Rafale documents stolen from MoD: Govt tells SC, threatens media

New Delhi, Mar 2: Senior Congress leader P Chidambaram on Sunday hit out at Union Home Minister Amit Shah for his comments that no one from the minority community will be affected by amended Citizenship Act and asked why then was the community excluded from the law in the first place.

Addressing a rally in Kolkata, Shah assured people of the minority community that not a single person will lose citizenship due to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA).

"The Home Minister says that no minority will be affected by CAA. If this is correct, they should tell the country who would be affected by CAA. If no one would be affected by CAA, as it currently is, why did the government pass the law?

"If the CAA aims to benefit all minorities (no one will be affected, says HM), then why are Muslims excluded from the list of minorities mentioned in the Act?," the former finance minister asked in a post on Twitter.

At his first public rally in Kolkata after the 2019 general elections, Shah said, "The opposition is terrorising the minorities. I assure every person from the minority community that the CAA only provides citizenship, does not take it away. It won't affect your citizenship."

"The opposition parties are spreading canards that refugees will have to show papers but this is absolutely false. You don't have to show any paper. We will not stop until all refugees are granted citizenship," Shah told the public.

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Guwahati, Feb 13: Hours after Assam's updated citizenship data disappeared from the website 'nrcassam.nic.in', an FIR was filed against a former NRC official for allegedly failing to submit the password to the sensitive document before quitting her job.

Talking to news agency on Thursday, NRC state coordinator Hitesh Dev Sarma said the complaint against former NRC project officer was filed under Official Secrets Act in Paltan Bazar police station here, as she "did not provide the password to the document, despite written reminders".

"She failed to surrender the password even after tendering her resignation on November 11 last year. She was a contractual employee and no longer authorised to hold the password, after quitting her job. An FIR has been filed against the former NRC project officer on Wednesday for violating the Official Secrets Act," he said.

Sarma also stated that the NRC office had written to her on several occasions for submitting the password, but did not get any response.

"We knew (she had resigned) and, therefore, sent several letters to her for handing over the password. But as she did not respond all these months, we filed a complaint against her yesterday for violating the Official Secrets Act.

"We must know if she has tampered with the sensitive information, after resigning," he added. The NRC state coordinator, however, refuted allegations of "malafide intent" involved in the matter.

"...this (cloud service provided by IT major Wipro) was not renewed by the earlier coordinator. So, the data went offline from December 15 last year. I assumed charge only on December 24," Sarma, who had gone on leave for a weeks after being appointed as the NRC state coordinator, clarified.

He also said that the state coordination committee had discussed the issue in its meeting on January 30 and wrote to Wipro during the first week of February.

"Once Wipro makes the data live, it will be available to the public. We hope that people will be able to access it in the next 2-3 days," Sarma claimed.

Reacting to the development, Wipro had said: "The IT Services Contract was not renewed by the authorities upon its expiry in October, 2019. However, as a gesture of goodwill, the company continued to pay the hosting service fee until January-end, 2020."

In another FIR filed with state criminal investigation department on Wednesday, NGO Assam Public Works (APW) alleged that former NRC Assam coordinator Prateek Hajela tampered with the final NRC list - published on August 31, 2019.

APW member Rajib Deka, in his complaint, accused Hajela of disobeying orders and directions of the Supreme Court, forgery of public register and committed offences under cyber laws for altering or changing public records by misusing his powers and position.

The NGO also said that after publication of the final list, several social networks and sections of the media had reported anomalies, insisting that many 'doubtful' persons were able to insert their names in the final list.

The Centre on Wednesday asserted that NRC data in Assam was safe even though some technical issues have been detected, which would be resolved soon.

Senior journalist-cum-RTI activist Saket Gokhale had sent an application to the NIC, the IT wing of the government, seeking a copy of the contract with Wipro.

"The Assam NRC data suddenly vanishing from the website (& the lack of data security) is incredibly shady. I've filed an RTI with the NIC specifically asking about details of the contract with Wipro, name of the cloud service provider, & all contracts signed for hosting this," he tweeted, while attaching a copy of the RTI application.

Leader of the Opposition in Assam Assembly and Congress leader Debabrata Saikia has also written to the Registrar General of India, requesting him to look into the fiasco urgently.

"It is a mystery as to why the online data should vanish all of a sudden, especially as the process to file appeals was yet to begin, all because of the go-slow attitude adopted by the NRC Authority. There is, therefore, ample scope to suspect that disappearance of online data is a malafide act," he had insisted.