafia should not cause offence as it was consistent with the aims of the EHRC (formerly known as CRE) who at parag 17 of their submissions to Ministry of Justice said as follows:

“A New way of Appointing Judges” state that the following principles should underlie the procedure for appointing judges: independence, transparency, quality and accountability. Further the document goes on to state that it acts as a check on the Executive demands that judges are free and seen to be free from political interference, influence and patronage.

This is essential to secure public confidence in the judiciary and its legitimacy. HHJ McMullen’s dismissal of the application for disclosure goes nowhere in securing public confidence in regard to transparency or securing freedom from political interference, influence and patronage given the House of Lords has become a caucus-run body of the Labour Party.

Further a request of the racial origin is important in view of a study carried out in Pennsylvania in regard to Institutional Racism in the judiciary and in the administration of justice by Dr Deman's friend who was the Executive Director of the Program sponsored by the Federal Courts.

HHJ McMullen’s second statement that he considers the use of the term Zionism and party politics as unspecified stereotypical racism reflects his own stereotype mind set and he chose to to put in his order to prejudice the Judge who would eventually hear the claimant’s appeal.

In Dr. D’Silva v NATFHE [UCU], Michael Scott & Others EAT/PA/1161/06/LA, Mr Justice Elian the he was drew Counsel, Mr Dale Martin's attention to CEM’s letter in which they complained that he belonged to a Zionist-Labour Party Mafia. Mr. Justice Elias said that he was not a Jew. On this, Mr. Martin’s told him, “Your ethnicity is irrelevant as you could still support the Zionist regime” (see para 24). Mr. Justice Elias accepted Mr. Martin’s submission without taking any offence.

CEM’s request was for disclosure of his connections with “Zionist Labour Party mafia and employers”. The recent scandal of fund raising (see article by Gilad Atzmon, Jewish: Bundle 2; pages 3-4) of the British Labour Party undertaken by Lord Levy “cash for honours scandal”, Abraham and Mendelssohn and their connection with “Friends of Israel” shows that political influence, patronage and indirect racism practised by such a movement influences the Labour Party. No reasonable person with an independent mind could characterise the CEM request, “as repugnant the unspecified stereotypical racism”. Further a well known MIT Professor, Noam Chomsky, Jewish also condemned Zionism being the highest form of racism and a UN resolution could not become a reality outlawing Zionism as Racism because of US threat of Veto.

TRIBUTE TO A GREAT MAN - JOHN DAVIES, QC

Obituary: John Davies, QC - A Great Friend of Ethnic Minorities

It was a shocking news when I heard about the sudden demise of John Davies. I am told that he had just returned from honeymoon and then within a couple of days suddenly had a massive heart attack. I was devastated and I can't even imagine what his wife, Barbara Davies is going through. When he traveled with me to Belfast he often used to mention Barbara and his daughter. I believe all are of the same age as he used to buy two gifts.

Mr Davies was not only a leading Barrister but he was also a very descent human being who never hesitated to take on high profile people and also judges of the EAT and the Court of Appeal. One could disagree with him without causing any hard feelings. He was very witty and I recall once I told him that some times victims can be even worse when they get their hands on power. He smiled and said, look at what is happening to the Palestinians.

Perhaps everyone knows he represnetd me in most of my cases at the Tribunal, EAT and the Court of Appeal. A number of observers used to attend the court whenever my case up for a hearing. In one of his opinions on my cases, he advised the CRE and rejected erroenous assertion of a vexatious litigant and characeterised me as a persistant litigant, who screwed the employers and the judiciary. Mr Davies was very popular with the Ethnic Minority people who have shown a great degree of confidence in his professional integrity. In my own case, I approached the Commission on Racial Equality (now called CEHR), Greenwich Racial Equality Council, Law Centre, National Civil Rights Association & others run by Labour Party racist mafia who told me that I had no case against my employer, the University of Greenwich & others. Mr John Davies put a percentage of success between 60-65% and then won at the hearing on my behalf. At the last day of submission, my estranged wife attended his closing submissions and described him as a good orator and better than some of my lawyers which she had seen in the past. I do not believe any other Counsel ever acted for behalf of so many individuals from ethnic minorities as Mr Davies did.

Further when Dr D'Silva and myself were betrayed by the CRE, Themside Racial Equality Council, Law Centres and our own Union, AUT, NATFHE, and UCU, Mr Davies stood by us. His notable cases are: Mr Justice Lindsay, President of the EAT, then he was, reversed in the Court of Appeal in Deman v Association of University Teachers, Lord David Triesman, Joanna DeGroot, Brian Everett, Geoffrey Talbot and he also succeeded in recusing Central London Employment Judge Solomon and HHJ McMullen, QC at the EAT in the same case when it was referred to the EAT for a rehearing. Mr Justice Elias, President of EAT, then he was, refused to recuse by concealing his close association with Mr Michael Scott, AUT solicitor but then wihtin after 6 month, Mr Davies' junior colleague, Mr Dale Martin exposed Mr Justice Elias and forced him to recuse (http://cemkumar.googlepages.com/bumpyrideateat). Of course, he won Dr Deman's claims of racial discrimination, victimisation and unfair dismissal against the University of Greenwich, Russell Brockett and Ross Geddes at the Ashford Tribunal in 2002. Mr Davies will always be remembered.

Dr S Deman

BSc, MA (India), MA&ABD (US)

M.Phil (UK), PhD (Japan)

UNEP/UNCTAD Consultant &

Visiting Professor, Japan/Australia, NewZealand

see: http/employmenttribunalsnews.blogspot.com

M-Squared Economics of Recovery

Why Bill Gates SOLD-OFF Microsoft?

Letter from Manmohan Singh to Mr. Bill Gates of Microsoft

Subject: Problems with my new computer

Dear Mr. Bill Gates,

As you know to keep my people updated with ongoing recovery with the guidance of my other half, Mr. Montek Singh, we recently have bought a Home Computer. I thought I could check myself the progress of economy since Montek keeps changing his story abour growth rate and status of the recession. However, we have found some problems which I discussed with Montek but he is facing the same problems so I must bring this to your notice before my people end up in the same global mess as our economy is under our noble guidance (M-Squared):

1. There is a button 'start' but there is no 'stop' button. We request you to check this.

2. We find there is 'Run' in the menu. One of my friends clicked 'run' he ran up to Amritsar ! So, we request you to change that to 'sit', so that we can click that by sitting.

3. One doubt is whether any 're-scooter' is available in system? I find only 're-cycle', but I own a scooter at my home.

4. There is 'Find' button but it is not working properly. My wife lost the door key and we tried a lot trace the key with this ' find' button, but was unable to trace. Please rectify this problem.

5. My child learnt 'Microsoft word' now he wants to learn 'Microsoft > sentence', so when you will provide that?

6. I always wonder why you have kept 'enter' button withoutkeeping the exit button ?

7. It is surprising that windows says 'MY Pictures' but there is not even a single photo of mine. So when will you keep my photo in that.

8. There is 'MICROSOFT OFFICE' what about 'MICROSOFT HOME' since I use the PC at home only.

9. You provided 'My Recent Documents'. When you will provide 'My Past Documents'?

10. You provide 'My Network Places'.. For God sake please do not provide 'My Secret Places'. I do not want to let my wife know where I go after my office hours.

Regards,

Manmohan Singh

Last one from me to Mr Bill Gates :

Sir, how is it that your name is GATES but u are selling WINDOWS?

Q. Bill Gate: Why you are called M-Squares?

A. Manmohan: Since we made Gay Partnership legal we are made for each other.

Right to Justice and Judicial Accountability - Hurry up for Registration!!!

ACADEMY FOR SOCIO-LEGAL STUDIES


Venue: 49 Vivek Nagar, Station Road, Jaipur 302006, Tel. 0091 141 2206139, email, aslsraj@gmail.com
____________________________________________________________________

ANNOUNCEMENT

A Two-Day Programme on Right to Justice and Judicial
Accountability to be held on 12-13 September 2009 in Jaipur

Dear Sir/ Madam,

You and your organisation are already acquainted with the campaign for right to justice and judicial accountability. A number of activities including Public Hearings, University Seminars and discussions among various sections of Society have been regularly held to build up an effective movement for total and basic change in the present judicial system in the country. These efforts are beginning to have effect, but it seems that there is a long way yet to go. The U.P.A. Government in the centre did announce recently that immediate steps would be taken up to reform the judicial system. The Union Law Minister have even fixed 30th September, 2009 as last date by which the judicial reform programme will be implemented. However it is our experience that such pronouncements mostly remain hollow. Moreover the Government’s concept of judicial reform is not even clear. We don’t need only cosmetic changes but we need a completely new, sensitive and people oriented judicial system.

Naturally you and your organisation must have skirmishes with the system in some way or other and for which you must be having your own experiences. We request that you actively participate in this two-day programme with all of your experiences and suggestions. Some of the points for consideration are as under:-

- Justice as a right or Solicitation.
- The concept of People Oriented Judicial System.
- Your problems relating to the present judicial set- up.
- Ensuring Speedy Justice.
- The Phenomenon of Crores of Pending Cases for Years.
- The Procedural complicacy of judicial system.
- The process of Appointment of judges.
- Training and Orientation of Officers Connected with Judiciary.
- Judicial Accountability.

We further request that your organisation also become one of the organisers of the programme.

We hope to receive your consent at the earliest. The participant organisation is welcome to set up its own stall. This two-day programme will be held at the premises of Rajasthan Samagrah Seva Sangh Durgapura, Jaipur. A number of people’s organisations, activists, jurists, Lawyers, Judges, and other Judicial Officers are expected to participate in the programme.

We hope to receive your consent, response and suggestions after which a detailed programme will be dispatched to you as early as possible. We hope to receive your consent and suggestions regarding the programme at the earliest on the above address.

Yours Sincerely

Prem Krishna Sharma Sawai Singh Prashant Bhushan
Academy for Socio Rajasthan Campaign for
Legal Studies. Samagrah Seva Judicial
Sangh Accountability and
Reforms.

Members of the Advisory Board are.

Justice Shri V.S. Dave, Justice Shri Panachand Jain, Justice M. Shirimal, Smt. Aruna Roy, Dr. Sharda Jain, Sr. Advocate Colin Gonsalvis (HRLN Delhi), Sr. Advocate Mihar Desai (HRLN Mumbai), Sr. Advocate Mahesh Bora (Jodhpur), Prof. Suresh Deman (London), Shri Than Singh, Advocate Shri P.L. Mimroth (NCDHR), Shri V.S. Vyas, Shri Bhawani Shankar Kusum, Prof. Ganga Sahaya, Prof. Satish Shastri (Dean, Faculty of Law), Shri Ravi Hooja, Sr. Advocate S.R. Bajwa, Miss Parul Sharma (Stockholm), Smt. Nishat Hussain, Shri Radhakant Saxena and Prof. O. P. Mathur.