Assault on India's Democracy by UPA

03-07-2006, 11:16 AM

BJP may move EC for Sonia's disqualificationQUOTEFirst it was Jaya Bachchan and then Amar Singh. Now it is Congress President's Sonia Gandhi's turn.

The BJP on Tuesday has decided to consider moving the Election Commission for Sonia's disqualification from the Lok Sabha for "holding an office of profit" as Chairperson of the National Advisory Committee
 <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

03-18-2006, 08:16 AM

QUOTEOffice of Profit: Jaya's case opens Pandora Box; will Sonia follow?
Saturday March 18 2006 00:00 IST
NEW DELHI: President APJ Abdul Kalam on Friday disqualified high profile Actress turned politician and Samajvadi Party MP Jaya Bachchan as a Member of Rajya Sabha on ground that she held an office of profit as Chairperson of the Uttar Pradesh Film Development Council.

The disqualification followed the recommendation of the Election Commission takes retrospective effect from July 14, 2004 when she was appointed to the film development council post. She was elected to Rajya Sabha a month earlier.

"Having carefully considered the facts on record as contained in the opinion of the Election Commission and being fully satisfied therewith, the President has disqualified Jaya Bachchan from her Rajya Sabha membership," an official release said giving the President's decision on a petition for disqualification filed by a Congress leader Madan Mohan Shukla.

The disqualification of Jaya Bachchan has opened the Pandora Box with many political parties, particularly opposition parties for seeking same action against many Members of Parliament including Congress President Sonia Gandhi. 

After Jaya Bachchan's disqualification, aiming the guns, BJP alleged that Congress chief Sonia Gandhi also attracted disqualification as Lok Sabha member by virtue of her being Chairperson of the National Advisory Council (NAC) on implementation of Common Minimum Programme.

"Prima facie, Sonia Gandhi's position as Chairperson of the National Advisory Council too attracts provisions of disqualification under the Constitution," BJP spokesman Prakash Javadekar said.

While one petition has been filed with the President against Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh, the TDP has petitioned against Congress President Sonia Gandhi on the ground that she held an office of profit by virtue of being Chairperson of National Advisory Council, Rajiv Gandhi Foundation aided by Government, Indira Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Trusts. 

The TDP has also sought disqualification of Union Minister of State for Mines T Subbarami Reddy, who is Chairperson of Tirupati Tirumala Devasthanam and Karan Singh, who is heading the Indian Council of Cultural Relations.

Utilizing the opportunity, Trinamool Congress President Mamata Banerjee also demanded similar action against a number of CPI (M) MPs alleging that they too enjoyed offices of profit. Mamata said ''If this law is applicable to Jaya Bachchan, why should it not be enforced against others, including CPI (M) MPs enjoying office of profit? Law should be one for everybody."

She alleged that CPM MP Hannan Mollah is the chief of the state Waqf Board while another party MP Lakshman Sett is the chairman of the Haldia Development Authority. This apart, Amitava Nandi, another CPM MP, holds the post of vice-chairman of the state Fisheries Development Corporation." She also said that CPM MP Swadesh Chakraborty, holding the post of the HRBC Chairman.

However, Congress President Sonia Gandhi is unlikely to be come under the scanner of office of profit with the present statutory exceptions to office of profit. The National Advisory Council, which was created by the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) Government, did not figure in the list of statutory exceptions.

But, the exceptions were given to Chairpersons of the National Commission for Minorities, National Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, National Commission for Women under the Salary, Allowances and Pension of Members of Parliament Act, 1954

The Act specifically excludes offices held by

(a) a Minister, Minister of State or Deputy Minister for the Union or for any State, whether ex-officio or by name

(b) Leader of the Opposition in Parliament

Â© Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission

(d) Chief Whip/Deputy Chief Whip or Whip in Parliament or a Parliamentary Secretary

(e) Chairpersons of the National Commission for Minorities, National Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, National Commission for Women

(f) Member of National Cadet Corps, Territorial Army or Reserve and Auxiliary Air Force or Home Guard

(g) Sheriff of Bombay, Calcutta or Madras

(h) Chairman or Member of the Syndicate, Senate, Executive Committee, Council or Court of a University or any other body connected with a University

(i) Member of any delegation or mission sent outside India by the Government for any special purpose

(j) Chairman or Member of a Committee temporarily set up for advising the Government on a matter of public importance and

(k) Village revenue officers collecting land revenue and getting share or commission in the collection

However, the debate on office of profit among politicians and legal luminaries is likely to continue to occupy priority.

http://www.newindpress.com/Newsitems.asp?I...ries&Topic=402&

Â
Jaya Bachchan seeks Supreme Court clarification on "office of profit"
By Gyanendra Kumar Keshri, New Delhi: Following President A P J Abdul Kalam approval to the disqualification of her membership from Rajya Sabha, actress Jaya Bachchan has decided to seek the Supreme Court's clarification on the "office of profit".

"There is no definition of office of profit. There are over 70 Members of Parliament from different political parties who are holding similar position as Jaya Bachchan," said Pradeep Rai, Jaya Bachchan's Lawyer.

He said as Chairperson of the council, Bachchan never drew any salary and hence it should not be deemed as the office of profit.
"This is an advisory council which gives suggestions to UP government on the possibility of the development of filmmaking in the state. We will file a petition in the Supreme Court seeking clarification which position should be considered as office of profit and which should not be," said Rai.

The Uttar Pradesh government had created the council in 1999 to promote filmmaking in the state.

Bachchan was elected to Rajya Sabha in January, 2004. Following that she was also made the chairperson of Film Development Council in July the same year.

Bachchan holds the position as chairperson of the council with perks and status of a Cabinet minister, however, she draws no salary.

The Election Commission had recommended Jaya Bachchan's disqualification from the Rajya Sabha on March 6 on the petition filed by a Congress leader from Uttar Pradesh Madan Mohan on the ground that she was holding an office of profit as Chairperson of the Film Development Council.

The matter had gone before the President for his approval before he embarked on a foreign tour last week. The President had given its nod on the issue on Thursday evening.

The decision will now be published in the official gazette before it takes effect.

Article 102 of the Constitution prescribes many disqualifications 'for being chosen as and for being a Member of either House of Parliament'. One of the disqualifications is holding of an "office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of the State".

Parliament, however, can make a law declaring any or as many as they like, offices as not to disqualify its holders.

According to Prevention of Disqualification Act, 1959, a large number of offices like ministers, leaders of Opposition and chairpersons of several commissions or committees are not deemed as the office of profit.

Mulayam Singh government had pushed through a bill seeking to take away 79 posts in various government bodies from the list of office of profit to pre-empt Jaya Bachchan's disqualification.

However, Governor T V Rajeswar has withheld his consent to the bill.
http://www.newkerala.com/news2.php?actio...s&id=27116

Office of profit issue should be decided by legislature: CPI-M
New Delhi, March 17. (PTI): The CPI(M) today said the issue of whether a Member of Parliament was holding an office of profit should be decided by the legislature and the Election Commission should decide on such matters only at the time of elections.

Reacting to questions on disqualification of SP's Rajya Sabha MP Jaya Bachchan, party leaders Mohd Salim and Basudeb Acharia told reporters here that the parliamentary committee on offices of profit comprising members of both Houses had already notified posts which did not fall into this category.

But there remained a grey area as there was no exhaustive list of such posts. The issue, therefore, should be decided on the basis of "whether the spirit of the law is being violated or not", Salim said adding that what would happen to a MP who held such a post but did not take any salary or perks.

To specific queries on the Bachchan case, he said the matter was between the President and the Election Commission "though it should have been decided by the poll panel at the time of her election".

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/001...171640.htm

03-22-2006, 10:20 AM

How to save Queen Sonia?
QUOTETo stop office-of-profit axe, UPA gets ordinance
R VENKATARAMANPosted online: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 at 0000 hrsÂ
NEW DELHI, MARCH 21
Violating Parliamentary norms and to ensure that Congress president Sonia Gandhi, along with several prominent MPs, including Karan Singh and Somnath Chatterjee, escape the Jaya Bachchan-type disqualification because they hold an âoffice of profit,â the Congress-led UPA government is bringing in an ordinance to change the law. The draft of the ordinance, finalised today, amends the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 and exempts a fresh batch of offices, including that of the National Advisory Council chairman (Sonia Gandhi), chairman of the Indian Council for Cultural Relations (Karan Singh), state development boards, textile boards etc.

The draft ordinance amends Section 3 of the PPDA and will be subsequently introduced as a Bill in the current session as Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Amendment Bill.

What is bound to raise political controversy is the timing. Article 123 of the Constitution empowers the President to promulgate any ordinance any time âexcept when both Houses of Parliament are in session.â The Governmentâs fig leaf is that Parliament is in recessâbreak from March 23 to May 9âalthough this is the recess in one session, not between two sessions.

Sources said there is a hurry to push the ordinance through given the fact that after Bachchanâs disqualification for her job as chairperson of the UP film council, complaints against 44 prominent MPs are with the President.

These include Sonia Gandhi (chairman of National Advisory Council and several Govt-aided trusts), Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee (chairman, West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation), Karan Singh (chairman, Indian Council of Cultural Relations), Union Minister T Subbirami Reddy (chairman, Tirupati trust). The complaint against Amar Singh

03-22-2006, 08:46 PM

Office of profit: Govt to consider ordinance tomorrowQUOTEIn an unprecedented development, Parliament was abruptly adjourned sine die perhaps after the shortest Budget session.

This happened in the backdrop of controversy over government's reported move to bring an ordinance on the office of profit issue.
...........

Can govt. can bring ordinance now, when Parliament is not in session?

Current Govt behavior is similar to "Emergency days".

03-23-2006, 12:32 AM

QUOTENDA Convenor George Fernandes dubbed the move as an act of desperation. "Since an ordinance cannot be introduced unless Parliament is prorogued, the Government has decided to adjourn it sine die," he said.

03-23-2006, 12:37 AM

QUOTEGovt on mat over 'Save Sonia' ordinance
Pioneer.com
Yogesh Vajpeyi / New Delhi
* Parliament adjourned sine die * NDA smells plot, meets President----- The UPA Government on Wednesday abruptly adjourned both Houses of Parliament, sparking furious protests from the Opposition, which alleged that this was done to rush through an ordinance to avoid the disqualification of several MPs including Congress chief Sonia Gandhi for holding 'offices of profit'.

Infuriated by the "brazen assault on the established principle and practice of the parliamentary system", Members of Parliament from BJP-led Opposition immediately marched from Parliament House to Rashtrapati Bhawan, seeking President APJ Abdul Kalam's intervention in the issue.

"This has been done solely and exclusively for the purpose of promulgating an ordinance to save Ms Sonia Gandhi, president of the Congress party and chairperson of the National Advisory Council, from certain disqualification on grounds of holding an 'office of profit'," a memorandum submitted by them said.

"We have come to urge you, as the Custodian of the Constitution, not to sign the ordinance and thus give presidential sanction to this sacrilege," the NDA delegation, which was led by former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee told the President.

The NDA leaders pointed out that the Congress had gloated when Samajwadi Party's Jaya Bachchan was disqualified from the membership of Rajya Sabha for holding an office of profit but now that Sonia Gandhi's membership was under threat on the same ground, the Congress party was gripped with panic.

"You will certainly agree with us that there cannot be double-standards in application of the law - one standard for Ms Jaya Bachchan and another for Ms Sonia Gandhi," they told the President.

NDA Convenor George Fernandes dubbed the move as an act of desperation. "Since an ordinance cannot be introduced unless Parliament is prorogued, the Government has decided to adjourn it sine die," he said.

Constitutional experts feel that the way both the Houses were abruptly adjourned had put a question mark on the Government's bonafides. Under the circumstances, the President can refuse to sign it, or return it to the Government and ask it to bring a Bill in Parliament in the next session.

Earlier, a media report rocked both the Houses about the Government's plan to prorogue Parliament and bring an ordinance to save Ms Gandhi and other MPs in the UPA camp, including Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee from disqualification.

Mr Chatterjee chose to stay away from the proceedings in view of complaints that he was among those holding the office of profit.

Both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha saw repeated adjournments as the Opposition BJP and the Samajwadi Party, an outside supporter of the Congress-led coalition, targeted Congress president Sonia Gandhi alleging that the ordinance move was aimed at "saving" her membership.

The sine die adjournment brought immediate resentment in the Opposition camp with Leader of Opposition LK Advani describing the development as "singularly unfortunate event in the history of Indian Parliament".

Amid cries of "shame, shame", Deputy Speaker Charanjit Atwal adjourned the Lok Sabha sine die saying Government has requested the Speaker that since there was no business for the rest of the session, it should be adjourned sine die.

Significantly, there was no attempt on the part of the Government to clarify the situation. Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Priyaranjan Dasmunsi, however, gave a hint to media persons outside the House about the Government's intention, when he said: "It is for the government to see if there are any shortcomings in the existing laws on office of profit."

Amid Parliamentary uproar, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met with senior ministers HR Bhardwaj (Law), Shivraj Patil (Home) and PR Dasmunsi (Parliamentary Affairs) and is understood to have discussed the issue of an Ordinance.

The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs is meeting on Thursday ahead of a meeting of the full Cabinet amidst speculation that the Ordinance may come up soon.

Originally, the Budget Session of Parliament was scheduled in two parts with the first part slated to end today and the second part set for opening on May 9 in view of the coming Assembly elections.

When the House adjourns in between fixed sittings, it is adjourned with the specific date fixed for resumption. But this time with the BJP and other parties including SP making common cause against the Government, both the Houses were adjourned sine die.

03-23-2006, 12:40 AM

FALL OF UPA GOVERNMENT IS IMMINENT.

Only Congress supported major terrorist attack or Riots can save them.

Election in Communist state are within few months and they can pull rug.

03-23-2006, 12:47 AM

QUOTEIn nailing Jaya, Cong got caught 
Pioneer.com
Navin Upadhyay / New DelhiÂ
Office-of-profit issue rocks House---- The wheel of a well-planned political conspiracy turned full circle on Wednesday. First, the Congress used a party worker to file a complaint with the Election Commission seeking disqualification of eminent actor and Samajwadi Party MP Jaya Bachchan for holding an office of profit. Then it plotted to amend the very same Act to save the skin of its own supreme leader Sonia Gandhi.

After Ms Bachchan was disqualified, Congress leaders lost no time in ridiculing demands for similar action against Ms Gandhi for heading the National Advisory Council (NAC) as its chairperson.

But on Wednesday reality dawned. Congress bigwigs sensed that the threat was more real than it looked at first and their supreme leader could indeed face the axe on a petition filed by the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) before President APJ Abdul Kalam for disqualification of Ms Gandhi and others.

Similarly, the way the Left parties connived with the Congress in facilitating the adjournment of Parliament sine die, was indication of their own worries, because at one point of time Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee had held the office of chairman of West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation.

Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee had raised the issue of the Speaker and other CPI (M) MPs and MLAs holding offices of profit and written to President Kalam seeking their disqualification.

The script of the sordid drama that took place in Parliament on Wednesday was written well in advance when the Government fist decided to pass the Budget before Parliament went into recess. While the Opposition thought that the Government wanted to curtail the full Budget session in view of the Assembly elections in five states, Congress legal eagles were drafting an ordinance that would exempt NAC and other offices headed by Congress and Left leaders from the ambit of "office-of-profit."

The Congress and Left camp had reasons to be worried on several counts. 

First, the NAC and other posts held by both sides was not covered under the Prevention of Disqualification Act, 1995. Secondly, the President was sooner or later bound to refer the matter to the Election Commission as he had done in the case of SP leader Amar Singh. Thirdly, Mr Kalam had set a precedent by disqualifying Jaya Bachchan by ignoring her plea that as chairperson of the Uttar Pradesh Film Development Board, she had not earned any pecuniary benefit.

In fact, the example set by the President in the case of Jaya Bachchan clearly implied that irrespective of the fact that a MP accepts monetary benefit or not, he could still be disqualified for holding an "office-of-profit". This had alarmed the Congress and Left leaders.

03-23-2006, 12:57 AM

QUOTEExperts flay 'artificial recess for enacting Ordinance'
Pioneer.com
Abraham Thomas/New Delhi
The Government's hurry in enacting an amendment in the law holding certain offices of profit, as not amounting disqualification is well found.

But adjourning the Parliament sine die to enact an Ordinance to this effect has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts, who believe, any such attempt to amend law retrospectively would now have to undergo the test of "reasonableness" and "fairness" by judiciary.
...............
While terming Wednesday's unprecedented move to adjourn Parliament sine die as "unfortunate", eminent constitutional expert and senior advocate Rajeev Dhawan said, "You do not put Parliament into artificial recess for enacting an Ordinance." By doing so, he suggested, "the Government has placed its post or person higher than the working of Parliamentary democracy." Paralysing Parliament itself for tackling the question of qualification amounts to undermining Parliamentary democracy itself, he opined.

Among the various grounds for disqualification of a Member of either House of Parliament as contained in Article 102 of the Constitution, one of the ground is holding of an "office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of the State". Parliament, however, can make a law declaring any or as many as they like, offices as not to disqualify its holders.

The Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 was enacted to address this issue, as a large number of offices like posts of ministers, Leader of the Opposition and Chairpersons of several commissions or committees were declared as not offensive to the Constitutional prohibition.

Eminent lawyer and constitutional expert Mr Soli J Sorabjee said, "Parliament in its wisdom has the right to amend a law retrospectively. But such decision is subject to judicial review where the court has the power to examine the reasonableness and fairness of the legislative action."

Since the expression "office of profit" is not defined under law, courts from time to time have been pronouncing upon specific cases that came before them. In 1967, a similar case had come up for judicial scrutiny where one Ms Kathuria a Special Government Pleader under the State of Rajasthan was declared elected to the State Assembly.

Her election was challenged on the ground that she held an office of profit. But even before the petition could be heard, the Rajasthan State Legislature passed an Act titled Rajasthan Legislative Assembly Members (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1968, which retrospectively removed Ms Kathuria's disqualification.

A five-member Bench of the Supreme Court held that the Constitution itself recognised the power with the Legislature to remove the disqualification and legislature had the power to pass retrospective law.

03-23-2006, 02:17 AM

QUOTEConstitutional experts made it clear that the action to adjourn Parliament sine die with no prior notice was totally unprecedented, and this âfiddling with Parliamentâ, as Mr Rajeev Dhawan put it, was last heard of in the days preceding the imposition of Emergency in 1975 â when then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi stood in danger of losing her parliamentary seat following an order of the Allahabad high court. Mr Dhawan said that it was a âtotal fraudâ on the nation as the government had bypassed the complainant, bypassed the Election Commission, the President and now Parliament itself.

03-23-2006, 03:35 AM

QUOTE Mian, biwi raji, gayab hai qazi 
It was a rare site in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday. On one of the most dramatic days in the Lok Sabha Leader of the House Pranab Mukherjee and Leader of the Opposition sat throughout its tumultuous proceedings while Speaker Somnath Chatterjee decided to stay away from the House. âSince my name has appeared in a newspaper with regard to which some honourable members have been agitating, I said in my Constitutional duty that I am not sitting on the Chair by way of propriety,â Mr Chatterjee told mediapersons. One of the MPs involved in MPLADS schemes, who had been asked by Mr Chatterjee not to attend the House till he had been cleared of the charges levelled against him, however, dubbed it âpoetic justiceâ. âIf he was so conscious of his Constitutional responsibility, he should have stopped attending the House since the day Trinamool Congress leader sent a petition to the President questioning the legality of his remaining an MP because he held an office of profit,â he said. In her missive to the President sent last week, Ms Bannerjee had demanded that Mr Chatterjee should be disqualified from the membership of the House because of his chairmanship of a body in Shantiniketan.Â <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

03-23-2006, 03:38 AM

QUOTEÂ Amar Singh in thick of things 
Â Â pioneer.com
The Upper House hardly sees Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh as active as was on Wednesday. The reason was a report published in a newspaper in Delhi regarding possibility of an ordinance over post of profit. Mr Singh from the very early in the morning was in a Rajputi mood, without swords of course, as he led his army of Samajwadi members to well of the House six times in a row. Mr Singh generally keeps quite in the House. But armed with a weapon that the Congress itself had used against him and Jaya Bachchan, on Wednesday he was moving from one seat to another contacting members from all parties except the Congress. He did not seem to mind joining hands with even the BJP. Mr Singhâs hyperactivity seemed to create panic in the Congress benches, which were amazed to see a proclaimed ally hobnobbing with the Opposition. Seeing his jehadi mood, his bete noire Rajeev Shukla left the treasury benches and rushed to meet him on his seat. He held his hand and tried to persuade him to keep the cool. But Mr Singh, like a real Kshatriya, was unmoved and kept leading his army to well, waiving the newspaper and even shouting slogans. A journalist sitting in the press gallery commented very prudishly : âThis is the time for Mr. Singh to show his guts. For the first time he looked like a real agitating Samajwadi.â

03-23-2006, 03:45 AM

Govt to promulgate ordinance on office of profit on FridayQUOTEGovernment would promulgate an ordinance on Friday to identify some posts as office of non profit, a move the opposition alleged is a ploy to "bail out" Congress chief Sonia Gandhi from a "certain disqualification" as MP, sources said late on Wednesday night.

This was understood to have been decided at a meeting at the official residence of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh which ended at the stroke of midnight.

The sources said 62 petitions relating to disqualification of MPs on the ground that they hold offices of profit were pending
..................

I don't know what HT is thinking.

03-23-2006, 09:03 AM

Govtâs ham-handedness gives Oppn a stickQUOTESources said that neither Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee nor Rajya Sabha Chairman Bhairon Singh Shekhawat had been âin the loopâ about the governmentâs game-plan
............................

The Governmentâs overnight decisionâwithout consulting the Opposition or its own allies or even the presiding officers of Parliamentâonly underlined the ham-handed handling of the whole issue, triggered by needless haste and unnecessary panic, government sources privately admit.
...............

What makes the handling of the issue particularly clumsy is that the Government could easily have chosen much less contentious ways to achieve the same end.
.................

Apart from the constituents of the NDA, Samajwadi Party and Telugu Desam who have taken the lead in attacking the Congress, even UPA alliesâJD(S), CPI and CPI(M) among othersâpublicly disapproved of the Governmentâs âordinance routeâ today.

03-23-2006, 09:24 AM

Democracy adjourned QUOTEosted online: Thursday, March 23, 2006 at 0000 hrsÂ
To adjourn Parliament in order to protect an ordinance reflects political morality at its lowest. It does more than that. It demonstrates astonishingly poor political judgment and a disturbing lack of sensitivity to democratic norms. This adjournment could go down as one of the lowest points in the UPA governmentâs tenure, and one that it could come to regret deeply. Whether the government likes it or not, it will be interpreted as a move to protect just one person in that long list of MPs who potentially face disqualification under the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, and that person is Congress President Sonia Gandhi, and chairperson of the National Advisory Council. Egregious, too, is the move â front-paged exclusively in the Express â to promulgate an ordinance in the opportunistic manner that the Manmohan Singh government has sought to do. A mature democracy disdains the ordinance route, although the UPA government has taken recourse to it, time and again, in the nearly two years of its existence. Bypassing Parliament by exploiting the short recess between the two halves of the Budget session reveals an over-zealous executive mind that has little patience with the often burdensome nitty-gritty of democratic due process. The pity about this entire crisis is that it is all so unnecessary. The issue that triggered it is a bad law that has long passed its âsell byâ date. What had constituted an office of profit, or what made for the âconflict of interestâ in the late fifties, when the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act was first passed, has become almost farcical today. At that point, it was the government that was the largest, and possibly sole, source of patronage. It is ridiculous that today, when MPs with innumerable business interests and sitting in crucial select committees, do not attract the penalities inherent in this law, those who head government committees â some innocuous in the extreme like the one Jaya Bachchan does â should do so. The illogical and antiquitarian nature of such a law should have attracted the legal accumen, across party lines, that Parliament seems to be so richly endowed with. Instead, it has been used as an instrument of political sparring. The Congressâs delight in Samajwadi Party MP Jaya Bachchanâs discomfiture, soon returned to haunt it. A salutary lesson of how bitter political skirmishes can go so horribly wrong. Today, Indian democracy has had to pay the price for this misguided wrangling.

03-23-2006, 08:59 PM

Sonia Gandhi resigns as Lok Sabha MP, NAC chief
QUOTEThe resignation came on day the BJP petitioned President APJ Abdul Kalam seeking her disqualification from Lok Sabha on the ground she held an office of profit as Chairperson of NAC. The TDP had already petitioned the President last week in this regard.
Thief got caught red handed and HT already started singing her sacrifice drama.

03-23-2006, 09:02 PM

Sonia's action victory of democracy: TDPQUOTE
Telugu Desam Party on Thursday said Congress President Sonia Gandhi's decision to resign from her Lok Sabha seat "amounted to admission she is holding office of profit."

"She might have felt compelled under the circumstances after our complaints to the President. Instead of waiting for Election Commission's decision, she might have felt that it is better to step down. Since she has respected rule of law, we welcome it," TDP Parliamentary leader K Yerran Naidu told reporters
................. <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

03-23-2006, 09:25 PM

QUOTEAdvani takes credit for Sonia's resignation 
Pioneer.com
Agencies / Varanasi
BJP leader LK Advani on Thursday sought to take credit for the resignation of Congress President Sonia Gandhi from the Lok Sabha as also Chairpersonship of the NAC.

"The course of action adopted by the Government was so outrageous that our immediate response was also very firm and this firm response has led to this sequence of events", the Leader of Opposition reacted to Gandhi's sudden announcement.

Advani said the Opposition NDA would oppose the Centre's decision to bring an ordinance for deletion of some posts from the list of office of profit in the apparent bid to "protect" Gandhi as there cannot be two standards on the issue, one for Jaya Bachchan and the other for the Congress President.

Similarly, there cannot be double standards on the issue, one for Uttar Pradesh and the other for the Centre, he said.

Advani, who was in Varanasi to visit the Sankat Mochan Temple, which was rocked by the terror attack on March 7, castigated the Centre for adjourning Parliament sine die on Wednesday in order to bring an ordinance on the issue of delisting some posts from the office of profit.

He said such a move could not have been possible if Parliament would have been in session till May.

He alleged that the decision to shorten the length of the Budget session by the Government was "unprecedented and aimed at weakening the Parliamentary and democratic institutions of our country".

03-23-2006, 09:26 PM

BJP demands Speaker's resignation

03-23-2006, 09:40 PM

'Hunter becomes hunted'QUOTENation
âThe person who has fired the arrow has become its pray. All parties have united on the issue of the offices of profit. Democracy is being torn,â Yadav said while speaking at a meeting organised on the occasion of socialist ideologue Ram Manohar Lohia after inaugurating the Jai Prakash Narain International Centre.

It is not proper for a party having only 145 MPs to behave in an autocratic manner,â the Chief Minister said in an obvious reference to Congress

Login




Remember me Lost Password?