First Indian Tax Amnesty Since 1997 Seeks To Boost Compliance: Foreign Media

New Delhi, Jan 7: When a reign of terror was unleashed by "masked goons" in the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) on Sunday, Delhi Police registered two cases against varsity students union president Aishe Ghosh, who was badly injured in the attack, within a span of five minutes.

The registration of cases on two separate complaints against Ghosh and other students filed by JNU security department on January 3 and January 4 were registered on Sunday night when the violence was on, triggering questions about the motive behind the timing.

While the FIRs against Ghosh and others were registered between 8.44 pm and 8.49 pm after the JNUSU president was admitted to AIIMS, an FIR on the Sunday violence was registered on Monday at 5.36 am against unknown persons. The Sunday violence case has been transferred to Crime Branch for further investigations.

Questions are being raised over the registration of FIRs on Sunday while the complaints were filed on the previous days. Students allege that it was an afterthought from the police and authorities, as a nationwide outrage erupted as soon as the violence was reported.

Delhi Police is under attack for not coming to the aid of students targeted by the mob of ABVP activists armed with iron rods and sticks who went on a rampage on the campus. While no single person in the Sunday violence was arrested, the police are also accused of being a "mute spectator" by allowing the rioters to leave the campus without being arrested.

In its complaints, the JNU Security Department has alleged that Ghosh and others entered into a verbal and physical scuffle with security guards, including women, when officials tried to open the Centre for Information System (CIS) that was blocked by students protesting against the fee hike and registration process.

While the January 3 complaint claims that the students switched off the power supply to the CIS and evicted staff forcefully, the January 4 complaint alleged that they damaged the information system.

They also claimed the students damaged the servers, made it dysfunctional, severely damaged optic fibre cables and broke the biometric system in the CIS. The complaint also cited a Supreme Court order that prevented any protest within 100 metres of Administration Block and claimed the students violated the direction.

The FIR filed on Sunday violence on the basis of the statement of Inspector Anand Yadav said that the first phase of violence was reported at 3.45 pm when "40-50 unidentified" people who had "covered their faces" attacked students in Periyar Hostel and the situation was brought under control.

However at around 7 pm, "50-60 people with rods in their hands" targeted students in Sabarmati Hostel in which students were attacked and public property destroyed.

The FIR said that students were injured but skipped the mention of the attack on teachers, who were injured. At least two faculty members Sucharita Sen and Ameet Parameswaran were taken to AIIMS while several other teachers suffered minor injuries.

Expressing concern over the ban imposed on TikTok by the government of India, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has reportedly called the development in the south Asian country “worrisome”.

TikTok was amongst the 59 Chinese apps that were banned in India but why it hogs the maximum limelight because TikTok had the second-largest user base in India with over 200 million users.

As per The Verge writer Casey Newton, Zuckerberg was worried about TikTok’s India ban. Although it soon cashed into the opportunity and released a TikTok clone “Reels”, the government’s reason behind banning the app in India wasn’t received well by Mark Zuckerberg. 

He had said that if India can ban a platform with over 200 million users in India without citing concrete reasons, it can also ban Facebook if something goes amiss on the security and privacy front.

Why Mark finds it particularly worrisome because Facebook is already involved in a lot tussle with the governments across the world involving national security concerns. 

“Facebook already faces fights around the world from governments on both the left and the right related to issues that fit under the broad umbrella of national security: election interference, influence campaigns, hate speech, and even just plain-old democratic speech. Zuckerberg knows that the leap from banning TikTok on national security grounds to banning Facebook on national security grounds is more of a short hop,” the report by Casey read.

Facebook till now has not faced any kind of issue in India but considering the debacle with the other governments, it is not entirely wrong to worry about its future in India if any national security issue arises. Back in 2016, Facebook’s Free Basics service, which means a free but restricted internet service, was banned in India by the telecom regulators. 

The TRAI had said that the Free Basic services were banned in India because it violated the principles of net neutrality. With Free Basics services, Facebook had planned to bring more unconnected users online. But since 2016, there has been no major tussle between the Indian government and Zuckerberg due to national security issues.

Dhaka, Jan 3: Bangladesh's paramilitary force chief said on Thursday that a total of 445 Bangladeshi nationals returned from India in last two months following the publication of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) by the Indian government.

Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) Director General Maj Gen Md Shafeenul Islam disclosed the figure during a press briefing here.

"About 1,000 people were arrested in 2019 for illegal border crossings from India to Bangladesh, with 445 of them returning home in November and December," he said.

After verifying their identities through local representatives, BGB came to know that all the intruders are Bangladeshis, Islam said, adding that 253 cases were lodged against them for illegal trespass, while initial investigations found that at least three of them were human traffickers.

The BGB Director said the trespassing did not create any tension between the border forces of Bangladesh and India.

Last week, Islam visited India where he said that the creation of the NRC is completely an "internal affair" of India and the cooperation between the border guarding forces of the two countries is very good.

He said the BGB will continue to do its work of preventing illegal border crossings as per its mandate.

A BGB delegation, led by Islam, was on a bilateral visit to India to hold DG-level border talks with its counterparts, the Border Security Force (BSF).

The talks took place from December 26-29, during which a host of issues related to cross-border smuggling and activities of criminals and others along the 4,096-km-long front were discussed.

Responding to a question, Islam said, "No discussion was held at the conference over the (NRC) issue".

He said during the five-day talks held in New Delhi, the BGB demanded that the BSF should take effective steps to prevent killings of Bangladeshis on frontiers as casualty figures sharply rose in 2019.

"The number of border killings in 2019 was highest in the last four years. As per our calculation, the number of such unexpected deaths was 35," the BGB chief said.

However, the BSF estimate of the casualty figure is much lower than our calculation, he said.

Islam said the BSF is following the policy of maintaining maximum restraint and minimal use of force even after being attacked by "armed border offenders".

A statement issued by the BSF last month in New Delhi after the conclusion of the DG-level talks said, "On the concern of the BGB regarding the death of Bangladeshi nationals on borders, it was informed to them that a non-lethal weapon policy is strictly followed by BSF personnel on borders.

"Firing is resorted to only in self-defence, when BSF patrols are gheraoed and attacked by ‘dah’ (a sharp-edged weapon) etc. It was specified that the BSF does not discriminate between criminals based on nationality," it said.