Hyd, JNU were ultra-Left movements with a small section of Jehadis: FM

March 28, 2016

New Delhi, Mar 28: Both the Hyderabad Central University (HCU) and JNU events were “ultra-Left movements” also involving a small section of “jehadis”, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley contended on Sunday.

fm-LIn the case of JNU, the predominant section of those involved in the agitation was “ultra-Left” barring a small section of “jehadis”, who had their faces masked during a demonstration on the campus on Feb 9 in which anti-national slogans were raised, he said.

The name of Dr B R Ambedkar was “unfairly used” in the case of HCU where protests erupted after the suicide by a research scholar Rohith Vemula, Jaitley said during an interaction with PTI journalists here.

He drew satisfaction from the fact that religious and minority groups and their leaders across the country had not participated in the debate set off by the events in the two universities.

“The moderate Left and the Congress had got trapped into what was otherwise a movement of the ultra-Left,” the minister said, adding that the BJP had therefore taken it as an ideological challenge.

The BJP had won the first round of this “ideological debate” in the sense that everybody had to come at least “close to the position we were taking”.

Asked if he expected more rounds in the debate, the BJP leader said that it was not a battle his party had started. “We are not raising the debate to this extent (of further rounds) but if somebody against starts the whole idea, then the debate will certainly carry on.”

When asked if the BJP was reaping political dividends by raising the nationalism debate, Jaitley said, “I am not looking for a dividend. This was an ideological positioning and we have made our point. On this battle I don’t think we can lose.”

Jaitley said they took it as an ideological challenge and “whether for posturing or otherwise, as the core debate proceeded....at least they were pushed into this position (to say Jai Hind instead of Bharat Mata Ki Jai). I am quite happy and satisfied that they were pushed into this position.”

Answering questions, Jaitley saw no contradiction between the government's agenda of development and the debate over nationalism.

“I think there is a section in this country, however small, which does not find this discourse very fascinating. So it wants to divert the issue.

“It is not compulsory in this country to raise a slogan (of Bharat Mata ki Jai). But it became an issue only when somebody said I take objection and I will not raise it,” he said in an apparent reference to a declaration made by Majlis MP Asaduddin Owaisi.

Asked if it was an overkill to slap sedition charges against JNU students union President Kanhaiya Kumar, Jaitley said it was a legal issue and he would not like to get into it.

PTI

"That is a matter of individual culpability. Whether he is technically liable, what sections should he be prosecuted for and whether he should be prosecuted or not. I do not want to prejudice the trial even against him or for that matter anybody else.

"There are slogans being raised that this country will be broken up by 'jung' (war). We will break up this country by jung. And an individual goes and participates in this unlawful assembly where this resolve is being made. So whether he is legally liable or not, is a question which courts will have to look into," he said.

Attacking the Congress, Jaitley said people from mainstream parties should have thought twice before joining an unlawful assembly which is talking of a 'jung' to break this country.

"In Parliament I had said there are two types of people--one who think first and then act and the other who act first and then think. Congress leaders first took the step. They went and joined and preached that this 'break up of this country' slogan is free speech and we have come here to defend this free speech."

The minister contended that the overwhelming majority of this country has disapproved of the very character of the anti-India slogans.

He said he was personally in favour of "radical romancing" in universities in which one says something not very responsible out of extra enthusiasm which after 10 years he realises that it was not the most sensible thing to do.

"You can give a licence for that. But I think having said that somehow to speak in terms of 'desh ki barbadi, desh ke tukde, tukde', I think this crossed all limits," he said.

Comments

TWIST
 - 
Monday, 28 Mar 2016

Cheddi chelas alwz taught to view as opposite..

Abdullah
 - 
Monday, 28 Mar 2016

Better to send him back Britian.
the agent of British now singing again the British tune.

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
February 17,2020

New Delhi, Feb 17: The Supreme Court said on Monday that people have a fundamental right to protest against a law but the blocking of public roads is a matter of concern and there has to be a balancing factor.

Hearing pleas over the road blocks due to the ongoing protests at Shaheen Bagh against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), a bench comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph said its concern is about what will happen if people start protesting on roads.

Democracy works on expressing views but there are lines and boundaries for it, the bench said.

It asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde and advocate Sadhana Ramachandran to talk to Shaheen Bagh protestors and persuade them to move to an alternative site where no public place is blocked.

The matter has been posted for next hearing on February 24.

People have a fundamental right to protest but the thing which is troubling us is the blocking of public roads, the bench said.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said Shaheen Bagh protestors should not be given a message that every institution is on its knees trying to persuade them on this issue.

The apex court said that if nothing works, we will leave it to the authorities to deal with the situation.

Protestors have made their made their point and the protests have gone on for quite some time, it said.

Restrictions have been imposed on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch and the Okhla underpass, which were closed on December 15 last year due to the protests against CAA and Register of Citizens.

The top court had earlier said the anti-CAA protesters at Delhi's Shaheen Bagh cannot block public roads and create inconvenience for others.

The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by advocate Amit Sahni, who had approached the Delhi high court seeking directions to the Delhi Police to ensure smooth traffic flow on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch, which was blocked by anti-CAA protesters on December 15.

While dealing with Sahni's plea, the high court had asked local authorities to deal with the situation keeping in mind law and order.

Separately, former BJP MLA Nand Kishore Garg has filed a petition in the apex court seeking directions to the authorities to remove the protestors from Shaheen Bagh.

One of the pleas has sought laying down of comprehensive and exhaustive guidelines relating to outright restrictions for holding protests or agitations leading to obstruction of public place.

In his plea, Garg has said that law enforcement machinery was being "held hostage to the whims and fancies of the protesters" who have blocked vehicular and pedestrian movement from the road connecting Delhi to Noida.

State has the duty to protect fundamental rights of citizen who were continuously being harassed by the blockage of arterial road, it said.

"It is disappointing that the state machinery is muted and a silent spectator to hooliganism and vandalism of the protesters who are threatening the existential efficacy of the democracy and the rule of law and had already taken the law and order situation in their own hand," the plea had said.

In his appeal, Sahni had sought supervision of the situation in Shaheen Bagh, where several women are sitting on protest, by a retired Supreme Court judge or a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court.

Sahni has said in his plea that protests in Shaheen Bagh has inspired similar demonstrations in other cities and to allow it to continue would set a wrong precedent.

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 28,2020

New Delhi, Jun 28: With 19,906 new cases, highest single-day spike so far, India's COVID-19 count touched 5,28,859 including 2,03,051 active cases, 3,09,713 cured/discharged/migrated, according to the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.

410 deaths were reported in the last 24 hours and the cumulative toll reached 16,095 deaths.

Coronavirus cases in Maharashtra have climbed to 1,59,133 while Delhi's tally stands at 80,188.

2,31,095 samples were tested yesterday and the total number of samples tested up to 27 June is 82,27,802, according to the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).

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 20,2020

Lucknow, Jun 20: A media body on Saturday described as "an act of intimidation" the filing of an FIR in Uttar Pradesh against a journalist over a report on the impact of the lockdown on a village, saying it was part of an "established pattern" of harassment of independent scribes.

In a statement, the Media Foundation put on record its strong protest over the FIR filed by the Uttar Pradesh government against Supriya Sharma, executive editor of news portal Scroll.in.

The case was filed against Sharma for allegedly misrepresenting facts in a report on the impact of the lockdown in a village adopted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, police sources had said on Thursday.

The FIR against Sharma and the Scroll editor-in-chief is an "an act of intimidation and a case of abuse of process", intended to discourage honest and critical reporting, the Media Foundation said.

The Media Foundation was started in 1979 with the aim of upholding freedom of speech, expression and information.

The FIR against Sharma is only the latest instance of similar coercive actions against professional journalists, part of "an established pattern of harassment and humiliation of independent journalists", it said,

"It is an unacceptable encroachment on press freedom," said the foundation, whose chairperson is veteran journalist Harish Khare.

The Media Foundation called upon the judiciary, and central and state governments to uphold the spirit of freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed in the Constitution.

Comments

True Indian
 - 
Sunday, 21 Jun 2020

people who speak truth will be send to jail and the people who speak lie will get award..we dont understant which religion they following...may be they following devil religion of RSS.....hindu brother must come out from deep sleep to protect the real value of hindusim...today all evil people in BJP will take protection for their evil deed by using hindu gods...

 

God clearely said in the quran, dont worship material bcoz one day some evil people will come and use this to control you and destroy you..

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.