US will come to regret 'ridiculous' sanctions: Iranian foreign minister

Agencies
November 7, 2018

Tehran, Nov 7: Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said that United States President Donald Trump's administration will "regret" the newly-imposed sanctions on his country.

"The US administration will come to regret taking these ridiculous measures," Anadolu News Agencyquoted Zarif, as saying.

The foreign minister further stated that while previous US Presidents have also displayed "disrespectful attitudes" towards Iran, they have eventually changed their stance, and said the Trump administration will have to do the same.

"Past US presidents changed their attitudes towards Iran in line with experience. Mr Trump's administration must understand that its anti-Iran policies won't bear fruit and therefore have to be changed," Zarif said.

Asserting that the US' "desperation" was highlighted in their move to include closed companies in the sanctions, Zarif said that the anti-Iran move was mostly criticised and opposed by the international community and that only a handful of nations like Israel and others supported the move.

Stating that it would mostly be the Iranian people than the government that would have to bear the effects of the sanctions, Zarif said that the government has undertaken steps in order to minimise the effect on the public.

"I assure our people that all necessary efforts have been made, both in the Council of Ministers and in other relevant institutions. Dark days await the US administration.

Washington hasn't been able to convince its own people that its policies are serving their interests. This administration doesn't consider its own national interests; it only serves a small group. They cover for murder committed by Saudi Arabia and Israel," the foreign minister added.

On November 5, the Trump administration had imposed the "toughest-ever" sanctions on Iran's banking, energy and shipping industries, in a move aimed at altering the "behaviour" of the country's regime.

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
April 17,2020

Beijing/Wuhan, Apr 17: China's coronavirus death toll mounted to 4,632 on Friday as the country revised figures in its epicentre Wuhan with 1,290 additional fatalities amid international criticism of under-reporting of COVID-19 data.

The Wuhan municipal headquarters on Friday revised the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths due to the disease, state-run Xinhua news agency reported.

As of April 16, the total number of confirmed coronavirus cases in Wuhan was increased by 325 to 50,333 and the number of fatalities up by 1,290 to 3,869.

The revised figure raised China's overall COVID-19 death toll to 4,632. The total number of cases also increased to 82,692.

The Wuhan municipal headquarters in a notification said the revisions were made in accordance with related laws and regulations as well as the principle of being responsible for history, the people and the deceased.

The revision of figures came amid sharp criticism of China by the US and other nations for its alleged under-reporting of the coronavirus cases and cover-up of the origin of the viral strain, which emerged in Wuhan in December last, reportedly from the local Hunan sea food market.

Explaining the reason for the figure revision, the Wuhan municipality said it was done to ensure that the information on the city's COVID-19 epidemic is open and transparent, and that the data are accurate.

Listing the reasons for the data discrepancies, it said the surging number of patients at the early stage of the epidemic overwhelmed medical resources and the admission capacity of medical institutions. Some patients died at home without having been treated in hospitals.

Besides, during the height of their treating efforts, hospitals were operating beyond their capacities and medical staff were preoccupied with saving and treating patients, resulting in belated, missed and mistaken reporting.

Also, due to a rapid increase of designated hospitals for treating COVID-19 patients -- including those administered by ministries, Hubei Province, Wuhan city and its districts, those affiliated to companies, as well as private hospitals and makeshift hospitals -- a few medical institutions were not linked to the epidemic information network and failed to report their data in time.

The registered information of some of the deceased patients was incomplete, and there were repetitions and mistakes in the reporting, the Wuhan authorities noted.

Citing an official of the Wuhan municipal headquarters, Xinhua reported that a group for epidemic-related big data and epidemiological investigations was established in late March.

The group used information from online systems and collected full information from all epidemic-related locations to ensure that facts about every case are accurate and every figure is objective and correct.

"What lie behind the epidemic data are the lives and health of the general public, as well as the credibility of the government," the official was quoted by the report.

The timely revision of the figures, among other things, shows respect for every single life, the official said.

Meanwhile, the revised cases were not included in the overall national figures released by China's National Commission (NHC) in its daily report on Friday as it reports previous day's cases.

As per NHC data, as of Thursday the overall confirmed cases of coronavirus was 82,367, including 3,342 deaths.

As many as 1,081 patients are being treated and 77,944 people discharged after recovery, it said.

NHC said it received reports of 26 new confirmed COVID-19 cases from the mainland on Thursday, of which 15 were imported.

The other 11 new cases were domestically transmitted, it said, noting that five cases were reported in Guangdong Province, three in Heilongjiang Province, two in Shandong Province and one in Liaoning Province.

No death was reported on Thursday on the mainland.

As of Thursday, China has a total of 1,549 imported cases, NHC said, adding that 879 were undergoing treatment with 45 in severe condition. Besides, there were 66 new asymptomatic cases, taking the tally to 1,038.

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
June 29,2020

Karachi, Jun 29: Four heavily-armed militants attacked the busy Pakistan Stock Exchange on Monday morning, killing four security guards and a police sub-inspector before being shot dead in an exchange of fire, media reports said.

The unidentified militants opened indiscriminate fire and lobbed hand grenades at the main gate of the building as they tried to storm it, Geo News reported.

Police said that all the terrorists have been killed while five persons injured in the attack.

Four security guards and a police sub-inspector were also killed in the attack.

"An unfortunate incident took place at the Pakistan Stock Exchange. They made their way from our parking area and opened fire on everyone," said Abid Ali Habib, Director of Pakistan Stock Exchange.

The firing by militants caused panic among the people in the building.

Sindh province Governor Imran Ismail condemned the incident.

"Strongly condemn the attack on PSX aimed at tarnishing our relentless war on terror. Have instructed the IG & security agencies to ensure that the perpetrators are caught alive & their handlers are accorded exemplary punishments. We shall protect Sindh at all costs," he said on Twitter.

Police and rangers have arrived on the spot and surrounded the area.

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.