So much for 'rule of law'!

420 IPC (Hindi; 2021)

Director: Manish Gupta

So that is how it is. Everybody claims to be adhering to the rule of law. For a simpleton like me, that sounds like sound advice. The law is there to protect the little people against the tyranny of the deep-pocketed. I was nurtured to believe that the Truth will always prevail in the end. Lady Justice is supposedly blind to coercion, they say. As I grew older, I realised that all these are just bunkum. 

The people who frequently invoke the phrases 'rule of law' and 'by the book' do not mean what they say. What they actually mean is that they have masterminded the nooks, corners and loopholes in the legal system that they can literally get away with murder. They can legitimately proclaim that they can legally needle themselves away from being caught in a comprising position. They have got all their sides, frontal and posterior, all concealed.

When and if ever they are queried, they have the fortitude to use the same law used to persecute them to shield themselves instead. No matter how hard truth tries to prevail, nothing can challenge the best brain that wealth can purchase. The way law can be interpreted as much as the defender can afford to pay. Top dollars can buy top lawyers. 

Law is written, and its execution is as good as the words and nuances it is written. Words can be manipulated. The first teachers of this art were the sophists. Greek philosophers like Socrates and Plato did not have any nice things to say about them. They were viewed as prostituting themselves by selling the art of speaking and providing wisdom to convince the impossible. They must be the first to have sold ice to the Eskimos.  

This is an engaging film about a seemingly small-scaled chartered accountant, Bansi Keswani, who is initially arrested when his client is caught for money laundering. He is discharged, but Bansi is re-arrested for stealing some cheques two months later. This time around, he has to face the whole brunt of the law. Why would an intelligent accountant do something so amateurish like stealing cheques and falsifying the issuer's signature in such a novice way? The defence digs deep into his sleeves and all roads plainly seem to lead Bansi to a lengthy jail term.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Follow

Sins of our fathers

We carry the burdens of our ancestors. At least, that is my understanding of how life works. In my simple mind, we suffer for the mistakes of our ancestors and the misdeeds or inaction of the past leaders. Conversely, we prosper and enjoy the reason for our existence from their farsightedness.

I was taught to believe, as the picture of life painted by my mother as I was exposed to the lessons in life, that when we do 'good things', we will be rewarded in due time. Somewhere somehow our good deeds will be returned, directly or indirectly. Then I discovered that you do 'good things' because it is the only humane thing to do. Later came the talk of karma and its nuances of how 'evil' actions, like Newton's Law, has a correspondingly counter re-action which may affect your descendants. Now, these people tell me that every person is an island. Everyone is responsible for his own actions or inactions and his 'soul' has to answer for it in this life or the next, in this realm or another.

The question that has been bogging of late is whether, in the material world, we are answerable to the follies and wrongdoings of our parents? It popped up when the children of now-deposed ex-PM Najib who made repeated pleas in the media of their ignoramus state of the dealings involving their father.

Are offsprings and forbearers just linked intrinsically for the infusion of beneficial DNA, cancelling of unsuitable traits and the continuity of species? If every individual is a stand-alone product, why is that the progenitors slog their life away for the wellbeing of their kids? That their descendants have a better life than theirs. The parents literally work their asses down till it the fibres of their soul run thin.  Their search for wealth and comfort for their kinfolks never stops despite knowing that their sojourn on Earth is finite and a short one at that.

Yajna - a sacrificial ritual to invoke Gods for salutations,

the offering and cajoling them for personal gains. It is said to

have the capability to ensure the well-being of our descendants

as well as to correct our past mistakes, at a higher realm.

Logically if the descendants benefitted from the loot of their elders, they should be punished as well. Shouldn't the lavishness of life alert the children that something is not right? But then, people are becoming so creative in hiding their ill-gotten spoils that proving ownership becomes a Herculean task in mumbo-jumbo imbroglio of red tape. 

So you are going to leave judgement to the pleasure of the Divine Forces? In the ethereal world, however, nobody knows what rules are actually followed if there are any, rules or the ethereal. Is it pure chance or the result of the dice-throwing games of the celestial bodies?

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Justice must appear to be done!

Jolly BA, LLB 2 (2017)

Is it not scary or what? Here I am heading to Lucknow for a literary festival, and on the plane, I randomly chose a film to watch. And the movie I decide to view is set in Lucknow, of all the places in India. Is it mere coincidence? Is it synchronicity, the higher powers over me having a quiet chuckle at my expense? Is it trying to show who the boss is? Or am I having a delusion of grandiose that the world revolves around me and for me? Daunting or am I just creating an issue out of nothing? A mountain out of a molehill or cherry-picking what suits me and cry "Boo!"

 This Akshay Kumar movie, which is the second offering after the excellent run of Jolly LLB. Sadly, the sequel does not live up to the standards of the former. It fails to impress in the humour department, and the story is pathetically predictable.

Jolly is a junior lawyer in an established law firm. He has not shown his mettle and is often looked down upon by his boss, partly because of his humble beginnings. To prove his worth, he sets up his own law firm by deceiving a client of her money. The client, a pregnant mother, tries desperately to clear her deceased husband's name who was accused of terrorism. She screams of police brutality, but nobody seems interested. Upon realising that she has been cheated, she commits suicide. The remorseful Jolly promise to continue the widow's work.

The law remains the last bastion upon which the common man can seek justice. Even though the truth is multifaceted and is dependent on perspectives, the ordinary Joe should have an avenue to air his grievances and hope for sympathy, remuneration and dignity. Increasingly the legal system appears not to seek justice but just mete punishment. The judicial system fails to portray independence and merely act as a rubber stamp of the ruling political master. Altruism and morality remain only in rhetorics, as a smokescreen to convince, not in action. It exudes a corrupt image that is easily bought over by power, money and all the ugly primal, animalistic instincts. Paradoxically this was the very reason why our forefathers tried to establish a system where the average person, deficient in own ways, also gets a place in the sun to carry the duties of his existence. The autonomy of the judiciary appears only on paper. 

https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

All lives matter?

*Terms and conditions apply!

The newest battle cry screams 'Black Lives Matter'. Of course, it is the only politically correct thing to say, that all lives are precious, irrespective of race, colour and class.

Nice on paper, nice to hear but not in practice. It is an undeniable fact that some lives matter more than others. Rather than thinking that race, colour and creed are determining factors on who should live and who should just bite the bullet and disappear, I would like to think that money is the common denominator that saves everybody's skin in the end.

In this time and age, the dictum 'Health is Wealth' no longer holds water. It should be rewritten as ' Wealth assures good Health'. As the cost of medical services snowballs by leaps and bounds, governments and health providers are running to cut cost. Even though the world has the technological know-how or at least have access to some experimental techniques to treat some potentially fatal illnesses, the cost may be a limiting factor. How many times have we heard of doors to expensive modalities of treatment being shut for non-affordability? With the wave of stacks of the greenback, even cadavers would open their gap to volunteer organ donation! True, entitlement to basic health care is a human right. That is how it is going to be for the (m)asses, basic with bare necessity. Looking at the way medical services have evolved over the years, it appears like it is only affordable to the demigods. The rest of the mortals can only live their lives on a prayer or just go to hell.


Even God could not help you if you walked on the wild side to cross the wrong aspect of the law, especially if you are born or happen to live on the wrong side of town. How quickly a false arrest, misunderstanding or just being in the wrong place wrong time can develop into something unbailable. Legal representation for the barrel scraper is at the liberty of the unskilled novice defender of justice. With affluence, with the best representation that money can buy, Lady Justice would gladly tilt the scales in your favour. Echoes of wrongful arrests, technicalities, loss of cold chain, incompetencies of the force may be heard loud and clear.

It is 'Animal Farm' all over again where some animals are 'more equal' than others. Some lives matter more than others.

I walk the line

It is never 'all-or-none' rule. Above all show compassion, they say. These statements would flash scenes of border patrol officers, with batons in the hands or rifle pointing at the invaders, women or children. Then, of recent, close to us, distance wise, of a voluntary police personnel giving an earful to a shade-seeker from the torrential rain at a mosque for apparently not dressed appropriately for the occasion (of seeking shade at a house of worship).

True, above all common sense should prevail and one of most revered human gift is compassion. True that World War 3 was averted in 1962 when a Russian officer decided to listen to his heart than to act on a faulty signal to start the sequence to activate the Russian nuclear head.

Also true that ill-intended individuals are using this soft spot to cheat, smuggle and rob people blind. True, people who act as watchdogs should not be masters themselves but be obedient servants to stand in the line of fire and go as much as to take the bullet of their lords.

It looks like only the higher echelon of the society is given the onus to bend the rule. Other mere mortals should just toe the line.

Come what may!

The Greeks say that a true Stoic sage would not crack under pressure. He would take all the curve balls that life hurls at him at the same stride as he embraces joy. He would find happiness in the simplest of things in life and would not gloat of others’ misgivings or be envious of others’ successes. He knows that everyday accomplishment has its weak points and every underachievement its merit!

King Rama must have slipped into this role, a true Stoic sage, quite well. Imagine the tragedies that bemoaned upon him. He, however, continued performing his various duties, as a ruler, a son, a crowd pleaser without losing focus. Perhaps, the priorities of being an exemplary husband or a doting father did not fall into his dictionary.

After waiting so many years in line for the realm, just when the ascent to the throne is imminent, he had to take a back seat and retreat into the jungle for 14 years. That too, because of some nonsensical promise made by his father.  Imagine an exile into the unforgiving woods, with a new bride hardly accustomed to the hardship of life. Life in the wild was no walk in the park either. Keeping intruders away was a challenge. If that was not enough,  his young wife had to be kidnapped because of some old flame issues.

Recruiting an army in a far away land down south was no easy feat. For which, he could not thank his Tamil friends enough. Rama carried the guilt of killing a just and learned king who was revered by his subjects. What about his dear friends that gave up their lives in the meaningless battle? Rama carried all that guilt.

Just when he thought all were over with the burning city and death of the ‘evil’ monarch and that he could rule Ayodhya in peace, political turmoil dictated that his wife is exiled again. If that was not enough, his wife had been pregnant when he sent her off! If not for the sage, Valmiki, she would not have survived the ordeal. What more, she had a pair of twin boys without his knowledge for years!

If fate were indeed cruel, it did rear its ugly head in Rama’s case. The sacrificial horse had to wander into their territory and his kids, Luv and Kush, had to defend it. Even before meeting his dear wife, she succumbed to her old age. Imagine, a father who not only misses his fatherly duties but almost killing them in the line of duty!

In spite of all these obstacles in life, Rama continued his worldly obligations, allegedly without flinching, surrendering, faithful to natural justice, staying steadfast to his Dharma. That must have been the reason for his elevation to God-like status comparable to the Protector of the world!

Law and justice: Not interchangable?

See the haughty lady who is pleased with the judgement of 

splitting the baby to appease both parties. Of course, the wise 

one used it as a test to look for both mothers' body language.

The turn of events of late reminded me of a story narrated in my early childhood. I was a toddler when puthu atteh was renting a room in our house. It was a routine for us to pester her every evening with yet another story. She had a penchant for telling folk tales in such an exciting manner. I must have seen such a pain, as I remember, asking many smart-alec questions. After all, it was all just fairy and folk tales.

The tale that comes to mind is the one regarding two women fighting over a single baby, and the learned King had to pass judgment.  Of course, this story had been told in many traditions. In Tamil mythology, King Pandiyan of the Chola Kingdom was the judge; King Solomon presided in the Biblical version.  I am sure there must be similar versions elsewhere in other cultures.

Two ladies (friends) delivered about the same time. One, unfortunately, had a fresh stillbirth. The bereaving mother, either on purpose or upon the effect of postpartum melancholia, stole the other lady’s child to claim as hers. After a session of baby-snatching and quarrelling, the matter was brought to royal courts. With his true wisdom, the King decreed that the baby should be split right down in the middle to appease the mothers. From the corner of his eye, he noticed the snigger of one mother. The other mother voluntarily surrendered the baby to the other in one piece, fearing any injury to the newborn. In one instant, the true mother of the baby was revealed through a single action of sacrifice!

In the same vein, it should be clear who the aggressor is and who the victim is. An aggressor who indulges in winning smiles of his victory without caring for the aggrieving party has only self-interest written all over his face. True love sacrifices for the wellbeing of others without putting personal pride in the equation. Maternal love is that special force that drives a mother to barge into a burning building and jumps into a lake when she herself is no duck to the water when her offspring is caught in either of them. It is that moment in the middle of the night when the world is sound asleep, and the mother is only one who jumps out of her slumber to attend to her newborn, thinking of the worst, when the baby gives a soft grunt in her own sleep!

Shame game

Over the last weekend, the family was deeply engaged in a debate on the appropriateness of a video clipping that went viral on the cyberspace. A thick in the middle kind of a middle aged man was filmed on a handphone whilst a girl, who may be the victim, went on a rampage accusing him of outraging her modesty while seated in a flight. He had apparently touched her after slipping his hands through the space between the seats.

The debate was whether what the victim did was right or the accused deserved such a shaming.

The victim who is from the generation who wishes that their mobile devices were attached to their body had the clarity of mind to record the whole event soon after the said crime was committed. She raised an alarm and drew fellow plane passengers to her seat as she started confronting the perpetrator with artillery of piercing questions. The accused on the receiving end sat slouched in shame covering his face. There is a second clip where the accused is in better spirits as he defends his actions.

In this digital age, it is becoming norm that  justice ala street justice is carried by social shaming. Sympathy is garnered by the number of likes. Almost everybody would agree and feel for the victim. The public would ask for blood. In a flash, all the job of judge, jury and executor would be even before natural justice takes its course. So much for someone being innocent until proven guilty.

All this may look benign but hitting the wrong button may prove fatal in the right predisposed individual. All the raw emotion hurled at the accused may just push him over the brink. Remember the nurse who spilled the beans over Kate Middleton's (Duchess of Cambridge, wife of Prince William) hospital admission in severe symptoms of early pregnancy - she took her own life. The pressure of guilt and accusation proved too much to stomach.
In this case, what if the gentleman who is accused of not being so gentle decides to take the path of least resistance away from all the shame? The accuser has blood in her hands or she could pat herself for justice had been served?

http://www.mid-day.com/articles/viral-video-girl-confronts-molester-on-flight-leaves-him-shame-faced/15958195

Is it worth it?

American Sniper (2014)
Produced and Directed by: Clint Eastwood

Normally I do not fancy American military propaganda films but decided to give a go as it was directed by Dirty Harry himself. The academy also plays an important role of stirring national pride and international justifications by nominating these films in loads of categories.
This particular movie was no different except that if you notice carefully, the story kind of mocks the double standards of Americans practise in dealing with international affairs. When children all over the occupied territories are wailing day and night with hunger, homelessness and loss of piece of mind, the protagonist gets all riled up when his crying neonate is not attended to by the nurses in the nursery.
Just because of a piece of cloth and ideologies that supposedly save mankind but does not mean a thing to the man on the street, young men go to zones that they are not familiar with and probably not heard of before in their entire lives. They fight for glory for nation and race and for their efforts, they return in body bags, with post traumatic stress disorder or in a totally different state of mind for the society and family to put up with, as if the fold of flag that is handed to their next of kin, the state funeral, the 21 gun salute and financial help is going to replace their loss.
Of course, in this movie, Chris Kyle, a SEAL sniper, is reputed to have made quite a killing in his 4 tours of duty in Iraq, returns home a broken man. He pulls through his mental twist only to succumb to a bullet from a fellow disturbed veteran during one of his sessions at the shooting range.
Is all these worth it? Some corporations make mountains of cash trying to monger war and sell arms for lesser beings to kill themselves silly. And their own boys also the bear the brunt of their actions. I suppose the high standards of living that their own community has comes with a price!

Lawfully yours?

Law: Freedom trap?
Heard over the weekend, a public forum, in the ambience of a multi-storey departmental, the epitome of the success of capitalism, of a topic highlighting things that mattered to the lowly common folks of the country- the law and whether it was the best thing available for the common man on the street. The forum forms part of the series of BFM Night School's outdoor activity, bringing intellectual and philosophical discussions to the masses.
With the advent and selective use of law by leaders, of late, to subdue their political opponents and even curb the supposed freedom of his subjects, this topic appears more relevant than ever, today. Whenever common sense fail to rule, the long arm of the law is conveniently invoked to scare the living daylights of its victim (lay people). The law sometimes seem not accessible to the common man as compared to people in power. Law seem to take more time than the process of governing the country. Even though avenues are available for fair representation and trial, the process appears to be going at snail's pace. At the end of the day, it looks like there is no justice in courts.
In the beginning of time, citizens agreed that things need to be done in a certain manner. He sacrificed a part of his freedom and traded it in for peace on earth. That was acceptable as law. Human beings, being left to his instincts would do whatever he feels, sometimes at a primal level. So, people have bargained with the state to let go a bit of their 'freedom' to be ruled (trapped). All in the name of peace and order so that all beings can like happily, each getting their place in the sun.
Looking at things now, rather than law helping to set order, it seems that the law is used to cause disorder.
Human rights denotes what a human being can rightfully do. It does not make sense that a law has to be meted to say what a human can do or rather teaching a human how to live. As if human beings never lived before 1948. Maybe there is something wrong in the mindset of human being himself if he does not know how a human should live.

Take for example, a primitive society in the fringe of modern city may be quite contented with their local law which may appear so-stone aged to an average modern man. Capital punishment and amputations may have been accepted as a just punishment to be meted. Can we say that that society in their own laws?
At the end of the day, man makes law to put things in order but some how feels trapped when the law he creates is used to trap into submission to satisfy certain higher orders.

But, that is not real way...

Now how often have we heard people sitting high up and looking down saying, "yeah but they is the real way of doing it! They are not doing it right. There are specific ways of doing it. The Truth is all there in the scriptures!"
Yes and yet no religion is not guilty of it.
The animals are supposed to be respected and are said to be also creations of the Almighty but the way they are abused, culled and hunted, it appears like their sole purpose of existence is to be eaten, hunted and be bullied. They say that their religious way of justice is God sent and is cast on stone. If you look around, their justice is made to look so disconnected from the train of thought of contemporary man. If you do not have a living example to follow, how can you proclaim that your system is the best. We need a sign. We need a living proof of superiority of the merchandise that you are trying to sell us!
Your religious leaders allow atrocities to be carried out on fellow citizens. Yet they advise middle path as the best way to reach Enlightenment. Even your saffron robed holy men partake in these atrocities in the name of justice. Others of the same faith, however, admonish their actions by saying that their brand of seeking the truth is deviant.
You say God works in mysterious ways but yet you take it upon yourself that you must do His work on Earth. And you self appointed yourself as the chosen one.
You say everyone is sent to Earth for a specific reason but how do you know that what you doing IS the reason you are sent for? Perhaps, you still have not found you are looking for.
You think you know everything and you know are right but what if, just what if, you were wrong all the time? You cannot undo what you did to them, can you?
Are you trying to show your might as might just might be right and buries the rest?
Since we are all groping around trying to understand the things that surround us, why you give peace a chance? Maybe when the storm had cleared, you can see clearly then...
You do not want yesterday once more.

What if...

Stranger on the Third Floor (1940)

This is usually categorised as the first of many movies which were shot in a particular techniques involving a lot of shadows, narrating stories which are dark with a low budget production copying German and French cinematography. In hindsight, it was called 'film noir' and boasts of many groundbreaking new cinematography then. RKO Radio Pictures has the bragging rights of producing many such films.

The irony of this movie is that the main actor associated it only speaks in the last 10 minutes of the show! It is Peter Lorre, the guy who gained international recognition through Fritz Lang's 1931 movie 'M'. He, like the many Jews who were victims of witch hunt of the Nazi regime in the late 30s migrated lock, stock and barrel to flourish Hollywood's Tinseltown.
Reporter Michael Ward has his future all set. He has a lovely girl, Jane, who is all excited that he has a promotion and is a star witness in a murder trial. He cannot wait to tie the knot once all this is over.
At the trial, Michael becomes the key and only witness that can potentially send a man to the electric chair. The mostly lethargic judge and bored jury are convinced as the accused has a history of delinquency as a child and was seen at the scene of the crime. It all sounds eerily too easy. Both Michael and Jane (especially) start to have their doubts about the turn of events as the accused vehemently denies the charges. It soon strains their relationship. Pretty soon, Michael has doubts on his own testimony.

Peter Lorre

Back in his dingy apartment, he sees a suspicious character (Peter Lorre) leaving his neighbour, Albert Meng's apartment. Now, this Meng character is an annoying character who admonishes Michael for making too much noise on his typewriter, for bringing Jane to the apartment and even comments on his choice of consumption of beverage. In between sleep, dream and wakefulness, Michael finds Meng to have been murdered. The pattern of murder is just like the murder case he was testifying earlier. Suddenly, it is clear to him. The stranger must be the killer of both murders!
Michael find himself being the suspect due to circumstantial evidence and goes under custody as he had been seen threatening Meng during their arguments.
This 1 hour drama ends with Jane finally tracking down the stranger and saving the day.
I think that is what everybody in the modern world is fear of. Even if we have the most creative ways of punishing the wrong-doers, man as fallible as we can be, we may inadvertently pass a death sentence on an innocent victim. Is that the justice we are looking for? It is no more justice but more of revenge on loss lives/property/ dignity/etcetera or a witch hunt to put the fear of God (pun not intended) in refraining people from committing crimes, Sadly, punitive actions have never been shown to deter any form of crime.

To carry out law or justice?

Judgement at Nuremberg (1961)
As our country comes to a crossroad, and many uncertainties have to be thrashed out so that history would not judge us in a bad light, it is always good to look back at history. Even though inevitable, we do not to want history to repeat itself.
Many of the dialogues in this film cut through incisively like a knife. The topics argued here about race and masterly inactivity by the people in authority are relevant today as it were 80 years ago. It is worth a watch, albeit its 3 hour speech filled presentation.
This film narrates the military trial in Nuremberg of 4 civilians who served in Nazi Germany. The accused are Emil Hahn (prosecutor), Frederich Hoffstetter, Warren Lemmpe and Ernst Janning (a reputable authority in law and Minister of Law, acted brilliantly by Burt Lancaster.)
The trial is presided by a tribunal panel of 3 where the head is Judge Harewood (Spencer Tracy). He is actually given the job as nobody else wanted it and was just a small time District Court Judge from Maine.
Basically the trial covered three angles - forced sterilisation, racial pollution as decreed by Nazi Germany  and Holocaust.
The 4 accused, through the powers that they had had either decided to follow the ruling Government's decree or did nothing to mete justice. They carried out the law but not justice!
In the forced sterilisation case,  a mentally deficient individual, Peterson (Montgomery Clift) tells of how because of his family's political affiliations, was sterilised as the family had a hereditary genetic disorder.
In another case, an elderly Jew was executed as he was accused of having an affair with a young German (Aryan) girl, Irene Hoffmann (Judy Garland). Ernst Janning (Burt Lancaster) was the presiding judge then.
In between the trial, Judge Harewood also tries to understand the sentiments of the average German through the eyes of his servants and a former wealthy wife of a Nuremberg executed General, Mrs Bertholdt (Marlene Dietrich). The Americans actually admire the German's culture, civilisation, countryside and music. They could not fathom why they allowed such an atrocity to happen in the first place.
In the meantime, outside the courtroom, pressure is mounting for the court to give a favourable verdict to woo the German people's heart as the Cold War was building up. Russian troops were advancing and for the love of democracy, the Americans have to garner support of the Germans to prevent fall of Germany to the Eastern Bloc.
The prosecutor then screens a film in the courthouse of the events of executions in the concentration camps. By the inactions of the accused, they have been privy to Hitler's cruelty.
Most people claim that the general public were not made aware of the killings. The people in higher place knew the killing but not gravity of the problem, that the execution involved 6 million people!
In a touching speech by Janning, he explained that like many things in life, the Nazi would just be a passing phase. He did not expect it to be a way of life. At that juncture, he thought he could change things by staying within the system.
The defence lawyer, Hans Rolfe (Maximilian Schell who got an Oscar for his role), justified that the accused alone cannot be guilty of their crimes. The whole world should be guilty of it - the Russian for signing a pact to justify Nazi's march to Poland, the Vatican for approving their government, Churchill for praising the leadership in Hitler. Despite his shortcomings, Hitler did give a sense of national pride to its citizen at a time it was devastated from the effects of the world war. Anyway, the Americans have their hands dirty via the human devastation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The 8 months trail ended with all 4 given life imprisonment but were released soon after.
So, the discussion point is that whether we are doing justice to the nation by our inaction. What is the role of a judge? Is it to carry out what the law says or it to carry out justice? Should they be independent true to the profession or should they be subservient to their paymasters or pass judgements to satisfy populist sentiments?

The trouble is...

If there were a God, I think it very unlikely

that he would have such an uneasy vanity 

as to be offended by those who doubt 

his existence. And He would not like to be

apple polished all the time! Imagine your

children singing praises of you every time

they think of you. Annoying, right?

"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."

-Bertrand Russell

That is the trouble, is it not? People are so cocksure that certain things must done in a certain way and insists that others follow suit or malady may befall upon them. And the naysayers do not have the courage to support themselves steady on their vertebrae to oppose such views as they themselves are not cocksure about their convictions or is it because they are wiser but do not want to offend? At the end of the day, the louder, the mightier and the vocally gifted would rule the world. The real truth would lay dormant, pacifying the feeble into submission, living on hope the elusive truth would one day came afloat to reveal the final revelation. Till that day, the cheats, bigots, idiots and evil would reign...

An old Tamil proverb consoles the oppressed in this manner, "The king's justice is immediate but the justice of the Divine is worth the wait!" Now, the problem is that the king wants to mete the Divine's justice on Earth!

Remember the time?

Make yourself at home

Remember the time in history when the first merchant ship landed in Surat and the year 1509 when Lopez de Sequeira landed on our shores with gifts and praises. The locals bent over backwards, as the local culture dictates, to please the guests and make them comfortable and feel welcome. The guests, fondly referred to as 'Benggali Putih', did not fulfil their part of the bargain of being a gracious visitor but instead became their masters. Life, as the locals knew it, was never the same.

Here comes trouble!

Fast forward 5 centuries later, the whole country is excited that the most powerful man on the world with the official authority to annihilate the whole world with a press of a button decided to grace his presence in this land. Media has gone bonkers hailing the visit as the next best thing since 1966 when his predecessor came here to signal to the Eastern Block that we were proxies of the Uncle Sam. So, keep out!

And it applies to others too!

So, why the honour? Is it because Big Brother wants to ensure his little one is doing alright? Is it like how we have to visit our loved one every so often to show that we do care about them?
Is his visit going to straight our dismal human rights' record, our achievement in topping human trafficking list, poor media freedom and the mushrooming of state sanctioned ultraist groups? Dream on.
In the immortalised words of his predecessor known for his clandestine activities in the cloak room than the oval office per se, "It's all about the economy, stupid"!
The poster boy has arrived to exude his charm or twist arm the leaders to sign at the dotted lines of the TPPA (Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement). We have reached a crossroads where the leaders would have to decide whether to enrich corporate America, to safeguard its citizens or benefit (enrich) themselves via spillover effect of the deal.

Sitting ducks, are we?

For years and years, many seemingly unimportant information are written in case notes of patients. Many apparently worthless piece of news is recorded diligently. Who actually bothers about the weight of the placenta during delivery. Many routine things are recorded faithfully at spinal level without any any grey matter involved.
Even when a doctor 'clerks' your illness, at the back of his mind is to record salient features of your interview. Sometimes, he acts more like a clerk trying fulfill his duty of completing the mandatory questions and forms. Don't even bother about the nurses! By the time they retire, they would written all the Vedics scriptures a thousand times over.
Why all this obsession to write? I always wondered.... And I saw how many particulars are retrospectively filled and many descriptive posterior covering documentations occur when an unfavourable outcome happens. All are done in the hope that they, the attendants, would be likely pinpointed and penalized when the day of reckoning, if it happens, one day!
Hey, then it all makes sense. Those in the medical profession are just sitting duck writing day in and day out for one day, if the patient that they had care for, has a bone to pick, their nitty-gritty cherry picking attorneys can scheme through with a fine tooth comb to corner the practitioner, who acted in good faith and God as their witness, to appear as a buffoon and a conniving psychopath with the benefit of hindsight! The attorneys would appear like all knowing smart alecs highlighting the elementary facts of life!
So that is what it is.....

sitting duck

Fig. someone or something vulnerable to attack, physical or verbal. 

(Alludes to a duck floating on the water, not suspecting that it is the object of a hunter or predator.) 

Blind Justice?

So you think the truth will always prevail? You tell me that justice is impartial and is always fair. Is it just me or why is it that I think that it just a farce, just created to pacify a crying child. It is never fair. Justice is blind, deaf, mute, dumb and everything in between.

So, there I was, driving like a good guy, crossing the junction after ensuring that the road is clear. In fact, the cars at the T-junction waited for me to cross. Out of nowhere, comes a motorcyclist weaving through the traffic in between cars to crash directly to the side of my car. No warning, no honk, just like that, like a death wish.
And there I was trying to help him out to be up on his feet. Somehow, I felt the whole accident was staged. Out of nowhere, people appeared to the site offering various services - towing, insurance claims and unwarranted less than 2cents' worth of opinions.
And when, I, as a diligent citizen, made my police report, I was told that I was not totally off the hook. After listening out my story, the investigating officer suggested it was my duty too to ensure that nobody comes my way when I drive!
I was there, I know what happened!
And my father tells me of a civil court case where the presiding judge decreed that in a case of an accident at a junction, even if the traffic light is green on his side, the onus is still on the driver to ensure that there was no oncoming vehicle. What a load of crap? The law is blind alright!

Justice for all, still?

A friend of mine once attended a surprise party where sharks were the main item, not on the menu but rather attended mainly by lawyers. He ended up being surprised as the main conversation on everybody's lip was money, money and more money - all in tune of hundreds of thousands of ringgits, at least. It also left him with a bad after taste and it was not the food... Gone are the days where the practice of law is to fight for liberty, rights, justice and all that goes with it.
I just downloaded the whole Season 1 of the famed Perry Mason done in 1957. The TV series were instrumental in churning of many learned lawyers all around Malaysia (at least of the Gen X and late Baby Boomers). Later generations would have been drawn by the glitz of LA Law. By then, the fight for justice had dwindled and the so called glamour had taken over.

Faithful Secretary, Della Street
(Barbara Hale)

Perry Mason, the series, gives you the feel good era of the yesteryears where everybody is well behaved and well dressed. Of course, the strict rules laid down by the guild played a role -no profanity and no cleavage is revealed. Mason and his whole team seem to be working 24/7 and on top of that they seem to be dressed for the occasion, trim, proper and formal!
Some of the tactics employed by the hero appear to me like tampering with evidence and obstructing justice to me.
It is interesting that everybody is just willing to surrender when they are cornered without really denying it or giving a fight.
Raymond Burr, an actor, who later came out of the closet, used to be Appa's favourite actor when he acted in 'Ironside'.