<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>A day late, EC receives petition against Sonia </b>
Pioneer News Service/New Delhi
The petition seeking the disqualification of Congress president Sonia Gandhi has reached the Election Commission along with 15 other petitions seeking disqualification of Members of Parliament for holding "office of profit".
Announcing this at a Press conference here on Friday, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) BB Tandon said, "The petition filed by Telugu Desam Party (TDP) seeking disqualification of Ms Sonia Gandhi has been received by us." President APJ Abdul Kalam forwarded the petition to the Election Commission (EC) for seeking its response. Another petition filed against Ms Gandhi by Sanjay Jaruliya was also received by EC.
<b>Besides Ms Gandhi, the EC also received petitions seeking disqualification of Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee, Congress Rajya Sabha members Mr Karan Singh, Mr T Subbirami Reddy and Ms Kapila Vatsyayanan, Lok Sabha member Mr Chandrapal Singh Yadav (Samajwadi Party), Anuradha Choudhary (Rashtriya Lok Dal).</b>
<b>Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee had filed the petition seeking disqualification of Mr Somnath Chatterjee before President Kalam. Mr Tandon confirmed the receipt of the petition, which had sought the disqualification of nine other Members of Parliament from the Left Front.</b>
<b>These included Lok Sabha members Mohammad Salim, Hannan Mollah, Lakshman Seth, Amitava Nandi, Tarit Baran Topdar, Bansa Gopal Chowdhury, Sujan Chakravarti and Sudhansu Sil, while one petition pertained to Rajya Sabha member Nilotpal Basu.</b>
Since the petitions lacked requisite information like the period from when they were holding the office of profit and whether they occupied prior to their elections or after that, the Commission has decided to send a notice to them seeking relevant information by April 17.
<b>Mr Tandon clarified, "if the period pertained to post-election, the Commission would come into the picture. If it was before their election, then the petitioners should approach courts."</b>
The CEC, when asked about the petition seeking <b>the removal of Election Commissioner Navin Chawla denied having received any such reference from the President House. "I have not received any communication from the President in this regard," </b>Mr Tandon said while replying to a question in this regard. Mr Chawla, who is under attack from BJP for his alleged links with Congress Party, was also present at the press conference refused to comment.
Over 200 MPs belonging to Opposition NDA had breathed fire on him by petitioning the President seeking his immediate removal as an Election Commissioner. Mr Chawla, who was appointed as Commissioner last year was accused of having received funding for his family trusts from MP Local Area Development scheme of Congress politicians.
<b>The Commission further indicated that it had received the disqualification plea regarding four Jharkhand MLAs, forwarded by Jharkhand Governor on Friday. These include Khiru Mahto, Karia Munda, Saryu Rai, and Chattruram Mahto</b>.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sonia Gandhi has regained moral high ground in India: analysts
By Tripti Lahiri
âSheâs signaling that she is not interested in power and in Indian politics that makes her influence and capability actually go upâ
Gandhiâs move distances her from her mother-in-law, former prime minister Indira Gandhi, who in 1975 declared a state of emergency to hold on to power after a court found her guilty of electoral fraud
A decision by Indiaâs ruling Congress party leader Sonia Gandhi to quit her parliamentary seat to avoid a conflict of interest has seen her regain the moral high ground but her party remains tarnished, analysts said on Friday.
Gandhi resigned from parliament on Thursday after the opposition charged she had wrongfully held another salaried public post.
âSheâs signaling that she is not interested in power and in Indian politics that makes her influence and capability actually go up,â said political analyst Mahesh Rangarajan. âShe is now sitting pretty.â
Gandhi cited her âinner conscienceâ when she stepped down in a move that echoed her decision not to become prime minister after leading the Congress party to an upset victory in the 2004 election.
âFollowing the principles of probity and my inner conscience I am resigning my post in the parliament,â Gandhi said Thursday, adding however she would run again for the seat in Indiaâs elected lower house.
The 59-year-old Gandhi said she would also quit as chairwoman of the National Advisory Council (NAC), set up to implement her governmentâs electoral pledges. Right-wing opponents had charged that Italian-born Gandhi was breaking regulations by holding both posts and that the Congress adjourned parliament so it could push through a cabinet ordinance to save her.
Rangarajan said the unexpected resignation had put the opposition in a bind.
âThey banked their strategy on her holding on,â said Rangarajan. âNow all that goes out of the window.â
Indiaâs main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) responded by pouring scorn on Gandhiâs gesture.
âShe has become a victim of her own conspiracy and by resigning she is trying to save face,â said BJP spokesman Arun Jaitley. âThis grandstanding will not pay any dividend.â But on Friday, cartoons in Indian newspapers depicted Gandhi wearing a halo and published letters from readers praising her.
âGandhi deserves to be congratulated for the sense of propriety she has displayed,â said AP Govindakutty in a letter to The Hindu newspaper. According to Rangarajan, Gandhiâs move distances her from her mother-in-law, former prime minister Indira Gandhi, who in 1975 declared a state of emergency to hold on to power after a court found her guilty of electoral fraud.
But, analysts noted, the star of the Congress party, which had appeared to be trying to circumvent parliamentary rules to protect Gandhi, isnât shining quite so brightly.
âLast time around when she did the right thing, the party came out a big winner,â said Balveer Arora, a professor of political science at Delhiâs Jawaharlal Nehru University. âThe government in power now was chosen by her.â
Political journalist Neerja Chowdhury lambasted the Congress party, while admitting that Gandhi had âmade the best of a bad bargain.â
âThe whole affair was badly handled by the Congress,â Chowdhury wrote in The Indian Express newspaper.
But with elected leaders from several parties in the same position as Gandhi, the larger political problem has not been solved, analysts said. AFP
Was on ZeeTV - a Yagna was held in Nagpur by Congress to ward of the evil clouds over 10 Janpath Marg. Flyers/postors of Advani and Amar Singh were 'sacrificed' in the yagna fire to appease the gods.
Things must be pretty bad for Congress that they are deparate enough to indulge in such "un-secular" and un-congressi rituals <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Office of profit issue: Anil Ambani resigns from RS Link
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->However, Ambani said, "It is my firm view that in public life one must uphold the highest standards of transparency, propriety and ethics and avoid any possibility of controversy, however remote or unlikely."
He added, " Keeping this in mind, I have decided to tender my resignation from Rajya Sabha with immediate effect."
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Some interesting comments by HT users
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Abraham Lincoln once said, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time." I wish Sonia Gandhi was a more educated lady and had read this warning from a great man.
<b>Yes, one person is definately going to emulate Sonia Gandhi. And that's Dawood Ibrahim as he is now getting trapped. So he will be surrendering and we will call it 'sacrifice' for the country.
Sonia's resignation as chairperson of NAC is just diversionary tactics. Apparently, she has been holding several more "offices of profit".
An Internet document (http://www.rumela.com/women/sonia_gandhi.htm ) gives the information that, from 1998 onwards, Sonia has been holding the following positions - Chairperson of (i) Rajiv Gandhi Foundation; (ii) Indira Gandhi Memorial Trust; (iii) Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund; (iv) Nehru Trust for Cambridge University; (v) Kamala Nehru Memorial Society and Hospital; (vi) Nehru Memorial Museum and Library; (vii) Indian Council for Child Welfare Trust; (viii) Swaraj Bhawan Trust; and Patron, Round Square (International Group of Schools), United Kingdom.
Obviously, these positions are much more remunerative than chairperson of NAC. Therefore, Sonia gave up the NAC position to make the people believe she has made a great sacrifice.
- Cogito_ergo..., New Delhi, India (March 25, 2006)
_________________________________
The resignation of Sonia Gandhi is no doubt a virtue derived out of compulsion. But who forced that compulsion out of a trivial and ambiguous issue? Who in this country would think/agree that it is wrong to head NAC while being an MP (what ever be the technicalities)?
It is strange that the opposition had chosen such a trivial issue to create a huge uproar. By resigning, it is now as if she exposed the triviality of the issues being raised by opposition and even meeting the President asking to intervene! As for Sonia, she has nothing to lose and everything to gain - the common man who does not know what NAC is will now know (good marketing for NAC).
It has to be seen though, whether the Congress will be smart enough to be able to make use of this for real political gain or not. As for the opposition, making an issue of NAC as "office of profit" and demanding Sonia's resignation on this issue is perhaps the most foolish act so far.
- Pradeep K, Bangalore, India (March 25, 2006)
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Boooooo Hoooooooooooooo... Innver voice comes out again!!! <!--emo&:lol:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='laugh.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:lol:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='laugh.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Sonia Gandhi quits as MP, denying she wants to make money from India</b>
The Independent (London, England); 3/24/2006
Byline: Dan McDougall in Delhi
<b>She may already be sanctified by the masses as the matriarchal head of the nation's most famous political dynasty but Sonia Gandhi, the leader of India's ruling Congress Party, has continued as the perennial martyr of Delhi politics. </b>Â <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Barely two years after she turned down the opportunity to follow her mother-in-law in becoming only the second woman to head the world's largest democracy, <b>claiming it would damage her family life</b>Â <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> , Ms Gandhi, 59, yesterday stood down as an MP over allegations that she had wrongfully held two salaried posts within the Indian government.
The Italian-born Ms Gandhi, who has two children, led India's Congress Party to power in the 2004 election and has since overseen a ruling coalition in parliament.
But she stunned her vast public following <b>by resigning after right-wing opponents from the Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)</b> claimed she was breaking parliamentary rules by working as an MP and the chairwoman of the National Advisory Council (NAC), a body set up to implement her government's electoral pledges.
Since 1959, India's constitution has forbidden MPs from holding what it calls an "office of profit", which essentially means any other government post that entitles them to pay and perks. The controversy over Ms Gandhi erupted after another member of parliament was disqualified this month for also serving as head of a state cinema development board. Since then, several petitions have been filed against other members of parliament, including Ms Gandhi.
In an emotional speech, Ms Gandhi angrily told her detractors she had no financial motivation for serving her country and said she was standing down as an MP to allow people to judge her and re-elect her to office after a by-election.
<b>"Following the principles of probity and my inner conscience I am resigning my post in the parliament,"</b> she said. "I have done this because I think it is the right thing to do. Some people in the country have been trying to create an environment as if the government and the parliament are being used only to favour me. This has pained me greatly.
<b>"I did not enter public life for any personal gains. I have made a resolve to serve the country and Indian society and to protect secular values. </b>That is why, in keeping with the ideals of public life and politics as well as my own beliefs, I am resigning as an MP."
Despite her seemingly grand gesture, Ms Gandhi is expected to easily win a by-election in her constituency of Rae Bareli, a safe Congress seat, within the next 90 days.
The BJP, India's main opposition group, launched a scathing attack on Ms Gandhi, accusing her of capitalising on the scandal.
Ms Gandhi was first elected to parliament in 1999. After her party won elections in 2004, she refused to take the post of prime minister, but did take over the ruling coalition, and until last night headed the National Advisory Council, combining roles that saw her hold enormous sway over government policy.
Despite her resignation, Ms Gandhi will still wield political clout. Much of her influence is informal, and, as the leader of the political party she represents, she is seen by many Indians as the real power behind the Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh.
A senior minister claimed last night that Mr Singh had intervened at the 11th hour and tried to dissuade Ms Gandhi from quitting, but political analysts believe that she has pulled off a master stroke by resigning, holding the moral high ground, before her inevitable return.
<b>Suggestions of political manipulation aside, Ms Gandhi has always let it be known that she is a reluctant politician.</b> <i>{And, the media is supposed to keep tabs on "Power, Responsibility & Accountability!!}</i>. Growing up the daughter of a middle-class construction magnate in the northern Italian town of Orbassano, she was thrust into the intense cauldron of Indian politics after marrying Rajiv Gandhi, scion of India's political first family, in February 1968.
His assassination in 1991 by a Tamil Tiger suicide bomber left India's once-dominant Congress party out of power and in limbo. By the end of the 1990s, party chiefs turned to his widow to help guide the party back.
'I have done this because I feel it is the right thing to do'
A life in the ruling dynasty
1946: Sonia Gandhi born to Italian parents in a small town south of Turin and raised in a conservative Roman Catholic family
1968: Marries Rajiv Gandhi, whom she met at Cambridge. Rajiv, son of former president Indira, is part of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty that effectively ruled Congress politics since Indian independence
1983: Becomes a full Indian citizen and India's first lady after assassination of Indira Gandhi by her bodyguards in 1984
1991: Rajiv, now Prime Minister, killed by a Tamil suicide bomber. Sonia withdraws from politics
1998: Agrees to re-enter politics. Although she wins her first parliamentary seat, the BJP defeat Congress in a humiliating 1999 general election
2004: Congress coalition triumphs in a landslide victory. Like her mother-in-law Indira, Ms Gandhi's appeal is to the aam aadmi (ordinary people) and she wins mass popular support. Refuses post of Prime Minister, and hands it to the Finance Minister, Manmohan Singh
2006: Steps down as a Member of Parliament amid controversy regarding her political posts.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b> Polls </b>
Â
Has Sonia Gandhi turned the tables on the Opposition by resigning from the Lok Sabha and the NAC?
Yes 25.41 %  Â
No 73.94 %  Â
Can't say 00.65 %  Â
March 24, 2006Â
  Â
Should the law on the office of profit be changed?
Yes 31.76 %  Â
No 64.57 %  Â
Can't say 03.67 %  Â
March 22, 2006Â
Do you share the Opposition's suspicion of a scam in the Scorpene deal?
Yes 80.15 %  Â
No 18.06 %  Â
Can't Say 01.79 %  Â
Sonia, we have been told, has "checkmated" the BJP and taken "the wind out of the sails" of those who dared to suggest that she was holding an office of profit in the National Advisory Council. Her twin resignation from the Lok Sabha and NAC has been dubbed a "masterstroke" and a "stroke of genius". The noisy claque that assembled outside 10 Janpath couldn't have agreed more.
Of course there have been contrarian voices from the other side. With characteristic earthiness, BJP president Rajnath Singh invoked the imagery of the disingenuous pilgrim who trips into the Ganga and turns awkwardness into piety - paier phisal gaya toh Har Har Gange <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> . However, since old Hindu sayings may be culturally incomprehensible to the congregation of the newly canonised, it may help get the same message across in Latin - dat veniam corvis, vexat censura - "the censures indulge the crows but harass the doves."
Sonia's third renunciation is calculated to yield diminishing returns. By turning the focus on her own selflessness, she will, no doubt, give the Congress a talking point. At the same time, this knee-jerk reaction to avoid the Election Commission's scrutiny carries the risk of grave collateral damage.
First, her unilateralism has left her UPA allies sullen and unimpressed. Second, it has added to the strains between the Congress and the Left parties. The Left shared the BJP's misgivings over the needless conspiratorial bid to smuggle in an ordinance after abruptly concluding the Budget session.
<b>Finally, and this is the most damaging consequence, her grandstanding has injected the first real note of instability into the Manmohan Singh Government. For the first time since May 2004 there is talk of the UPA Government being forced into an early general election to deflect from the growing internal contradictions of the coalition</b>. Beginning with the vindictive assault on Jaya Bachchan, the course office-of-profit drama reveals an inherent mismatch between the agenda of Sonia's Praetorian guards and those pursuing sober governance. The present tamasha has made the PM look responsible and the Congress president impulsive. Will dynastic interests permit this emerging 'distortion' to continue?
By Rajiv Malhotra
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->There is something called "victim syndrome" that is deep roooted in Christianity. It valorizes martyrs, i.e. those who volunteer to become victims for the service of good against evil. Jesus was the pre-eminent voluntary victim. Most saints ordained by the Vatican in its history were martyrs as their main claim to deserving sainthood. The church maintains a FORMAL database of martyrs organized by year and by country, and this is a celebrated status. There is a whole trackong system worldwide funded to notify of martyrs and church training often encourages its evangelists to put themselves in harms way to become martyrs.
Muslims also adopted this idea and they call such a person "shaheed" or martyr.
But in the Hindu-Buddhist-Jain traditions greatness was not based on being martyrs - Ram, Krishna, Shiva, Goddess, various gurus and saints over centuries, intellectuals like Patanjali, Abhinavagupta, Nagarjuna, etc., each were greats on entirely different criteria than martyrdom. We never extolled victimhood as a way to achieve glory. Sikhs do have a few martyrs who died at the hands of the Mughals.
What effects does the martyrdom archetype and victim syndrome cause in the world?
It encourages jihad as a way to reach paradise, it makes people want to claim victim status quickly to get support. That is why the strategy being taught to dalits and minorities across India is how to become "victims" in order to advance. This is new to most Indian jatis, as they competed in the past and went up/down the socioeconomic strata without any of this victim syndrome. Most medieval kings in India were shudras, and many of India's famous textile, iron/steel, and other manufacturing industries were controlled by jatis which later became classifed by British ethnographers as "victims".
This new menatlity causes conflicts by design. It is about time serious intellectuals problematized the use and abuse of victimhood as strategy to get ahead.
regards,
rajiv<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A email that was forwarded to me.
03-26-2006, 11:07 AM (This post was last modified: 03-26-2006, 11:10 AM by acharya.)
No Profit, Only Loss
So Sonia Gandhi made a virtue out of necessity and has, as the Congress website have us believe, taken the wind out of the BJP sails, but surely the issue goes far beyond cynical political one-upmanship? Updates
SUNDEEP DOUGAL
It is like being stuck in a bad Mumbai fllm with a tired, unimaginative script hammed away to glory. Unfortunately, in this one, even the actors don't change. It isn't as if they have just lost the plot, they seem to be lost in the plot itself, which revolves around the fine art of first arrogantly indulging in cynical and myopic politics that effortlessly culminates in painting oneself into a corner and then, in sheer panic, desperately trying to project the painful process of trying to extricate oneself as a heroic, nay, saintly virtue of self-less sacrifice in the service of the nation.
That, in short, is the story of the Congress party, particularly in its UPA avatar. And its handling of events leading upto the disqualification of Jaya Bachchan under the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act 1959 on grounds of holding an 'office of profit' was (surprise surprise) a sad and miserable rerun of the same sequence of events. One did not really have to be an Einstein to know that the same standard would be sought to be applied to Sonia Gandhi or Somnath Chatterjee, among many others, holding the amorphously defined 'office of profit'.
But the possibility of being hoist by one's own petard was arrogantly and nonchalantly dismissed out of hand. The opposition too had seemed to be exhausted perhaps from the very idea of yet another communally divisive yatra, but as the campaign was launched with similar complaints to the President against Sonia Gandhi, among others, the government appears to have panicked. And panicked big time. On Wednesday, the Indian Express broke the story in its front-paged story on how the UPA was proposing to being out an ordinance, with its sub-text being the express purpose of ensuring that the 'office of profit' charge would not be applicable to Sonia Gandhi.
And the confirmation was available by late Wednesday evening when the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, declared that he had received a request from the government to adjourn the house sine die. It is easy to dismiss 'political morality' as an oxymoron, but constitutional obligations cannot be wished away, nor can this 'fiddling with Parliament' and 'fraud on the Constitution' as Constitutional expert Rajiv Dhavan put it, be simply shrugged off as yet another in the series of cynical improprieties. While a somnolent, issue-less, bankrupt and confused BJP hemorrhaging under the assault from its erstwhile mass-based leaders, suddenly found yet another political lollipop handed over to it in on a platter, and understandably and rightly stepped up the heat, the echoes of support cutting across party lines was not surprising at this blatant attempt to once again brazenly ride roughshod over parliamentary democracy.
Faced with mounting pressure, the response from the panicking Congress was predictable. Even in the most charitable readings of the situation, even if one grants that Sonia Gandhi herself may not have had anything to do with the Jaya Bachchan disqualification or the brainwave of an ordinance that led to the adjournment (perhaps we should believe the conspiracy theory that she was kept in the dark?!), one has to seriously question the political acumen of the 'grand strategists' surrounding her, who, it would appear, excel in breathing life into a moribund opposition. The 'political masterminds' who had earlier been gloating over the disqualification of Jaya Bachchan, do not seem to have even paused to ponder how their too clever by half ploy would be transparent to one and all and would blow to smithereens whatever little is left of the halo of the Sainthood they had bestowed on their leader the last time she tried making a virtue out of a political necessity.
So Sonia Gandhi had to do what worked for her the last time around: adopt the moral high-ground. Frankly, what other option did she have? This was the only option left available to her, and as and by itself, it is only the right thing to have done, as she claims, and compared to the shameless pygmies she is surrounded by, within and without her party, it is a graceful act. But given the context and the cacophany being generated by her assorted minions seeking to project her as the Great Renunciator, it is difficult to see it as anything other than yet another resignation in the grand tradition of Jagdish Tytler, Natwar Singh, Buta Singh et al, yet again packaged as a self-less sacrifice in the service of the nation. Much water has flown down the Yamuna since circa 2004. Compounding the whole crisis are the controversies surrounding the Congress-appointed UP governor and the Election Commissioner Navin Chawla. The saint had been tainted (from Volcker and Quattrocchi), and the halo which had been dissipating with the ravages of Jharkhand, Goa and Bihar, has only been hollowed even more with this latest episode. Charges of witch-hunting and vindictiveness against the Bachchans (and never mind the company they keep) in particular would not appear to be baseless anymore.
More importantly, this whole exercise of having made a non-issue to the front-pages that has not only forced the Congress president to resign, whom her brilliant strategists apparently wanted to protect, but also substantially dented the recent assertive initiatives by the prime minister himself. The whole episode also begs the question that if the 'office of profit' is such a technicality that it can easily be by-passed by a mere ordinance, and another election for Sonia Gandhi at the cost of the exchequer, why not simply sort out the definitional confusion? Why adjourn Parliament sine die?
Without going into the merits of the specifics of the Jaya Bachchan case, it is obvious that clarity and transparency is needed on the 1959 law. Is the chairperson of the U.P. Film Development Council a more lucrative 'office of profit' than various others on various boards, councils and corporations and committees? Do they suddenly become offices of no profit if a bunch of people decide that it isn't so? What objective criteria is applied? And what is one to infer from the activities of those four 'cash on camera' Lok Sabha MPs busy dispensing bounties from their MPLAD funds, for example, who were not dismissed but were merely 'reprimanded' and suspended effectively for mere three days? Surely, we expect that our right hon'ble representatives can discuss and debate such anomalies instead of trying to save one individual whose main claim to fame stems from her surname.
With Sonia Gandhi's resignation, the Congress party, true to its brazen ways, may like to think that it has taken the wind out of the BJP's sails, which it certainly has, but those suddenly in the dock now are not only Amar Singh, but also the speaker Somnath Chatterjee and many other stalwarts of the ruling alliance as well. Effectively, apart from having ensured the resignation of its own MPs, and mini elections at tax-payers' expense, and causing political turbulence in various state legislatures, it has only left more than a substantial and stinky egg on the face of the party, its president and the prime minister - and in these days of the deadly H591, it could go far beyond embarrassment.
<b>
The Congress should thank its stars that its main opposition comes from those who are not only equally morally and ideologically bankrupt, but also deeply divided.</b>For now, while the comrades mull how best to deal with Mamata dee's fresh ammo-charged attack, while the Congress seeing short-term electoral gain brazenly goes to town on the theme of sacrifice and how it has raised the bar in upholding political morality, and while the BJP goes into yet another funk and sulks, it is time to underline that the real loser in this whole sorry episode has only been parliamentary democracy.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>'A Fraud On The Constitution'</b>
No amount of those political heroics of the kind, which we saw in May 2004, will save the government from the situation in which it has landed itself.
ARUN JAITLEY
The abrupt adjournment of Both Houses of Parliament sine die is admittedly at the behest of the government. The government decided that the Parliament be prorogued so that an ordnance can be issued to save the membership of the Lok Sabha of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi where disqualification has been sought in a petition filed before the President.
The conduct of the government is a fraud on the constitution. It is a subversion of Parliament. Article 123 of the Constitution enables the government to issue an ordinance. The pre-conditions for the issuance of an ordinance are:
<b>a) Both houses of Parliament are not in Session
b) Circumstances exist which necessitate for taking of immediate action.</b>
<b>The following facts are clear:</b>
  * The Budget session is the longest session with a mid session recess.
  * This recess and the holding of the session after the session had already been re-scheduled
  * The fresh schedule had already been circulated w.e.f. 10.5.06
  * A large part of both government and non-government business remains to be transacted
<b>In the present case both the prerequisites for issuance of an ordnance are absent</b>.
  * The parliament was in session. A bill if any could be introduced in the Parliament. Adjournment sine die of a session in order to enable the issuance of an ordnance is a fraud on power
  * There can be no urgency in the matter of amending an Act, which seeks to exempt, public offices as not being offices of profit. There can be no constitutional urgency in the matter of saving an individual from disqualification.
<b>The political ramifications of this action are significant.</b>
  * The government has panicked. Its crisis management has proved to be pathetic.
  * The facade of 'sacrifice" and 'detachment from office' image of the Congress President stands exposed. To stick to an office of a Member of Parliament, she can go to the extent of subverting both the parliament and the constitution in order to have the law retrospectively changed through the ordnance route.
  * The Congress has kept up its tradition of making the parliament and the constitution subservient to the Gandhi family.
The law was retrospectively changed to save Mrs. Indira Gandhi's membership of the Lok Sabha. The law is being now retrospectively changed to save the Lok Sabha membership of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi.
The BJP believes that there exist no circumstances for the issuance of an ordnance. The nation hopes that the President would rise to the occasion and refuse to grant accent to this ordnance.
It is now being reported that a government in panic and party in panic are attempting to even resort to an afterthought retraction. If they did that then question still would be: Why was the Parliament adjourned sine die?
No amount of those political heroics of the kind, which we saw in May 2004, will save the government from the situation in which it has landed itself.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
on the eve of 14 lok sabha elections results ,a goddess of sacrifice was born ,as she was the only member of the congress first family to reject the post of prime ministership.
This undoubtedly created a good image of her among Indian people,but it was short lived as Goa, Jarkand and Bihar political developments shown her true colours.
In mean time old friends and new foes i.e Bachchan's and Gandhi's have drawn cross swords against each other.In furtherance of this a congress member filed a complaint against M.P Jaya Bachchan for holding office of profit in Uttar Pradesh Film Development Corporation as chairperson.
The vigilant election commission recommended disqualification of her from Parliament to president,acting on the recommendation president had disqualified her from Parliament.
congress was in celebration mood over the disqualification of jaya bachan,but in no time they realised that they have open a Pandora's box from where madam Sonia Gandhi name also came up for disqualification from Parliament for holding office of profit in Central government as chairperson of National Advisory Council.
Over enthusiasm by congress members to bring a bill to protect there madam as M.P was emphatically protested by opposition.In haste government adjourn the Parliament sine die ,while keeping proclamation of ordinance in mind.This created catch-22 situation for congress.
By seeing the out cry of the Indian people on high handedness of the issue.congress resorted to same all tactics of showing her as the goddess of sacrifice by giving her resignation as M.P and NAC chairperson.
After that they came into damage control mood and rejecting that they have any plan of proclamation of ordinance,and arguing that NAC chairperson post is not an office of profit under Art 102(a) of constitution of India .
They forgotten that the whole issue have created some doubts in the minds of Indian people which needed to be cleared.
1) why she resign as MP and NAC chairperson when it is not an office of profit?
2)why was Parliament adjourn for sine die?
3)why didn't government came up and said that there is no scope of proclamation of ordinance on this issue,when there was buzz going around about proclamation of ordinance?
4)why government didn't call for all party meeting on this issue?
5)why was congress government acted in so haste for bringing a bill on the issue?(Bakhi sab bahana hai,Sonia ko bachana hai)
what's next? As they are planing to bring a bill in Parliament on this issue.It clearly shows that after re-election she can enjoy both the posts.Isn't this all "beat about the bush"?
(send your comments, suggestions on email address:randhir_kapoor007@yahoo.com)
came via email
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Since 24th March, the moment Sonia Gandhi came out of her residence 10 Janpath, to address the party members that she is resigning from her Lok Sabha seat and her one office of profit, the National Security Council; Congressmen are staging continous show of protest, chest beating drama at her residence. The real fact of such fake and phony Congress brand of protest over the resignation of their Queen, was captured by NDTV's cameramen, who asked one poor from group of protesters and asked him, who is Sonia. The hesitant poor man said she is president of Youth Congress. NDTV reporter repeated the question, and the man again replied that Sonia Gandhi is the Pradhan of Youth Congress.
NDTV reporter asked the man point blank if he was promised some money to come here and join the protest. He said: 'we <b>are poor laborers. It is no problem with the payment of money. They will pay. They have promised to pay ten rupees for shouting slogans.'</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The gun with which the Congress targeted Ms. Bachchan backfired. But instead of crying over spilt milk, it cleverly converted the incident into the second sacrifice of its leader.
S. Dhana Mani,
Bangalore
* * *
By resigning, Ms. Gandhi has accepted that she was holding an office of profit and was most likely to attract disqualification. The people of the country will surely see through her drama.
Ram A. Sharma,
Indore, M.P.
* * *
Though we may credit Ms. Gandhi with the best of motives, we cannot help feeling that the resignation was forced upon her and that she was only making the best of a bad bargain.
T.M. Premachandran,
Madurai, T.N.
* * *
Renunciation is like a Brahmastra. It can be used only once. The Congress should realise that the common man is not a fool. Why should someone who has no desire for power try to become an MP again?
Shyam N. Rao,
Bangalore
* * *
Anguished Sonia sprang a surprise, quit as MP and NAC chairperson, and will contest again from Rae Bareli â all at the expense of the poor tax-payers and the starving millions of India.
The earlier politicians understand that the country is not their fiefdom, the better for us.
K.R. Nath,
Kozhikode, Kerala
* * *
The common people do not expect any sacrifice from present day politicians. What they do expect from them is the spending of the taxpayers' money responsibly.
They also expect them to be free from corruption and extravagance. These will be the greatest sacrifices on their part.
K.R. Chandran,
Thanjavur, T.N.
* * *
Why should the people bear the cost of Ms. Gandhi's re-election to Parliament?
The by-election has been necessitated because of her mistake and for the sake of her prestige and image.
The law should be amended to make political parties or candidates pay for by-elections caused by their misdemeanour.
Manohar Alembath,
Chennai
* * *
It is a mockery of democracy that a person for whom the Constitution was sought to be subverted is being projected as a martyr.
The Congressmen, who have egg on their face, are eulogising their leader as an exceptional person who does not care for position, in the process cleverly hiding the bitter truth that her resignation is directly connected to the Government's abortive attempt to go for an ordinance.
T.R. Venkataraman,
Palakkad, Kerala
* * *
One wonders whether the nation has realised the gravity of the Congress' attempt to subvert the Constitution by adjourning Parliament to issue an ordinance.
The sycophants in the party appear to think what they do or say is democracy.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>PIL against Sonia seeks repay of allowances</b>
Press Trust of India
Lucknow, March 27, 2006
A public interest litigation was filed in the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court on Monday seeking direction to Congress President Sonia Gandhi to return the allowances availed by her between June 3, 2004 and March 23, 2006 as a Member of Parliament.
The PIL alleged that Gandhi had resigned from her Lok Sabha membership for fear of being disqualified by the Election Commission.
The petition is likely to come up for hearing on Tuesday.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->