Sack George, don't cast aspersions on SC: BJP

DHNS
October 28, 2017

Bengaluru, Oct 28: The BJP on Friday said the Congress, instead of sacking Bengaluru Development Minister K J George was casting aspersions on the Supreme Court.

Addressing a press conference here, Union Minister Prakash Javadekar said the Supreme Court had rejected the CID probe into the DySP M K Ganapathy case "lock, stock and barrel" and handed over investigation to the CBI.

Javadekar, who has been appointed BJP election in-charge of Karnataka, is in Bengaluru to review the preparations for the party's Nava Karnataka Parivarthana Yatra, scheduled to be launched on November 2.

"For fair investigation, the Apex Court asked the CBI to investigate the case. I am amazed that instead of sacking George, Congress leaders H M Revanna, K R Ramesh Kumar and C M Ibrahim are questioning the motives of the Supreme Court".

He said Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's contention that the CID had filed a 'B' report in the case cannot be accepted. "But the 'B' report was not accepted by the Supreme Court. The 'B' report came before the forensic report, which stated that the photos, call details pertaining to the case were deleted," Javadekar said.

Comments

Wellwisher
 - 
Saturday, 28 Oct 2017

What about gharwapsi; what about beef;what about lynching; what about attacking Dalit ciimmunity. A simple question with this self called upper cast rss agent all we know he cannot  give reply. In Karnataka other than rss no Hindu's wI'll listen or support.

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.
Ram Puniyani
March 14,2020

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.

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 2,2020

Kochi, Mar 2: The Vatican has rejected the second appeal by Sister Lucy Kalappura -- one of the nuns who protested against rape accused Bishop Franco Mulakkal -- against her expulsion from Franciscan Clarist Congregation (FCC).

In her plea, she had demanded that her version be heard and her expulsion from FCC revoked.

She was expelled from FCC for participating in public protests demanding the arrest of Franco Mulakkal in the nun rape case.

''I got a letter from Vatican which says my appeal has been rejected. But the rest of the letter is written in the Latin language. So after I understand it, I will respond," Sister Lucy told news agency.

''The authorities are contemptuous of those who make such complaints. That is why the letter is written in Latin. Sister Lucy would continue her legal fight in the courts,'' said George Moolechalil, who has been authorised by Sister Lucy to communicate with the media on her behalf.

A petition of Sister Lucy is still pending at Mananthavady Munsif Court at Wayanad that demands that she should not be expelled from the convent where she is staying.

Comments

fairman
 - 
Wednesday, 4 Mar 2020

Religious issues should be resolved within the guidelines of devine laws.

 

Unfortunately the Chrisitianity is no more in its originality.

The holy bible has been systematically abused and edited to the benefits of rulers.

 

 
The book has been contaminated with lots of editions.

 

People should search for truth and follow it.

 

Example, the religion never told to remain unmarried for priests or nuns.

They go against its teaching inveting their own idea against God's teaching.

 

Abdul Gaffar Bolar
 - 
Monday, 2 Mar 2020

Vatican is a corporate person.

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.
coastaldigest.com news network
May 5,2020

The Department of Preuniversity Education, Karnataka has declared the board exams or pre university I exam results. To get results online, the students need to log on to result.bspucpa.com and have to provide their registration number and date of birth. 
Apart from the online portal, the students will get the results via mail or SMS.

“The results of the first year Pre-University Examinations will be announced on May 5. The results will be sent directly to students. Hence, colleges will not be displaying the results,” said S Suresh Kumar, Primary and Secondary Education Minister. 

The pre-university course of PUC is a two-year course including class 11 and class 12 called PUC I and PUC II. It is based on PUC score that candidates can get admission to varsities.

Earlier, the Karnataka PUC 1 result was to be announced on March 27 which was postponed and hence the revised dates are announced now.

The board exam results have been put on halt due to the nation-wide lockdown imposed after the coronavirus pandemic gripped India. As of May 3, the number of people infected by the coronavirus in India had crossed over 40,000.

The HRD Minister Ramesh Pokhriyal Nishank had in a meeting asked state and central boards to resume their evaluation process and declare the results to curb any further delay in the academic cycle. The academic cycle has been delayed by over a month due to the coronavirus. Now, the colleges will start by September instead of July.

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.