US Congress opens impeachment proceedings against President Trump

Agencies
September 25, 2019

Washington, Sept 25: US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the initiation of a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump over the latter's controversial phone call with the Ukrainian president.

"Today, I'm announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry," said the Democratic congresswoman from California in a speech on Tuesday, after she concluded a closed-door meeting with the House Democratic Caucus, Xinhua news agency reported.

Citing Trump's admission this week that he talked about Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden during the July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Pelosi said "the actions of the Trump presidency revealed the dishonourable fact of the president's betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security, and betrayal of the integrity of our elections."

Pelosi said she will direct six House committees to proceed with their investigations into Trump "under that umbrella of impeachment inquiry."

"The president must be held accountable. No one is above the law," she said.

Trump responded immediately to Pelosi's announcement, taking to Twitter and calling the inquiry "a presidential harassment."

The president said the Democrats "never even saw the transcript of the call," adding their decision to impeach him is "a total Witch Hunt!"

Earlier on Tuesday, Trump said he authorized the release of the full transcript of the phone call between him and his Ukrainian counterpart.

The president Trump tweeted from New York, where he was attending the United Nations General Assembly session, that he has "authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript" of the phone call. "You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call," he added.

The presidential conversation between Washington and Kiev is at the centre of a whistleblower complaint filed in mid-August by an unidentified intelligence official, alleging that Trump interacted inappropriately with a foreign leader and made an unspecified "promise."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrat from New York, said Tuesday his chamber voted unanimously in support of the content of the whistleblower complaint being provided to Congress.

"The Senate by unanimous consent passed my resolution calling for the whistleblower complaint to be provided to Congress as required by law," Schumer tweeted.

"That means every GOP Senator supports the whistleblower report being immediately provided to the Senate and House Intel Committees," he added. Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire has been withholding the material from congressional committees investigating the scandal.

The Hill, in a Monday report, cited a congressional official as saying Maguire and Michael Atkinson -- inspector general of the intelligence community with which the complaint was filed -- are both expected to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee later this week.

Maguire is scheduled to appear before the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday, the report added.

On the other side of the aisle, Republicans in both chambers denounced Pelosi's announcement. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy called on the Democrats to "put the public before politics."

"Speaker Pelosi happens to be the speaker of this House but she does not speak for America when it comes to this issue. She cannot decide unilaterally what happens here," McCarthy told reporters Tuesday. "They have been investigating this President before he even got elected," he added, referring to the Democrats.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, for his part, called the impeachment inquiry a "rush to judgment" by "Washington Democrats."

"This rush to judgment comes just a few hours after President Trump offered to release the details of his phone conversation with President Zelensky," the Republican from Kentucky said in a statement. "It comes despite the fact that committee-level proceedings are already underway to address the whistleblower allegation through a fair, bipartisan, and regular process."

In an attempt to contain the fallout of the scandal, McConnell said Monday that lawmakers should handle the issue through bipartisan cooperation.

"I believe it's extremely important that their work be handled in a secure setting with adequate protections in a bipartisan fashion, and based on facts rather than leaks to the press," he 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.
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.
Agencies
January 11,2020

New Delhi, Jan 11: Assets worth Rs 78 crore have been attached by the ED in connection with a money laundering probe against former ICICI Bank Chairman Chanda Kochhar and others, officials said on Friday.

A provisional order under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) has been issued for attachment of the properties that includes Kochhar's Mumbai-based house and some other assets belonging to a company linked to her, they said.

The book value of the attached assets is Rs 78 crore, they said.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) is probing Kochhar, her husband Deepak Kochhar and others in a case of alleged irregularities and money laundering in giving loans by the bank to the Videocon group.

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
July 27,2020

Chengdu, China, Jul 27: The American flag was lowered at the United States consulate in Chengdu on Monday, days after Beijing ordered it to close in retaliation for the shuttering of the Chinese consulate in Houston.

Footage on state broadcaster CCTV from outside the consulate showed the flag being slowly lowered early Monday morning, after diplomatic tensions soared between the two powers with both alleging the other had endangered national security.

Relations deteriorated in recent weeks in a Cold War-style standoff, with the Chengdu mission Friday ordered to shut in retaliation for the forced closure of Beijing's consulate in Houston, Texas.

The deadline for the Americans to exit Chengdu has been unclear, but the Chinese consulate in Houston was given 72 hours to close after the original order was made.

On Saturday news agency reporters saw workers removing the US insignia from the front of the consulate.

Over the weekend, removals trucks entered the US consulate and cleaners were seen carting large black rubbish bags from the building.

Beijing says closing the Chengdu consulate was a "legitimate and necessary response to the unreasonable measures by the United States", and has alleged that staff at the diplomatic mission endangered China's security and interests.

Washington officials, meanwhile, said there had been unacceptable efforts by the Chinese consulate in Houston to steal US corporate secrets.

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.