Forbes list: Saudi Crown Prince 8th most powerful person in the world, PM Modi 9th

Agencies
May 9, 2018

New Delhi: Forbes released its 2018 list of the 75 most powerful people who make the world turn, on Wednesday, which declared Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi as the ninth most powerful person in the world.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has topped the list this year replacing Russian President Vladimir Putin who was at the top for four consecutive years.

Beating the likes of Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Theresa May, Kim Jong-un and Justin Trudeau, Modi made it to the top 10.

About Modi being the 9th most powerful person, Forbes said: “India's populist prime minister remains hugely popular in the second most populous country on earth, with a population of 1.3 billion people.”

Forbes also cited sudden demonetisation step taken by Modi. It said  “In November 2016 he unexpectedly announced plans to eliminate India's two largest banknotes in a bid to reduce money laundering and corruption.”

“Modi has raised his profile as a global leader in recent years during official visits with Donald Trump and Xi Jinping. He has also emerged as a key figure in the international effort to tackle climate change, as warming affects millions of his country's rural citizens.”

Mukesh Ambani, the only Indian, apart from Modi who made it to the list this year has been ranked 32. Forbes cited: “In 2016, Reliance sparked a price war in India's hyper-competitive telecom market with the launch of 4G phone service Jio. Jio has signed on 160 million customers by offering free domestic voice calls, dirt-cheap data services and virtually free smartphones.”

Forbes opened the list with the introductory lines “There are nearly 7.5 billion humans on planet Earth, but these 75 men and women make the world turn. Forbes' annual ranking of The World’s Most Powerful People identifies one person out of every 100 million whose actions mean the most.”

Here is the list of top 10 among the 75 most powerful people in world:

1.            Xi Jinping (China)

2.            Vladimir Putin (Russia)

3.            Donald Trump (United States)

4.            Angela Merkel (Germany)

5.            Jeff Bezos (Amazon.com)

6.            Pope Francis (Roman Catholic Church)

7.            Bill Gates (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation)

8.            Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud (Saudi Arabia )

9.            Narendra Modi (India)

10.          Larry Page    (Google)

You can check the full list by following the link in this tweet:

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
March 29,2020

Beijing, Mar 29: In a rare display of public anger in China, dozens of people in central Hubei province, the epicentre of the coronavirus outbreak till recently, attacked official vehicles after they were stopped from crossing a bridge and travel to neighbouring Jiangxi after the lifting of the lockdown.
Hubei province with over 56 million people was kept under lockdown from January 23 as part of aggressive measures to bring down COVID-19 cases which rapidly spread in the area.

Videos on Chinese social media on Friday showed unprecedented scenes of police from Hubei and Jiangxi clashing on the bridge connecting the two provinces over barricades erected from stopping Hubei people from moving out over fears of coronavirus spreading.

Policemen from both sides argued over how to verify if people were allowed to enter Jiangxi, according to local media reports.

It was a major relief for millions of people in Hubei province, when the Chinese government which kept it under lockdown lifted the restrictions on travel.

The government will permit people from the province to travel if they hold a green health code, meaning no contact with any infected or suspected COVID-19 cases.

But people of Hubei to their shock on Friday found roadblocks on the 1st Yangtze River Bridge that separates Huangmei county in Hubei erected by Huangmei county of Jiangxi province.

In local media reports, witnesses were quoted as saying that Huangmei police in Jiujiang erected roadblocks on the bridge to stop people from Hubei from crossing it, a move they alleged stigmatised them.

Video footage shared online showed rows of police armed with riot shields holding back the crowds, while members of the public could be seen damaging and even overturning police vehicles.

In a clip published by the Huanggang city government, which administers Huangmei, the county's Communist Party chief Ma Yanzhou could be heard speaking to the people through a loud hailer, warning them that by gathering in a large group they were increasing their chances of contracting the virus, Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post reported.

While it is unclear exactly how the clash started, police from the two sides published separate official statements online, which were quickly deleted, it said.

The incident underlines the problems China faces as it seeks a return to normalcy after months of lockdown, the Post said.

After the incident, the governments of Huangmei and Jiujiang on Friday issued a joint statement saying they had agreed to remove the barriers set up to restrict travel during the lockdown, and also to recognise each other's health screening codes to make it easier for people in good health to get to where they needed to be, the Post report said.

An article by the ruling Communist Party of China (CPC) mouthpiece, People''s Daily acknowledged the problems in getting the country back on its feet.

"In the past few days, all walks of life have called for governments to accept workers from Hubei," it said.

"However, it is undeniable that some places, intentionally or not, have set up obstacles for Hubei migrant workers to return to their posts and hold prejudices against them."

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
June 30,2020

Beijing, June 30: China said on Tuesday it was concerned about India’s decision to ban Chinese mobile apps such as Bytedance’s TikTok and Tencent’s WeChat and was making checks to verify the situation.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told reporters during a daily briefing that (the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government of) India has a responsibility to uphold the rights of Chinese businesses.

India on Monday banned 59, mostly Chinese, mobile apps in its strongest move yet targeting China in the online space since a border crisis erupted between the two countries this month.

The apps are “prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India, the defence of India, the security of state and public order", the ministry of information technology said in a statement, which came two weeks after 20 Indian Army personnel were killed in a violent clash on the India-China border in Ladakh.

The companies have been invited to offer clarifications before a government panel, which will decide whether the ban can be removed or will stay.

The move also came ahead of military and diplomatic talks between India and China scheduled this week.

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
August 6,2020

New Delhi Aug 6: In a new twist in the Vijay Mallya case, a certain document connected with the case in the Supreme Court has gone missing from the apex court files. 

A bench comprising Justices U.U. Lalit and Ashok Bhushan adjourned the hearing to August 20.

It was hearing the review plea filed by Mallya against a July 14, 2017 judgment wherein he was found guilty of contempt for not paying Rs 9,000 crore dues to banks despite repeated directions, although he had transferred $40 million to his children.

The bench was looking for a reply on an intervention application, which it seemed has gone missing from the case papers.Parties involved in the case sought more time to file fresh copies.

On June 19, the Supreme Court sought explanation from its registry regarding Mallya's appeal against the May 2017 conviction in the contempt case for not repaying Rs 9,000 crore dues to banks not listed for the last 3 years.

A bench comprising Justices Lalit and Bhushan had asked the Registry to furnish all the details including names of the officials who had dealt with the file concerning the Review Petition for last three years.

The bench said according to the record, placed before it, the review petition was not listed before the court for last three years. "Before we deal with the submissions raised in the Review Petition, we direct the Registry to explain why the Review Petition was not listed before the concerned Court for last three years," said the bench.In May 2017, the apex court held him guilty of contempt of court for transferring $40 million to his children, and ordered him to appear on July 10 to argue on the quantum of punishment.

The bench said let the explanation be furnished within two weeks. "The Review Petition shall, thereafter, be considered on merits," it added.In 2017, the apex court passed the order on a contempt petition against Mallya by a consortium of banks led by the SBI. 

The banks claimed Mallya transferred $40 million from Daigeo to his children's accounts, and did not use this money to clear his debt. Banks cited this as violation of judicial orders.

stm88 info live rtp slot

slot auto scatter hitam

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.