The term “good governance” is being used in development literature. Bad governance is being increasingly regarded as one of the root cause of all evil within our societies. The concept is elusive and value laden. Hence proved to be difficult to define accurately.
The outline of the concept attempted to sketch through two documents.
The Indian National Movement was based on certain values and principles, that have further guided the constitutional development in India. It upheld the values of secularism, socialism, democracy and humanism. Most of these values evolved and emerged as a result of the struggle against the British rule.
Indian society is a kaleidoscopic community, with different religious and ethnic communities. It represents a truly plural society. Religious aspects have influenced the life of the people to a great extent. The intermingling of the different religious communities have given a sense of toleration among different communities.
The national movement evolved a much broader concept of humanism, that guided the Indian state, post-independence. The National movement was motivated by a humanistic spirit, that guided the people towards a common brotherhood. This human spirit was based on two sources:
Rohingyas are the stateless and among the most persecuted people in the world. They belongs to Muslim ethnic-minority group who lived as a people in Myanmar for centuries and speak their own language, which isn’t recognised by the state. They have faced repression since the 1970s, but more intensively since 2011, when the government transformed from a military administration to a democratic administration.
Women Empowerment refers to increasing and improving the social, economic, political and legal strength of the women, to ensure equal-right to women. It helps women to control and benefit from resources, assets, income and their own time, as well as the ability to manage risk and improve their economic status and wellbeing. Many of the barriers to women’s empowerment and equity lie ingrained in cultural norms. Many women feel these pressures, while others have become accustomed to being treated inferior to men. Empowering women to participate fully in economic life across all sectors is essential to build stronger economies, achieve internationally agreed goals for development and sustainability, and improve the quality of life for women, men, families and communities.
Mohandas Karam Chandra Gandhi, whom we all refer to as Mahatma Gandhi or The Father of the Nation was the inventor of satyagraha. The title Mahatma which literary means a high-soul was given to him for inspiring the nation for civil rights and freedom across the world using non-violence and civil disobedience movements. He was the heart and soul of the fight for independence and brought down the British Empire to its knees by his very own weapons of non-violence, brotherhood and Satyagraha.
India is a secular country. According to 2011 census, India accommodates around 14.23% Muslims out of total population making it world’s third largest Muslim population. India which has nowadays emerged as a powerful nation among all and the very first nation successfully launching Mars Orbiter Mission and teaches the lesson of women empowerment to the world still sees the life of Muslim women being ruined mercilessly under the threat of a sudden, oral and out-of-court divorce merely by uttering “talaq” thrice which is popularly known as Triple Talaq.
The Indian constitution protects gender equality, but on issues of marriage, divorce and inheritance, different religious communities are governed by their own so-called personal laws. Whether a person is subject to those laws is usually determined by their religion at birth.
Most of the Muslim women are forced to marry before the age of 15 years which is illegitimate as per our constitution but legal as per Muslim law board. Marriage at such a tender age decreases their ability to acquire proper education and become self-dependent financially. According to a survey conducted by Bhartiya Muslim Mahila Andolan revealed the horrific picture that 95% of divorced women does not receive any maintenance from their husbands.
TIMELINE OVER CAUVERY WATER DISPUTES TRIBUNAL
May 1990: Supreme Court directs Centre to constitute Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal, a demand made by Tamil Nadu since 1970.
June 1990: Centre notifies Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT).
June 1991: The CWDT announced an interim award: Karnataka ordered to release 205 tmcft. In a move to nullify the interim awards, Karnataka government passes an Ordinance. Supreme Court intervenes, strikes down Karnataka’s ordinance and upholds the interim award of the CWDT. Karnataka refuses to oblige.
September 2002: Cauvery River Authority chaired by Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee directs Karnataka to release 9,000 cusecs (0.8 tmcft) of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu unhappy with the order says it will move Supreme Court.
July 2005: Karnataka refuses to implement the distress sharing formula and rules out Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu.
February 2007: After 16 years, Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal holds as valid the two agreements of 1892 and 1924 executed between the governments of Madras and Mysore on the apportionment of water to Tamil Nadu
September 2012: At the seventh meeting of the CRA, Manmohan Singh directs Karnataka to release 9,000 cusecs of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu at Biligundlu. Both the CMs — Jayalalithaa and Jagadish Shettar — term it “unacceptable”. This is the first CRA meet since the UPA came to power at the Centre in 2004.
February 2013: The Centre notifies the final award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT). The Central government was mandated to constitute the Cauvery Management Board (CMB) simultaneously with the gazette notification of the final award of the Tribunal dated February 19.
March 10, 2013: The Tamil Nadu chief minister says she will work for the formation of the Cauvery Water Board during a felicitation ceremony organised in Thanjavur for her efforts to get the final award notified in the Union gazette.
March 2013: Tamil Nadu moves the Supreme Court to give directions to the water ministry for constitution of the Cauvery Management Board.
May 2013: Tamil Nadu moves Supreme Court, seeking Rs 2,480 crore in damages from Karnataka for not following the orders of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal.
June 2013: The Union water resources secretary chairs the first meeting of the supervisory committee in which Tamil Nadu demanded its share of water for June as stipulated in the award.
June 2013: Karnataka says it cannot release 134 tmcft of water to Tamil Nadu between June and September.
July 2013: Karnataka and Tamil Nadu clash during the third meeting of the Cauvery Supervisory Committee over the latter’s share of the river water. While Tamil Nadu sought 34 tmcft in July and 50 tmcft in August to save the Samba crop, Karnataka says that it had already released 34 tmcft between June and July 13.
August 2016: Tamil Nadu asks the Supreme Court to direct Karnataka to release water to Tamil Nadu after Siddaramiah says there is no water in the reservoirs.
September 2016: SC directs Karnataka to release 15,000 cusecs a day till Sept 15. Protests break out in Karnataka
Herbert A. Simon propounded the bounded rationality model to explain why limits exist to rational decision within decision – making environment. He defined decision – making as “the alternative courses of action”. He states that, decision – making pervades the entire organization that is decisions are made at all level of organizations. Hence, he said an organization as structure of decision – makers. According to him, decision is an all – embracing activity subsuming all the administrative functions described as ‘POCCC’ by Fayol and ‘POSDCORB’ by Gullick.