One of our colleagues, Lalit Mehta, was brutally murdered  in Palamu, Jharkahand recently.  A sloppy report has prepared by the Deputy Commissioner and the SP, Palamu indicates that the Jharkhand police is either insincere in pursuing the murderers or actively protecting them. Lalit was in the process of organising a survey on NREGA along with Jean Dreze and a band of volunteers. Instead of pursuing the murders, the report casts aspersions on the survey team and even goes on to suggest that Jean could have been involved in the murder.  It also claims that the survey team manufactured evidence of fraud in NREGA works.
I have been a part of such surveys before with similar teams and I have only one word to describe the insinuations in the report – Ridiculous! Corruption after all can thrive where it gets active support of the police.  I only understand this shabby report by the police (see details below) as a attempt to protect the corrupt murderers in nexus with them.

There is now no room to have any confidence in the police in this matter.  I demand a CBI probe into the murder so that some confidence can return to to those who want to see the culprits punished.  Copied below is a statement on that is being circulated for a signature campaign on this issue.

We are shocked by the recent report prepared by the Deputy Commissioner (DC) and Superintendent of Police (SP) of Palamau, commenting on Lalit Mehta’s murder as well as on the survey of NREGA conducted there in May 2008 by the G.B. Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad.  This report is a deliberate attempt to divert attention from the real issues, which effectively protects those responsible for corruption and violence in the area.

The report shows that the police have made no serious enquiries into Lalit Mehta’s murder. It does not provide any credible clue to this murder, but raises a number of mischievous conjectures using selective evidence. For instance, the report refers to interviews with Lalit Mehta’s brother and his sons, without mentioning that the sons are one and three years old, respectively. Meanwhile, evidence from extensive interviews with Lalit’s wife, Ashrita, is ignored. Further, the report is full of factual mistakes. Even the date of the murder is incorrect: Lalit Mehta was murdered on 14 May, not on 15 May as stated in the report.

Instead of presenting a serious analysis of the circumstances of the murder, the report makes  absurd insinuations, such as Jean Drèze’s possible involvement in the murder, or the allegation that he and his team manufactured evidence of fraud in NREGA works. Equally ridiculous is the unsubstantiated claim of the possible role of an old family dispute about Lalit Mehta’s inter-religious marriage being the cause for the murder.

The report also makes insidious allegations about the survey team, Vikas Sahyog Kendra, and Lalit Mehta’s family. For instance, the report presents a ludicrous picture of the social audit activities conducted by the survey team, and even accuses the team of using devious means to collect testimonies. No-one familiar with the team’s work (which was conducted in a transparent manner in full view of the public and the media) can take this seriously. Casting  unwarranted aspersions on people like Jean Drèze, who is a member of the Central Employment Guarantee Council (and therefore mandated to monitor and investigate NREGA implementation anywhere in the country), and on students from Delhi University  and other reputed universities, is in fact an attempt to snuff out any independent monitoring of government expenditure.

The report reinforces earlier suspicions that there is an entrenched and deep rooted nexus of corruption and violence surrounding NREGA in Palamau, with powerful connections. Otherwise, why would the district’s seniormost officers go to such length to undermine a forthright examination of the use of NREGA funds in this area?

We demand that the report of the DC and SP Palamau be rejected by the Central Government as well as by the State Government, and that a CBI enquiry into Lalit Mehta’s murder and the corruption in NREGA works in Palamau District be initiated immediately.

Right from the word go combating corruption in the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) has been a major agenda of activists of the Right to Food Campaign. Needless to say, it brings activists into conflict with the vested interests that are deeply rooted in India today. This week in Palamu, a young and committed activist – Lalit Kumar – was murdered, perhaps a result of his actions to secure the poorest of people their rights. I am reproducing an appeal below from the website of the right to food campaign on this issue:

We are deeply disturbed by the recent murder of Lalit Kumar Mehta, member of Vikas Sahyog Kendra (Palamau District), who was brutally killed on 14 May 2008 as he was returning from Daltonganj to Chhattarpur on a motorcycle.

The circumstances of this murder are disturbing. Lalit (aged 36), an active member of the right to food campaign and Gram Swaraj Abhiyan, has been working in this area for more than 15 years on issues related to the right to food and the right to work. He was a very gentle person and his work was widely appreciated. However he was also fearless in exposing corruption and exploitation, and often came in the way of vested interests.

At the time of this incident, Lalit was helping a team of volunteers from Delhi and elsewhere to conduct a social audit of NREGA works in Chainpur and Chhattarpur Blocks of Palamau District. Attempts had already been made to dissuade the team from conducting this investigation, particularly in Chainpur Block. Is it a coincidence that Lalit was murdered just one day after the investigation began?

If this murder was an act of intimidation, it did not succeed. Friends and supporters from all over Jharkhand gathered at Vikas Sahyog Kendra on 17 May. They unanimously resolved to continue the campaign against corruption and exploitation in this area.

A public hearing of NREGA will be held in Chhattarpur on 26 May. We appeal to all those who stand in solidarity with Lalit and his work to participate in this event.

Our immediate demands: (1) CBI enquiry into this incident; (2) strict action on all the complaints and irregularities emerging from this social audit of NREGA.

Balram (Right to Food Campaign), Jean Drèze (Allahabad University), Jawahar (Vikas Sahyog Kendra), Meghnath (Akhra, Ranchi), Vinoy Ohdar (ActionAid) and others including all members of Gram Swaraj Abhiyan.

Local contact: 06566-290013 (Vikas Sahyog Kendra) or rozgar@gmail.com

I worked for a few years with activist organisations in India and the contribution of young people to these organisations, and to social movements was striking.  Equally striking was the attrition that these organisations had.  A part of it was clearly for financial and professional reasons, but that was clearly not the whole story. Activist groups that work on issues like labour rights or democracy often do not pay attention to such issues within.  Many young people whose efforts form the backbone of the work of these campaigns find themselves in a strange position of arguing for democracy and dissent in the society on the one hand and not finding the space among the very people who champion them.

Fortunately for me, I worked with some exceptional people with a deep commitment to democracy, not just in the polity but in their personal lives.  The example that they set made that which I saw around me even more stark.  But I had my moments, many of which I would not have experienced had it not been for my age and status.  I have copied below one email that I sent the wonderful people that I worked with.  I decided to post it on my website since this indicates a frustration that I have seen in many other young people that I worked with at that time.  I post it with a realization that I too was not the easiest person to work with; after all, activist organisations tend to attract people with strong opinions.  My class background, and the fact that I worked with a supportive team, ensured that moments like these were rare and that they were redressed.  Many young people needed the meagre salaries and work experience and did not have the privilege to rebel or a network of support.  Their days were needlessly filled with frustration, and this should not be so.  I revisit my thoughts in solidarity and for a better workspace for all.

All of us have gathered here to work on a common cause, and not private profit. Each of us is giving what is precious to us. I hope to work in an environment where I can put my best for a social cause I value. I am lucky to be working with all of you, each of whom is distinguished in many ways. That said, I am a highly self-willed person who evaluates the usefulness of what I do. While I am willing to do certain things I don’t believe in, for the sake of teamwork, I consider that I am not obliged to do so. If I am asked to do something, I will evaluate the value of the work to be done, I am capable of taking things up only when I am convinced of the merits of doing it. This scheme of things is considered healthy in a horizontal set up. Without asking any of you about it, I have declared myself an equal partner in this common venture (liberty shall not descend onto me, I shall raise up to it). Luckily for me, most of you have accepted me as such. This has enabled me to dialogue with you. The dialogue has helped me understand your positions and on most occasions be convinced of your opinion. Unfortunately, this is not the case with everyone. This is stifling dialogue. In the extreme case, he even questioned if I should be a part of the campaign when I did not subscribe to his view on BT cotton (we never discussed my stand, I merely did not accept his). I wonder if there is some way of dialogue between generations!

I feel that I am working with wonderful people and have a lot to gain from you all. I am certain that I am doing as good a work as I can at my age. I urge you all to make the best use of me, I am glad to be of use. I urge you to try influencing me; I have strong but pliable opinions. I urge you to point out to my failings when I am in my good mood (which is more often the case) and I am inclined to accept change. I am more than willing to play that part with you. While I am willing to work hard without a sense of reward, it is important for me to feel that my time is usefully spent. For this I demand that the group does its homework. I demand that you think and plan well before asking me to take up a task. I demand that you convince me of the effectiveness of proposed measures, by articulating your understanding and by convincing me of its foundations. I demand that I am not taken for granted, expected to do what is given or repeat what is said. Work with me with democratic values, intellectual honesty, adequate homework and courtesy; I will promise you a rewarding experience.

Thus went the mail and a lot of smoke went up the air subsequently.  The wonderful-of-the-lot continued to support me and lived the values I expected of them.

The Government of India passed the all-important National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) in 2005 (for an intro click here). Whenever I mention it to my friends in USA the first question they ask me is, “is this like the new-deal”. The new deal has many similarities with NREGA, but is a much wider concept. NREGA is a programme dealing exclusively with labour-intensive, unskilled work. Employment programmes under new deal were much wider in scope including large-scale employment of artists, writers, among others. There were so many agencies and programmes under new deal that Roosevelt’s administration was called the ‘alphabet-soup government’ (due to acronyms such as WPA, CCC, etc.). In this alphabet soup, one programme comes close to NREGA – that is Civilian  Conservation Corps (CCC).

CCC aimed at creating employment under the condition of mass unemployment and in the process assist environmental regeneration. CCC and other fellow programmes are credited with creating numerous national parks in the US, soil conservation, reforestation, and other important feats that have improved the environment in this country (a list of major park projects through CCC). Let me pause for a moment to confess that I have read only a little about CCC so far, and am not acquainted with its criticism – hopefully, I will work on it soon. In any case, the ambition of NREGA is similar to CCC – to provide employment so that people do not suffer from hunger and destitution and at the same time create useful assets. Among useful assets are ‘Jal, Jungle, Jameen’ i.e. water, afforestation and soil conservation.

Employment or assets?

One of the many criticisms of the Employment Guarantee Act is that projects often do not create useful assets. Critics argue that if transfer of money to poor people is the aim, then it is better done directly rather than making people do hard work that yields nothing. Even if NREGA yields no assets, it serves a useful ‘selection’ function i.e. since only poor people tend to take up hard physical work for minimum wage, NREGA ensures that money goes to people who need it the most. That said, the argument that NREGA is not creating assets is a serious one and should get the attention it deserves.

I have not come across detailed studies about asset creation by NREGA. What we know of it so far is from the record of Employment Guarantee Scheme in Maharashtra and of the various food-for-work programmes across India. There is some evidence in Maharashtra that it had a good impact on some sectors – particularly horticulture. But on the whole I think there is some merit to the notion that wage-employment programmes did not produce useful assets. Given the potential do good work, this is a pity. Somehow there seems to be a division between creating employment and assets – at least administratively.

Interestingly, the debate on whether wage-employment programmes should concentrate on creating employment or assets is neither new nor restricted to India. When the debate was raging in 1930s FDR (then president of USA) met with Harry Hopkins and Harold [?] at two different times on a day to discuss CCC. When Harry Hopkins argued that employment should get the priority and FDR answered, ‘you are perfectly right’. Later in the day Harold argued that assets should get the emphasis and FDR responded, ‘you are perfectly right’. His wife had watched the two and she confronted him that he had said both opposing views were correct. FDR looked at Eleanor for a moment and said, ‘you know what dear, you are perfectly right’ [Recounted by J K Galbraith in a talk at Harvard May 9, 2002].

While one would think that there is a great deal of synchrony between employment and asset creation, these are two different equally worthy goals for those in the administration. Unfortunately though, within the scope of wage employment programmes such as NREGA, employment is the gaze with which the government looks, and so asset creation does not get the emphasis it deserves. If the claims that I read about CCC were true, it has had remarkable achievements in a short span. Due to environmental mismanagement in the last century there were many environmental disasters in the mid-west including periodic floods, massive erosion of topsoil, etc. CCC worked in restoring things in important ways. Many parks were created that people continue to enjoy till today.

Employment for Environment

There is no question that India needs to invest in its environment, water, land and other resources. With our vast human resources, these are well within our reach. The question though is whether we will start putting our attention to these issues. NREGA offers the perfect opportunity for us to give environment the attention it deserves. With some push, we can make a lot happen.  Let the slogan be Employment for Environment.

Mander, Harsh, Jean Dreze, and S. Vivek. 2002. Freedom from Hunger and Fear. New Delhi: Rajiv Gandhi Centre for International Studies.

Vivek, S. Forthcoming. “Making Hunger a Political Priority in India.” In Human Right To Adequate Food: Definitions, Interpretations And Initiatives. Manila: Philippines: University of Philippines Press.

———. 2003a. “Notes from the Right to Food Campaign: People’s Movement for the Right to Food.” In Vol. New Delhi. Delhi: World Food Program. http://www.wfp.org.in/website/events/countdown_2007/s_vivek.pdf.

———. 2003b. “Hope in Our Hands.” Humanscape X (Xii; 10th Anniversary Series) (December). http://www.humanscape.org/Humanscape/new/dec03/hopeinourhands.htm.

———. 2008. “School Feeding as a Global Obligation.” In Global Obligation for the Right to Food, ed. George Kent. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. [Download]

———. 2009. “Exploring Linkages of Rights Based Approach to Development & the Human Development Approach.” In Human Rights and Human Development. Bombay, India: Tata Institute of Social Sciences. [Download]

———. 2010. “Understanding Public Services in Tamil Nadu: An Institutional Perspective”. Doctoral dissertation, Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University. [For details and download, click here]

Vivek, S., and Jean Dreze. 2002. “Hunger in the Classroom.” Hindustan Times, October 15. [Download draft]

Vivek, S., and Basudeb Guha-Khasnobis. 2006. “Gender and the Right to Food: A Critical Reexamination.” In Gender and Food Security. Kolkata: United Nations University: World Institute of Development Economics Research.

———. 2007. “Rights Based Approach To Development: Lessons From The Right To Food Movement.” In Food Insecurity, Vulnerability and Human Rights Failure. Studies in Development Economics and Policy. Basingstoke: UK: Palgrave-Macmillan. [Download]

Vivek, S., and Sudha Narayanan. 2007. “Food Policy and Social Movements: Reflections on the Right to Food Campaign in India.” In Food Policy for Developing Countries: The Role of Government in the Global Food System. Ithaca: New York: Cornell University. http://cip.cornell.edu/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&page=current&handle=dns.gfs&collection=.

[googlevideo]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3238128636848285898[/googlevideo]

In case you have trouble viewing it, please go to the permanalink by clicking the title above, or here

I have drawn extensively on the materials we have prepared in the campaign, and specially on discussions with the ‘support group’. I would like to acknowledge up-front that this note involves a lot of piracy. I wold like to thank the ‘support group’, Dr N C Saxena and the numerous participants of the campaign whose ideas form the notes below.

The Right to Food Campaign in particular has been home to a spectacular variety of activities for the various reasons. One, hunger is a ‘bottom-line concern’ for people working in a variety of areas. Thus the campaign has got participants from large areas of work and regions. Two, hunger has an impact on most developmental issues e.g. education and health. Thus established campaigns on these issues have a stake in the issue of right to food. Third, a large variety of institutions have been utilised by participants of the Right to Food Campaign adding to the diversity in the activities. The following, for example, have been used frequently: mass mobilisation, advocacy, social audits, courts – ranging from the Supreme Court to the district courts, human rights commissions, a monitoring system based on a commissioner with oversight powers over all food and employment schemes, research, seminars, media advocacy and public hearings. A proper documentation of the campaign would have been invaluable. Unfortunately, such a systematic effort has not gone into it so far. In the limited time one has had for writing this paper, I have tried to make notes of some of the most important lessons on the way ahead to make a hunger free India. I hope it adds value to the deliberations.

1. INTRODUCTION

I made friends with a boy of 15 from rural UP. He once asked me what I do. In the best of my Hindi I told him about the Right to Food Campaign. After listening for a while and signaled that he had understood what I do – ‘acha! roti banathe ho’ (oh! You make bread).

DAY 1: A Meeting of ICDS functionaries

On our first day at Dhaulpur, at the ICDS Project Office, we chanced upon a gathering of about 60 ICDS functionaries, including AWWs, ANMs and primary school teachers. This was their third day of a workshop, where they had been listening to expert speakers on a range of issues including ayurvedic home remedies, malnutrition, AIDS/HIV issues, education, etc.
The functionaries were drawn mainly from Dhaulpur town and a neighbouring village – Tasimu – and were from diverse backgrounds it seemed. Some appeared well to do, others less so; many were very vocal and outspoken, some not quite. There also seemed to be a representation of various castes including several SCs. On the whole, they participated actively and seemed very well informed of the details of all 6 services of the ICDS scheme and the guidelines, as was evident from the manner in which they finished the supervisors sentences (and on occasions corrected her, in chorus) during the latter’s lecture.
The Supervisors Lecture

We were impressed by the supervisor’s lecture for several reasons. It followed the ICDS guidelines thoroughly and covered all the services in substantial detail and depth. Further she also seemed to have a very good understanding of the larger social context – she particular and frequent emphasis was on gender allocation within the family (feed daughters in law, give women in the family enough time to eat, give adequate quantities, and the right kind of food), the importance of women’s education & literacy in ensuring better childcare (most of this was declared in chorused unison). Similarly it was clear that the supervisor also understood the importance of convergence of (medical and non-medical) services and given that the audience included ANMs as well, the message seemed to us to be particularly appropriate. The supervisor elaborated on the need for sorority building and camaraderie with the mothers through home visits, etc. She urged the AWWs to establish a rapport with new mothers by visiting them when a child is born. She added that the AWWs could then use the opportunity to tell them that the first milk is very good and useful to the babies and perhaps not so much to the “devathas” to who they are typically offered. She also mentioned the importance of weaning food and the need to inform mothers of best practices and learn in turn about their habits.

Among other things the supervisor took some time to stress that the 100 beneficiary target would have to be firmly enforced and beyond that, the AWW would have to say “no” (“pyar se aur prem se”). Alcoholic husbands, twins, if the last child had died would ideally have to be included, as the disadvantaged (poor, SC-ST and BPL)

Ten months have gone by since the Supreme Court directed all state governments to introduce cooked mid-day meals in all primary schools within six months. A few state governments are implementing the order, but most are trying to buy time, plead for central government funding, or even reverse the order. [The future of mid-day meals depends a great deal on the ability of public pressure to overcome this resistance.]

In states that have started providing mid-day meals, various implementation problems have arisen. There have been occasional reports of food poisoning, notably in Pondicherry where hundreds of children recently fell ill after consuming the mid-day milk. Teachers often complain that mid-day meals encroach on their time or disrupt classroom processes. And in some states, high-caste parents have objected to the idea of an all-caste lunch, or to the mid-day meal being prepared by a dalit cook.

It is, however, important to avoid a loss of nerve in the face of these teething problems. Consider for instance the issue of food poisoning. Occasional incidents of indigestion at school carry little weight against the enormous health gains (present and future) that may be expected from higher school attendance and reduced hunger in the classroom. According to recent investigations by the [State Council of Educational Research and Training in Delhi], even in urban areas a large proportion of children from poor families leave for school in the morning with an empty stomach. Better-fed and better-educated children are the key to the future health of the nation.

For drought-affected people, employment is crucial to escape hunger. Over the past three years hundreds of demonstrations have been held all over the state to demand an expansion and improvement of relief works. Measures to promote transparency were taken to ensure that these resources reach the needy and do not line the pockets of corrupt people. In both respects the campaign has had a major impact.

This year witnessed the largest provision of relief employment in the history of Rajasthan, and it ranks as one of the best drought relief efforts in India. This is partly influenced by the prospect of elections, but credit is also due to the campaign for making relief work a political priority in the state. The contrast, for example, with neighbouring Madhya Pradesh is quite stark.