If Italy does not keep its word, there will be consequences, warns PM

March 13, 2013
New Delhi, Mar 13: Taking a tough stand, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Wednesday accused Italy of violating "every rule of diplomatic discourse" and asked it to send back the two naval guards undergoing trial for killing Indian fishermen, failing which there will be consequences on bilateral ties.

italyResponding to the issue raised by the Opposition in both houses of Parliament, Singh noted that the country is agitated over Italy's action which is "unacceptable" and said the government will pursue diplomatic channels to bring the two naval guards back.

Urging the Italian authorities to respect the undertaking given to the Supreme Court, he said they should return the two accused - Massimiliano Latorre and Salvatore Girone - to stand trial here for the incident of February last year.

"They have violated every rule of diplomatic discourse and call into question solemn commitments given by an accredited representative of a government," Singh said in the Lok Sabha which witnessed uproar during Question Hour as well as Zero Hour.

The Prime Minister, who made a similar statement in Rajya Sabha, said the government has already made it clear that this action by the Italian government is "not acceptable". "If they do not keep their word there will be consequences for our relations with Italy," Singh said firmly, adding that bilateral relationship has to function on the basis of trust.

Assuring Parliament that the government would continue to urge Italy through diplomatic channels to send back the naval guards, he wanted the members to act and speak together while dealing with the matter with the seriousness that it deserves.

The Prime Minister's response came after former external affairs minister Jaswant Singh and Basudeb Acharia (CPM) attacked the government on the issue with the BJP leader dubbing the action of the Italian government as a "very curious Italian job".

Rajya Sabha also witnessed uproar over it with demands for arrest of the Italian ambassador Daniele Mancini.

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
March 1,2020

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

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 27,2020

Thiruvananthapuram, Mar 27: Kerala Police social media team is using innovative methods to get people engaged in the home during the lockdown period. From conversing with people to giving them suggestions of must watch movies and sharing links of e-books Kerala police have become new 'chat friend' of people in the state.
"The traditional method of policing of interacting with people is not possible due to social distancing, so Kerala police is using the digital platform to reach out to people," Additional Director General of Police (ADGP), Head Quarters Manoj Abraham, who is heading the social media wing told ANI.
"We used social media and tried to be different at the same time innovative. From creating awareness to taking precautions we through various videos like police dance, coronavirus animations etc reached out to people. We used film stars also and used local dialect. It has got good reach and public acceptance. The most important aspect is that they received the underlying message well and are staying home" he added.
Abraham also said that Social Media team of Kerala Police is also fighting the fake news and rumours being spread at the COVID- 19 times.
"Some people were misusing social media by spreading wrong information. We also went behind those who tried to sell medicines saying it is good against Coronavirus. We crushed them with an iron hand - registered cases and arrested them. We send a strong message in social media that no rumour-mongering will be allowed, " he said.
He said the Kerala Police realised that people staying indoors was one of the keys to winning the fight against COVID-19.
"We started a chat box with the public. People were in their houses and they used the time to chat with police on various aspects of lockdown. We provided them with the right information, " he said.
The social media team has prepared a list of e-books that can be downloaded and also has a list of must watch movies. Not only that the team also occasionally share jokes with people during chat sessions.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday announced a 21-day lockdown in the entire country effective from midnight to deal with the spread of coronavirus, saying that "social distancing" is the only option to deal with the disease.

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
January 31,2020

New Delhi, Jan 31: Slamming the BJP over the Jamia firing incident, Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra on Friday said such incidents were possible with the ruling party's leaders inciting people to shoot, and asked Prime minister Narendra Modi to answer whether he stands with violence or non-violence.   

Her attack on the government comes a day after tensions in the Jamia area spiralled on Thursday after a man fired a pistol at a group of anti-CAA protesters, injuring a student, before walking away while waving the firearm above his head and shouting "Yeh lo aazadi" amid heavy police presence in the area.

"When the BJP government ministers and party leaders incite people to shoot, give provocative speeches, then all this becomes possible. The Prime Minister should answer what kind of a Delhi he wants to build?" Priyanka Gandhi said in a tweet in Hindi.

Does the PM stand with violence or non-violence, she asked.

"Does he stand with development or with anarchy?" the Congress general secretary said.

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.