From Iraq to Iran: The Recurring Questions Around US Military Interventions

0

The recent strikes by Israel and the United States on Iran have raised serious concerns. The attacks reportedly took place even as diplomatic engagement was said to be continuing.

Senior Iranian figures, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, were killed in the strikes, which also hit civilian areas. One such target was a girls’ school in southern Iran, where, according to Iranian media, about 180 children under the age of 12 killed. The United Nations has called for an independent investigation into the incident. UNESCO has described attacks on schools as grave violations of humanitarian law.

Civilian Sites Caught in the Strikes

Hospitals and medical facilities were also affected. Reports from health authorities and humanitarian organisations say several hospitals and clinics across Iran were damaged during the bombardment. Gandhi Hospital in Tehran was badly damaged and had to be evacuated after nearby explosions. Doctors and nurses were forced to move patients, including newborn babies, in chaotic circumstances. Officials of the World Health Organization expressed deep concern and reminded all sides that medical facilities must be protected during conflict.

In another tragic incident, an air attack hit a sports hall in Fars province in southern Iran, killing 20 female volleyball players. Local reports say the young athletes were training in a simple gymnasium when the strike took place.

These incidents show how ordinary civilian life has been caught up in the violence. Civilian deaths in any conflict weaken the moral basis of military action.

Changing Explanations for the Attack

Public explanations from the United States about the objective of the strike have kept changing. At different times it has been described as deterrence, dismantling nuclear capability, leadership targeting, bringing democracy and regional stabilisation. The latest explanation is particularly difficult to follow. It says the United States struck Iran because the U.S. expected that, after Israel’s attack, Iran might target American bases. Such a justification raises obvious questions about the real purpose behind the strike.

The bombing of a school, a sports complex and medical facilities also raises another question. The United States often speaks of the accuracy and precision of its weapons. When such places are hit, it becomes difficult to believe that everything was accidental. Yet such deaths are often brushed aside as “collateral damage”.

According to the Iranian Red Crescent Society, the civilian toll from the strikes has risen sharply, with more than 1,000 people reported dead and many more injured across different cities. These numbers show that the suffering has gone far beyond the stated initial targets.

A Pattern Seen in Earlier Wars

This attack fits into a longer pattern of interventions carried out in the name of democracy. The 2003 invasion of Iraq was justified on the claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and that the war would bring democratic reform. Those weapons were never found. The invasion instead led to the collapse of institutions and years of instability. Research by the Costs of War project estimates that the wars launched by the United States after 9/11 have contributed to about 4.5 million deaths and displaced more than 38 million people.

It was during the build-up to the Iraq invasion that George W. Bush made the famous statement: “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” That line shaped global politics at the time and left little room for disagreement. And of course, there have always been governments and commentators ready to support whatever the United States does.

Similar outcomes were seen elsewhere. In Libya, the removal of the government led to fragmentation and fighting between rival groups. Syria has endured a long war involving several foreign powers. Egypt too saw major political turmoil after external and internal pressures reshaped its political path. These cases show a repeated pattern where intervention did not bring the stability that was promised.

From Panama to Venezuela

Latin America has also experienced direct U.S. military action. In 1989, the United States invaded Panama and arrested Manuel Noriega, who had once been a close ally. More recently, in January 2026, U.S. Special Forces carried out a military operation in Caracas and captured Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife. They were taken to New York to face drug-trafficking charges, which they deny. The removal of a sitting head of state in this manner by a country that calls itself a defender of democracy is deeply troubling.

The United States’ steady support for Israel has also drawn criticism over the years, particularly during military operations in Gaza and the West Bank, where large numbers of civilians have lost their lives.

International Reactions and Growing Concerns

Not every country has supported the recent actions. The Spanish government refused to allow the United States to use military bases on Spanish soil for attacks on Iran. Spain said such use should comply with international agreements and legal norms. The U.S. response was swift: President Donald Trump threatened to cut off trade with Spain after its refusal. Many in Spain and other European countries supported Madrid’s position, saying it was a stand for sovereignty and international law. Cutting off trade relations and imposing high tariffs are the new weapons in the President’s arsenal.

Some commentators have also suggested that domestic political pressures within the United States sometimes coincide with sudden military actions abroad. These claims are debated and may not always be supported by clear evidence. Even so, the perception itself is significant. When military action appears to distract from internal problems, it weakens credibility.

The Question of Democracy and Intervention

Across many regions the results have often been similar: weakened institutions, civilian suffering and long-term instability. If democracy and stability are truly the objectives, it is reasonable to ask why undemocratic methods are repeatedly used to achieve them. Like several past actions carried out by the United States and its allies, the attack on Iran too deserves strong condemnation.

Selective Targeting? The Firestorm Over Bengal’s 60-Lakh ‘Adjudication’ List

0

Kolkata: In Polling Booth No. 118 of the Shyampur Assembly Constituency in Howrah district, the number of Hindu and Muslim voters is almost equal. Yet, when the Election Commission of India released the final electoral roll for West Bengal, only Muslim voters in the booth were marked “Under Adjudication.”

The anomaly came to light after Partha Das, a psephologist, posted about it on X. Soon after, several netizens responded, claiming similar patterns in their respective wards — alleging that Muslim voters alone were flagged despite comparable demographic compositions.

The issue has snowballed into a larger controversy following the publication of the final list on February 28, which placed nearly 60 lakh voters under adjudication across the state. A substantial number of them are concentrated in Muslim-majority districts such as Murshidabad and Malda. Together, the two districts account for nearly 20 lakh voters under adjudication.

Passports Ignored, Muslim Voters Flagged: Is SIR Targeting Selectively?

The experience of Mohammed Reyaz, an assistant professor, has further fuelled concerns. Ahmed said his entire family — except his mother — possesses valid Indian passports. During the verification hearing, all relevant documents were submitted.

“Except for my mother, all of us have been put under adjudication,” he wrote on Facebook.

Following his post, several acquaintances shared similar experiences. Many said they had submitted passports and other official documents during the hearing process, yet their names appeared in the adjudication list.

For many, the passport — considered one of the strongest proofs of citizenship — being disregarded raises troubling questions about the criteria being applied in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process.

bengal 60 lakh voters under adjudication sir controversy voter list

60 Lakh Under Adjudication: Why Minority Districts Dominate the List

The publication of the final list has triggered fresh protests across Bengal. Activists and civil society groups argue that more than half a crore voters placed under adjudication risk being disenfranchised ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections.

Demonstrations have resumed in parts of Kolkata and several districts, with protestors alleging selective targeting of minorities and marginalised communities.

Jawhar Sircar, former state Chief Election Commissioner and ex-Rajya Sabha MP, told eNewsroom, “The Chief Election Commissioner has not hidden his motive to harass Muslims and Dalits by deleting as many names as possible, as part of the Hindu Right’s agenda. His legally dubious SIR operation was first carried out in Bihar and is now specifically targeting West Bengal.”

Sircar further alleged, “The BJP has submitted Form 7 applications to delete Muslim voters in targeted localities and districts. However, no such action is reported from pockets where Hindu immigrants without valid citizenship papers are present in large numbers.”

From Booth 118 to Statewide Outrage: Allegations of Electoral Bias Grow

Mahasweta Samajhdar, journalist and social activist who has opposed the SIR process from the beginning, described the development as deeply alarming.

“The entire process seems to be a conspiracy. BJP and the Election Commission have colluded to exclude non-BJP voters so that the BJP may win the Bengal election. The judiciary also appears compromised.”

Mahasweta and others will have a protest march till the state Election Commission on March 5, asserting: “We want every citizen to have voting rights.”

Meanwhile, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee announces a March 6 dharna in Kolkata as allegations of “selective targeting” and “disenfranchisement” intensify ahead of the 2026 Assembly polls.

bengal 60 lakh voters under adjudication sir controversy voter list TMC

International Spotlight on Bengal: IAMC Condemns Voter Roll Purge

The controversy has drawn international attention too. The Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC), a US-based advocacy organisation, issued a strong condemnation of the SIR exercise in West Bengal.

In a statement, IAMC said the process has resulted in the deletion or suspension of voting rights of over 12 million citizens, with Muslim and marginalised communities bearing a “disproportionate and deeply alarming share” of the burden.

IAMC President Mohammed Jawad stated, “We are gravely concerned that the SIR has functioned as a targeted operation against Muslim voters and marginalised communities. What is unfolding in West Bengal is a constitutional crisis. When over 12 million voters, concentrated mostly in Muslim-majority districts, are stripped of their democratic rights without explanation or recourse, we are witnessing the systematic dismantling of minority citizenship in India.”

From Gaza to Tehran: How Western Power Politics Undermines Global Peace

The American-Israeli attack on Iran is cowardly and a betrayal of diplomatic norms and practices. The assassination of the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini, reflects the American establishment’s policy of regime change through killing or abducting leadership. Donald Trump came to power to make America Great Again, but it seems his main concern is to protect the Israeli regime of Netanyahu, who destroyed Gaza and killed thousands of children there. An action of this kind by Russia in Ukraine would have rushed the so-called human rights defenders and hypocritical democracy lovers into singing choruses against Vladimir Putin. Russia can do the same with Ukraine. It can destroy Kyiv, but it has charted a very careful path. Americans, on the other hand, have often been careless about the “rules-based order” they speak so loudly about, along with their European allies. I am sorry to say that the crisis has grown vast due to the shameless surrender of European leadership. They remain deeply hypocritical.

One may not agree with everything about the Iranian regime, but that is a question the Iranian people have to resolve. Why should the West interfere so much in the name of democracy in Iran? How are gender rights defended by killing 150 schoolchildren, all of whom happened to be girls? Why is Iran being targeted? Is there any outrage over the brutal killing of these innocent schoolgirls in Iran?

Selective Outrage and the Politics of Intervention

In this era of American hegemony, Europe appears as a minor partner of American corporate politics. Democracy in the Western world is widely believed to be controlled by the deep state as well as powerful corporate lobbies. They influence the media, information, and narratives. Those who do not surrender to their agenda are targeted. You decide who is evil and who is a saint. They are experts in media propaganda and narrative-setting, as Vladimir Putin has said.

The irony is that the Muslim world itself has become a puppet of these hegemonists. Those who stood looking straight into the eyes of colonial powers were defamed. Popular leadership in Iraq and Libya was eliminated as it challenged American and Western hegemony. Ayatollah Khomeini has become a hero in the Global South, particularly in parts of the Islamic world, for not bowing to the US-led Western imperial order. He paid the price, but with his sacrifice, he united Iran, as can be seen in the massive protests happening not only in Iran but in other parts of the world.

us-israel war on iran global power order crisis India Brics
Protest against the US-Israel war on Iran in the United States on February 28 | Courtesy: wgbh.org

The Muslim World, Resistance, and Regime Change

The question is: how can the Western world dictate terms at its whims and fancies? How can one kill anyone without being held accountable? The fact is that Donald Trump’s actions and the failure of European leadership have already isolated them from the rest of the world. Indian leadership remains shamelessly tame in countering and confronting the American-Israeli action against Iran.

Those who shout against Jawaharlal Nehru must remember that, despite Chinese pressure, Nehru allowed the Dalai Lama and other Tibetan refugees into India, gave them respect, and never compromised on the issue until the end. Today’s leadership has betrayed the cause of the Indian people and the Global South. Narendra Modi and his government have not been able to condemn the killing of the head of a sovereign nation that has always been friendly with India and supported it. Because some within the Sangh ecosystem hate Muslims, the Indian foreign policy establishment has allowed itself to be influenced by the street politics of the Sangh Parivar, thereby undermining our independent foreign policy.

India’s Foreign Policy and the Question of Moral Authority

With this act, will India really be able to claim a moral high ground to lead the BRICS nations? Would India prefer to remain in it or distance itself from it? India is going to host the BRICS summit this year, but given its current position, will BRICS leaders trust the present regime? The Indian government has also kept quiet on the issue of Venezuela and Cuba. It tried to play a balancing role in the Russia-Ukraine war. It cannot afford to antagonise Russia, and Russia knows this well. Vladimir Putin’s visit to India was more about signalling his global acceptability to the West than anything else.

The Crisis of Global Leadership and the Future of Multipolarity

We hope good sense will prevail. The UN must revive itself and take on the role of mediating disputes between countries. It is also time for the American people to reflect on why their system continues to betray the public interest. American democracy appears corporate-controlled, and it is time for a real pro-people party that truly represents Indigenous people, African Americans, minorities, and other communities. It is important to have a party outside corporate control that serves the interests of the American people.

The world is at a crossroads, and we need statesmen to handle such a crisis. India needs a Nehru more than ever — someone who commanded huge respect and had the moral authority to lead the Global South. The United States needed a Kennedy to handle matters with care and diplomacy. Sadly, the world’s largest democracies are controlled by crony corporations and leaders who have little understanding of the crisis and are more interested in event management than addressing the serious challenges their countries face.

Let us hope that peace returns. But will it be possible without asking uncomfortable questions about the American-Israeli idea of regime change through killing the heads of sovereign states? As long as Americans and the West enjoy impunity for their actions, there cannot be lasting peace. Will Russia or BRICS take a stand to protect the rights of the Global South?

झारखंड में भाजपा की शहरी जमीन खिसकी: 48 निकायों के नतीजों ने बदला सियासी समीकरण

रांची/कोलकाता: झारखंड में 23 फरवरी को हुए 48 नगर निकायों के चुनाव के परिणाम अब सामने आ चुके हैं। इन नतीजों से एक अहम राजनीतिक संकेत मिला है—राज्य के शहरी इलाकों में भी भाजपा की पकड़ पहले जैसी मजबूत नहीं रह गई है। खासकर बड़े नगर निगमों के परिणामों ने यह दिखाया कि मुकाबला अब एकतरफा नहीं रहा।

नौ बड़े नगर निगमों में हुए मेयर चुनाव में भाजपा समर्थित उम्मीदवार सिर्फ तीन जगह ही जीत दर्ज कर सके। तीन जगह निर्दलीय उम्मीदवार जीते, दो जगह झामुमो समर्थित और एक जगह कांग्रेस समर्थित उम्मीदवार ने बाजी मारी। यह भी महत्वपूर्ण है कि भाजपा के खिलाफ कोई औपचारिक गठबंधन चुनाव नहीं लड़ रहा था, बल्कि गठबंधन की पार्टियां अलग-अलग मैदान में थीं। इसके बावजूद भाजपा को उम्मीद के मुताबिक सफलता नहीं मिली।

रांची से गिरिडीह तक: बड़े शहरों में भाजपा को झटके

रांची में भाजपा को सफलता जरूर मिली, लेकिन वहां का गणित दिलचस्प रहा। कांग्रेस ने मेयर पद पर अपना उम्मीदवार उतारा था और झामुमो ने भी अलग से प्रत्याशी खड़ा किया। झामुमो उम्मीदवार को मिले वोट भाजपा समर्थित रोशनी खलखो की जीत के अंतर से ज्यादा थे। यानी अगर विपक्ष एकजुट होता, तो नतीजा अलग हो सकता था। इसके बावजूद यह साफ दिखा कि वोटों के बिखराव के बावजूद भाजपा को बड़ी बढ़त नहीं मिल पाई।

गिरिडीह नगर निगम में झामुमो की प्रमिला मेहरा ने भाजपा समर्थित उम्मीदवार को बड़े अंतर से हराया। यहां भाजपा के प्रदेश अध्यक्ष और वरिष्ठ नेता बाबूलाल मरांडी ने खुद कैंप किया था और पार्टी ने डॉक्टर शैलेन्द्र चौधरी को पूरा समर्थन दिया था। लेकिन झामुमो की मजबूत जमीनी पकड़ ने भाजपा की रणनीति पर भारी पड़ी।

राजधनवार (गिरिडीह) में अध्यक्ष पद पर सीपीआई(एमएल) के विनय संध्या लिया की जीत ने भी सबका ध्यान खींचा। भाजपा के पूर्व प्रदेश अध्यक्ष और पूर्व सांसद रवींद्र राय ने वीडियो जारी कर अपील की थी, लेकिन इसके बावजूद भाजपा समर्थित खेमे को सफलता नहीं मिली।

देवघर में भाजपा सांसद निशिकांत दुबे ने पूरी ताकत लगाई थी, फिर भी मेयर पद पर भाजपा को जीत नहीं मिली। यहां रवि रावत मेयर चुने गए और उनकी मां वार्ड पार्षद बनीं। इससे साफ हुआ कि वार्ड स्तर से लेकर मेयर पद तक भाजपा अपने प्रतिद्वंद्वियों को रोकने में सफल नहीं रही।

मानगो, मेदिनीनगर और अन्य शहरों का संदेश

मानगो (जमशेदपुर) में पूर्व मंत्री बन्ना गुप्ता की पत्नी सुधा गुप्ता, जो कांग्रेस समर्थित उम्मीदवार थीं, ने मेयर पद पर जीत दर्ज की। यह खास इसलिए माना जा रहा है क्योंकि विधानसभा चुनाव में बन्ना गुप्ता को हार का सामना करना पड़ा था, लेकिन एक साल के भीतर उनके परिवार की वापसी हो गई।

भाजपा को रांची के अलावा मेदिनीनगर और आदित्यपुर में सफलता मिली। लेकिन हजारीबाग, धनबाद जैसे बड़े शहरों में निर्दलीय उम्मीदवारों ने जीत हासिल की। मधुपुर, जुगसलाई, बेरमो, रामगढ़ और चास जैसे इलाकों में भी भाजपा समर्थित उम्मीदवारों को जीत नहीं मिल सकी।

शहरी वोटर का बदलता रुझान?

राज्य में भाजपा पहले ही दो बार विधानसभा चुनाव हार चुकी है और सत्ता से बाहर है। हालिया लोकसभा चुनाव में भी उसकी सीटें कम हुईं। अब शहरी निकाय चुनाव के नतीजे यह संकेत दे रहे हैं कि शहरों में भी पार्टी की पकड़ कमजोर हो रही है।

चुनाव के बाद यह चर्चा भी रही कि भाजपा ने कई जगह नए और कम अनुभवी चेहरों को टिकट दिया। कई पुराने कार्यकर्ताओं की नाराजगी और बगावत ने भी नुकसान पहुंचाया। वहीं झामुमो ने अपेक्षाकृत मजबूत और स्थानीय स्तर पर सक्रिय उम्मीदवारों को मैदान में उतारा, जिसका फायदा उसे मिला।

भाजपा ने चुनाव प्रचार में राष्ट्रीय मुद्दों, राष्ट्रवाद और ‘जय श्री राम’ जैसे नारों पर ज्यादा जोर दिया, जबकि स्थानीय समस्याओं—पानी, सड़क, सफाई और नगर सेवाओं—पर अपेक्षित ध्यान नहीं दिया गया। विश्लेषकों का मानना है कि शहरी मतदाताओं ने इस बार स्थानीय मुद्दों को प्राथमिकता दी।

बैलट पेपर से चुनाव और बड़ी भागीदारी

इस बार चुनाव ईवीएम की बजाय बैलट पेपर से कराए गए। लंबे समय बाद बैलट पेपर से मतदान हुआ, जिससे कुछ जगह मतगणना में देरी जरूर हुई, लेकिन ज्यादातर उम्मीदवार इस प्रक्रिया से संतुष्ट नजर आए।

करीब 44 लाख मतदाता इस चुनाव में शामिल हुए, जिनमें 21 लाख से ज्यादा महिलाएं थीं। 48 शहरी निकायों में कुल 1087 पदों के लिए मतदान हुआ। महिलाओं की बड़ी भागीदारी भी इन चुनावों की एक अहम विशेषता रही।

कुल मिलाकर, झारखंड के शहरी निकाय चुनावों ने यह संकेत दिया है कि राज्य की राजनीति में मुकाबला अब और ज्यादा खुला हो गया है। भाजपा के लिए यह नतीजे चेतावनी की तरह हैं, जबकि झामुमो, कांग्रेस और निर्दलीयों के लिए यह मनोबल बढ़ाने वाला परिणाम माना जा रहा है। आने वाले समय में इसका असर राज्य की बड़ी राजनीतिक लड़ाइयों पर भी दिख सकता है।

Consumer Protection Act 2019: Haryana High Court Intervention Highlights Gaps in India’s Consumer Justice System

0

The Consumer Protection Act, originally enacted in 1986 to safeguard consumer rights, was significantly amended in 2019. Despite these reforms, consumer awareness in India remains low. The 2019 Act established the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) along with State and District Consumer Commissions to regulate unfair trade practices, misleading advertisements, and other violations. It also introduced provisions for quicker and more effective redressal through specialised consumer forums.

However, the government’s lack of adequate administrative resources raises serious concerns about the effective implementation of the law. No substantial, research-based reforms have yet been introduced to strengthen the consumer protection framework.

Consumer rights are as vital as the fundamental rights of citizens. Under the Act, manufacturers, service providers, and sellers can be held liable for damages caused by defective goods or deficient services. The law provides for a three-tier quasi-judicial mechanism—District, State, and National Commissions—for dispute resolution through simplified procedures.

The Act empowers regulatory authorities to promote, protect, and enforce consumer rights. These powers include conducting investigations, ordering product recalls, and imposing penalties for misleading advertisements. Importantly, the 2019 Act explicitly includes e-commerce platforms and prescribes fair trade practices for online sellers.

Why Consumer Protection Act 2019 Still Struggles Despite Legal Reforms

The law guarantees six fundamental consumer rights:

Right to Safe Products

Right to Full and Clear Information

Right to Choice

Right to Hearing

Right to Redressal

Right to Consumer Education

Consumer protection includes safeguards against hazardous goods and services. It mandates transparency regarding product quality, quantity, purity, and pricing. Consumers must have access to a variety of goods and services at competitive prices. The Act also provides mechanisms to seek compensation against unfair trade practices and makes consumer awareness promotion a statutory responsibility of the government.

From Right to Safety to Right to Redressal: What Consumers Are Guaranteed by Law

Despite these provisions, India’s consumer protection system remains complex and comparatively less effective than those in many developed countries. Several challenges hinder its efficiency.

Enforcing consumer rights in an increasingly digital marketplace poses a significant difficulty. Strong regulatory mechanisms are essential to prevent exploitation and ensure access to safe and quality goods and services.

According to a survey conducted by the National Consumer Helpline, only 30% of Indians are aware of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. While the Act has strengthened the legal framework, major gaps persist in the efficiency and accessibility of consumer courts. A study by the Indian Institute of Public Administration found that over 40% of cases in consumer courts take more than a year to be resolved, undermining the objective of timely justice.

Administrative deficiencies, particularly at the State and District Commission levels, along with poor coordination in implementation and monitoring, further weaken the system in many states.

To ensure that consumer rights are practical and not merely theoretical, reforms are urgently needed. These may include streamlining case management systems, increasing the number of consumer courts, and providing better training to judicial officers to handle complex disputes. The legal framework must also evolve to address challenges posed by e-commerce, such as online fraud, counterfeit products, and data privacy concerns.

Justice TPS Mann vs Haryana Government: Battle Over Consumer Commission Autonomy

The situation in Haryana illustrates the structural tensions within the system.

In August 2025, the Punjab and Haryana High Court intervened in a dispute between the Haryana State Consumer Commission and the state government. The court stayed certain state government orders allegedly issued against the Commission’s decisions.

The intervention followed a petition filed by the Commission’s Chairman, former High Court judge Justice TPS Mann, who accused the government of day-to-day interference in the Commission’s functioning. Justice Mann argued that such interference paralysed operations, encouraged employees to disregard lawful instructions, and weakened the institution’s independence. Senior officials reportedly described the interference as “illegal and beyond jurisdiction.”

Justice Mann, appointed Chairman on December 29, 2018, maintained that under Section 70 of the Consumer Protection Act, he is the administrative head of the State and District Commissions.

According to the petition filed before the High Court, the Principal Secretary of the Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection Department had been encroaching upon the Commission’s jurisdiction for several months. The allegations include interference in transfers, disciplinary proceedings, and administrative decisions concerning appointments and postings.

Transfers, Suspensions and Jurisdiction: Inside the Haryana Consumer Commission Dispute

Several incidents have further intensified the controversy.

In one case, a Superintendent of the State Commission allegedly misbehaved with the Chairman. His transfer to the Yamunanagar Commission on charges of misconduct was reportedly halted by the Principal Secretary, and the disciplinary inquiry was suspended.

In another instance, a member of the District Consumer Forum in Panipat was transferred to Jind, but the transfer was reversed by the Principal Secretary on the grounds that it exceeded the Commission’s authority.

A letter dated March 6, 2019, from the Chief Secretary of Haryana clarified that the state government does not have authority over the Commission’s administrative and judicial proceedings. Despite this clarification, disputes have continued.

Former Additional Sessions Judge Gulab Singh, President of the Yamunanagar District Consumer Forum, also approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking a transfer to Fatehabad. The matter has since escalated through judicial proceedings, and related issues are reportedly pending before higher courts.

Can Supreme Court Intervention Rescue India’s Consumer Protection System?

The final clarity on the Commission’s composition, jurisdiction, and the extent of government control is likely to emerge from the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Such judicial guidance could significantly strengthen the institutional independence and effectiveness of consumer forums.

The Haryana government must address these issues seriously to ensure that consumer rights are meaningfully protected and that redressal mechanisms function efficiently.

If implemented properly, new consumer protection policies in Haryana could mark a turning point and set an example for other states. However, without administrative autonomy, institutional coordination, and resource allocation, even the strongest legal framework risks remaining ineffective.

SIR Row Intensifies in Kolkata as Activists Flag Voter Deletion Fears

0

Kolkata: Two days before the publication of the final draft of the voter list following the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), Kolkata witnessed a strong show of dissent. On February 26, Civil Society Against SIR organised a public demonstration in the heart of the city, demanding that the exercise be scrapped, calling it “unconstitutional, inhuman and a threat to genuine voters.”

The protest comes amid legal developments, with the Supreme Court directing that a supplementary list be released along with the final draft of the revised electoral roll. However, activists claim that there is still no clarity on the timeline for the publication of the supplementary list, creating uncertainty among voters ahead of the final draft release.

Activists, students, hawkers’ representatives and concerned citizens gathered in front of the Tea Board in central Kolkata, holding placards and raising slogans against what they described as an arbitrary and exclusionary process. Protesters alleged that the SIR drive has created fear among ordinary voters, particularly marginalised communities, and risks wrongful deletions from the electoral rolls.

After brief speeches, the gathering marched peacefully towards the office of the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), West Bengal, under police escort. A three-member delegation—Shaktiman Ghosh, head of the Hawkers Sangram Committee, Manzar Jameel, and Md. Rafay Mahmood Siddiqui—was allowed to meet Additional CEO Arindam Niyogi and submit a memorandum outlining their objections and demands.

According to members of the delegation, the Additional CEO gave them a patient hearing and assured that their concerns would be forwarded to higher authorities. The protest concluded without any untoward incident.

Concerns Over Form 7 and Voter Harassment

During the meeting, Rafay Siddiqui raised specific concerns regarding alleged discrepancies in Form 7, the form used to object to a name on the electoral roll. He claimed that under the current process, “unknown senders” can file objections declaring individuals as non-citizens, following which the Election Commission issues notices to those voters. Activists argue that such provisions can be misused to harass genuine citizens and create an atmosphere of suspicion.

Manzar Jameel, speaking after the meeting, struck a sharper tone. He alleged that more than 134 SIR-related workers and voters have died in Bengal in recent months, linking the figure to stress and anxiety caused by the revision process. He further accused the Election Commission of acting under political pressure, claiming that the exercise benefits the BJP. These allegations, however, have not been officially responded to by the Commission.

Civil Society Against SIR has maintained that the revision process is not only unnecessary but also burdensome for citizens already grappling with economic challenges. Members argue that repeated document verification, public notices and objections disproportionately affect daily wage earners, migrant workers and elderly voters.

Democracy, Accountability and Public Discourse

The February 26 rally followed a press conference held on February 23 at the Kolkata Press Club, where several social activists criticised the SIR process as a drain on public funds and an avoidable exercise in what they called the world’s largest democracy. Speakers argued that democratic legitimacy rests not merely on periodic elections but on transparency, accountability and informed public debate.

Academic Himadri Mukherjee, said during the rally that institutions are human creations and therefore subject to scrutiny. “No parliament, no office, no authority is beyond accountability,” adding that democracy thrives on rational, accessible and fearless public discourse.

As the final draft of the revised voter list approaches, Civil Society Against SIR has vowed to continue its campaign. “Our fight to save genuine voters will continue,” members said, signalling that the debate over the SIR process is far from over in West Bengal.

झारखंड म्युनिसिपल चुनाव 2026: क्या शहरों में भी कमजोर पड़ रही है भाजपा की पकड़?

झारखंड से लौटकर: झारखंड का म्युनिसिपल चुनाव 2026 राज्य की राजनीति में अहम मोड़ साबित हो सकता है। अब तक आम धारणा रही है कि शहरी इलाकों में भारतीय जनता पार्टी की मजबूत पकड़ है और नगर निकाय चुनावों में उसे बढ़त मिलती है। लेकिन इस बार कई शहरों से आ रहे रुझान अलग कहानी बयान कर रहे हैं।

हालांकि चुनाव औपचारिक रूप से पार्टी बेसिस पर नहीं था, फिर भी ज़मीनी स्तर पर लगभग सभी प्रमुख दल खुले तौर पर मैदान में दिखे। ऐसे में नतीजों को दलों से अलग करके देखना मुश्किल होगा।

पार्टी बेसिस नहीं, फिर भी खुलकर मैदान में भाजपा-झामुमो

इस बार का चुनाव गैर-पार्टी आधार पर हुआ, लेकिन हकीकत यह रही कि झामुमो, भाजपा, कांग्रेस और वाम दलों ने खुलकर अपने-अपने समर्थित उम्मीदवारों के पक्ष में प्रचार किया।

भाजपा समर्थित उम्मीदवारों के कार्यक्रमों में भगवा झंडे, नारों और वरिष्ठ नेताओं की मौजूदगी साफ दिखाई दी। दूसरी ओर झामुमो ने भी अपने संगठन और मंत्रियों के जरिए उम्मीदवारों को पूरा समर्थन दिया।

ऐसे में अगर भाजपा समर्थित उम्मीदवार हारते हैं, तो यह कहना मुश्किल होगा कि यह केवल ‘व्यक्तिगत’ हार है।

झारखंड में 48 शहरी निकायों में चुनाव हुए हैं। लगभग हर जगह झामुमो भाजपा को कड़ी टक्कर देती दिख रही है। यह टक्कर कई सीटों पर जीत में भी बदल सकती है।

गिरिडीह में सीधी टक्कर—प्रमिला मेहरा बनाम डॉ. शैलेंद्र चौधरी

गिरिडीह नगर निगम के मेयर चुनाव ने सबसे ज्यादा ध्यान खींचा है। यहां झामुमो की प्रमिला मेहरा और भाजपा समर्थित डॉ. शैलेंद्र चौधरी के बीच सीधा मुकाबला है।

डॉ. चौधरी के समर्थन में भाजपा के वरिष्ठ नेता बाबूलाल मरांडी ने मीटिंग्स कीं। प्रचार में भगवा रंग और ‘जय श्री राम’ के नारे प्रमुखता से दिखे।

दूसरी ओर झामुमो ने प्रमिला मेहरा के लिए संगठनात्मक ताकत झोंक दी। स्थानीय स्तर पर मिल रहे संकेत बताते हैं कि मुकाबला कड़ा है और भाजपा के लिए राह आसान नहीं दिख रही।

राजधनवार में विनय संथालिया मजबूत, CPI(ML) समर्थित उम्मीदवार

राजधनवार सीट पर स्थिति और भी दिलचस्प है। यहां भाजपा के पूर्व सांसद रविंद्र राय ने वीडियो जारी कर विनय संथालिया को हराने की अपील की और पार्टी का नाम लेकर वोट देने की बात कही।

इसके बावजूद विनय संथालिया को मजबूत बताया जा रहा है।

अगर यहां भाजपा समर्थित रणनीति असर नहीं दिखा पाती, तो यह स्थानीय समीकरणों पर बड़ा सवाल खड़ा करेगा।

चतरा, मानगो, मधुपुर, जुगसलाई—शहरी किले में सेंध के संकेत

चतरा से मिल रहे रुझान भी भाजपा के पक्ष में स्पष्ट नहीं हैं।

जमशेदपुर के मानगो में पूर्व मंत्री बन्ना गुप्ता की पत्नी मैदान में हैं और उन्हें कांग्रेस का समर्थन प्राप्त है, मजबूत स्थिति में बताई जा रही हैं। मधुपुर और जुगसलाई जैसे इलाकों में भी भाजपा के लिए जीत आसान नहीं दिख रही।

यदि इन क्षेत्रों में भाजपा पिछड़ती है, तो ‘शहरी पार्टी’ की उसकी पहचान को चुनौती मिल सकती है।

रांची और धनबाद में तस्वीर धुंधली, सस्पेंस बरकरार

राजधानी रांची में अभी स्थिति स्पष्ट नहीं है। यहां झामुमो समर्थित उम्मीदवार आगे रहेंगे या भाजपा समर्थित, इस पर अंतिम तस्वीर सामने नहीं आई है।

इसी तरह धनबाद में भी मुकाबला बेहद कड़ा माना जा रहा है। दोनों प्रमुख दलों के समर्थक अपनी-अपनी जीत का दावा कर रहे हैं, लेकिन जमीनी रुझान मिश्रित संकेत दे रहे हैं।

इन दोनों शहरों के नतीजे पूरे राज्य के राजनीतिक संदेश को प्रभावित कर सकते हैं।

टिकट चयन, असंतोष और UGC बिल—क्या भाजपा को भारी पड़ रहा समीकरण?

भाजपा के सामने इस बार संगठनात्मक असंतोष भी चुनौती बनता दिख रहा है। गिरिडीह जैसे उदाहरणों में अपेक्षाकृत नए चेहरों को प्राथमिकता दिए जाने से पुराने कार्यकर्ताओं में नाराजगी सामने आई। कुछ स्थानों पर बागी उम्मीदवारों के मैदान में उतरने से कोर वोट में बंटवारे की आशंका जताई जा रही है।

साथ ही UGC बिल को लेकर फॉरवर्ड कास्ट के एक हिस्से में नाराजगी की चर्चा है। बिल के बाद यह झारखंड में पहला बड़ा चुनाव है, इसलिए इसके प्रभाव को भी नजरअंदाज नहीं किया जा सकता।

दूसरी ओर झामुमो ने अपेक्षाकृत जमीनी और पुराने कार्यकर्ताओं को प्राथमिकता दी, जिससे उसका पारंपरिक वोटबैंक एकजुट दिखाई दे रहा है—ठीक वैसे ही जैसे पिछले विधानसभा चुनाव में देखने को मिला था।

अब 27 तारीख को घोषित होने वाले नतीजे यह तय करेंगे कि शहरी मतदाता किस दिशा में रुख कर रहे हैं—और क्या झारखंड की राजनीति में शहरों का समीकरण सचमुच बदल रहा है।

म्युनिसिपल चुनाव 2026: कौन हैं शिवम आजाद? राजनीतिक संरक्षण पर उठे सवाल

गिरिडीह। गिरिडीह जिले में चुनावी हिंसा नई बात नहीं रही है। लेकिन अब तक यह हिंसा मुख्यतः नक्सली प्रभाव वाले ग्रामीण इलाकों तक सीमित मानी जाती थी। शहरी क्षेत्रों, खासकर गिरिडीह शहर, को अपेक्षाकृत शांत माना जाता रहा है।

मगर 2026 के म्युनिसिपल चुनाव में वार्ड नंबर 18 में हुई फायरिंग की घटना ने इस धारणा को तोड़ दिया है। गोलियां चलने से दो लोग घायल हो गए और शहर का इलाका भी अब चुनावी हिंसा से अछूता नहीं रहा।

इस घटना के बाद सबसे बड़ा सवाल जिस नाम के इर्द-गिर्द घूम रहा है, वह है शिवम श्रीवास्तव उर्फ शिवम आजाद।

कौन हैं शिवम आजाद?

शिवम श्रीवास्तव उर्फ आजाद गिरिडीह नगर निगम के पूर्व वार्ड पार्षद रहे हैं। उनकी मां भी वार्ड नंबर 18 से पार्षद रह चुकी हैं और इस बार भी चुनाव मैदान में थीं।

स्थानीय स्तर पर शिवम का नाम लंबे समय से विवादों से जुड़ता रहा है। बस स्टैंड क्षेत्र में उनका कारोबार बताया जाता है, जहां ठेकेदारी से लेकर अन्य गतिविधियों में उनकी सक्रियता की चर्चा होती रही है। आरोप यह भी हैं कि अवैध शराब कारोबार से भी उनका नाम जोड़ा जाता रहा है।

अगर पिछले वर्षों की खबरों को देखा जाए तो कई हिंदी अखबारों में शिवम से जुड़े मामलों का जिक्र मिलता है—कहीं शराब कारोबार में संलिप्तता का आरोप, तो कहीं तड़ीपार होने के बाद गिरफ्तारी की खबरें।

सूत्रों के अनुसार उनके खिलाफ विभिन्न धाराओं में मामले दर्ज हैं। उन पर सीसी एक्ट लगाए जाने और अंतरराज्यीय शराब तस्करी से जुड़े केस का भी उल्लेख सामने आता रहा है।

भाजपा से झामुमो तक का सफर

शिवम आजाद की राजनीतिक यात्रा भी चर्चा में है। वे पहले भारतीय जनता पार्टी से जुड़े रहें हैं। लेकिन 2024 के विधानसभा चुनाव से ठीक पहले उन्होंने झारखंड मुक्ति मोर्चा (झामुमो) का दामन थाम लिया।

स्थानीय राजनीतिक विश्लेषकों का मानना है कि इस तरह की छवि वाले लोगों का सत्ता के करीब पहुंचना प्रशासनिक सख्ती को प्रभावित करता है। आमतौर पर चुनाव के दौरान आपराधिक पृष्ठभूमि वाले लोगों पर नजर रखी जाती है, हथियार जब्त किए जाते हैं और जरूरत पड़ने पर गिरफ्तारी भी होती है।

प्रशासन पर उठते सवाल

हालांकि, वार्ड 18 फायरिंग मामले में कार्रवाई करते हुए टाउन थाना प्रभारी को भी निलंबित कर दिया गया है।

पर घटना के 24 घंटे बाद तक गिरफ्तारी नहीं होने को लेकर जिला प्रशासन पर सवाल उठ रहे हैं। स्थानीय लोगों का आरोप है कि प्रशासन न सिर्फ घटना रोकने में विफल रहा, बल्कि कार्रवाई में भी ढिलाई बरत रहा है।

यह भी आरोप सामने आ रहे हैं कि कुछ उच्च अधिकारी लोगों को मामले को “ज्यादा तूल नहीं देने” की चेतावनी दे रहे हैं। हालांकि प्रशासन की ओर से इन आरोपों पर आधिकारिक प्रतिक्रिया नहीं आई है।

गौरतलब है कि गिरिडीह का शहरी इलाका अब तक इस तरह की गोलीबारी से अपेक्षाकृत सुरक्षित माना जाता था। ऐसे में यह घटना कानून-व्यवस्था पर गंभीर सवाल खड़े कर रही है।

झामुमो की कार्रवाई

घटना के बाद झारखंड मुक्ति मोर्चा ने त्वरित कदम उठाते हुए शिवम आजाद को प्राथमिक सदस्यता से निष्कासित कर दिया है। साथ ही केंद्रीय कमेटी को उनके निलंबन के लिए पत्र भेजा गया है।

राजनीतिक रूप से यह संदेश देने की कोशिश मानी जा रही है कि पार्टी कानून-व्यवस्था के मुद्दे पर समझौता नहीं करेगी। हालांकि यह देखना बाकी है कि प्रशासनिक स्तर पर कितनी ठोस कार्रवाई होती है।

पहले भी विवादों में रहा नाम

शिवम आजाद का नाम इससे पहले भी मारपीट और अन्य मामलों में सामने आ चुका है। दिसंबर में भी एक मारपीट की घटना में उनका नाम चर्चा में आया था।

इस बार उनकी मां सरिता श्रीवास्तव का कहना है कि शिवम पर हमला हुआ था। हालांकि अब तक सामने आए अधिकांश मामलों में शिवम खुद आरोपों के घेरे में रहे हैं।

स्थानीय नागरिकों का कहना है कि वर्षों से मामलों का सामना करने के बावजूद उनका प्रभाव बना रहना यह संकेत देता है कि उन्हें राजनीतिक संरक्षण हासिल था। यही कारण हो सकता है कि उन्हें कानून से ऊपर होने का एहसास हुआ हो।

आगे क्या?

अब निगाहें जिला प्रशासन की कार्रवाई पर टिकी हैं। क्या आरोपियों की गिरफ्तारी होगी? क्या घायल दो लोगों का समुचित इलाज सुनिश्चित किया जाएगा? और क्या भविष्य में चुनावी हिंसा को रोकने के लिए ठोस कदम उठाए जाएंगे?

गिरिडीह जैसे जिले, जो अब तक शहरी स्तर पर अपेक्षाकृत शांत माना जाता रहा है, वहां हुई यह घटना आने वाले दिनों में शहर की राजनीति और प्रशासनिक साख—दोनों को प्रभावित कर सकती है।

प्रशासन की कार्रवाई ही शहर का मिजाज तय करेगी कि यह घटना एक अपवाद बनकर रह जाएगी या आने वाले समय की नई प्रवृत्ति का संकेत साबित होगी।

शिवम आज़ाद ने एक वीडियो जारी कर ट्रांसपोर्टर राजू खान पर चुनावी हिंसा कराने का आरोप लगाया है।

Saudi Arabia’s Founding Day: A Three-Centuries Legacy, a New National Narrative, and the Path to Vision 2030

The history of nations is not merely dusty records of bygone events; rather, it provides the intellectual and political foundation upon which their bright futures are constructed. The most important country of the West Asian region and in particular of the Arabian Peninsula, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia—formally established in 1932—carries a magnificent historical legacy spanning three centuries. In the long evolutionary journey and historical struggle of this Kingdom, certain days hold such pivotal importance that their echoes are heard throughout its entire history, shaping the country’s identity.

Interestingly, until the year 2022, only three official public holidays were observed in Saudi Arabia. Two of these were associated with religious festivals (Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha), while one holiday of a national nature was celebrated as the ‘Saudi National Day’. However, in 2022, through a historic royal decree by the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Salman bin Abdulaziz, February 22 was added as ‘Founding Day’, and then in 2023, March 11 was added as ‘Flag Day’, introducing a new dimension to the Kingdom’s national narrative.

Today is February 22, and for the past five years, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been celebrating its ‘Founding Day’ with elaborate festivities and a deep sense of national pride. This year is actually Saudi Arabia’s 300th Founding Day, commemorating the historic day of 22nd February in 1727 when Imam Muhammad bin Saud (1687–1765) took charge of the emirate of Diriyah, planting the seeds of the first Saudi state. Although this event is three centuries old, its official commemoration only kicked off after the royal decree of January 27, 2022. Prior to this, the only national day celebrated at the state level was the ‘Saudi National Day’ on September 23, commemorating the unification and formal establishment of the modern Saudi state in 1932 under the leadership of King Abdulaziz (1876–1953).(The formal observance of the National Day did not begin itself immediately after 1932 either; rather, the tradition of celebrating it officially started only in 1965 during the era of King Faisal (1906–1975), and it was first granted the status of a public holiday in 2005 during the reign of King Abdullah [1924–2014]).

Regarding the historical narrative before 2022, a traditional viewpoint prevailed among historians and international relations experts that the establishment of the First Saudi State occurred in 1744 (1157 AH), when the ‘Charter of Diriyah’ was agreed upon between Imam Muhammad bin Saud (1687–1765) and the renowned religious reformer Sheikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab (1703–1792).This was an ideological alliance that provided religious legitimacy to the House of Saud and paved the way for their future conquests across the Arabian Peninsula. However, in the official narrative following 2022, 1727 was deliberately prioritized to establish the state’s history of origins as a full 300 years deep. The purpose of this shift is to highlight the independent political leadership of the House of Saud and downplay the centrality of the ideological and religious alliance, aligning perfectly with the current leadership’s efforts toward a modern national identity under ‘Vision 2030’.

The 300th Founding Day of Saudi Arabia celebrated today commemorates that crucial historical turning point when Imam Muhammad bin Saud united the scattered Arab tribes under one political banner and laid the foundation of the First Saudi State. On the other hand, the “National Day” celebrated on September 23 is the fruit of the great struggle initiated by King Abdulaziz bin Abdul Rahman Al Saud (Ibn Saud), who in 1932 united the fragmented political and administrative units of the Arabian Peninsula, naming it the “Kingdom of Saudi Arabia”.

Put simply, while Founding Day is a symbol of the state’s longevity and deep roots, National Day is the mark of the modern kingdom’s cohesion and strength. Today, as Saudi Arabia scales new heights of progress under “Vision 2030,” the primary purpose of celebrating these days is to make the new generation realize that their country is not a temporary structure built on shifting sands, but the result of three centuries of resilience, sacrifice, and visionary leadership. King Salman’s decision in 2022 was not merely the addition of another holiday to the Saudi calendar; it was a highly bold and strategic step to redefine Saudi Arabia’s historical lens, its state narrative framework, and its future direction under Vision 2030.

In the following paragraphs, we will examine in greater detail why Saudi Arabia decided to trace its history back to 1727 instead of 1744, what objectives the current leadership aims to achieve through these steps, and why this tricentennial Saudi legacy matters in our modern era.

Pre-1727 Arabia: An Era of Chaos and Anarchy

To understand the significance of the establishment of the First Saudi State in 1727, it is essential to look at the conditions of the Arabian Peninsula during that era. In the early 18th century, the Arabian Peninsula, and particularly the central region of Nejd, lacked any unified authority. Tribes and modest city-states were constantly at war with one another for control over vital resources like water, pastures, and caravan paths.

According to the famous Saudi historian Uthman bin Bishr (1796–1873), Najd during this period faced not only intertribal feuds but also severe environmental and economic woes that had devastated the region. In 1716, a famine struck the towns near Diriyah, severe droughts occurred in 1724 and 1725, and in 1726, a horrific plague spread, leaving many settlements deserted. The city of Diriyah itself suffered from internal rivalries and was divided into two main factions: ‘Ghusaybah’ (dominated by the Rabiah clan) and ‘Al-Mulaybid’ (base of the Muqrin family). (The Al Saud family originates from the Muqrin family; the father of Al Saud’s founder Muhammad bin Saud was Saud bin Muhammad bin Muqrin). In this atmosphere of pervasive hopelessness and vulnerability, there was a need for leadership that could unite the region.

1727: The Rise of Imam Muhammad bin Saud and a Nascent State

February 22, 1727, the date when Imam Muhammad bin Saud took over the emirate of Diriyah, proved to be a major turning point in the history of the Arabian Peninsula. Breaking from the mold of nomadic warlords, Imam Muhammad bin Saud began to think like an organized ruler and governed the region with structure and foresight. His very first achievement was transforming the divided areas of Diriyah into a strong and unified city.

Imam Muhammad bin Saud’s rule was not based merely on force; rather, he pioneered a new “Social Contract” that historians term it as “Consensual Authority”. He convinced his people, neighbouring towns, and tribes that unity and peace, rather than constant warfare, were in everyone’s interest. He secured the routes for trade caravans and pilgrims, bringing economic stability to the region. Furthermore, he set up a ‘Bait-ul-Mal’ (public treasury), through which Zakat and taxes were collected and spent for the needy, education, and community welfare, thereby breaking the old, oppressive economic monopolies.

The Shift in Historical Narrative: Why 1727 Instead of 1744?

This is the most fascinating and crucial aspect of this entire discourse. For generations, it was taught and understood both inside and outside Saudi Arabia that the First Saudi State began in 1744. 1744 is the year when Imam Muhammad bin Saud granted refuge to the famous religious reformer Sheikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab in Diriyah, and a historic agreement (known as the Charter of Diriyah) was forged between them. This framing cast the Saudi state as essentially a byproduct of “Wahhabism.”

However, today’s Saudi leadership and contemporary Saudi scholars deem this narrative ¸as historically flawed or an incomplete truth. According to Dr. Khalid Al-Dakhil, a prominent Saudi Assistant Professor of Political Sociology currently at King Saud University, reducing the history of the Saudi state to a mere religious movement or a “war against polytheism (Shirk)” diminished the stature of the state itself.

The purpose of rewinding the history from 1744 to 1727 is to highlight the significance of those initial 17 years, which earlier historians like Ibn Ghannam (1739–1811) and Ibn Bishr (1796–1873) had overlooked out of religious devotion. The new narrative establishes that when Sheikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab arrived in Diriyah, a stable, thriving, economically prosperous, and politically and militarily independent state already existed there, having been founded in 1727. Therefore, the political legitimacy of the state is not dependent on any specific religious doctrine, but is founded upon the political acumen, governance, and tribe-unifying capabilities of the House of Saud.

diriyah 1727 to saudi vision 2030 journey

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Vision 2030, and the State’s New Blueprint

The Founding Day’s refreshed concept is directly linked to the broader objectives of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s sweeping ‘Vision 2030’agenda,which seeks to transition Saudi Arabia from an oil-dependent economy into a diversified, vibrant, and forward-looking society. Achieving this goal required major reforms at the social and cultural levels.

In the past, the 1744 storyline provided the religious elite (Ulema) and the religious police with immense justification to interfere in every affair of the Kingdom. To curtail this conservative religious grip (which he also tied to post-1979 extremism and radicalism in a lengthy 2022 interview with ‘The Atlantic’ magazine), Mohammed bin Salman has steered the state back toward its original “political and national foundations.” Through Founding Day, the current leadership is sending a message to the Saudi nationals that their identity is not the product of a Wahhabi religious militia called Al-Ikhwan or any other hardline religious ideologies, but is based on citizenship, the rule of law, and a social contract that exists between the state and the people. This day is a symbol of national unity, bringing all citizens together under one flag, transcending their regional, tribal, or sectarian differences.

Global Reach of the New Narrative and Harnessing Soft Power

The Saudi leadership is wielding this 300-year saga to amplify the kingdom’s soft power worldwide. Western media and policymakers often sarcastically describe the Gulf states including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as “artificial creations from the lines drawn by Britain and France under the ‘Sykes-Picot Agreement’ after World War I” or as “countries built overnight by oil wealth.”

Pointing to year 1727 reminds the world that the Saudi state had already emerged as a sovereign and independent political entity even before the United States (founded in 1776) and the French Revolution (1789).Saudi Arabia possesses a magnificent, indigenous, and purely Arab history of state-building, rise and fall, and survival. The Saudi Kingdom was established three times: The First State (1727 – 1818) was destroyed by Ottoman and Egyptian invasions. The Second State (1824 – 1891) collapsed due to internal strife. The Third, current state was established in 1902 by King Abdulaziz and continues to stand strong today.

This continuity and resilience prove that this state is not merely built the bases of a few lines drawn on a map by Europe and abundant oil wealth, but stands on a strong national spirit, astute leadership, and resolute public support. In the realm of cultural diplomacy, Founding Day has transformed Saudi Arabia’s historical sites, particularly the ‘At-Turaif‘ district in Diriyah (designated a UNESCO World Heritage site in 2010), into a global tourist hub. Mega-projects worth billions of dollars by the government, such as the “Diriyah Gate,” reflect that culture and heritage are now the new fuel for the Saudi economy and identity.

Significance in the Arab and Muslim Spheres

This evolving narrative also holds deep significance in the Arab and Muslim world. For a long time, the legitimacy of Saudi Arabia’s leadership was based solely on its custodianship of the Two Holy Mosques (religious legitimacy) and petrodollars (financial support for religious causes). Founding Day adds a new dimension to this, which can be termed “civilizational and historical legitimacy.”

This sends a message to other powerful countries in the region that Saudi Arabia is not a new player; rather, its political structure has centuries-old roots, which had no alliance with the Ottomans nor backing from Western colonial powers. This serves as a compelling argument that the foundations of the Saudi state are purely indigenous.

Simultaneously, this process of separating the state from Wahhabism is being viewed as a positive development by the international community and among Muslims. This is helping Saudi Arabia present itself as a modern and tolerant state that, free from the stigmas of extremism, is leading its citizens toward art, culture, entertainment, and a bright future. Since Saudi Arabia rightfully holds the position of a leading centre of the Muslim Ummah globally, the impacts of adopting flexibility, tolerance, and ‘Moderate Islam’ in its state narrative will inevitably influence other Muslim countries as well. As a result of this intellectual shift, far-reaching and positive effects will also be seen in the social and political attitudes of Muslims worldwide in general, and Indian Muslims in particular.

How 1727 Reframes Saudi Arabia’s National Identity

Saudi Arabia’s celebration of Founding Day on February 22 is not merely a historical festivity, but an act of a nation rediscovering itself. This is the story of a kingdom that braved the darkest and most difficult periods of history, rose again from the ashes after destruction, and is today prepared to walk shoulder to shoulder with the modern world. King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s revival of the 1727 date is actually the fulfilment of the Vision 2030 dream, which aims to make Saudi Arabia a country whose roots are deep in its soil and culture, but whose branches touch the heights of the sky. This narrative clarifies that the true secret of Saudi Arabia’s strength lies not in its oil wells, but in the courage of its people, the political acumen of its rulers, and its glorious three-hundred-year history.

Ramzan Charity Oversight Raises Larger Questions About Equality Before Law and Selective Scrutiny

0

A recent report in NDTV quoted Omar Abdullah defending an administrative order in Jammu and Kashmir regulating the collection of charity during Ramzan, and the development has prompted a debate that extends far beyond one district or one month. Some have characterised the measure as unnecessary interference in religious practice, while others have welcomed it as a corrective step towards accountability in faith-based giving. My own position cannot be reduced to either reaction, because I support transparency in religious charity, yet I remain wary when reform appears to be applied selectively or disproportionately.

Personal Lessons on Charity and Due Diligence

My support for regulation is grounded in personal experience rather than abstract theory. A few years ago, individuals approached us claiming to be reverts to Islam who had allegedly been ostracised by their families and left without financial support, and their account was sufficiently compelling to move us into action. With sincerity and urgency, we mobilised friends and relatives and raised a substantial sum to assist them with accommodation and subsistence, believing that we were fulfilling both a moral and religious duty. Subsequent inquiries exposed inconsistencies in their documentation and narrative, and it gradually became clear that the emotional appeal had masked factual irregularities that we should have verified earlier.

In another instance, funds were collected in the name of a masjid renovation and a madrasa expansion, yet the collectors were unable to provide registration details, audited accounts or formal receipts when reasonable questions were raised. The response suggested that seeking documentation reflected a lack of trust, as though procedural clarity were incompatible with piety. These experiences convinced me that informal systems, however well intentioned, create opportunities for misuse and misunderstanding, and that transparency in religious charity enhances rather than diminishes the moral authority of faith-based institutions.

Why Ramzan Charity Needs Transparency

It is therefore legitimate for an administration to require registration, documentation and oversight for public collections conducted in the name of religion, particularly during Ramzan when charitable giving intensifies and large sums are mobilised within a short period. Donors deserve assurance that their contributions reach intended beneficiaries, and genuine institutions benefit when their credibility is reinforced through proper compliance. The sanctity of zakat and sadaqah is preserved through integrity and clarity, not weakened by procedural safeguards.

Waqf Reform and Fears of Selective Enforcement

The debate, however, acquires a more complex dimension when placed alongside discussions surrounding the Waqf Amendment Bill and the broader framework of the Waqf Act, where sections of the Muslim community have questioned not merely the substance of proposed reforms but also the pattern within which they appear. Reform of waqf governance is necessary, as digitisation of records, professional auditing and protection of assets from encroachment are long overdue, yet concern arises when scrutiny appears disproportionately concentrated upon one community’s institutional ecosystem while others function without comparable legislative intensity.

If transparency is presented as a principle of governance, it must operate uniformly rather than selectively, because selective enforcement undermines the legitimacy that reform seeks to establish. The controversy surrounding the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 illustrates why legislative intent is closely examined, as the introduction of religion as an explicit criterion in fast-tracking citizenship marked a departure from the traditionally religion-neutral character of Indian citizenship law. While the government defended the Act as a humanitarian measure addressing persecution in neighbouring countries, many Muslims perceived the exclusionary structure as a signal that legislative reform was not being framed on equal constitutional terms.

Similarly, property demolitions in Uttar Pradesh under the administration of Yogi Adityanath have attracted scrutiny where demolitions followed communal tensions and were perceived to disproportionately affect Muslim homes and commercial establishments. Officials have defended such actions as enforcement against illegal constructions, yet the timing and pattern in certain instances have led civil society observers to question whether administrative power is being exercised evenly. Even when legality is asserted, perception of asymmetry affects public trust in neutrality.

CAA, Hijab, Triple Talaq: Pattern of Anxiety

The hijab controversy in Karnataka further intensified anxieties regarding selective focus, as Muslim female students became central to a policy debate framed around uniformity and discipline in educational institutions. While the state emphasised institutional order, critics questioned why visible expressions of minority religious identity were subjected to regulatory intervention in a society otherwise marked by plural cultural practices. The issue extended beyond attire to the symbolic message conveyed when minority identity becomes the focal point of administrative discipline.

The enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, which criminalised instant triple talaq, also generated debate regarding legislative symmetry, because although the objective of protecting Muslim women’s rights was widely acknowledged, the decision to criminalise a marital practice within one personal law framework raised questions about comparative treatment of matrimonial disputes in other communities. When civil disputes in one context are treated as criminal offences in another, legislative intent inevitably becomes a subject of scrutiny.

Investigative actions by agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate have, in certain high-profile cases involving Muslim political figures or charitable bodies, been interpreted through a communal lens, particularly when comparable intensity is not perceived in relation to similarly placed entities outside the community. Communal violence investigations in Delhi have likewise produced contested narratives about the distribution of prosecutorial focus and the invocation of stringent statutory provisions. Even if each action is defensible on legal grounds, the cumulative pattern influences how subsequent reforms are received.

Public discourse around halal meat sellers provides another example of perceived asymmetry, as small Muslim vendors often encounter administrative scrutiny and social pressure, whereas large-scale beef export enterprises operate through formal approvals, export licences and economic clearances. The contrast creates an impression that regulatory attention descends more readily upon economically vulnerable actors than upon structurally embedded commercial networks, and such disparities reinforce suspicion that reform is not always neutral in its practical application.

Equal Standards for All Religious Institutions

My earlier writings on Muslim empowerment have consistently argued that the community must invest in civic literacy and legal awareness rather than rely solely upon emotional mobilisation, because institutional strength is built through compliance, documentation and strategic engagement with constitutional frameworks. Masjid committees, madrasa boards and waqf bodies should maintain audited accounts, digitise property records and train administrators in governance standards so that their operations withstand legal scrutiny without hesitation. Legal compliance is not submission to authority but an assertion of institutional maturity, and internal reform should be embraced as a means of strengthening collective credibility.

At the same time, equality before the law requires that comparable standards of disclosure and accountability apply across religious institutions, including temple trusts, mutts and church bodies, so that transparency is understood as a constitutional norm rather than a communal measure. Empowerment cannot be delivered through suspicion, nor can dignity be secured without internal discipline, and therefore both the state and the community bear responsibility for ensuring that integrity is pursued consistently and visibly.

Administrative regulation of Ramzan charity collections may prevent fraud and protect donors, just as waqf reform may secure valuable assets for future generations, yet the credibility of such measures ultimately depends upon whether they are embedded within a framework of equal standards. Transparency must function as a universal governance principle rather than a targeted instrument, and accountability must strengthen institutions across communities without reinforcing perceptions of selective scrutiny. Only when reform is applied consistently, and when legislative intent reflects constitutional equality in both substance and perception, can regulation transform from a source of distrust into a foundation of shared institutional confidence.