Govt issues rules for no-fly list

News Network
September 8, 2017

New Delhi, Sep 8: Unruly fliers will land in a national no-fly list from now on that can extend upto life time for offences ranging from verbal abuse to life threatening behaviour.

The government on Friday unveiled the changes made to Civil Aviation Requirement (CAR) to enable the country to promulgate the national no-fly list, which it said is "unique and first of its kind in the world".

The new rules provide graded punishment for offences which are categorised into three levels. One will end up in the no-fly list for upto three months if the passenger is found of violating Level 1 (unruly behaviour - verbal) offences like disruptive behaviour, physical gesture and verbal abuse.

A flier who commits a Level 2 offence (physical behaviour) will be banned for up to six months. The offender will end up in the list for "two or more years without limit" if he commits a Level 3 offence which is categorised as life-threatening behaviour like murderous assault, choking and damaging aircraft operating system among others.

For repeat offenders, the person will be banned for twice the period of previous ban. These provisions are airline specific. An airline can ban a passenger but others can continue to fly the passenger if they desire so

The amendments to the existing CAR on 'Handling Unruly/Disruptive Passengers' came following the incident involving Shiv Sena MP Ravindra Gaikwad who repeatedly slapped an Air India manager in April.

"The no-fly list provisions are applicable to every passenger. There are no exemptions," Civil Aviation Minister Ashok Gajapathi Raju told reporters. The provisions of the CAR came into existence on Friday itself, which also said, "sale of tickets inadvertently to such person(s) shall not confer a right upon them to fly."

The complaint of unruly behaviour should be referred to an internal committee set up by the airline have headed by a retired district and sessions judge with a representative each of another airline and passenger association. This panel should decide the matter in 30 days and till such time, airline can impose ban on passenger from flying for 30 days. In case the committee fails to take a decision in 30 days, passenger will be free to fly.

If any party is aggrieved with the decision, they can approach a government-appointed panel headed by a retired High Court judge, representative of airline who is not below the rank of Vice President and representative of passenger association or consumer forum. (ENDS)

Unruly behaviour

Level 1: Unruly behaviour (verbal)
Level 2: Physically behaviour
Level 3: Life-threatening behaviour

Flying ban

Level 1 offences: upto 3 months
Level 2 offences: upto six months
Level 3 offences: minimum 2 years or more without limit
** Persons barred by MHA: such time that the person is perceived to be national security risk

** Sale of ticket by mistake to such a person shall not confer a right upon him to fly.

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.
The wire
May 20,2020

Bhopal, May 20: Two months after Deepak Bundele, an advocate and former journalist, was brutally assaulted by the Madhya Pradesh’s Betul Police on March 23, an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Kotwali Police Station in Betul district, BS Patel, approached the victim to record his statement. However, he allegedly tried to convince Bundele to withdraw the case saying that the cops had mistaken him for a Muslim since he has a long beard and assaulted him. But, the cop added, they were ashamed of the incident after they came to know that they had beaten their ‘Hindu brother’.
Bundele was on his way to the government hospital for diabetes treatment, a day before the countrywide lockdown was announced, when the assault occurred. Miffed with the incident and after the district police denied to register the case, he wrote to the State Human Rights Commission; Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh High Court; Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan; Vivek Johri, Director General of Police, Madhya Pradesh; and SP Betul to register an FIR against the police officials and take punitive action against them.
In the wake of COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, section 144 had been imposed in Betul district and public movement was restricted when the incident had occurred. 
Talking to Bundele, ASI Patel had said, “We seek an apology on behalf of those officials [who assaulted Bundele]. We are truly embarrassed because of the incident. If you want, I can bring those officials and make them apologise in person to you. They mistook you as a Muslim and assaulted you, since you had a long beard. And the man (who assaulted you) is a kattar (staunch) Hindu…In Hindu-Muslim riots whenever a Muslim is arrested, they beat them up brutally, always,” the police official can be heard saying in an audio recording shared by the victim.
In the 14 minutes long audio, he further said, “I request to you to withdraw the complaint. Please agree to our request; understand that we are living in Gandhi’s country; we are all Gandhi’s children…I have at least 50 friends from your caste.”
The cop continued, “All those people are ashamed that they did something like this to a Hindu brother without knowing his identity. We do not have any enmity against you. Whenever there is a Hindu-Muslim riot, police always supports the Hindus; even Muslims know this. But whatever happened with you was because of ignorance. For that, I have no words.” 
Refuting ASI Patel’s claim, Bundele claimed that there was no Hindu-Muslim riot that day, and asked whether he was beaten for being wrongly identified as a Muslim. The police officials agreed, and said: “Yes, exactly.”
“When I constantly declined to withdraw the compliant, he indirectly threatened me saying, ‘Agree to our request, else you and your advocate brother will face consequences’,” Bundele claimed. 
When contacted Betul SP DS Bhadoriya said, “I’m not aware of this audio clip. I will taken strict action, if I receive any such complain.”
Bundele said that he has written to the DGP and other senior police officials with details about the incident.   
THE ASSAULT
On March 23 evening, when Bundele was on his way to a hospital for the treatment, Betul Police allegedly thrashed him. The 32-year-old advocate had worked as a journalist for various dailies in Madhya Pradesh’s state capital for a decade. He moved to Betul in 2017 and started practising in the district court with his brother. “I have been a patient of diabetes and blood pressure for the last 15 years. On March 23, since I was not feeling well, I decided to visit the hospital and get some medicines. But I was stopped by the police midway,” Bundele had said. 
Even though the advocate, who sports a beard, said that he explained to police personnel that he had to get his medicines but one of them slapped him without trying to listen to what he was saying. “When I protested and said that police have no right to beat the public, they got anxious and within no time, many police officials came and started beating me up with sticks,” he added. 
"I need constant medication and lifesaving medicines to survive and I told the policemen everything while they were assaulting me. But, they kept hitting me, even after I fell,” he said, adding, "I bled for almost a 2-3 days after the incident.”
Bundele, sustained multiple injuries and his ear bled for almost two days after the incident, but, Betul police denied to file an FIR in the incident.
‘WILL MOVE TO THE HIGH COURT’
“Even after two months of the incident, no FIR has been registered and it seems that police is trying to sweep the matter under the carpet,” Bundele said, adding, “I have talked to the Supreme Court’s veteran advocate Vivek Tankha and Etasham Hashmi and will take this matter to the court.”
He also raised serious concerns about the communal angle of the incident, saying, “It’s a matter of grave concern that the police is turning communal and targeting a particular community.”

Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.thewire.in/article/communalism/madhya-pr…

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.
Agencies
July 23,2020

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.

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.
Agencies
June 26,2020

New Delhi, Jun 26: The Road Transport and Highways Ministry has issued a notification to enable citizens with mild to medium colour blindness to obtain a driving licence.

An official release said that the Ministry has been taking measures to enable divyangjan citizens to avail transport-related services, especially driving licence.

It said the ministry received representations that the colour blind citizens are not able to get a driving licence due to requirements in the declaration about physical fitness (Form I) or the medical certificate (Form IA).

The release said that the issue was taken up with expert medical institution and advice sought.

The recommendations received were that mild to medium colour blind citizens be allowed to drive and restrictions should only be on the severe colour blind citizens.

"This is also allowed in other parts of the world," the release said.

The notification seeks to amend Form 1 and Form 1A pertaining to Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989.

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.