FIR against Sajjad Nomani an attempt of intimidation: PFI

Media Release
March 10, 2018

Popular Front Chairman E Abubacker in a statement took strong exception to the FIR lodged by The Hazratganj police against All India Muslim Personal Law Board spokesperson Maulana Sajjad Nomani alleging sedition.

He rubbished the accusations made by UP Shia Waqf Board Chairman, Waseem Rizvi against Maulana.

 Maulana Nomani is known for his integrity and commitment to the constitutional values, and has never spoken against any religion or community.

At the same time, he has been a vocal critic of Sangh Pariwar’s divisive politics. Criticizing RSS and its ideology of hatred is not criticizing a community. It seems that Mr. Rizvi working as a tool of RSS and taking his cue from Sangh Pariwar in their plan to intimidate Muslim leaders criticizing RSS into silence.

This FIR is detrimental to the freedom of expression guaranteed by the constitution. We express our solidarity with Maulana Nomani.  RSS has to stop using individuals like Rizvi to defame Muslim leaders, stated the release issued by PFI chief.

Comments

shaji
 - 
Sunday, 11 Mar 2018

This Rizvi is agent of Sangh parivar and gets paid on statement wise basis. The more anti muslim statements he gives more he gets paid. He is an enemy of all muslims and his statements should not be considered by any Law agency. He is trying to defame Muslims on the behest of Sangh parivar. His illegal and illogic statemetns will give rise to trouble all over India. hence he should be arrested immediately.

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
April 21,2020

New Delhi, Apr 21: The historic rout in oil markets that sent US crude prices plummeting to as much as minus USD 40 a barrel is unlikely to translate into any big reduction in petrol and diesel prices in India as domestic pricing is based on different benchmark, and refineries are already filled up to brim and cannot buy US crude just yet.

With storage capacity already overflowing amid coronavirus-induced demand collapse, traders rushed to to get rid of unwanted stocks triggering the collapse of US West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude for May delivery.

Indian Oil Corp (IOC) Chairman Sanjiv Singh said the collapse was triggered by traders unable to take deliveries of crude they had previously booked because of a demand collapse. And so they paid the seller to keep oil in their storage.

"If you look at June futures, it is trading in positive territory... around USD 20 per barrel," he said.

Low oil prices may seem good in short-term but in the long run it will hurt the oil economy as producers will have no surplus to invest in exploration and production which will lead to a drop in production, he said.

He did not comment on retail fuel prices that have been static since March 16.

Oil companies have not changed rates despite a fall in international prices as they first adjusted them against the increase that was warranted from a Rs 3 per litre hike in excise duty and close to Re 1 per litre additional cost of switching over to cleaner BS-VI grade fuel from April 1.

Petrol in Delhi is priced at Rs 69.59 a litre and diesel comes for Rs 62.29 per litre.

"The negative price has no direct impact on India or Indian oil prices, as this has taken place due to crude oil produced and traded within the US. India's prices are driven partly by another benchmark, the Brent, which is still trading at USD 25/barrel. Therefore, the retail price of fuels in India are unlikely to fall," said Amit Bhandari, Fellow, Energy and Environment Studies, Gateway House.

Also, Indian refineries are already overflowing as fuel demand has evaporated due to the unprecedented nationwide lockdown imposed to curb spread of COVID-19. So, they can't rush to buy US crude.

The refineries have already cut operating rate to half because the fuel they produce has not been sold yet.

India imports 4 million barrels/day (1.4 billion barrels/year) of oil. The country has been benefitting from the falling prices of oil for the last five years, when oil dropped from a peak of USD 110/barrel to USD 50-60/barrel last year, enabling India to invest in public service programmes.

"However, the additional USD 30 fall of this week is good for India - but there is also a downside. If oil prices are too low, the economies of oil-rich gulf countries will be hurt, threatening the job prospects of the 8 million Indians working in the Gulf countries. India is the largest recipient of foreign remittances due to these workers – very low oil prices will hurt this cash stream," Bhandari said.

He said the negative price of oil shows how much oil oversupply exists in international markets today. "Global oil consumption has fallen due to the COVID-19 pandemic that traders are willing to pay customers to get rid of the barrels they can't store. The world does not have enough storage capacity, and dumping the oil is an environmental crime."

The first half of April saw Brent crude oil prices plummet 63.6 per cent to USD 26.9 per barrel. Prices of Western Texas Intermediate (WTI), the American oil, had also fallen similarly by 63.1 per cent.

But on April 20, WTI prices turned rapidly negative because traders on the Nymex exchange rushed to offload their May futures positions a day before expiry of contracts (on April 21).

Such WTI futures are traded on the Nymex exchange with contracts settled in physical crude oil. Problem is, those who had gone long are unable to find storage facilities for the oil and had to liquidate their contracts before expiry. This caused the plunge in WTI prices.

Contrast to this, June WTI Nymex futures prices is hovering around USD 21, while Brent for June delivery is at USD 25.

Miren Lodha, Director, CRISIL Research said the demand for crude oil was declining already because of economic slowdown when the COVID-19 pandemic-driven lockdowns crushed it further.

Consequently, oil demand is expected to contract by 8-10 million barrels per day (mbpd) in 2020 assuming demand recovery begins from the third quarter of the year, he said, adding if recovery doesn't happen by then, further demand destruction could occur.

On the supply side, producers reining in output following a strategic deal between OPEC members, Russia and the US.

Under this agreement, OPEC+ would reduce oil production by 9.7 mbpd for May and June, but gradually ease the curb to 7.7 mbpd between July and December 2020, and to 5.8 mbpd till April 2022 to stabilise prices.

"This is expected to reduce some surplus in the market by the end of 2020," Lodha said.

Crude oil demand is expected to decline by over 20 mbpd in April alone. Typically, monthly global demand is about 100 mbpd. Given this scenario, supply curbs would have limited influence.

Consequently, Brent oil prices is expected to be in the USD 25-30 range for the second quarter while increasing marginally in the last 2 quarters of 2020.

"The gigantic inventory build-ups and lack of storage facilities would also put pressure on prices," he said, adding overall Brent could average USD 30-35 in 2020, with a strong downward bias.

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
February 24,2020

New Delhi, Feb 24: The shared values between India and the US are "discrimination, bigotry, and hostility towards refugees and asylum seekers", Amnesty International USA said in a joint statement with Amnesty International India ahead of US President Donald Trump's visit to India on Monday.

Trump, accompanied by his wife Melania, daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner as well as senior officials of his administration, landed in Ahmedabad on the first leg of his two-day visit to India.

"Anti-Muslim sentiment permeates the policies of both U.S. and Indian leaders. For decades, the U.S.-India relationship was anchored by claims of shared values of human rights and human dignity. Now, those shared values are discrimination, bigotry, and hostility towards refugees and asylum seekers,” Margaret Huang, Amnesty International USA’s executive director, was quoted as saying in the statement.

It was a reference to the anti-CAA protests in India, the internet lockdown in Jammu and Kashmir and the Muslim ban expansion by President Trump affecting Nigeria, Eritrea, Myanmar, Kyrgyzstan, Sudan and Tanzania, the statement said.

It added that Amnesty International USA’s researchers travelled to Lebanon and Jordan to conduct nearly 50 interviews with refugees that as a result of the previous version of the ban have been stranded in countries where they face restrictive policies, increasingly hostile environments, and lack the same rights as permanent residents or citizens.

The statement also came down hard on the Indian government, hitting out at the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) 2019 and saying it legitimises discrimination based on religious grounds.

It criticised statements such as “identify them (the protestors) by their clothes” or “shoot the traitors” by Prime Minister Modi and his party workers. Such remarks "peddled the narrative of fear and division that has fuelled further violence", it said.

“The internet and political lockdown in Kashmir has lasted for months and the enactment of CAA and the crackdown on protests has shown a leadership that is lacking empathy and a willingness to engage. We call on President Trump and Prime Minister Modi to work with the international community and address our concerns in their bilateral conversations,” Avinash Kumar, executive director, Amnesty International India said in the statement.

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.
coastaldigest.com web desk
June 16,2020

New Delhi, Jun 16: Despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi led government’s attempt to downplay the border dispute with China, matters have heated up unprecedentedly along the Line of Actual Control (LAC)- the effective Sino-India border in Eastern Ladakh. 

The country has lost three precious lives – an army officer and two soldiers. The last time blood was spilled on the LAC, before the latest episode, was 45 years ago when the Chinese ambushed an Assam Rifles patrol in Tulung La.

India had lost four soldiers on October 20, 1975 in Tulung La, the last time bullets were fired on the India-China border though both the countries witnessed bitter stand-offs later at Sumdorong Chu valley in 1987, Depsang in 2013, Chumar in 2014 and Doklam in 2017.

Between 1962 and 1975, the biggest clash between India and China took place in Nathu La pass in 1967 when reports suggest that around 80 Indian soldiers were killed and many more Chinese personnel.

While three soldiers, including a Commanding Officer, were killed in the latest episode in Galwan Valley, the government describes it as a "violent clash" and does not mention opening fire.

New Delhi described the locality where the 1975 incident took place as "well within" its territory only to be rebuffed by Beijing as "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong".

The Ministry of External Affairs had then said that the Chinese had crossed the LAC and ambushed the soldiers while Beijing claimed the Indians entered their territory and did not return despite warnings.

The Indian government maintained that the ambush on the Assam Rifles' patrol in 1975 took place "500 metres south of Tulung" on the border between India and Tibet and "therefore in Indian territory". It said Chinese soldiers "penetrating" Indian territory implied a "change in China's position" on the border question but the Chinese denied this and blamed India for the incident.

The US diplomatic cables quoted an Indian military intelligence officer saying that the Chinese had erected stone walls on the Indian side of Tulung La and from these positions fired several hundred rounds at the Indian patrol.

"Four of the Indians had gone into a leading position while two (the ones who escaped) remained behind. The senior military intelligence officer emphasised that the soldiers on the Indian patrol were from the area and had patrolled that same region many times before," the cable said.

One of the US cables showed that former US Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger sought details of the October 1975 clash "without approaching the host governments on actual location of October 20 incident". He also wanted to know what ground rules were followed regarding the proximity of LAC by border patrols.

A cable sent from the US mission in India on November 4, 1975 appeared to have doubts about the Chinese account saying it was "highly defensive".

"Given the unsettled situation on the sub-continent, particularly in Bangladesh, both Chinese and Indian authorities have authorised stepped up patrols along the disputed border. The clash may well have ensued when two such patrols unexpectedly encountered each other," it said.

Another cable from China on the same day quoted another October 1974 cable, which spoke about Chinese officials being concerned for long that "some hotheaded person on the PRC (People's Republic of China) might provoke an incident that could lead to renewed Sino-Indian hostilities. It went on to say that this clash suggested that "such concerns and apprehensions are not unwarranted".

According to the United States diplomatic cables, Chinese Foreign Ministry on November 3, 1975 disputed the statement of the MEA spokesperson, who said the incident took place inside Indian territory.

The Chinese had said "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong". In its version of the 1975 incident, they said Indian troops crossed the LAC at 1:30 PM at Tulung Pass on the Eastern Sector and "intruded" into their territory when personnel at the Civilian Checkpost at Chuna in Tibet warned them to withdraw.

Ignoring this, they claimed, Indian soldiers made "continual provocation and even opened fire at the Chinese civilian checkpost personnel, posing a grave threat to the life of the latter. The Chinese civilian checkpost personnel were obliged to fire back in self defence."

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson had also said they told the Indian side that they could collect the bodies "anytime" and on October 28, collected the bodies, weapons and ammunition and "signed a receipt".

The US cables from the then USSR suggested that the official media carried reports from Delhi on the October 1975 incident and they cited only Indian accounts of the incident "ridiculing alleged Chinese claims that the Indians crossed the line and opened fire first".

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.