Wayward:
December 19/2011: It is a good augury that the eligibility criterion for awarding Bharat Ratna, the nation's highest civilian award has been expanded by making it open-ended. Hitherto, this prestigious award has been limited to people of eminence drawn from the arts, sciences and social services streams. But now on, anyone of eminence with exceptional service or performance of the highest order "in any field of human endeavour'' can qualify for the coveted award. By restricting the fields of activity and thus casting the award in that mould, many distinguished men and women were kept out of the purview of the award. In that sense, a major anomaly has supposedly been removed by the Government and that could be lauded.
Pandit Bhimsen Joshi was the last to get Bharat Ratna in 2008. While the search is on for the next one, the Union Government has changed the rules for selecting eligible candidates. Established in 1954, so far 41 people have got it. Going by media reports, it would appear the rules are now being amended so that Sachin Tendulkar can qualify to bag Bharat Ratna. There is an orchestrated demand springing from his fraternity that no one else deserves Bharat Ratna more than Sachin. Even Union Sports Minister Ajay Maken did not conceal his glee when he said he had indeed tried hard to get the award for Tendulkar. With the scope for eligibility now being enlarged, it is but natural that there will be more claimants and, as a corollary, fierce lobbying for it. This change in rules could possibly include many of our dear readers like you and us too! Sadly, however, the noise pollution generated by way of demands and debate favouring people from the field of games and sports, is unmatched by any other people from any other field. As if in our country of 1.2 billion people, there is none else qualified enough for the Ratna.
This is the irony of the situation. There is no dearth of people who have done yeoman service to this country, but they remain largely forgotten or unnoticed as there is no one to sing paeans for them or do their public relations. For instance, September 27, 2009, a young Kashmiri woman Ruksana, from Rajouri district, thwarted an attack by six Laskar-e-Toiba terrorists. She snatched the gun from one of them and shot him dead. The rest fled. The incident created a nationwide sensation at the time and everyone praised her valour. However, the Government did nothing more than give her a bravery award. And then Ruksana went behind the veil of our short public memory. From no quarter did the demand come that Ruksana deserves Bharat Ratna. Similarly, when the whole nation is afflicted with the Anna Hazare epidemic, no one is sparing a thought to a woman, Irom Sharmila from Manipur, who is carrying on a hunger strike for the last 11 years demanding repeal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. From the point of view of people of her State, her demand is totally justified. The act has prevented people from leading a normal life in the area. This indomitable soul certainly deserves Bharat Ratna as much as, if not more than, anybody else. All this shows that a kind of caste system has crept into the award system that only recognizes `big and successful’ names. Note the alacrity with which rules of the Bharat Ratna `game’ are changed. What with a nationwide Sachin fever, it would not be difficult to generate public opinion to give him the award. If the Government were serious about honouring sportspersons with Bharat Ratna, then the man who was behind the golden age of Indian hockey, the legendary Dhyan Chand, should have got the award a long time ago, or he could even now be considered posthumously.
Nevertheless, better late than never. If Sachin Tendulkar gets Bharat Ratna, may he. We have no objections. Never mind the team has often been sacrificed for his personal goal of the highest run rate. Sachin may be iconoclastic, a monument for sports buffs. But that does not prevent us from taking stock of his contribution. He plays cricket, makes a lot of money from the game and endorsements. So do a lot of others in business and allied activities. One way to judge Sachin who has got so much from society is to find out what he has given back to it in gratitude. Alas, his score card in that respect may not match that in the cricket field. He is known more for his parsimonious nature than philanthropy which calls for sharing the riches with the poor and needy. The NGO that he runs for the poor is apparently a façade than anything else. We should not also forget the unsavoury episode where he pulled strings to dodge tax on a Ferrari that he imported. And he succeeded in that effort. All this reveals the true colours of a man who does what he does for sheer personal aggrandizement and glory. Sachin is a good cricketer and a bad citizen. To confer Bharat Ratna on a money-making machine will amount to lowering the prestige of the very award. By relaxing the rules for the award the Government of India has of course opened the flood-gates. Hordes of great men and women would now become Bharat Ratnas. In a sense, the common man who fights his way to eke out a miserable existence deserves Bharat Ratna more than anybody else for his grit, determination and the will to live against all odds. Since the nation’s highest award is conferred on men of eminence, we cannot recommend animals. Otherwise, our take would be to confer the same, even if posthumously, on a village stray dog that saved two little children from swirling waters during the 1999 super cyclone of Orissa. Those who had seen the arresting picture of the valiant dog in action would agree with us, no doubt. This convinces us that the Union Government, by its latest action, could have made this highest Award go wayward.