BM Farookh tastes defeat again as 28 JD(S) MLAs boycott polls, 7 rebels cross-vote

coastaldigest.com news network
March 23, 2018

Bengaluru, Mar 23: Business magnet and JD(S) chief general secretary B M Farooq, who had tasted defeat in 2016 Rajya Sabha polls from Karnataka thanks to the cross voting by party rebels, today got only two votes!

When JD(S) state president and Assembly floor leader H.D. Kumarswamy realized that his party’s candidate cannot win the polls, he decided to boycott the elections. By the time two of the 37 JD(S) MLAs had cast their vote.

A total of 28 JD(S) MLAs boycotted the elections after a heated argument with the Returning Officer who had allowed Congress MLA and former Minister Baburao Chinchansur and Revenue Minister Kagodu Thimmappa to vote again with a second ballot paper.

Remaining seven suspended JD(S) MLAs violated the whip and cross voted to facilitate the victory of the third candidate fielded by the Congress.

Among the four other candidates in the fray, Rajeev Chandrasekhar of the BJP got the highest number of votes (50). Congress candidates — G.C. Chandrashekar got 46 votes, L. Hanumanthaiah 44 and Naseer Hussain got 42 votes. Interestingly, among the Congress candidates, the third candidate, Chandrashekar, secured the highest votes.

Following heated arguments, voting was suspended for some time. Based on the JD(S) petition, the Election Commission of India replaced Mr. Murthy and appointed M.S. Kumaraswmay as the Retuning Officer. Mr. Kumarawamy is the Joint Secretary of the State Legislative Assembly.

Four votes were declared invalid. Votes cast in the second ballot paper by Mr. Chinchansur and Mr. Thimmappa and those of two other legislators were declared invalid as they marked the ballot paper wrongly.

Comments

Ilyas bin abdullah
 - 
Friday, 23 Mar 2018

The Gowda father-son combination never tried seriously to get elected Farooq Bhai to Rajya sabha. In 2016 and now they knew that BMF will never reach the end point, because their tangrams proved only gimmicks. If big Gowda tried seriously in congress high command level definitely there would have been good result. It is just hushups, they really wants Farooq Bhai beside them in state politics to serve their needs.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
February 29,2020

Like most of the political phenomenon, even the practice of Nationalism is not a static one. It changes with the changing political equations of the political forces and assumes the expressions which are very diverse. As such the phenomenon of Nationalism has a long journey and various state policies in particular have used it for purposes which relate more to the power of the state ‘vis a vis’ its people, power of the state ‘vis a vis’ the neighboring countries among others.

In India there has been a certain change in the practices of the state which have transformed the meaning of Nationalism during last few years. Particularly with BJP, the Hindu Nationalist outfit gaining simple majority, it has unfolded the policies where one can discern the drastic change in the meaning and application of Nationalism in regard to its citizens, particularly those belonging to minority community, with regard to those who are liberal, and with those who stand with the concept of Human rights.

Our former Prime Minister of Dr. Manmohan Singh hit the nail on the head when he said that “Nationalism and the "Bharat Mata Ki Jai" slogan are being misused to construct a "militant and purely emotional" idea of India that excludes millions of residents and citizens. Former Prime Minister recently stated this in an apparent attack on the BJP.” The occasion was the release of a book, ‘Who is Bharat Mata’, edited by Purushottam Agarwal and Radhakrishna. This is a compilation of significant extracts from writings of Nehru, and important assessments of and contributions of Nehru by prominent personalities.

Dr. Singh went on to add "With an inimitable style…Nehru laid the foundation of the universities, academies and cultural institutions of Modern India. But for Nehru's leadership, independent India would not have become what it is today," This statement of Dr. Singh has great importance in contemporary times, as Nehru is being denigrated by Hindu nationalists for all the problems which India is facing today and attempts are on to undermine his role and glorifying Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel. This is also significant as it gives us the glimpses of what Nationalism meant for Nehru.

As Singh’s statement captures the present nationalism being practiced by BJP and company, the Hindu nationalists, immediately shot back saying that Dr. Singh is supporting the anti India activities at JNU and Jamia and his party is supporting the anti India nationalists. They asked whether Singh likes the nationalism of the likes of Shashi Tharoor or Manishankar Ayer who are provoking the Shaheen Bagh protest rather than making the protestors quiet. Whether he likes the anti national protests which go on at JNU or Jamia? As per them there is no Nationalism in Congress. One more example being cited is the private visit of Shatrughan Sinha who talked to Pakistani President during his visit there recently!

Most of the arguments being used to oppose Dr. Singh are very superficial. What is being referred to; is not opposition to Indian nationalism and its central values which were the core of anti colonial struggles. While ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ may not be acceptable to a section of population, even the book he was releasing has the title ‘Who is Bharat Mata’. What is being stated by Singh is the twist which slogan ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ has been used by Hindu nationalists to frighten the religious minorities.

Indian nation came into being on the values, which later were the foundation of Indian Constitution. Indian Constitution carefully picked up the terminology which was away from the concepts of Hindu or Muslim nationalism. That’s how the country came to be called as ‘India that is Bharat’. The freedom of expression which was the hallmark of freedom movement and it was given a pride of place in our Constitution. It respected the diversity and formulated rules where the nation was not based on particular culture, as Hindu nationalists will like us to believe, but cultural diversity was centrally recognized in the Constitution. In addition promoting good relations with neighbors and other countries of the World was also part of our principles.

JNU, Jamia and AMU are being demonized as most institutions so far regard the freedom of expression as a core part of Indian democracy. These institutions have been thriving on discussions and debates which have base in liberalism. Deliberately some slogans have been constructed to defame these institutions. While Constitution mandates good relations with neighbors, creation of ‘Anti Pakistan hysteria’ is the prime motive of many a channels and sections of other media, which are servile to the ideology of ruling Government. They also violate most of the norms of ethical journalism, where the criticism of the ruling party is an important factor to keep the ruling dispensation in toes.

A stifling atmosphere has been created during last six years. In this the Prime Minster can take a detour, land in Pakistan to have a cup of tea with Pakistan PM, but a Congress leader talking to Pakistani President is a sign of being anti National. Students taking out a march while reading the preamble of Indian Constitution are labeled as anti-national; and are stopped while those openly wielding guns near Jamia or Shaheen Bagh roam freely.

Nationalism should promote amity and love of the people; it should pave the way for growth and development. Currently the nationalism which is dominant and stalking the streets has weakened the very fraternity, which is one of the pillars of our democracy. Nehru did explain that Bharat Mata is not just our mountains, rivers and land but primarily the people who inhabit the land. Which nationalism to follow was settled during the freedom movement when Muslim nationalism and Hindu nationalism were rejected by the majority of people of India in favor of the Nationalism of Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and Maulana Azad, where minorities are equal citizens, deserving affirmative action. In today’s scenario the Hindu nationalists cannot accept any criticism of their policies.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 11,2020

Bantwal, Jan 11: Seven people were booked for organising protest without taking permission or intimation, police said on Saturday.

The alleged accused were identified as Nandavar Juma Masjid President Basheer, Khateeb of the Masjid Abdul Majeed Darimi, Gram Panchayath President Mohammed Shareef Nandavar, former President of Masjid Majeed, Arif Nandavar, Mustafa and Abubaker.

They have been booked for allegedly organising protest outside Nandavar Juma Masjid on Jan 10 afternoon without intimation to police or obtaining permission.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 18,2020

Mangaluru, Jan 18: Congress leader Siddaramaiah targeted Union Home Minister Amit Shah soon after he arrived in Bengaluru on Saturday, demanding his answers on various questions pertaining to the state.

In a slew of tweets under the #AnswerMadiShah banner, Siddaramaiah raised issues ranging from the August 2019 floods to the recent police shootout in Mangaluru that killed two people during an anti-CAA protest.

On December 19, Jaleel (45) and Nausheen (24) were killed after the police opened fire during a protest against the CAA.

“Two innocent victims were killed in Mangaluru in what public opinion says that it is a fake encounter. You are the Home Minister of the country. Don't you think adequate investigation has to take place when people cry foul about the incident?” Siddaramaiah asked.

He further asked: “Mr Amit Shah, before investing time to brainwash people to accept your divisive policies, why don't you visit flood-affected areas again and assess if the Central government funds  are sufficient or not?”

The Congress leader pointed out that Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa had claimed that Karnataka suffered losses of over Rs 35,000 crore due to the floods. “But your aid is just Rs 1,870 crore. When are you planning to give the remaining? Will there be any funds left after the implementation of CAA, NPR & NRC?” he added.

The former chief minister brought up the Mahadayi river water sharing dispute. It may be recalled that Shah, in the run-up to the Karnataka Assembly elections in 2018, had promised a resolution to the dispute within six months if BJP was voted to power in the state.

“Mr. Amit Shah, your colleagues give contradictory statements on the initiation of Mahadayi project. Why is there a change in stance after elections? What is your stand on the issue,” Siddaramaiah asked.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.