1. Immediate arrest of Pradeep Thakur
2. Unconditional apology from Pradeep Thakur
3. Revelation of Source of derogatory remark
4. Detailed call records of his two phone numbers.

Source-The Arunachal Times dated Sep 2, 2011

So far, the Times of India Group has pulled down the content that offended the Nyishi Community of the State and had given an apology on the issue on 26^th of May, 2011. Further, the journalist in question, one Pradeep Thakur is suppossedly on anticipatory bail over the issue and has tendered his unconditional apology; the video footage of which is available online on social networking sites like Facebook etc. For wider circulation, the tendered video apology is embedded herewith, if it helps mitigate the issue.

However, all this effort by Times of India group and the State Government who went ahead and brought the video footage of apology of Pradeep Thakur did not help to resolve the issue once and for all. Apparently, may be because so far the source of remark has not been divulged or the details of call records has not been given.

But the question is, would all these “Bandh Calls” be enough to make the ToI Group or one Pradeep Thakur to divulge the source of remark? What if ToI group declines to reveal the source of remark? What if they invoke “Reporter’s Privilege“? In that case, are there any alternatives to bring the issue to the logical end other than to accept the fact that ToI has pulled down the content and has apologised and Pradeep Thakur has issued a video apology? I guess not. Or are there any?

By dragging the issue, the remark, over which the NES and the ANSU started this fight for their community, would be re-quoted again and again while reporting about the issue, thereby defeating the sole purpose of fighting for the issue. Further, the people, who initially emphatized with the Nyishi Community over the derogatory remark by one Pradeep Thakur may start believing that the whole issue is not about the remark on Nyishi Community but entirely political, as is being discussed in some pockets.

While the issue may not come to logical end soon, (not until NES and ANSU accept the solution other than their demands) it would surely make the reporter, who was a non-entity prior to May 4th, 2011, (In) famous; let that “derogatory remark” alive forever and subject the resident’s of Twin Capital City of Naharlagun and Itanagar to further hardships as they are being subjected to for 48 hrs since 0500 hrs of 5th of September, 2011.

So when the Capital District Administration banned playing, conducting or propagating ‘Boli’ in any form across the State Capital, terming  it is disturbing the social fabric and causing conflicts in families, the organizing committees cried foul over District Administration’s decision to ban the game. They said that responding to show cause notice issued to the organizing committee of the game by the Deputy Commissioner, they had met Deputy Commissioner and apprised her (the DC) of the benefits of the game. They claimed that impressed with presentation on game, the DC had decided against banning the game and had rather shown interest in joining the game.

However, withholding her earlier decision to ban the game, the Deputy Commissioner has asked the organizer of the game to wrap up the game within one month time.

So, what is ‘Boli’?

‘Boli’ is a Hindi term literally meaning bidding. Thus, ‘Boli’ is a bidding game where huge sum of money exchange hands and where the person who bids the lowest is declared successful in a round of game which consists of several rounds equivalent to the number of members in a group.

How it is played?

It is played in a group, the number of which, the amount (usually in millions) for which it is played and the frequency of the game  (i.e., in how many rounds the game would be finished) is decided by the organiser. Each member then deposits an amount equivalent to the total amount divided by number of members in a group in each round. For example, if there are 10 members in a group and the  game is played for an amount of 2 million then each member has to put in an amount of  20,000/- in each round.  Then ‘Boli’ or rather bidding starts. However, prior to commencement of the game, a rule is framed. The rule is framed for the maximum amount a person can bid for, which is usually 80% to 90% of the amount for which the game is being played (decided by the committee). This 10% or 20% of the total amount as decided by the committee is then distributed equally amongst the members. Thus, the amount left for bidding is 80% 0r 90% of the total amount.

Now, based on the personal requirement of money at that time, the member bids how much minimum amount they are ready to take from the available amount for bidding (i.e., total amount minus 10% or 20% of the total amount as decided). The member who is ready to take the minimum amount is the winner and draws the bid amount from the available amount for bidding. The remaining amount i.e., the amount left after deducting bid amount from the available amount for bidding is then distributed amongst the members. The member who is declared successful in bidding is further barred from bidding in the subsequent rounds of the game, though in each round the member has to contribute equal amount as decided earlier.

Does it affect the societal set-up?

No matter how hard the fan of ‘Boli’ may try to justify this game by saying that it has helped them to meet financial requirement for educating their children or for medical treatment or to buy properties etc., a simple arithmetic calculation shows otherwise.  The fact is that only few of the members do actually get benefitted and remaining needy members who had drawn money, by bidding amount much lesser than the amount available for bidding do get exploited monetarily, who shell out more money than the rest. In order to draw large sum of money at one go (for whatever financial requirements), it is said that people tend to borrow money at a very high interest rates falling in debt trap which finally leads to conflicts in the family and resultant disintegration of the family. So, it would not be wrong to say that ‘Boli’ has in one way or the other has affected the societal set-up.

On a lighter note: It was overheard that  ATM’s at Capital Complex are not able to dispense cash because the ATM’s become empty as soon as ATM’s are replenished with cash as huge sum of money are drawn from the ATM’s to be put in ‘Boli’

The district administration has spoken and declared ‘Boli’ illegal and I too have put my perspective on it. So, it’s your turn to say if ‘Boli’ is a social evil as some section of the society and the district administration says or if it is the means for weaker section of society just to mitigate their financial needs as advocated by the fans or rather players of the game. Do put in your views.

Well, by outright selling of complete and incomplete HUDCO Shopping Complexes at Roing, Pasighat, Daporijo, Ziro and Naharlagun and by leasing out Tourist Lodges for a period of 10 years.

Government spokesman Tako Dabi today announced the Government’s decision to sell out complete and incomplete HUDCO shopping complexes at Roing, Pasighat, Daporijo, Ziro and Naharlagun.

He told media persons that the cabinet has decided to go for an outright sale to fill the state’s coffer. Moreover, the tourist lodges will also be given out on lease for a period of 10 years with the same objective, he said.

-Arunachal Front

Anyone interested?

I wouldn’t be surprised if politicians end up owning these structures ultimately.

It all started with All Papum Pare District Students’ Union (APPDSU) and All Nyishi Students’ Union (ANSU) serving quit notices on 6^th September to illegal migrants to leave the state within 5 days, in the wake of reported increase in cases of burglary, theft, conspiracy to murder and other serious crimes allegedly involving the so-called ‘illegal Bangladeshi’ migrants at Capital Complex. The first phase of ‘Operation Clean Drive’ was carried out on September 12^th where the supporter’s of students’ union supposedly took the law into their own hands and physically went about evicting the ‘illegal Bangladeshi migrants’. 

The memory is still etched in my mind when about a decade back, denizens of twin Capital Township of Naharlagun and Itanagar would rush back to their homes or in the event they are not in a position to make it to their homes, would make it a point to be near ‘Idiot-box’, wherever they are, to catch on the 15 mins local news programme ‘News and Views’ aired from Doordarshan Itanagar, every evening at 7.30 pm. It was produced for DD Itanagar by bureaucrat turned video film maker turned journalist and NE TV media awardee and NETV correspondent for Arunachal, Taro Chatung and it became an instant hit gripping the psyche of Arunachalees. It became hit not because the content was good or the presentation was awesome-in fact, with the kind of accent and the questions put during interview, it was rather comical; but because the journalist-cum-anchor-cum-editor-cum-producer would put the questions to politicians that the masses always wanted to ask but a conventional media would not dare to. However, when the popularity of ‘News and Views’ was at it’s peak, it was taken off-the air rather haphazardly with Doordarshan Authorities citing denial of further extension to the programme.

The void left by ‘News and Views’ was filled by another local news programme ‘Aaj ki Awaj’ quite some years later. It was produced by a Hiba Kaha and unlike it’s predecessor ‘News and Views‘, it was beamed through local Cable TV service. Devoid of any electronic news media in the state, like it’s predecessor News and Views, Aaj ki Awaj too became an instant hit among the masses. Quite recently, it even celebrated it’s 250^th episodes in a grandiose manner by inviting Bollywood singer Udit Narayan. Alas, their rejuvenation was short lived. Exercising the power under section 19 of the Cable TV Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, the Papum Pare Deputy Commisioner has prohibited the transmission or re-transmission of ‘Aaj Ki Awaz‘. The ban came after it was found that the programme was violating the section 5, 6(d) and 6(e) of Cable Network Rules 1994.

The DM in an order issued today under section 19 of the Act, the copy of which was released to the Press, said that the channel has been airing it’s programme without registering with the registering authority or without permission from the authorized officer thereby violating section 5 of Rules 1994.

It has been found violating section 6(d) of Cable Network Rules 1994 by airing programme for over a year which are “defamatory, deliberate, false and suggestive innuendos and half truths,” the order said, adding it blatantly violated section 6(e) by “encouraging or inciting violence or presenting news items against the maintenance of law and order.”

-Arunachal Front

No doubt, any agency violating the law should be dealt with strictly, but in this particular case what amazed me is the timing. Why now? Why after 250^th episodes and not before? Was it not violating the rules earlier? Besides, aren’t the charges quite flimsy, especially section 5 of Cable Network Rules 1994. Whom is it applicable to-’Aaj Ki Awaz’-a news programme or the Cable TV Service Provider, who was airing the programme?

Inadvertently, a comparison is drawn between ‘News and Views‘ and ‘Aaj Ki Awaz‘. Both were known for it’s ‘straight forwardness’ leaving the interviewee in an awkward position. Now I only wonder, did both the programmes became victim of their ‘straight forwardness’?

Links:

• Cable TV Network (Regulation) Act, 1995