Anbu Mani and AIIMS : Antics Unlimited
Anbu Mani and AIIMS : Antics Unlimited
Anbumani finds fault with AIIMS and appoints a panel to study those issues. He is thus the prosecutor and judge. Two of the panel members report to him. So how can we expect an impartial enquiry? When the minister has stated the Specific problems the panel has no option but to go by them. What will happen if its perceptions are different from that of his? That is ruled out as two of the members are appointed in their official capacity and they are associated with the same ministry. Thus the credibility of the Panel is next to nothing. Had the enquiry been merely on strengths and weaknesses and problems of AIIMS as of now that would have made sense. But the minister has made threats, veiled and otherwise, to the director and has talked of punishments etc. So the panel is already told what it should say and should not say. The whole idea seems to frame the director and ease him out by using the report of the Panel.
Consider this: the govt. acts as the judge and as well as the prosecutor. Now principles of natural justice demand that the judge cannot be the prosecutor and vice-versa. When the Church was indulging in witch hunting and burning at stakes, it was the Judge as well as the prosecutor. Anbumani’s behavior is no different. If the govt. wants to probe the affairs of AIIMS it could have simply appointed a Panel consisting of experts and professionals who are not under or associated with the Ministry as well as not associated with AIIMS in the present. That would have made sense despite the current controversy. But with such a behavior Anbumani has made a mockery of the whole process. He is more interested in settling scores with the director than with making AIIMS a better institution.
I think that the director should approach the Court and seek justice. In my view the behavior of the minister clearly indicates that he is using the Panel to mask his personal vendetta against the director. While the govt. certainly has powers to appoint a Panel to go into the functioning of an institution like AIIMS the way it has gone about and the utterances of the minister are not above board. Man Mohan Singh has been a party to this exercise and his credibility has been eroded further.
Recently Viduthalai, that rag published by DK wrote that Venugopal, the director, was an Andhra Brahmin and should be taken to task for supporting the students and doctors, who went on strike against 27% reservation for OBCs. Anbumani has fulfilled that demand. As Venugopal has committed two 'sins' (of being a Brahmin and of supporting those doctors and students) how can be expected to remain as a director in these days of Mandal Raj. So what next, perhaps Anbumani will order that 27% of the beds should be reserved for OBCs and would like to amend rules of AIIMS so that only an OBC can be director of AIIMS. In any case he can expect the support the left lunatics in such antics, not to speak of the support from advocates of social justice (read OBC dominance). Of course some of them will demand quotas for minorities also in beds as well as in positions in AIIMS. Dont worry, you will find Kancha Ilaiah soon making a demand that AIIMS should be closed down as people still die in India and that too in AIIMS.
Welcome to Mandal II, welcome to the land of social justice!.
Anbumani finds fault with AIIMS and appoints a panel to study those issues. He is thus the prosecutor and judge. Two of the panel members report to him. So how can we expect an impartial enquiry? When the minister has stated the Specific problems the panel has no option but to go by them. What will happen if its perceptions are different from that of his? That is ruled out as two of the members are appointed in their official capacity and they are associated with the same ministry. Thus the credibility of the Panel is next to nothing. Had the enquiry been merely on strengths and weaknesses and problems of AIIMS as of now that would have made sense. But the minister has made threats, veiled and otherwise, to the director and has talked of punishments etc. So the panel is already told what it should say and should not say. The whole idea seems to frame the director and ease him out by using the report of the Panel.
Consider this: the govt. acts as the judge and as well as the prosecutor. Now principles of natural justice demand that the judge cannot be the prosecutor and vice-versa. When the Church was indulging in witch hunting and burning at stakes, it was the Judge as well as the prosecutor. Anbumani’s behavior is no different. If the govt. wants to probe the affairs of AIIMS it could have simply appointed a Panel consisting of experts and professionals who are not under or associated with the Ministry as well as not associated with AIIMS in the present. That would have made sense despite the current controversy. But with such a behavior Anbumani has made a mockery of the whole process. He is more interested in settling scores with the director than with making AIIMS a better institution.
I think that the director should approach the Court and seek justice. In my view the behavior of the minister clearly indicates that he is using the Panel to mask his personal vendetta against the director. While the govt. certainly has powers to appoint a Panel to go into the functioning of an institution like AIIMS the way it has gone about and the utterances of the minister are not above board. Man Mohan Singh has been a party to this exercise and his credibility has been eroded further.
Recently Viduthalai, that rag published by DK wrote that Venugopal, the director, was an Andhra Brahmin and should be taken to task for supporting the students and doctors, who went on strike against 27% reservation for OBCs. Anbumani has fulfilled that demand. As Venugopal has committed two 'sins' (of being a Brahmin and of supporting those doctors and students) how can be expected to remain as a director in these days of Mandal Raj. So what next, perhaps Anbumani will order that 27% of the beds should be reserved for OBCs and would like to amend rules of AIIMS so that only an OBC can be director of AIIMS. In any case he can expect the support the left lunatics in such antics, not to speak of the support from advocates of social justice (read OBC dominance). Of course some of them will demand quotas for minorities also in beds as well as in positions in AIIMS. Dont worry, you will find Kancha Ilaiah soon making a demand that AIIMS should be closed down as people still die in India and that too in AIIMS.
Welcome to Mandal II, welcome to the land of social justice!.
The committee is the latest in a series of panels the government has constituted to look into the affairs of AIIMS. All along, the committees suggested changes but also underlined the need for autonomy.
The Public Accounts Committee report (2004-05) tabled in the Lok Sabha last year had criticised AIIMS for degenerating into yet another "large hospital without adequate emphasis on teaching and research", instead of becoming a centre for excellence in medical research and teaching. It had also noted that "excessive government control and political influence" can "erode the efficiency and growth capacity of an institute" and recommended that an autonomous body should be set up to preserve its autonomy.
Three months ago, another central committee headed by former health secretary Javed A. Chowdhury recommended increasing the retirement age of faculty to 65, giving monetary compensation for research work, and raising the non-practising allowance from the current 25 per cent to 30 per cent. "The Javed Chowdhury committee was set up to examine why doctors were leaving the CGHS and government hospitals such as AIIMS at an alarming rate. About 90 per cent of its recommendations will be implemented. The new committee will look specifically at AIIMS functioning over the past three years,” said Ramadoss.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1724023,0035.htm
Posted by
Anonymous |
Wednesday, June 21, 2006 3:03:00 AM
Ravi,
Good article ! What else one can expect from these useless politicians, especially from Tamilnadu ????
It is unfortunate that the many mistakes committed by his party earlier have not made the minister a wise man (by learning from mistakes) ;-)
Posted by
enRenRum-anbudan.BALA |
Wednesday, June 21, 2006 4:42:00 AM
Ever since the Leftist supported government came to power they are subverting the democratic system to further their cause. (Arjun singh's Reservation rag, Anbumani's AIIMS issue. Are they wanting to destroy the premier institutes so that Indians will go back to the hay days of "Socialism" when everybody with little brain leaves the country!!? )
Unfortunately people still believe that what they do is social justice!! (sic).
Posted by
வஜ்ரா |
Friday, June 23, 2006 6:09:00 AM
Dr. Venugopal is not an Andhrite nor is he a brahmin. He is a Malayalee. A quick search in Google will reveal this. The DK wants to convert everything into a brahmin-non-brahmin issue for its own ends..
Posted by
Anonymous |
Sunday, June 25, 2006 8:48:00 AM