Eye on Assam polls, UPA govt to amend law on whoâs an illegal
EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE
Posted online: Saturday, February 11, 2006 at 0219 hours IST
NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 10: With an eye on the Assam polls and on the eve of Congress president Sonia Gandhiâs scheduled visit to the state, the UPA government today decided to amend the Foreigners Act to ensure âfair hearingâ to a person before he or she is declared a foreigner.
The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA), chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh whoâs himself a Rajya Sabha MP from Assam, decided on the move after the Supreme Court struck down the controversial Illegal Migrants Determination by Tribunals (IMDT) Act last July.
The SC ruling had caused concern among parties wooing minorities in Assam who account for some 30 per cent votes and hold the key in 40 of the 126 Assembly constituencies.
Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters today that once the Foreigners Act is amended, every case to determine a foreigner will be referred to a tribunal set up by the Government to ensure âfair hearingâ.
Reacting to the CCPA decision, <b>BJP spokesman Ravi Shankar Prasad called it a âbackdoorâ move to get past the SC order. </b>âThis has been done to shield <b>foreigners against identification and deportation</b>. The BJP never wants any problems for Indian Muslims, but we cannot ignore the threat to security and integrity of the country posed by foreigners sn! eaking into our territory,â he said. During his visit to Assam last month, the Prime Minister had assured the minorities that all necessary steps would be taken to protect their legitimate interests in the wake of the SC judgment. He had indicated that the GoM would complete the task of drafting an alternate to the IMDT Act soon.
Assam is due for Assembly elections and the <b>Congress faces problems galore. </b>
Adding to fears of anti-incumbency are infighting and the move by more than a dozen Muslim and linguistic groups to float the United Democratic Front (UDF).
IMDT gone, avatar for âfair hearingâ
⢠Under IMDT Act, onus to prove a personâs foreign identity was on complainant
⢠IMDT Act was struck down by Supreme Court last July
⢠Govt appointed GoM to find way out
⢠CCPA decides to amend Foreigners Act, set up tribunals fo! r âfair hearingâ
⢠BJP, AGP oppose move, say every illegal can now demand âfair hearingâ to stall deportation
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Refraining from questioning the survey, Army chief General JJ Singh said on
Monday that the recruitment is based on merit and ability to perform different
duties and that the Army is apolitical, secular and professional.
He said the Army gives equal chance to everyone aspiring to serve in the
organisation and "the entry system is based on merit and capability to perform
different duties. We never have this kind of a thing like where you come from,
what language you speak or what religion you believe in. That's always been our
policy, Gen Singh said in Vishakhapatnam and added "the Army is apolitical,
secular and professional."
Army chief's statement came in the backdrop of reports that the armed forces
were reluctant to come forward with details of the number of Muslim officers and
men and reportedly conveyed apprehensions to the Government that such a survey
would send wrong signals.
The services also said the armed forces were truly secular, apolitical and
professional. Moreover, the Government had stopped raising new units on the
basis of caste and region in the 1950s and all the new formations were mixed in
nature, thereby giving representation to young men from all over the country.
The PMO reportedly overruled the objection, saying the survey formed part of the
Government's efforts to promote minority welfare by studying the social,
economic and educational status of Muslims in India.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What about the other minorities like Sikhs, Parsis, Christians? No one addressing their welfare issues!! One wonders as to what the ramnifications of such a survey about Indian Muslims in Army would lead too since we are surrounded by some Islamist nations against whom we have had several wars.
Related question: Does Pakistan survey the number of minorities in their army? Are these minorities in Pakistan redeployed to non-combat zones during war times?
This is an exclusive plot by that ITALIAN WOMAN to destroy the armed forces. With the help of traitors such as Pranab Mukherjee, Arjun Singh kind of low-life scums who will sell their mother to rapists for money and power, this ITALIAN WOMAN has come up with the biggest weapon: I think she studied British history and how they were able to divide Indians with the help of people such as Jinnah. Now with the help of above mentioned SCUMS, she came up with a brillaint plot. Destory the foundations of India by attacking private sector with reservations, destroy the coherence of army with this headcount. ManMohan is such gutless WIMP that he can't even raise a voice against this anti-national plot by this garabge woman whose wisdom is smaller than an egg.
I hope RSS/VHP realize this EVIL for what it is and try to work to end this anti-natioanl government. I hope Rajnath and Advani work together in unity inside and outside the aprliament to end this anti-national coaliation called UPA.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In an internal note, Mrs Gandhi said: "<b>Muslims have always been our natural allies</b>. We must take steps <b>to ensure them that they hold a special place for us</b>."
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The crucial amendment in the Foreigners' Act followed. It made deportation of an illegal immigrant really difficult. And now the latest controversy over the survey of minority population in various government institutions has once again raised the issue of vote bank politics, a charge the Congress rejects. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->UP is crucial, because it is from here that <b>Rahul Gandhi is hoping to kickstart his political career and after the Babri demolition more than 13 years ago, Muslim goodwill holds the key to the revival of Congress' fortunes</b>.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Election Commission met leaders from 50 recognised political parties to get their views on a government proposal for state funding of elections.
Among the proposals, the government will give a candidate a certain amount of free fuel, a free party office with a free phone as well as stamps and loudspeaker systems for campaigning.
But political parties differ amongst themselves over a limit on the funding.
Focus on funds
The issue is that if a Lok Sabha candidate can spend up to Rs 25 lakh, his party spends a lot more for his or her campaign.
"<span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='font-family:Times'>Expenses incurred by the political parties should not be included in the funding. It should be kept out of the purview," said Abhishek Manu Singhvi, spokesperson, Congress.</span></span>
But both the BJP and the Left want a limit on both the party and the candidate's expenses in each constituency.
"There should not be any other funding to the candidate," said VK Malhotra, spokesperson, BJP.
Left parties believe the proposal in its present form, would deny smaller parties a level playing field where funds are crucial for a strong election campaign.
"Unless there is a limit for poll expenditure by the party, there will not be any level playing field," said Nilotpal Basu, leader, CPI(M).
Ambitious plan
Representatives from the Congress, BJP and four other national parties, besides 44 state parties attended the meeting.
"We will finalise our recommendations and send it to political parties before forwarding it to the Centre," said BB Tandon, Chief Election Commissioner.
It is an ambitious plan to get the government to pay for election campaign. Not surprisingly, the political parties failed to reach a consensus in this issue.
The key difference ranges from complete funding of elections by the government to strict compliance of ceiling on the candidates.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Expenses incurred by the political parties should not be included in the funding. It should be kept out of the purview," said Abhishek Manu Singhvi, spokesperson, Congress<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If not expense ? What they should include?
They are not interested to reduce corruption, they know how to exploit loop-holes.
The Government's glib explanation failed to douse the political fire lit by the Zee News revelation on Tuesday. The main Opposition Bharatiya Janata Party demanded an independent inquiry and "an authentic statement" from the UPA Government on the latest phone-tapping allegation.
"It has never happened in any democratic country - that phone calls of an apex court judge are tapped," BJP general secretary Arun Jaitley said, adding that the nation had "the right to know whether anything like privacy exists in the country or not".
The revelation has also reinforced the BJP's suspicions about the alleged tapping being linked with the fodder scam case in which Union Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav is the principal accused.
<b>
Justice Variava, who retired in October 2005, was on the Supreme Court benches hearing cases involving Mr Yadav and his wife Rabri Devi, then Chief Minister of Bihar, and other high-profile cases, including the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case and the JMM bribery caseinvolving late Prime Minister PV Narsimha Rao</b>.
The BJP spokesperson recalled a news report last year about an alleged telephone call to Justice Variava from BJP leader Sushil Modi, who is also a petitioner in the fodder scam case. Mr Variava and Mr Modi had denied the telephonic conversation.
"That news report was based on Mr Variava's cellphone records, showing he had received a call from Mr Modi's landline. But, in fact it was a mischief in which somebody first made a blank call from Mr Modi's landline to Mr Variava's mobile phone and then obtained the judge's call records to try to establish a link," he said.
<b>
Anticipating trouble from the Opposition during the Budget Session, the Home Ministry summoned Delhi Police Commissioner and Secretary (Telecom) to find out how the CDR of the cellphone allotted to a Supreme Court judge reached "unauthorised hands".
Apart from a bland denial that neither the Delhi Police nor the MHA had ordered the tapping of Justice Variava's cellphone, the Government also asked Union Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Ministry to keep a watch over stories being telecast on TV news channels, sources told The Pioneer.
</b>
The I&B Ministry and the Ministry of Telecommunic-ations have also been asked to frame guidelines to ensure such things are not repeated in the future. The sources claimed that the proprietors of Zee could be asked to substantiate its claims.
Dismissing these exercises as "an attempt at whitewash", the BJP said, "An authentic explanation was required immediately to stem speculation over the story in the bud."
"Is this surveillance on Justice Variava's phone part of the same gameplan? Attempts have been made in the past to derail the fodder scam case hearing by Variava's bench. And now the question arises whether the Government was in anyway involved in the surveillance of the judge's MTNL phone," he said.
Mr Jaitley also referred to Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh's phone-tapping, saying such instances raise concerns over privacy rights.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->âBut, Congress is a secular partyâ
I think I can safely call this week going-by as the âTheatre of the Absurdâ week in the history of âsecularâ India.
But, before that, let me tell you something: âCongress is a secular partyâ
Donât you forget that! Bhool naa jaanaa, â¦â¦â¦.
Here is how the week started: While I believe in the respect for all religion and had some inkling of what the repercussions of the Danish cartoon controversy might/would create, this thing is going on and on and still surprised me. One after another country faced Muslim riots and property was burnt/destroyed and India is no exception. As of now, I think many people have died in this. This UPA govt has sent strong note to Danish govt on this. Didnât I tell you: âCongress is a secular partyâ
One of the Election Commissioner, Navin Chawla, an IAS officer, a hero of the Emergency Era under Indira Gandhi, and a close friend of Sonia Gandhi has been found taking money from Congress MPs. He flatly refused taking money from communal BJP MP, Sahib Singh Verma because we all know that âCongress is a secular partyâ
Raja Bhaiyya is re-inducted into UP cabinet, in the august company of criminal dons like Mukhtar Ansari, Afzal Ansari, et al. This is the same SP which is supported by Congress in UP. But then, what to do to keep BJP out? Unlike BJP, âCongress is a secular partyâ
The same SP plans to bring a No-Confidence motion against this UPA govt and make a third front over the issue of Iran Vote. After all, how can the UPA govt vote against Iran, a Muslim country, especially when âCongress is a secular partyâ?
Meanwhile, UPA govt announced the formation of a âMinistry of Minoritiesâ under A R Antulay, the same person accused in the cement scandal 30 years ago. BJP predictably alleged the govt of indulging in a lot of minorityism. But, what the hell, because âCongress is a secular partyâ
The secular President in his address unveiled a 15-point program for the minorities (read âMuslimsâ); the details are awaited. BJP claims that this is sheer Muslim vote Bank appeasement. Let them say anything, because, âCongress is a secular partyâ
After failing in their efforts to bring 5% reservation of jobs in private sector and after a rebuff from the Allahabad Court on the non-minority status of Aligarh Muslim Univ, HRD Minister, Arjun Singh assured Muslims that UPA will bring a bill or amend AMU Act to ensure reservation for minorities (read âMuslimsâ). After all, Muslim votes ka sawaal hai kyonki âCongress is a secular partyâ
Then, out of the blues came the news that UPA govt, with the help of Justice Sachar committee, has asked the armed forces to do a head-count of Muslims, after the same had been done in Navy and Air-Force. NDA claimed this is a preposterous, atrocious and divisive move, while Pranab Mukherjee claimed that the secular nature of army would stay and blamed BJP of vote bank politics. Many army-men and veterans have also expressed apprehensions and strongly disagreed with this exercise. Imagine what would our âsecular mediaâ would have said if BJP had asked for such a thing. This is only to bring about a quota for Muslims in the Armed Forces because âCongress is a secular partyâ
The doyen of media and the owner of newspaper, âThe Hindustan Times, Shobhana Bhartia was nominated to Rajya Sabha by the UPA govt. Simple! Because âCongress is a secular partyâ
Then we saw on Zee TV, the âSting Operationâ news of the âTapping of the phones of Justice Variava in Sept 2005â at a time when he was looking into the fodder-scam case of âsecularâ leader, Lalloojee. The govt denies this, just as it had done in Amar Singh phone-tapping case. At an emergency meeting of the Home Ministry, the Home Secy asked Secy DoT and Delhi Police as to how the hell details of this could reach Zee TV and asked DoT to come up with more stringent guidelines so that this information may not reach private channels in future (when next Phone-Tapping takes place). After all, âCongress is a secular partyâ
Not deterred, another TV channel, CNN-IBN showed the live pictures of a SP MP, Mehboob Ali, openly offering his services and services of his Lal-Batti kee car for ferrying heroine in his car for a hefty fee. But, kya Karen? Congress is taking and giving support to Samajwadi Party in UP and like SP, âCongress is a secular partyâ
A SP MP in the Rajya Sabha, Shahid Siddiqui rushed into the well of the house and tried to tear his clothes. Congress MPs kept quite because âCongress is a secular partyâ
Another news item: Sonia woos minorities in Assam, with sops and assurance for illegal Bangla Deshi immigrants and Muslims. I told you naa kee Desh kee neta Sonia Gandhi and âCongress is a secular partyâ
With Tarlochan Singh, Chairman, National Commission of Minorities retiring, UPA is considering appointing Tahir Mehmood as the next chairman, though he has already been the Chairman several times. After all, youâll also agree with me kee âCongress is a secular partyâ
As a result of the Danish cartoon, a Pakistani cleric, Qureshi, announced a $ 1 Million bounty on the head of the cartoonist who drew Prophet Mohammed. The local mosque, his religious school and the local jewelerâs association would give this money for the cause. Remember similar fatwa on Salman Rushdie during Congress regime? I know, Baba kee âCongress is a secular partyâ
Now, not to be left behind, UP SP Minister, Yaqoob Qureshi in Meerut announced a âSupari Killing in a Foreign Landâ award of Rs. 51 Crores, in a large rally, for âanyone who eliminates the Danish cartoonist who dared to make the caricature of Prophet Mohammedâ. Not only this, he promised the assassin gold equivalent to his weight and for this, people of Meerut and Muslim women were ready to sell their gold jewelry to contribute for the reward, he declared. But, Congress canât do anything because Law & Order is a state subject and âCongress is a secular partyâ
But, what takes the cake in this whole episode is the role and statement of Principal Secretary (Home), UP, Mr. Alok Sinha, an IAS officer, that âQureshi was just expressing the sentiments of the people of Meerut and this does not constitute any criminal offence. There is no offence to make such an announcement about a person living in a distant foreign countryâ, Sinha told reporters. BTW, the Indian law provides for 7-year jail, but in India, you know, âThe law takes its own courseâ. And, what that legal course is, you all know so well from Narsimha Raoâs time, donât you? Kya yaar, bhool gaye kee âCongress is a secular partyâ
I am not able to decide whether to laugh or to cry at this secular âTheatre of Absurdâ.
But, one thing is decided about which we all can laugh and cry kee--âCongress is a secular partyâ
Will India's Government
Survive November?
by Rajinder Puri
November 16, 2005
By this day next week the full Supreme Court judgment on the Bihar assembly dissolution should be out. It matters little what detailed arguments the judgment will rely on. By waiting for the full judgment before responding the Government merely bought time. The details of the judgment â whether it is unanimous or divided â will make no substantive difference. Under Presidentâs rule the Union Government passed an unconstitutional order that was signed for implementation by the President. Sacking Buta Singh will not suffice. The decision rested with the union government. So whose head will roll?
India is facing its moment of truth. It is not a crisis of government. It is a crisis of system. The system must change for the Constitution to survive.
The Prime Minister could resign. The President could resign. Both could resign. Neither may resign. This columnistâs views on the subject may be known to readers. Before the verdict an article stated the columnistâs position regarding the Presidentâs role and responsibility. After the verdict, it was written the PM must first resign or be dismissed by the President. After that the President himself must resign. Next, the Vice-President as acting President must explore options of finding a successor. If unsuccessful he must dissolve the House. If constitutional propriety remains the criterion, nothing that happened subsequently persuades a change of opinion.
The question now is: what could in fact happen?
Immediately after the first brief judgment the President and PM met. Next day in Chandigarh after the Congress Working Committee meeting the PM accompanied by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi addressed the press. He acknowledged that the Union cabinet had to accept its responsibility for passing the unconstitutional order. This indicated that the PM had decided to resign. The Congress party spokesmen stated that the response by the government to the verdict would be given after the full judgment became available. The Bihar elections were under way. The governmentâs decision to buy time made tactical sense. The full judgment is expected after the Bihar polling ends. Will the PM stick to his initial response or backtrack?
In Patna on November 8 the PM criticized Governor Buta Singh while speaking to the media. He described the Governorâs recommendation to dissolve the assembly as âunfortunateâ. Referring to the Supreme Court judgment he said the Governor should maintain the dignity of his post. âI donât like this controversy about the Governorâs role,â he said. âIt is an unfortunate development.â Unfortunate it was. But equally unfortunate was the cabinetâs decision to accept the Governorâs recommendation, then attach a newspaper clipping dated a day after the recommendation was received to bolster its case, and then, at midnight, fax it to the President in Moscow for his signature. Does not this smack of complicity and conspiracy compounding Mr Buta Singhâs folly? So, do the PMâs remarks on Mr Buta Singh betray a change of mind? We should know next week.
And what about the President? He is a genuine victim of the constitutional confusion created by politicians and legal luminaries alike. It matters little whether he did or did not send the order for reconsideration to the cabinet. Awakened at midnight during a foreign trip he would have been justified in thinking there was an emergency situation. He signed the order. Hypothetically, had he refused to sign the unconstitutional order would not the media and the entire political class have been at his throat, accusing him of staging a constitutional coup? Now the President is in the unhappy situation of having breached his oath to protect the constitution. How will he react? That is anybodyâs guess. But judging from what is known of President Kalamâs character and temperament, this scribe believes he will resign. The Presidentâs unhappiness and perplexity become apparent from two unrelated incidents.
First, he recommended to the Home Minister a blanket pardon for several mercy petitioners facing the death penalty. The President also expressed his support for abolishing the death penalty. The latter suggestion met with criticism from several quarters including retired Chief Justice Lahoti. It is reasonable to expect diverse opinions on the subject. It was only a suggestion. For it to become law Parliament must decide. But what about the Presidentâs indication that all the mercy petitioners who approached him should be spared the death penalty? Isnât the right to pardon among the Presidentâs prerogatives? The matter is still pending before the government. How it is resolved will determine what, if any, power the President can exercise. By raising the issue at this time was President Kalam testing the waters?
The other event was more intriguing. On November 9 the President addressed a seminar in the presence of the Chief Justice and the Lok Sabha Speaker. He expounded on the relationship between the executive, the judiciary and the legislature. His remarks attracted media attention and sparked a minor debate. The President said that while all three pillars of democracy should be independent, the executive was not fully independent but was curbed by constraints created by the legislature and judiciary. The media seized on this remark and concluded that he was obliquely criticizing the judiciary. Legal luminaries jumped into the fray. None of them appeared to grasp the real import of the Presidentâs speech. The Presidentâs remark was unfortunate inasmuch that it caused confusion and diverted attention from the thrust of his speech.
The President reinforced his remarks by quoting 17th century English philosopher John Locke:
âIt may be too great a temptation to humane frailty, apt to grasp at power, for the same persons who have the power of making laws, to have also in their hands the power to execute them, whereby they may exempt themselves from obedience to the laws they make, and suit the law, both in its making and execution, to their own private advantage.â
Who are the persons in our present political system forming part of more than one of the three organs of Government? They are the ministers. They legislate, and they execute. This scribe has pointed out in the past the same anomaly â to suggest that accountability of government becomes notional when those who execute also control the legislature through its majority. That makes Parliament unfit as an instrument to check government excess. The President focused on the impediments that the anomaly placed on the executiveâs functioning.
What therefore was the President driving at? To understand this it would be helpful to appraise his remarks in the light of our Constitution. Article 53 of the Constitution says: âThe executive power of the Union shall be vested in the President, and shall be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinate to him in accordance with this Constitution.â Thatâs pretty clear, isnât it? President Kalam doesnât appear to be confused. This scribe doesnât feel he is confused. Only legal experts seem confused and confusing.
If the President does decide to resign he should do so in a manner that compels a reappraisal of our system. If both the President and Prime Minister resign they would keep their reputations intact and have a public life after resignation. Alternatively, one or both could cling to office. That would preserve chair but destroy reputation.
India is facing its moment of truth. It is not a crisis of government.
It is a crisis of system. The system must change for the Constitution to survive.
Bharatiya Janata Party president Rajnath Singh said on Monday that the United Progressive Alliance government was the strangest kind of coalition the country has ever had. All its members are running in different directions, 'but are somehow held together by BJP-phobia', Singh said.
"Yeh milijuli sarkar nahin hai, balki milibhagat ki sarkar hai (it is not a coalition government but a government of conspiracy)," he said, speaking in the Rajya Sabha.
The UPA has changed the definition of coalition government and strangest behaviour was that of the Left, he said.
"There were no permanent allies and enemies in politics but the left leaders had disproved this by behaving as both permanent friends and enemies of the government," Singh said.
Their opposition or support to the government was not based on any principles but on the fear of the BJP coming back to power. "The ruling alliance is being driven forward by BJP phobia," he added.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Flying in the face of its claim that it doesnât interfere with the CBI, the UPA Government sent a letter directly to then agency director U S Mishra questioning him why and how no appeal was filed against BJP leader L K Advaniâs discharge in the case related to inflammatory speeches leading to the Babri Masjid demolition. The note asked the director to even report âinternal deliberationsâ in the agency and explain its âinternal mechanism.â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The first was on December 8, 2004, when Pulok Chatterjee, Joint Secretary in the Prime Ministerâs Office, wrote to Secretary, Personnel, raising the same questions. This sparked off a political storm in Parliament prompting Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee to deny any attempt to armtwist the CBI in the Ayodhya case.
But despite this assurance, on August 12, 2005, a second letter was sent from the Department of Personnel, this time addressed directly to Mishra.
Express has accessed official records which show that the UPAâs second confidential letter (S-22/AS(S&V)/2005) was written by B K Das, an Additional Secretary in the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT). It raps the CBI for making âno comments on specific pointsâ (points raised in the PMOâs controversial letter). <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
UPA govt is using CBI to frame us: Opp chorus http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story....t_id=88500
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Both Houses of Parliament were rocked today with the BJP-led NDA accusing the Government of âmisusing the CBIâ after The Indian Express reported that the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), writing directly to the CBI Director in August, 2005, had demanded an explanation on why the agency had not appealed against L K Advaniâs discharge in the Babri Masjid demolition case.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->BJP leaders said that in Advaniâs case, the Government had sought explanations from CBI on its handling of the case but in the Ottavio Quattrocchi case, it had claimed it did not interfere in the functioning of the CBI and was unaware of the decision to defreeze the London bank accounts of the Bofors case accused.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
MUMBAI: It could have been a coincidence, but there was apparently more to the blacking out of Abhishek Bachchan's item during the live telecast of the Filmfare awards on Saturday evening than met the eye.
Says father Amitabh: "Every time he came on stage the TV went blank saying 'No Signal'. And just as he went off, the telecast returned to normal. It happened twice -- once when he went up to get his award for best supporting actor and then during his live act.
"This happened all over the country. We received complaints about Abhishek's blacked-out presence from Delhi, Chennai, Patna..."
When contacted Anupama Mandloi, Sony's head of on-air programming, seemed shocked: "We are as baffled by what happened to Abhishek's act as the rest of the nation. Needless to say, we'd hardly be responsible for it ourselves. We are still trying to figure out what happened."
as long as there are jaichands foreigners will always get away with murder of Indian people...India has been cursed with jaichands regardless of the era
# Cr.P.C. does not have provisions to protect witnesses: Patil
# Lok Sabha members demand CBI probe
# Jessica Lal case a "symbol of huge injustice": Brinda Karat
-----------------------------------------------
What a JOKE! All these JOKERS know that Delhi police, prosecution are doing everything to destroy evidence to save the SON of CON(gress) party minister in Haryana. They all know what is WRONG? But these hypocrites are such useless farts..
Delhi police did the same to save the son of J P Singh, IPS who went RAPED and murdered Priyadarshini Mattoo.
Mrs Sonia Gandhi has been criticized by several people on account of her foreign origin. She lived in Cambridge, England, where she met Rajiv Gandhi. She eventually married into Indiaâs most famous family. After marriage she successfully assimilated into an Indian lifestyle. Since entering politics her conduct has been dignified and gracious...
What has alarmed the Government and the Congress is the evidence of massive Muslim mobilisation against the Bush visit. Whether in the metros or the district towns, the opposition to Bush and Indo-US strategic initiatives was almost entirely Islamist. The mobilisation was effected through the network of theological seminaries. Those who carried placards comparing Bush to various four-legged animals and proclaiming their willingness to become suicide bombers for the faith even replicated the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban in dress. It is important to note that the concerns of demonstrators were pan-Islamic and centred totally on happenings in West Asia. Indian Muslims were instigated to view India's foreign policy through the prism of their faith. More ominously, the Government was threatened with political retribution if the Islamist hatred for America was disregarded.
The whole country must unite against this communal blackmail. The defence and foreign policy of India has to be based on national interest, not sectarian considerations. Indians may not like what is being done to Iraq but which should get priority - India or Pan-Islamism? In 1919, Mahatma Gandhi courted the pan-Islamic Khilafat Movement for short-term gains. India was the long-term loser.
All Indian nationalists, whether they happen to be supporters of the Congress or the BJP, must compliment the Prime Minister for so far disregarding these friends of terrorists and doing what is in national interest. The opposition has a right to carp about the political management of nuclear talks but it should have no reason to complain about the outcome of the negotiations. Indeed, with the Indo-US agreement, the UPA and NDA have successfully established the continuity of India's nuclear policy.
Today, there is a broad nationalist consensus on the terms of Indo-US strategic engagement. Regardless of their other differences, all nationalist parties must now act in tandem to ensure that the necessary modifications in American law are speedily effected so that India gets international recognition as a nuclear power. This necessitates a mobilisation of the Indian diaspora and the active involvement of political parties, corporates and religious and community groups. On this issue, there is no scope for partisan politics. You are either with India or with the unholy alliance of Green and Reds.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN WEST BENGAL - Legalised Voters?
by R.Upadhyay
Various news papers' reports suggest that under the on going "Operation Clean Roll" exercise in West Bengal launched by the Election Commission (EC) of India, "revised" Voters' lists were hung outside booths all over the State on February 23, 2006. Till that day the names of 13 lakh bogus voters were deleted. The EC however, was apparently not fully satisfied with the outcome of the operation and therefore sent the team of Election Observers headed by K. J. Rao back for further check-up of the Voters' list. Reacting over the exercise, the State Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), Anil Biswas said, âlet them send hundreds of observers, yet nothing will prevent us from winning" (Pioneer dated February 24, 2006). Such over confidence of the State chief of the party shows that he is fully assured of its captive vote bank, as key to party's electoral success.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The backwardness and abysmal poverty of the Muslim community in India is a symbol both of the decline of its own leadership, and of the bankruptcy of the exploitative vote-bank politics of 'secular' formations.</b>
<b>
K.P.S. GILL</b>
The Indian politician, it appears, is entirely uneducable, incapable of learning from history. Today, virtually all the parties in India are divided into two broad camps - the 'communal' and the 'secular'. The former category, including virtually all minority community political parties - such as the Jamaat-e-Islami, the Jamaat-e-Ulema-e-Hind, the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), the Akali Dal, and the constituent groups within the 'Sangh Parivar' - are explicitly communal in their orientation, seeking a crystallisation of their own identity through a polarisation against others.
But the 'secular' parties are, in fact, anything but that; they practice an insidious and opportunistic '<b>reverse communalism</b>' that has historically done incalculable harm to the nation, and continues to undermine India's progress, security and stability.
An interesting manifestation was the anti-Bush demonstrations orchestrated during the American President's brief visit. The most vociferous protests among the 'secular' parties came from the Left formations, particularly the CPI(M) - a coalition partner in Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government. They have, of course, the right to protest and to project their perspectives - <b>though the incontinence of language and the crudity of attacks launched by some very senior leaders is poor testimony to their cause and their conviction.</b>
What is significant, however, is that, <b>despite the extraordinary 'cooperation' of the media </b>- specially the proliferating television news channels, who held tiny crowds of a few dozen, and occasionally of a couple of hundred in very tight frames, helping substitute an artificial frenzy for numbers - <b>it was clear that the 'secular' protestors had rather poor support.</b>
Failing to mobilise adequate support from their own ideological fraternity, the CPI-M had no compunctions in falling back on the stratagem of a 'multi-party' demonstration that relied overwhelmingly on the capacities for communal mobilisation of the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Hind, and it was only through the efforts of the latter that the substantial gathering at the Ramlila grounds at Delhi could be cobbled together.
A look at the various photographs and video images in the media demonstrates that the crowd at the Ramlila grounds was overwhelmingly Muslim - with hardly a peppering of 'secular' protestors. Much of the ire of the communally mobilised protestors was directed against the 'Danish cartoons' and other issues somewhat distanced from the context of President Bush's visit to India.
<b>Critically, however, when 'secular' parties hitch their wagon to communal mass mobilisation on emotive sectarian issues and an 'Islamic' anti-Bush platform, they participate in a dangerous and subversive trend, contributing directly to the greater radicalisation of sections of the Muslim community, and enlarging the centrality, within the national political space, of communal formations such as the Jamiat. </b>This is not the first time that the Communists have made an ideologically irreconcilable compromise with communal forces, as their (and the Congress's) extended partnership with the IUML in Kerala demonstrates.
<b>The conduct of the top leadership of the ruling Congress in the run-up to state assembly election in Assam is another case in point, and will have disastrous consequences for the security and stability,</b> not only of this state, but also for the wider Northeast, where illegal Bangaldeshi migrants are continuously expanding their presence.
The pronouncements on bringing amendments to the Foreigners' Act to 'protect' the Muslims - including the very large number of illegal aliens in the state who have acquired voting rights and are courted by the Congress as a vote-bank - fall into the same category of misconceived communal manipulation with disastrous long-term consequences. Once again, the Congress is being misled by immediate electoral calculations to act directly against the national interest.
In Uttar Pradesh, we see a d<b>eafening silence among the 'secular parties' </b>on the issue of the 'reward' of Rs 51 crore announced by a Minister for anyone who 'brings him the head' of the Danish cartoonists who had dared to caricature the Prophet. Interestingly, while 'secular' parties invent convoluted justifications for the failure to implement the country's law for this act of incitement to crime, and <b>while some of the Minister's coreligionists flock to congratulate him for his 'courageous' defence of Islam</b>, the Organisation of Islamic Countries has seen fit to condemn all such 'fatwas' and announcements calling for the death of the Danish cartoonists as 'un-Islamic'.
The fact is, all major 'secular' parties in India have had the consolidation of the 'Muslim vote-bank' as one of the crucial elements of their political and electoral agenda, and <b>they have tended to believe that supporting the extremist - rather than the moderate - Muslim stance is more productive in delivering the 'Muslim vote'. </b>The 'Hindu vote' is believed to be split across the various national and regional formations along caste, language and parochial lines, as well as between the 'secular' and 'communal' camps. It has, consequently, been accepted - outside the Sangh Parivar - that communal mass mobilisation of Hindus is either not possible, given the fragmented nature of the community, or that it is, in some sense, not politically desirable.
Despite overwhelming evidence that the Muslims are also an enormously diversified community across regions and classes in India, the same considerations have not guided perspectives on the country's principal minority. Interestingly, communal Hindu formations are also increasingly vulnerable to this intellectual blindness - witness, for instance, Mr LK Advani's and, more recently, Mr Jaswant Singh's pronouncements on Mohammad Ali Jinnah.
This blindness has afflicted Indian politics for decades, and the affliction has extended to some of the nation's greatest leaders. Gandhi, the Mahatma on so much else, was utterly wrong in his orientation to the Muslims and this was abundantly clear even in his first major and disastrous intervention in the country's politics, the Khilafat Movement.
The then famous Ali Brothers, who are now entirely forgotten by all but a few historians specialising in the period, with whom Gandhi formed a partnership of dishonour to lead the Movement, <b>openly stated that a Muslim thief was better than Gandhi</b>, simply because he was Muslim; Gandhi swallowed the insult in silence.When there were rumours that the Afghans could invade India, one of the brothers, Mohammad Ali, declared: "If the Afghans invaded India to wage holy war, the Indian Mohammadans are not only bound to join them but also to fight the Hindus if they refuse to cooperate with them." <b>Gandhi had no comment on this. Worse, Gandhi,</b> the apostle of ahimsa, <b>repeatedly justified Muslim violence</b>.
In the wake of the collapse of the Khilafat movement, the Moplah Rebellion broke out in Kerala, with Muslim mobs inflicting untold savagery and rapine on Hindus. Gandhi first denied these atrocities and later, confronted with incontrovertible evidence, described the Moplahs as "god fearing" people and declared that they "are fighting for what they consider as religion, and in a manner they consider as religious".
It is these double standards that created India's eventual partition. Regrettably, they survived that catastrophe, and continue to dominate India's 'secular' polity even today. There is, in fact, a comprehensive failure among the Indian political classes - across ideological and partisan boundaries - to understand the minority psyche.
The backwardness and abysmal poverty of the Muslim community in India even 58 years after Independence is a symbol both of the decline of its own leadership, and of the bankruptcy of the exploitative vote-bank politics of secular formations. You cannot fill people's stomachs with religion and silence their real needs - health, education, productive capacities and skills - with dogma. This, tragically, remains the unqualified agenda and objective of India's political leadership.
But the tokenism of 'representation' in the Army and government services and the <b>continuous manipulation of communal sentiments </b>will go no way in correcting these distortions. The solution lies in non-discriminatory efforts for the development of all the poor in India, and that includes the country's minorities.
K.P.S. Gill is former director-general of police, Punjab. He is also Publisher, SAIR and President, Institute for Conflict Management. This article was first published in The Pioneer.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
