$4.4 Billion Set Aside for PATH Beneficiaries

first_imgA sum of $4.4 billion has been earmarked in the 2013/2014 Estimates of Expenditure, now before the House of Representatives, for the Integrated Social Protection and Labour Programme.The project’s main objective is to support the Government of Jamaica’s efforts to improve human capital and labour market outcomes of the poor by enhancing the effectiveness of key social protection programmes.Anticipated targets for this fiscal year include: the payment of Programme of Advancement Through Health and Education (PATH) grants to approximately 400,000 beneficiaries, effective August 2013, reflecting a 15 per cent increase in payments; payment of post-secondary grants to 2,500 PATH students; introduction of a bus fare assistance programme for PATH students; development of a school feeding policy; and implementation of an on-the-job training pilot project.Physical targets initially envisaged under the programme include conducting baseline studies to support the development of a national employment policy strategy; implementation of a pilot for a parenting education workshop for PATH beneficiary households with children age two to six years old; and upgrading the PATH management information system.The project is being implemented by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, with support funding from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). It is slated to run from December 2012 to November 2016.By Athaliah Reynolds-Baker, JIS Reporterlast_img read more

BillionDollar Billy Beane

The film version of “Moneyball” depicts many establishment baseball types as ignorant of where wins in baseball come from and clueless about how to properly value talent.Take, for example, the scene when John Henry — the billionaire owner of the Boston Red Sox — tries to recruit the Oakland Athletics’ general manager Billy Beane. Henry tells Beane that any managers not rebuilding their teams with Beane’s system in mind are “dinosaurs,” and then hands him a slip of paper. On it, there’s an offer for Beane to become the new Red Sox general manager for the insane amount of $12.5 million over five years. His fictional colleague tells us that the offer would make Beane “the highest-paid GM in the history of sports.” Despite appearing tempted, Beane ultimately declines the deal, claiming, “I made one decision in my life based on money and I swore I’d never do it again.”1In real life, Beane briefly accepted the Red Sox’s offer before changing his mind (citing community and family reasons). He even began negotiating with the A’s over what compensation the Red Sox would have to give his old team for stealing him away. At the press conference announcing that he’d changed his mind, Beane was asked about that negotiation (from a contemporary news report):“Asked from a baseball talent-evaluator perspective what he was worth, Beane laughed and said, ‘I had one opinion before [accepting Boston’s job] and once I got there, I had a different opinion.’”Beane may not be the highest-paid GM in the history of sports, but he may be the most famous. An outfielder originally drafted 23rd overall by the New York Mets in 1980, Beane made his MLB debut in 1984, but was never successful against top competition. After getting washed out of the league, he became a scout for the A’s and eventually worked his way up to GM in 1997. As GM, he has used Bill James-style advanced statistics to inform his decisions, and taken a strictly economic approach to valuing and acquiring players. Under his leadership, the A’s have been a very successful franchise despite routinely carrying one of baseball’s smallest payrolls. Beane’s story caught the attention of author Michael Lewis, who made him the central character in his 2003 bestseller “Moneyball” and something of a cultural icon for sports analytics.Beane’s methods continue to be analyzed and celebrated by sabermetricians, and the A’s continue to massively exceed expectations given the amount they spend. They own the best record in baseball so far this season, and have the fifth-lowest payroll.2While also being rated as the “unluckiest” team this year. They currently lead MLB in Pythagorean wins by an even wider margin. It’s the best 100-game start of Beane’s career, and the best for the organization since its 1990 pennant-winning squad. Over the last 15 seasons,3The period covered by Baseball Prospectus’s payroll data. the A’s under Beane have had the fifth-best winning percentage in baseball, with the fourth-lowest total payroll. (The data used here is current through Monday, July 21.)Beane has been a godsend to the frugal A’s, enabling them to achieve top-tier performance at bottom-tier prices. For this, the A’s have paid him fairly modestly4In general, good GMs are probably way underpaid, but Beane is even more so. — but since we don’t know how much winning is worth to the A’s organization, it’s hard to say exactly how much Beane has been worth to them.For a team like the Red Sox, however, the picture is much more clear. Over the last 15 years, they’ve happily spent over $2 billion in the pursuit of wins — and because they’re one of baseball’s most successful franchises, no one in Beantown is complaining.From a strictly economic perspective, not offering Beane however much money it took to get him may have been one of the Red Sox’s poorest decisions since letting Babe Ruth go to the Yankees for next to nothing. And I mean that literally: Over the past 15 years, Billy Beane has been nothing less than the Babe Ruth of baseball GMs. The Red Sox offered Beane $2.5 million per year,5The 2002 Boston Red Sox paid Dustin Hermanson — a relief pitcher with a 4.21 ERA — $5.5 million, or more than twice as much in annual salary as they offered Beane. but even $25 million would have been a bargain.Finding Beane’s potential dollar value to the Red Sox is relatively simple: It’s the amount the team spent under general managers Theo Epstein and Ben Cherington, minus the amount it would have had to spend for the same performance with Beane as GM.6Hat tip to Jeremy Kahan — a hedge fund analyst and good friend of mine — for zeroing in on the Red Sox angle to this question.To show this, we first we need to figure out just how many A’s wins Beane has been responsible for, and how much those wins would cost on the open market.Let’s start by comparing the A’s performance under Beane’s leadership to the performance we would expect from a typical GM with the same payroll.7Prior to their change in ownership in 1995, the A’s maintained a healthy payroll, including the largest in the league in 1991, following their World Series appearance the year before. By the time they started downsizing, Beane was already with the team. This means there’s no way to compare Beane’s performance to that of a different A’s GM with a similar payroll. I created a logistic regression model8A type of model used to predict things like win percentages. that predicts a team’s win percentage by season based on the team’s relative payroll (excluding Oakland from the data), as measured by how many standard deviations it was above or below the average MLB payroll for each season. Below, I’ve plotted the non-Oakland team-seasons from 2000 to 2013 (on which the model is based) in groups of 15 by payroll (so, the dot farthest to the right represents the 15 team-seasons with the highest relative payrolls), and plotted the model’s prediction as a red line. I then plotted Oakland’s 15 seasons through 2014 as a single green point:The point on the upper right represents the 15 team-seasons with the highest relative payrolls. These teams were 2.68 standard deviations above the mean payroll on average and won 58.5 percent of their regular-season games on average.9Note there’s not much difference from a linear regression, which would have an underlying (season-by-season) R-squared value of .183 (though this can be increased by using less noisy metrics such as run differential). Oakland, on the other hand, averaged .81 standard deviations below the mean payroll and won 54.8 percent of its games on average.From this we can take each team’s expected wins per season based on payroll,10The logistic regression formula in Excel is: =1/(1+EXP(-(-0.009677+0.127212*[SD Payroll]))). and then see how many games above or below average it ran. Here’s Oakland, broken down by year (Note: 2014 is through the season’s first 98 games only):This comes out to 180.2 wins above expectation given the A’s payroll (165.5 prior to this year). That’s 12.0 wins above expectation per season (and there’s a good chance of that per-season average rising).“Wins above expectation” may sound familiar to you. It’s conceptually very similar to wins above replacement (WAR), the stat we use to evaluate how many wins a player earns a team versus how many games that team would expect to win without him.11There are two main differences between wins above expectation and wins above replacement:WAR is based on direct player performance metrics like hitting, fielding, etc., while a general manager’s wins earned are imputed indirectly from his team’s performance (both of these methods have their pluses and minuses).WAR is above “replacement,” meaning it’s the number of wins a player earns not over an average player, but over a borderline player — someone you would pay the minimum. A GM’s wins here are measured above what we would expect from the average non-Beane GM.But the difference between a “replacement” GM and an average GM is unclear to me: They all cost a pretty similar amount, and how much value they add is a mystery, so I thought an average GM was the appropriate baseline. Regardless, this means that this comparison could be understating Beane’s value. For example, Babe Ruth earned only 126 wins above average as a batter, compared to his 163 wins above replacement.Beane’s 12 wins per season above what we would expect of an average general manager is slightly more wins than Barry Bonds earned when he hit 73 home runs in 2001 (11.9 WAR). The most WAR earned by any batter over his entire career was 163 by Babe Ruth.12At least for now, Ruth does maintain a slight edge over Beane in total WAR (with 183.6) on account of his 20.6 WAR as a pitcher. In fact, if you assemble the top 15 position player seasons of all time, they still trail Beane’s 15 seasons as GM, with 180.1 WAR combined versus Beane’s 180.2 wins above expectation.No one can get that lucky. If you’re expected to win 1,116 out of 2,364 games, winning 1,296 games instead may not look impossible, but that’s because our intuitions about these things are terrible. Excel’s binomial distribution function makes calculating such odds pretty easy:13The Excel formula to calculate odds of winning a certain amount given an expected win rate is: =BINOM.DIST([Games]-[Wins],[Games],1-[Expected Win Percent], TRUE). In this case they’re somewhere around one in 13 trillion — effectively zero.14Granted, though odds that they’ve just gotten lucky overall are nil, it’s likely that the A’s have been “running well” to some extent — meaning, their performance has probably exceeded their true expectation. But this is true of any top team. Of course, we can’t know to what degree Beane alone is responsible for the A’s success. But as GM, Beane is formally responsible for the A’s performance, and there aren’t any other obvious causes that would suggest he isn’t responsible (there have been several different managers and 100 percent turnover of players during Beane’s tenure).Imagine the A’s wanted to have exactly this level of success and were willing to pay whatever it cost. With Billy Beane, the A’s have paid $839,902,108 to their players from 2000 up to and including the start of the 2014 season (but prior to recent acquisitions). How much do other teams normally have to pay for this level of success?There are a lot of estimates for the price of wins out there, ranging from ESPN’s Dan Szymborski’s $5.5 million per marginal win and FanGraphs $6 million on the lower end to Lewie Pollis’s $7 million and up to Hardball Times’ $7.6 million on the high end. To make things a little more complicated, the price of wins has also risen substantially with the growth of payrolls in the last decade15I’ll stick with FanGraphs and Hardball Times, because their historical estimates are readily accessible.:If we use these values to price wins above or below expectation on a year-by-year basis for every team as we did for Oakland above, and then sum up by team, it would look like this:FanGraphs’ value for Oakland’s performance adds up to $812 million since 2000, while the Hardball Times’ value adds up to $891 million. Over three-quarters of a billion dollars — that’s huge! We can smell-check these numbers by looking at the overall picture. Leaving aside standard deviations and year-by-year breakdowns for a moment, we can see how each team’s total payroll over the last 15 years has compared to its performance:That trend line shows us how well teams have performed relative to how much they’ve paid, but we can also use it for the reverse:16By solving for Win Percentage. In Excel: =([WPct]-0.4130893)/(0.0000669). The Oakland Athletics have won 54.8 percent of their games, so the corresponding 15-year payroll (the amount we would expect a team to have paid for that win rate) is about $2.02 billion — about $1.18 billion higher than the Athletics actually paid.So the smell-check turned out a higher number than the estimates based on the normal price of wins, when that normal price already seemed absurd.This isn’t broken down year by year, so it could just be that the A’s won a lot more in years when wins were cheaper. To correct for this, we need a more empirical method for pricing wins. On a year-by-year basis, how big would each team’s payroll have to have been to buy its performance? Using the regression above (and some fancywork in R17This is done using the inverse of the logistic regression built above, which leads to very complicated math, but can be done fairly easily in R using the boot package (where “mod” is the logistic model):require(boot)invPred <- function (W,G,mod) {(logit(W/G) – coef(mod)[[“(Intercept)”]]) / coef(mod)[[“payroll.sd”]]}I should note this leads to some very valuable-looking seasons (like Seattle’s 116-win season in 2001), because that kind of success is virtually impossible to “buy.” But it sums up across seasons very accurately.), we can model this and see that wins may be harder to buy than standard win-valuation models (FanGraphs, Hardball Times, etc.) would suggest. Valuing each team’s relative season-by-season performance this way leads to a very different accounting from above:Over the past 15 years, the A’s have exceeded expectations by close to $1.38 billion — even better than our smell-check estimate of $1.18 billion. This suggests that they’ve performed slightly better in years when they were at a bigger payroll disadvantage (at 2013 market value, those A’s wins would cost closer to $1.78 billion).18Note: though I use a logistic regression so the price of wins isn’t perfectly linear, this approach corresponds roughly to a price per win of around 4.7 wins per standard deviation of payroll. So the table of win prices over the years corresponding to those of Hardball Times and FanGraphs above would look like this: Yes, that’s “billion” with a B. (Or two.)* * * * *Now that we have a sense of Beane’s performance and how much it would cost to replicate it, let’s turn back to the Boston Red Sox and their failure to sign him (or even to offer him anywhere near his worth).The situations in Oakland and Boston aren’t directly comparable. Exploiting market inefficiencies is probably easier for Beane than it is for a successful big-money team, because he has never had to face the winner’s curse or the diminishing returns of spending. On the other hand, the A’s have been way above average, not just a little above average. Aside from the Red Sox’s post-season successes,19I should also note that, while not having any championships to show for it, the A’s have made the playoffs the same number of times the Red Sox have (seven), and they’ve been remarkably unlucky, losing all six series-deciding Game 5s they’ve played. the team has only performed 0.6 percent better than the A’s over the 15-year period — for which they’ve paid an extra $1.2 billion in salaries.But some of that money was spent and some of those wins came before the Red Sox attempted to hire Beane. To be conservative, let’s just look at the period since Henry made Beane his offer: In the last 12 years, the Red Sox spent $1.714 billion on payroll, while the A’s spent $736 million. We can then break down what it could have looked like if Beane had worked for the Red Sox like so:Let’s say it would have cost Boston the same $736 million that it cost Oakland to get the A’s performance with Beane.At the hypothetical $25 million-per-year salary I suggested earlier, Beane would have cost the Red Sox another $300 million. (It’s possible that Beane would have wanted more, but it’s even more possible that they could have gotten him for less.)The difference in performance between the A’s and the Red Sox over that period (where the Sox were as successful as at any point in the franchise’s history, and the A’s were supposedly stagnating after Beane’s early success) has been about 50 games for Boston. Since we don’t know exactly how good Beane would be at procuring additional wins above his Oakland performance, let’s assume that the Red Sox would have had to pay the typical amount teams have paid for wins in the period to make up the difference. According to the year-by-year price of wins from my calculations above, those 50 wins (taking when they happened into account) would have a market value of about $370 million (though this might have been lower with Beane in charge).If we combine these — the price of the A’s performance ($736 million) plus Super-Expensive-Billy-Beane’s salary ($300 million) plus the additional 50 Red Sox wins at high market estimates ($370 million) — merely duplicating their previous level of success still would have saved the Red Sox more than $300 million relative to what they actually spent, and that’s with reasonably conservative assumptions. That’s money they could have pocketed, or spent making themselves even better.In other words, failing to understand Beane’s true value may have cost the Red Sox hundreds of millions of dollars or more. “Moneyball” isn’t just some nerdy obsession that helps a few teams save a bit of money. It’s about more than nickels and dimes; it’s about millions and billions.CORRECTION (July 24, 7:10 p.m.): A footnote in an earlier version of this story misstated the most recent year the Oakland A’s played in the World Series; it was 1990, not 1991. read more

Analysis Cannabis Shops Linked to Lower Crime Increased Property Values

first_img A store selling legal marijuana is good for the neighborhood, so why do so many towns forbid them from opening shop? Listen Now Each week hear inspiring stories of business owners who have taken the cannabis challenge and are now navigating the exciting but unpredictable Green Rush. Image credit: Stephenie Hollyman | Getty Images David Downs Next Article Brought to you by Benzinga Add to Queue May 20, 2019 Retail Businesses –shares When your state legalizes cannabis, there’s no guarantee that a store will open near you. That depends on your local city or county council, which regulates if and where retails stores are allowed.As more municipal officials are faced with a decision to allow or ban cannabis dispensaries, a new study highlights those dispensaries’ links to lower crime, declining teen use, and increased property values.Fears over crime rates, teen use, and property values often drive the discussion around local zoning issues. Curious about what the actual research said about those issues, a team of researchers at Leafly embarked on a review of the available evidence. We focused on 42 research papers that directly addressed those fears. What we found in our report — Debunking Dispensary Myths — was eye-opening.The vast majority of current research suggests that allowing regulated cannabis stores actually improves community safety, health, and property values.Related: Recent Research Bolsters the Case That Cannabis Benefits SeniorsSome highlights:“Retail dispensaries lead to reduced crime,” a 2017 Federal Reserve Bank paper concluded.“The declines in substance use are striking,” California health officials wrote about teen cannabis use in 2018.“The introduction of a new dispensary within a half‐mile radius of a new home increases home prices by approximately 7.7 percent on average,” a 2018 study in Contemporary Economic Policy found.Losing the peace after prohibition ends.Allowing local access to cannabis is the key to successfully implementing legalization. So far, we’re failing at it.Though almost 60 percent of California voters approved Proposition 64 in 2016, just 25 percent of cities and counties currently allow cannabis stores. Many people must drive hundreds of miles to find a licensed outlet. Under the guise of “keeping cannabis out,” local officials who ban retail stores actually bolster the local illicit market, which offers untaxed, untested cannabis in virtually every neighborhood. And those sellers don’t ask for proof that their customers are 21 or older.This dynamic holds up across legalization states, where Leafly found about half of cities and counties ban stores. The dynamic is spreading to the East Coast and Midwest, currently in medical systems like Pennsylvania and in new adult-use states like Massachusetts and Michigan. These bans are often driven by local concerns over crime, teen use and property values. But the discussion rarely considers the actual data, based on five years of recreational sales in Colorado and Washington, and 15 years of medical cannabis sales in California.Debunking Dispensary Myths identified, analyzed, and ranked all the major studies addressing this important topic.Of the 16 studies on cannabis retail’s effect on crime, 12 studies, including ones in the journal Preventative Medicine, and the Journal of Economic Behavior & Organizationindicate licensed cannabis retail is associated with reductions in crime.Of the 20 studies addressing teen use, 14 found teen use had gone down in legalization states, including studies published in JAMA Pediatrics, and by the health departments of the states of Colorado, Washington, Oregon and California.Of the six studies looking at property values, four of them including ones in the journals Urban Geography, and Economic Inquiry found property values rose near licensed adult stores, as well as in cities that chose to regulate pot retail, instead of ban it.The vast bulk of the data suggests that a local policy of well-regulated cannabis retail licensing can have a positive impact on a community.  That data is matched by accounts from law enforcement, civic leadership and local regulators.Related: 6 Cannabis Brand Names We Wish We’d Have Thought OfIn towns where retail cannabis stores are allowed, you’ll find ample evidence of local shops embraced by their neighbors. In San Francisco, Green Cross dispensary operator Kevin Reed considers community accountability the essence of his job. The store employs a licensed security staff that enforces age gates, no-smoking rules, parking regulations and is trained in first aid. The Green Cross invested in better street lighting, and makes its camera system available to the Ingleside Police Station. It its six years of operation, the store has never been robbed or targeted for any other crime.The store also adopted the 4200 block of Mission Street. Staff members clean the street, plant new flowers every spring and enhance pedestrian safety with parking cones and caution signs.“Many neighbors were skeptical about us opening in the beginning,” Reed told our research team. “But through a great deal of hard work and initiative, they now see that’s we’ve made good on our promises and have improved the neighborhood as a whole.”That’s just one anecdote, but a growing body of published research indicates that Kevin Reed isn’t an outlier. The data shows that licensed and well-regulated cannabis stores provide good jobs, improve neighborhoods and allow adults to purchase legally, doing their part to put the illicit market out of business.The full report, Debunking Dispensary Myths, is available at Leafly as of Tuesday at 9 a.m. ET. Green Entrepreneur Podcast 5 min read Analysis: Cannabis Shops Linked to Lower Crime, Increased Property Valueslast_img read more

Modi to contest from Varanasi Shah replaces Advani in Gandhinagar

first_imgDravidian majors gear up for make or break bypolls SHARE SHARE EMAIL PM Narendra Modi with Senior BJP leader LK Advani. File photo   –  File photo national elections Prime Minister Narendra Modi will once again contest from Varanasi in Uttar Pradesh along with BJP President Amit Shah, who will contest his first Lok Sabha election by replacing LK Advani as a candidate from Gandhinagar. Advani is the sitting MP from Gandhinagar and the declaration of Shah as the BJP candidate from this seat means that the ruling party is not keen on fielding the Old Guard although Murli Manohar Joshi has been clear that he wants to contest again from Kanpur. He is reportedly being asked to shift to Bhadoi in eastern UP.Besides edging out the veterans, the other takeaway from BJP’s announcement of its first list of candidates for the Lok Sabha polls on Thursday night was that the party is fielding all the top Union Ministers from where they contested the polls in 2014 – Rajnath Singh from Lucknow, Nitin Gadkari from Nagpur and Smriti Irani from Amethi. Minister of State for External Affairs VK Singh has been fielded again from Ghaziabad and Culture Minister Mahesh Sharma from Gautam Budh Nagar.The first list contained the names of 182 candidates across Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal, Sikkim and Rajasthan. All the 17 names for Bihar have also been cleared, said Union Minister J P Nadda, but they will be declared jointly by the NDA, which includes JD(U) that is contesting 17 seats, and the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP), which is contesting six of Bihar’s 40 seats.Not much timeIt has been an anxious time for candidates in the first phase of elections on April 11 for which the last date of filing nominations is March 25. That leaves very little time, and even till Thursday night when JP Nadda released the list at the BJP headquarters, not all candidates for the first phase of elections had been announced. For instance, there are eight seats in Uttar Pradesh for the first phase – Muzaffarnagar, Saharanpur, Kairana, Bijnor, Meerut, Baghpat, Ghaziabad and Gautam Budh Nagar.The BJP’s Central Election Committee (CEC) has met for three consecutive days – March 18, 19 and 20 – but still, some seats were still undecided and party sources said that there would be changes in the names that had already been announced.In Kairana, for instance, former MP and Gujjar strongman Hukum Singh’s daughter Mriganka Singh had been fielded in the bypoll held last year after Hukum Singh passed away. Mriganka, however, lost to Tabassum Hasan who is now the Mahagathbandhan candidate from this seat. The party had not declared any candidate from this seat till late Thursday night. SHARE BJP COMMENTcenter_img BJP declares 182 candidates in first list; set to edge out Old Guard Published on March 21, 2019 RELATED political candidates COMMENTSlast_img read more

5049 deaths in jail in last 3 years

first_imgThe National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has registered 427 cases relating to alleged deaths of accused in police custody and 5,049 cases pertaining to deaths in judicial custody in the last three years. Junior minister for home G Kishan Reddy, in reply to a question in Lok Sabha on Tuesday, said cases of deaths in police custody registered by NHRC in 2018-19 were 136 and of those in judicial custody, 1,797. The corresponding number of cases involving alleged deaths in police custody and judicial custody in 2017-18 were 146 and 1,636 respectively and in 2016-17, 145 and 1,616 respectively. The minister said NHRC had recommen- ded disciplinary action against 20 erring public servants during the last three years in such cases. However, no record of the cases of conviction is maintained by the commission. NHRC also carried out visits to various prisons from time to time for monitoring the conditions of undertrials and prisoners. Download The Times of India News App for Latest India News.XStart your day smart with stories curated specially for youlast_img read more

India abstains from voting for LGBTQ rights at UN Human Rights Council

first_img Geeta Mohan New DelhiJuly 12, 2019UPDATED: July 12, 2019 21:44 IST Members and supporters of the LGBT groups at Delhi’s Queer Pride march. (PTI Photo)India maintained its past position on LGBTQ rights by abstaining from voting at the UN Human Rights Council on a resolution moved by Latin American states seeking to renew the mandate of independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI).This, despite a massive campaign in India ahead of the voting, asking Indian authorities to vote in favour of the resolution after the Supreme Court struck down Section 377, decriminalising homosexuality.In the run up to the voting, political leaders of various parties took to Twitter to express their support to a change.org petition that “urgently called for India to move away from its past trend of abstaining from voting on resolutions related to LGBTQ rights at the United National Human Rights Council and to vote in favour of a crucial resolution on LGBTQ rights”.This petition was initiated by Pune resident Varun Sardesai, urging India to change its stance on LGBTQ rights at the UNHRC, since the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment last year.Members of Parliament Shashi Tharoor and Supriya Sule, former MP Priya Dutt and Mahila Congress National General Secretary Apsara Reddy also tweeted in support of the resolution.Apsara Reddy said, “About 8 per cent of India’s population – 104 million individuals belong to the LGBT community in India. I have signed this petition urging Modiji to vote in favour of SOGI resolution at UN. Please sign this petition that pushes for dignity for all.”Shashi Tharoor also supported the petition saying, “I urge our government to vote in favour of renewal.”Congress leader Priya Dutt also supported the petition saying, “It is time India votes progressively.”NCP MP Supriya Sule said, “At this crucial juncture of the vote at the UNHRC, I request Honourable Prime Minister of India to vote progressively in support of the LGBT community as the SOGI resolution comes for vote. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has decriminalised Section 377 and it is now time for India to uphold the LGBT rights.”While India had reasons to abstain in the past, the legal situation has changed after the unanimous decision of Supreme Court in the Navtej Singh Johar versus Union of India case in 2018.Former CJI Dipak Mishra and Justice J Khanwilkar had noted then, “Section 377 IPC also assumes the characteristic of unreasonableness for it becomes a weapon in the hands of the majority to seclude, exploit and harass the LGBT community. It shrouds the lives of the LGBT community in criminality and constant fear mars their joy of life. They constantly face social prejudice, disdain and are subjected to the shame of being their very natural selves. Thus, an archaic law, which is incompatible with constitutional values, cannot be allowed to be preserved.”Therefore, while Section 377 does not particularly deal with homosexuality and same sex relationships are still not recognised by the Indian state, the order of the court striking down the law very specifically mentions protection against discrimination.The judgment hails human rights for all under the Constitution. The judgment has not been opposed by the Union government.Also Read | Not my fault I was born gay: 19-year-old commits suicide over homophobiaAlso Watch | History owes an apology to LGBT people, says SCFor the latest World Cup news, live scores and fixtures for World Cup 2019, log on to indiatoday.in/sports. Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for World Cup news, scores and updates.Get real-time alerts and all the news on your phone with the all-new India Today app. Download from Post your comment Do You Like This Story? Awesome! Now share the story Too bad. Tell us what you didn’t like in the comments Posted bySanchari Chatterjee Next India abstains from voting for LGBTQ rights at UN Human Rights CouncilDespite India decriminalising homosexuality, it abstained from voting in favour of LGBTQ rights at the United Nations Human Rights Council.advertisementlast_img read more