Saturday, September 21, 2024
Home Blog Page 23

Big decision by top court on Shivsena case in supreme court: What happens next?

parthasaarthi
-
0
Big decision by top court on Shivsena case in supreme court: What happens next?

Introduction:

In an era where political complexities dominate the discourse, the recent landmark verdict on the contentious Shivsena case in Supreme Court has sent shockwaves through the nation. The ruling, handed down by the judiciary, carries far-reaching implications for the political landscape, raising questions about power dynamics and democratic principles. This comprehensive analysis dives deep into the intricacies of the verdict, shedding light on the untold insights that could reshape the course of Indian politics. Brace yourselves for an in-depth exploration that will leave you enlightened and craving for more.

Unraveling the Historical Context; Disqualification Looms for Shinde, Uddhav’s Return as CM Denied

In a jaw-dropping ruling, the Supreme Court Constitution Bench has dropped a bombshell on Maharashtra’s political landscape. The bench unanimously declared that Governor Koshyari’s calls for a trust vote lacked crucial ‘objective material’ proving a loss of support for Uddhav Thackeray’s government. The Court’s scathing verdict has opened the floodgates to a potential downfall for Shinde.

While Governor Koshyari’s moves to invite Shinde to form the new government were deemed right, Uddhav Thackeray’s dreams of regaining power have been shattered. The Court’s ruling clarifies that Thackeray’s resignation before the floor test will keep the Shinde government in power.

Governor’s Blunder Exposed!

According to the Court’s observations, the Governor acted without concrete evidence when casting doubt on the incumbent government’s confidence. Clearly, a floor test cannot be weaponized to settle internal party disputes, a fact the Governor failed to comprehend. The repercussions of this glaring mistake are immense, shaking the foundations of the political arena.

Government Formation Justified!

A landmark decision in the Shivsena case in Supreme Court has validated Governor Koshyari’s inviting Mr. Shinde to form the new government, considering the circumstances surrounding Mr. Thackeray’s resignation. After Mr. Thackeray’s resignation on June 29, 2022, the position of Chief Minister in Maharashtra became vacant. The party that had secured the highest number of candidates in the State Assembly demonstrated their support for Mr. Shinde, leading to the Governor’s decision to invite him. Additionally, the Court rejected any notion of invalidating Speaker Rahul Narwekar’s election solely because some participating MLAs faced disqualification proceedings.

Speaker’s Court to decide now

The responsibility of deciding the disqualification petitions pending before the Court did not grant Speaker Rahul Narwekar to the Thackeray faction, as their plea was not accepted. Chief Justice Chandrachud, who authored the unanimous verdict on behalf of the five-judge bench, emphasized that unless there are exceptional circumstances, it is the Speaker who holds the authority to adjudicate petitions for disqualification under the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law).

The Chief Justice acknowledged the Speaker’s embodiment of propriety and impartiality, deeming it inappropriate to express distrust in the Speaker’s office. However, the bench also recognized that any decisions made by the Speaker while acting as a tribunal are still subject to judicial review.

Defection, not a Split

The Shivsena case in Supreme Court provided a detailed framework for the Speaker to consider when adjudicating the disqualification petitions. Firstly, the Court ruled that the Shinde group’s argument of a mere “split” from the Shiv Sena party, rather than a defection, could not be accepted by the Speaker as a valid defense. This was due to the amendment made by the Constitution (Ninety-first Amendment) Act in 2003, which removed Paragraph 3 from the Tenth Schedule, rendering the defense of a “split” no longer applicable to the Shinde group.

Clarifying the Selection of Whips: Determining the Appropriate Whip to Recognize

In a significant ruling, the Court emphasized that in cases where multiple Whips are appointed by different factions within a political party, the Speaker must consider which Whip represents the party. The Court further declared certain decisions by Mr. Narwekar, a prominent figure within the Shinde group, as “illegal.”

Specifically, the Court found Mr. Narwekar’s recognition of Bharat Gogawale as the Chief Whip of Shiv Sena and Mr. Shinde as the “Leader of the Shiv Sena Legislative Party” unlawful. Consequently, the Court nullified Mr. Narwekar’s decision made on July 3, 2022, which appointed Mr. Gogawale as Chief Whip in place of Sunil Prabhu and Mr. Shinde as Leader instead of Ajay Choudhari from the Thackeray faction.

The Court’s judgment highlighted that the Speaker’s recognition of a particular faction within the Shiv Sena Legislative Party (SSLP) without determining whether they represented the collective will of the political party was in direct violation of the provisions outlined in the Tenth Schedule. According to the Court, the Speaker must acknowledge the Whip and the Leader duly authorized by the political party, considering the provisions stated in the party’s constitution. The Speaker’s actions were deemed contrary to the established regulations by disregarding these principles.

Speaker’s Office & ECI Office are Independent Forums Operating on Separate Parameters

The bench expressed its disapproval of Mr. Narwekar’s decision to suspend the disqualification proceedings “in anticipation” of the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) verdict on the rightful political party of the Shiv Sena, considering it unreliable. The Shivsena case in Supreme Court emphasized that relying on the ECI’s decision for adjudicating disqualification petitions would be problematic as it would have a retrospective effect, which goes against the law.

The Court clarified that the ECI’s recognition of the Shinde faction as the authentic Shiv Sena would only take effect “prospectively,” meaning it would come into force after the Speaker decides on the pending disqualification petitions. Should the Speaker disqualify members of the faction awarded the party symbol, the remaining group members still present in the House would need to follow the prescribed procedure outlined in the Symbols Order and any other relevant laws to obtain a fresh symbol for their group.

Additionally, the Court decided to refer the question of whether a Speaker facing removal can decide disqualification petitions against MLAs under the Tenth Schedule to a larger Bench comprising seven judges. This matter of procedural importance will be further deliberated upon for a comprehensive resolution.

Bench laid down the framework for Speaker to decide.

According to the Bench, the defense invoked by the Shinde group must align with the current provisions of the Tenth Schedule. The Court emphasized that this referred explicitly to the 2018 party constitution, which witnessed the election of Mr. Thackeray as the party president. Secondly, the Court instructed the Speaker to consider the version of the party constitution submitted to the Election Commission of India with the mutual consent of both factions.

By examining this particular version of the party constitution, the Speaker could determine which faction should be recognized as the genuine representation of the Shiv Sena. Chief Justice Chandrachud articulated that the evaluation should consider the power configuration within the Assembly and the intricate fabric of leadership outside its confines.

Opinion on Shivsena Case in Supreme Court

It is obvious, as per the explanation to paragraph 2 of the 10th schedule, that the original political party is the party that set up the candidates for election.

Explanation of Paragraph 2 of the 10th Schedule: “Furthermore, it has been clarified that an individual is considered affiliated with a political party if they had been a candidate representing that party prior to the elections for that particular position.”

Therefore the bench did not have to provide a framework for the Speaker to focus on the party constitution and which faction to recognize, as the Shivsena case in the Supreme Court highlights that the original version of paragraph 3 of the Tenth Schedule stated that disqualification would not be applicable in the event of a political party experiencing a division, provided that at least one-third of the members from the original party joined the newly formed faction.

However, the 91st Amendment Act 2003 deleted Paragraph 3, leaving no scope for deliberation on any split or faction. Therefore, this kind of judicial overreach, especially regarding the recognition of faction, was not warranted given the clear, unambiguous provision of explanation to paragraph 2 of the 10th schedule of the Indian Constitution as it stands today.

Time Limit within which Speaker must decide

Party affiliations often hinder the Speakers, impeding their ability to make timely decisions, particularly when the accused member switches to a party aligned with the Speaker’s allegiance. This renders the 10th schedule completely ineffectual. In the case of S.A. Sampath Kumar v. Kale Yadaiah (2016), a Constitutional Bench was called upon to determine whether Courts could compel the Speakers to reach decisions on disqualification cases within a specified timeframe.

However, in the 2020 case, Justice Nariman asserted that such a reference was unnecessary and proceeded to establish a three-month time limit, emphasizing the expectation for Speakers to endeavor to resolve cases within a “reasonable period.” Therefore, if the Speaker doesn’t decide on the disqualification cases within three months, the latest legal position option of judicial intervention by the top Court may be a definite option.

The golden triangle of constitution: Judgements that led to evolution of these articles

sukritigupta24
-
0
The golden triangle of constitution: Judgements that led to evolution of these articles

ABSTRACT

Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950, also referred as the Golden Triangle of the Indian Constitution, or the Golden Triangle Law, constitutes the most essential part of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to not only citizens of India but also non-citizens in as much as several facets of Article 21 of the Constitution[1]. These Articles are connected to one another in a way that ensures that government will function safely and effectively and that no arbitrary restrictions on an individual’s rights within the nation will be made.

In a country like ours where diversity of race, culture, ethnicity, religion, language is so prevalent that it may build a tendency to sunder people, the rights entitled by our Constitution makes it less difficult to unite people of this vast diversification.[2]

These rights not only bind people together to live life peacefully but also ensure legitimate administration of the government. The aforementioned Articles i.e., Articles 14, 19 and 21 may seem at first to be overlapping, yet there is a scope of subtle difference between them. They compose, what’s known as the “Golden Triangle”. It was established in the infamous case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[3]. The Supreme Court interpreted that any law depriving a person of their ‘personal liberty’ has not only to go through the test of Article 21 but also Articles 14 and 19.

Hence, this article will focus on interpretation and expansion of the Articles which form the Golden Triangle of the Indian Constitution with the help of various case laws.

ARTICLE 14 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

In order to understand the concept of Equality, it is to be understood that this Article explicitly asserts, no person shall be granted any special privilege with respect to an individual’s religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. It deals with the individual’s Equality before the law along with its protection in equal terms[4].

It not only abstains government from unreasonable or illegitimate biasness towards its people but, also ensures that arbitrariness does not overlap rationality. In Harsh Mander & Anr. v Uoi & Ors.[5], the Apex Court of India decriminalised begging by stating that it is not a disease and this mindset has led to stigmatization towards criminalization in the society. By making begging a criminal offence, it would be a direct infringement of Article 14.

In M.G. Badappanavar v. State of Karnataka[6], constitutional bench of Supreme Court held that “equality is the basic feature of the Constitution of India and any treatment of equals unequally or unequal’s as equal will be violation of basic structure of the court of India”. This explains the concept of Equality of Law and Equal Protection of Law.

However, Article 14 has certain exceptions to it, which are reasonable in the eyes of law. In the case of State of Bihar v. Bihar Lecturers Association[7], Test of Reasonable Classification came into picture. It was observed that there is a transparent unbiased difference between a trained and an untrained teacher. This classification is purely legitimate and is based on Intelligible Differential that set trained teacher apart from untrained teacher.

This judgement also propounded that unequal’s cannot be treated equally.  In R. D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority[8], it was decided that Reasonable Classification is a judicial formula for knowing whether the legislative or executive action in question is arbitrary and therefore constituting denial of equality. If classification is not reasonable and does not satisfy the two conditions i.e., Test of Reasonable Classification and Intelligible Differentia, it would otherwise be violative of Article 14.

All individuals in similar scenarios must be given the same rights and obligations. The Apex Court in the case of Kush Kalra v. Union of India[9], observed that the concept of reasonableness pervades Article 14 like a brooding omnipotence and is a crucial component of equality or non-arbitrariness from a legal and philosophical standpoint. It is against Article 14 of the Indian Constitution to exclude female candidates from taking the NDA exam.

It was clearly a discriminatory practice that was prevailing since years and is a clear violation of Article 14. This interim judgement supported a number of female candidates who were subjected to gender discrimination. Earlier, by not allowing women to appear for NDA Examinations, the Test of Reasonable Classification and Intelligible Differentia failed.

Therefore, when the actions of the state are arbitrary, it cannot be shadowed under the protection of Doctrine of Reasonable Classification. The state must be vigilant enough in their governance so that they do not infringe the Fundamental Right of Right to Equality.

ARTICLE 19 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

In India, diversity of its people plays a very vital role in granting them with their rights. Allowing every citizen to participate in political and social activities of the nation is an essential component of healthy democracy. In a strong democracy, there should be plenty of space for free speech, opinion, and expression in all of its forms. India is one of the largest democracies in the world. It requires equal and free participation of its citizens in order to have good governance in the country.

To ensure that no individual is deprived of their Freedom of Speech and Expression, the Constitution of India guarantees this right under Article 19 to all its citizens. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[10], The Supreme Court directed that any individual has a right to express his/her opinion explicitly. Any law that deprives a person of their Right to Speech and Expression and Personal Liberty should stand the test under Articles 19 and 21.

The court also said that although a right may not be expressly mentioned in any provision of Article 19(1), it may nevertheless be included by one or more of those clauses.

Article 19 has a very wide scope. It is classified under 6 rights concerning the Freedom of –

  • Speech and expression
  • Assembly
  • Association
  • Movement
  • Residence
  • Profession

Recently on 3rd January,2023 the Supreme Court in the case of Kaushal Kishor v. State of Uttar Pradesh[11], highlighted the question of irony where it is said that judiciary is considered to be the protector of Fundamental Rights, though it was coming up new means to curtail speech violating Article 19.

Certain restrictions are provided under Article 19(2) to curtail Freedom of Speech and Expression on grounds of sovereignty and integrity of the nation, national security, friendly ties with foreign countries, public order, decency, morality, contempt of court, defamation and incitement to a criminal offence. So, one of the prime questions that arose in this case was whether restrictions provided under Article 19(2) are exhaustive, or can there be other rights restricting Freedom of Speech and Expression.

The facts of the case are two ministers of Uttar Pradesh government gave derogatory comments on Bulandshahar rape case by calling it a mere political conspiracy by opposition parties to defame ruling government. These remarks sparked the controversy and contended that the Right of Life and Personal Liberty is being infringed while exercising Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression.

The bench held that no more restrictions can be added in the list of Article 19(2) even if these two Articles are overlapping each other. The list of restrictions is an exhaustive one. The court imposed an onus on the government to defend people’s right to life and liberty against interference from private entities.

On the basis of the concept of collective responsibility, the majority bench determined that the government cannot be held vicariously accountable for a comment made by a minister that was linked to state matters. The judgement also concluded that until the minister’s words caused the citizen or other person distress or loss, they may not be liable.

There must be a fine line between Free speech and Hate Speech. Freedom of Speech is not a license to abuse. One must abide by the legitimate limitations that come with liberty.

Aishat Shifa v. The State of Karnataka and Ors[12]., also known as the “Hijab Row”, sparked a heated controversy questioning whether or not can Muslim women wear Hijab in educational institutions. One issue raised was whether by not allowing women to wear hijab in educational institutions is violative of Article 19(1)(a) i.e., Freedom of Expression or not and whether it infringes Right to Privacy guaranteed in Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Karnataka High Court upheld the ban of hijab in State’s Educational Institutions on 15th March, 2022 by contending that wearing hijab is not an essential religious practice under Islam. Further this decision was challenged in the Apex Court of India, where it was held that banning hijab in educational institutions does not violate Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

The bench upheld the High Court’s decision of banning hijab in educational institutions, though there were split opinions of the judges. So, this issue was and will be the most debatable issue that brings in picture the tussle of execution and interpretation between Religious Freedom, Human Rights, Freedom of Expression, Right to Privacy.

ARTICLE 21 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

Article 21 known as Right to Life and Personal Liberty, deals with the most imperative part of the Constitution. It says that “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to a procedure established by law[13].” Earlier Article 21 had a very narrow interpretation, however since past couple of years it has evolved a lot to widen its interpretation and use.

It is considered to be as one of the highly conflicted Article. Everything a person would require to have an ordinary fulfilling life is contained in Article 21. If we discuss the scope, it may be summed up with the phrase “limitless.” Of course, there are limitations because else the nation’s law and order would be compromised. However, these limitations are only put in place when someone has blatantly broken the law.

The Court in many case laws has given the term “life” a wide-ranging definition, giving it a broad breadth. In Kharak Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.[14], the Apex Court held that the term ‘life’ does not mean mere animal existence of any person, it is more than just existing. The prohibition against its loss applies to all the limbs and abilities that are used to enjoy life.

In Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration[15], the Supreme Court held that ‘Right to Life’ includes the right to live a healthy and peaceful life. It should include all the amenities which are essential for human bodies to live a prime life, like Right to live and sleep in peace and the Right to repose and health.

The horizon of Article 21 has been increased since time and now. Many modifications have been made for better execution of this Article. In case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[16], Court interpreted that Right to Life is not just a matter of physical survival but also incorporates the right to a life of dignity. The definition of Life of Dignity was expanded through the case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India[17].

Right against Sexual Harassment Workplace was incorporated in Vishakha and Ors v. State of Rajasthan[18] [(1997) 6SCC 241] where it washeld that sexual harassment of women at workplace is violative of person’s Right to Equality, Life and Liberty. Following this judgement, Sexual Harassment of woman at Workplace (prevention, prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 was passed.

Right to Clean Environment was propounded in the case of Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India & Ors.[19], where it was observed that lot of pollution is being caused in water bodies. So, with respect to this, the Court issued various guidelines to adopt a sustainable method towards environment.

By further adding new dimensions to Article 21, Right to be informed was incorporated through the case of Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Proprietors of Indian Express Newspapers, Bombay Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.[20], in this case court propounded that in a participatory democratic country where there is vast diversity, an effective way of administration requires that people have a knowledge of internal affairs of the state administration. This enables them to have a right to ask and question the government on matters which are directly or indirectly affecting them.

The landmark judgement of K. S. Puttaswamy & Anr. v. Union Of India & Ors.[21], started a debate of whether privacy is an intrinsic part of people’s life, whether it needs to be protected by the Constitution or not. The bench on 24 August, 2017 unanimously held that Right to Privacy is an inherent part of people’s life and is innate to their Right to Life and Personal Liberty.  People’s freedom to express and live their life on their own terms lies in their privacy.

The Apex Court outrightly overruled its past judgements given in the Case of Kharak Singh v. The State Of U P. & Ors.[22]and M.P. Sharma & Ors. v. Satish Chandra and Ors.[23] where they decided that Right to Privacy is not guaranteed to the citizens under the Indian Constitution. Hence, Right to Privacy was constituted as a Fundamental Right under Article 21.

There are many more rights which were incorporated like Right against Illegal Detention, Right to Travel Abroad, Right to choose a life Partner, Right to Speedy Trial, Right to Fair Trial, Right against Handcuffing, Right Against Solitary Confinement, Right Against Custodial Violence, Right to Bail, Euthanasia And Right To Life, and more.

The scope of Article 21 has a very wide ambit which is gradually and progressively advancing. Many judgements contributed to add and modify the essence of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. In order to make sure that no individual is deprived to live peacefully and with dignity in the society, Article 21 gives them the utmost power to lead a life of meaning and essence.

However, still there is a huge bridge between different sections of society and people still struggle to live a life even with basic necessities. For them these powers in form of Article 21 are of no use unless they are they are fulfilled with the basic requirements to live a life of a mere human existence.

CONCLUSION: GOLDEN TRIANGLE OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION

Our Constitution makers tried their level best to draft our country’s Constitution keeping in mind the then current and future situation of the nation with utmost diligence. It’s not easy to formulate a set of rules and regulations in form of laws for such a wide diversified piece of land. From 1950 to 2023, many amendments, additions and subtractions have been made to make it a better set of written rules and regulations as per the current scenario and requirements of the country.

In order to even have a thought to formulate certain old laws, issues relating to it are put forward in front of the Courts in form of Case Laws.  As discussed above, this Article primarily discusses about the evolution of Articles 14, 19 and 21 which is possible with the help of various questions that were raised since many years about the shortcomings of current Laws and Fundamental Rights.

The Fundamental Rights keeps a check and balance of proper running of Judicial system against violations and exploitations of Human Rights. When a concern about the nation’s liberty, fraternity, and equality emerges, this Trio of Articles 14,19 and 21 co-operates and creates a path so that justice may be served successfully and an appropriate framework can be provided for the administrator of the country.

[1] India Const. art. 14,19 & 21.

[2] Chakraborty Archisman, The Golden Triangle of the Indian Constitution, Jus Corpus LJ 2, p.1068 (2021).

[3] Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248.

[4] Bakshi, Parvinrai Mulwantrai, and Subhash C. Kashya, The constitution of India, Universal Law Publishing, (1982).

[5] Harsh Mander & Anr. v. Uoi & Ors., MANU/DE/2785/2018.

[6] M.G. Badappanavar v. State of Karnataka, (2001) 2SCC 666.

[7] State of Bihar v. Bihar Lecturers Association, (2007) 7SCC 231.

[8] R. D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority, (1979) 3SCC 489.

[9] Kush Kalra v. Union of India, MANU/DE/0027/2018.

[10] (supra)

[11] Kaushal Kishor v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2023 4(SCC)1.

[12] Aishat Shifa v. The State of Karnataka and Ors., (2023) 2SCC 1.

[13] Ullah, Aman, and Samee Uzair, Right to Life as Basic Structure of Indian Constitution,South Asian Studies, 26(2), (2011).

[14] Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., MANU/SC/0085/1962.

[15] Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, MANU/SC/0184/1978.

[16] (supra)

[17] Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, MANU/SC/0051/1983.

[18] Vishakha and Ors v. State of Rajasthan, (1997) 6SCC 241.

[19] Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India & Ors., (1996) 5SCC 647.

[20] Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Proprietors of Indian Express Newspapers, Bombay Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., (1988) 4SCC 592.

[21] K. S. Puttaswamy & Anr. v. Union Of India & Ors., (2017) 10 SCC 1.

[22] Kharak Singh v. The State Of U. P. & Ors., MANU/SC/0085/1962.

[23] M.P. Sharma & Ors. v. Satish Chandra and Ors., MANU/SC/0018/1954.

The evolution of the Indian presidency: Tracing the journey of presidents from past to present

javi
-
0
The evolution of the Indian presidency: Tracing the journey of presidents from past to present

Introduction: The Indian presidency holds a significant position in the country’s political landscape, serving as the head of state and symbolizing the unity and sovereignty of the nation. Since the adoption of the Indian Constitution in 1950, the presidency has undergone a remarkable evolution, shaped by the contributions of numerous individuals who have held the prestigious office. In this blog, we embark on a journey through time, exploring the transformation of the Indian presidency and the personalities who have left an indelible mark on its history.

  1. The Birth of the Indian Presidency: The Indian presidency traces its roots back to January 26, 1950, when the country officially adopted the Constitution and became a republic. Dr. Rajendra Prasad, a respected freedom fighter and a prominent member of the Indian National Congress, was elected as the first President of India. Dr. Prasad’s tenure laid the foundation for the presidential office, establishing the traditions and protocols that continue to this day.
  2. The Visionary: Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam: One of the most beloved and inspiring figures in Indian history, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam served as the 11th President of India from 2002 to 2007. Known as the “People’s President,” Dr. Kalam brought a scientific temperament and innovative vision to the presidency. He actively engaged with the youth, encouraging scientific research, and promoting education. Dr. Kalam’s presidency was marked by his efforts to bridge the gap between science, technology, and societal development.
  3. The Trailblazer: Pratibha Patil: In 2007, Pratibha Patil became the first woman to hold the office of the President in India. Her presidency was a significant milestone for gender equality and women’s empowerment in the country. During her tenure, President Patil emphasized the need for inclusive growth and social justice, particularly focusing on the welfare of marginalized communities and women. She played an instrumental role in promoting education and healthcare initiatives, leaving a lasting impact on society.
  4. The Scholar and Statesman: Dr. S. Radhakrishnan: Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, the second President of India, served from 1962 to 1967. A philosopher, scholar, and statesman, Dr. Radhakrishnan brought intellectual depth to the presidency. His erudition and commitment to education were evident during his term as he strived to promote the value of knowledge and intellectual pursuit. Dr. Radhakrishnan’s birthday, September 5th, is celebrated as Teachers’ Day in India, honoring his contributions to the field of education.
  5. The People’s Voice: Dr. Zakir Hussain: Dr. Zakir Hussain, the third President of India, held the office from 1967 to 1969. A renowned educationist and advocate for communal harmony, Dr. Hussain played a crucial role in strengthening national integration during a period of social unrest. He emphasized the importance of religious and cultural diversity, working towards fostering a sense of unity among the diverse population of India.
  6. The Statesman Diplomat: Dr. Shankar Dayal Sharma: Dr. Shankar Dayal Sharma served as the ninth President of India from 1992 to 1997. His presidency coincided with a period of significant political and social change in the country. Dr. Sharma, a seasoned politician and a respected statesman, focused on upholding democratic values and promoting social justice. He played a pivotal role in upholding the constitutional principles during a time of political instability, ensuring the smooth functioning of democracy.

Conclusion: The journey of the Indian presidency has been marked by remarkable individuals who have left an indelible mark on the nation’s history. From Dr. Rajendra Prasad to the recent presidents, each leader has brought their unique qualities, vision, and contributions to the highest office of the land. The evolution of the Indian presidency reflects the changing dynamics of the nation, as well as its aspirations and values. As India continues to move forward, the role of the presidency remains vital in shaping the country’s destiny, guided by the principles of democracy, inclusivity, and progress.

How RSS has saved insurgent Nagaland

Prasad Joshi
-
0
How RSS has saved insurgent Nagaland

India is an interesting case. India’s mainstream media rarely talks about India’s development stories or India becoming a better place to live and breathe. Instead, every news channel keeps shouting about electoral politics, politicians and their hatred for each other. But, let’s keep all that mess aside. Let’s talk about change. A positive change, bought by the common citizens of this country and which is hardly noticed by the people.

So, here is such a story from a remote Indian state of Nagaland. It is a story of change from chaos and uncertainty to Peace and stability. There are many unsung heroes of this story. But they were never talked about. Unfortunately, not many of us have even heard of ” Janjati Vikas Samiti”, -an organisation which is architect of this change. This RSS affiliate is working relentlessly in India’s North – East, without any greed for money or fame….But just for the utmost dedication to the cause of the nation.

Although Nagaland is an inalienable part of the republic of India, citizens of mainland India don’t care much about it. The state makes headlines only in its election period. The state is not easily accesible. To worsen their case, Nagas don’t look like Indians either. They have completely different facial looks. They often face discrimination in metro cities of India- mostly by the elite citizens.

Nagaland was just a land of local inhabitants – who used to live in forests and follow their customs, traditions and celebrate festivals – no business with the outside world. But this peace could not last forever: especially after the British conquest. British conquest was obviously followed by their religion. Missionaries entered the area. Churches were built. People were converted.

Even after the British departure from India, religion did not vanish- neither did the missionaries. Interestingly, consecutive congress governments never tried to intervene in the church malpractices – instead, they silently supported church. Obviously, the next job assigned to church was to bring massive instability to the region.

It is an easy task to infiltrate fear in minds of minorities- Especially, in a country where a single religion prevails. Church used the minority card to further their own agenda. India, with its stable borders and peaceful states would have easily progressed, which would have resulted as a challenge to the white supremacy and a nightmare for the west. Church was at its full pace during the 1980s and 1990s. Church indirectly formed and supported many militant groups. Militants, on their part, never missed an opportunity to destabilise the region. “Indian dogs go back” was a common line on the walls of towns and villages.

But RSS can never get caught napping on issues of national security and sovereignty. Many volunteers of RSS gradually entered the state – with the aim to bring Nagas into the mainstream of Indian nationalism, imbibe national values in them and most importantly, to bring back the stability and peace to the region.

These volunteers had a mission, they had a national cause. This was never an easy task. Terrorists outfits were after their lives. Even the name of RSS used to trigger many christians of the state. Volunteers of the “Samiti” faced brutal attacks many times. But RSS never left the ground. They built schools, hostels and many other basic facilities for the state. They convinced the locals to get their children enrolled in these schools. They faced every problem but never gave up. After efforts of almost two decades, a new Naga generation was there, with a sentiment of national thought and patriotism. Nagas were assured of their identity, beliefs and customs. RSS never tried to “Saffronise” the state. Instead, they added splendor to local customs. This behaviour of RSS increased locals’ support to them. Even today, if you visit the state you will find swayamsevaks having chats with Nagamese as if they are a part of the families. This was not a sudden change. This change resulted from countless efforts of several unidentified sevaks of this country.

Today, Nagaland has changed a lot. It is almost free from militant activities and instability. Peaceful democratic elections are conducted every five years. Tourists and businessmen from mainland India can tour and trade in the state. But this peace is not free of cost. The credit of this peace and progress of the state; or atleast a small stake of it goes to RSS’ Janjati Vikas Samiti.

We, as a nation should salute their bravery and nationalism!

-Prasad S. Joshi

What would mean Sheikh Hasina’s defeat in the next general election?

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
-
0
What would mean Sheikh Hasina’s defeat in the next general election?

Bangladesh’s progress and prosperity shall be at stake, if Sheikh Hasina’s government is either overthrown through undemocratic process or if Islamist forces such as Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) manages in stealing results in their favor with the direct help of the Biden administration. In any of these cases, Bangladesh shall be pushed towards the fate of a rogue nation or safe haven for jihadists and Islamists.

Unfortunately though, international conspirators are willing to see Bangladesh as an economically struggling nation thus fully depending on Western aid, citizens in the country are being misled through massive propaganda run by BNP, Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) and agents of Pakistani spy agency Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), where very unfortunately the state machinery or the ruling party have miserably failed in countering such well-orchestrated lies and propaganda.

In my opinion – reasons behind such lethargy of the state machinery and the ruling party in taking immediate measures in countering massive propaganda of BNP-Jamaat nexus and its cronies is – they are suffering from hyper-confidence of winning the next general election with landslide victory although international conspirators and their cohorts in Bangladesh are consistently trying to create an atmosphere where people may become totally misguided and cast their votes in favor of anti-Awami League bloc.

Western forces, particularly the Biden administration has been repeatedly pressing Bangladesh’s ruling party to ensure that the next general elections in the country is free and fair. At the same time, they also are demanding reinstating war criminal Jamaat-e-Islami thus enabling it in participating in the election. Any patriotic citizen of the country would outrightly reject such undue desire of the United States. Additionally, while Washington is talking about the next general election to be free and fair, it is showing no signs of convincing Bangladesh Nationalist Party in participating in the election, which can be seen as a sign of serious conspiracy against the country.

Sheikh Hasina warns countrymen

On May 2, 2023, during a civic reception accorded by the expatriate Bangladeshis in the United States, Sheikh Hasina urged the countrymen to stay alert as the anti-liberation elements, killers and arson terrorists never return to power.

Sheikh Hasina said the BNP-Jamaat alliance had burnt many people to death and destroyed thousands of roadside trees during 2013-15 in the name of so-called movement to dislodge the government.
 
She reminded the countrymen that the BNP-Jamaat clique had taken the country on the verge of destruction while the Awami League government put it again on the highways of development in the last 14 years ensuring country’s overall development.
 
“Bangladesh will march ahead and be transformed into a developed and prosperous country as dreamt by Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. We’re working to materialize that dream”, she said.

The prime minister heavily came down on the BNP-Jamaat quarter for carrying out anti-state propaganda at home and abroad cashing in on Digital Bangladesh.
 
“We’ve made Digital Bangladesh. They (BNP-Jamaat) are conducting propaganda against us using the tools of Digital Bangladesh. Don’t pay heed to that propaganda”, she added.

BNP-Jamaat’s chaos in Washington

During Sheikh Hasina’s just-concluded visit to the United States a group of BNP-Jamaat supporters began demonstrating outside the Ritz Carlton hotel, where she was attending a civic reception. At this stage, the Prime Minister asked – “what do they want to say? Let them come and talk to me”. As the officials of the PM went and asked the demonstrators to talk to the Prime Minister, they immediately fled the left the spot proving, they were acting upon instruction from BNP-Jamaat leaders simply to generate chaos and draw attention of the American media. But, none of the international media gave any attention to it as they too were aware – such demonstrations were part of BNP-Jamaat’s conspiracy of tarnishing image of Bangladesh and Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

While there is ongoing conspiracy against Bangladesh, let us try to understand the achievements of Sheikh Hasina’s government during the past 14+ years.

Bangladesh never fell into debt trap

On May 1, 2023, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina said, Bangladesh has never defaulted in repaying loans and fallen into a “debt trap”, calling upon the global development partners including the World Bank (WB) to continue their investments in the digital and physical infrastructures to transform the country into a “Smart Bangladesh” by 2041.

In Bangladesh, the Premier said her government has made impressive gains in food security, free and affordable housing, community healthcare, compulsory primary education, women’s empowerment, financial inclusion, access to electricity, and disaster preparedness.


“We wish to achieve our targets on universal health coverage, quality education, child welfare, skills promotion, urban development, sustainable industrialization, environmental protection and effective institution building”, she said.

Sheikh Hasina wants to ensure a free and fair election

On May 7, 2023 Sheikh Hasina urged the Commonwealth to send diversified election observers to oversee the next parliamentary polls in Bangladesh as Commonwealth Secretary General Baroness Patricia Scotland paid a courtesy call on her.

“Our Prime Minister raised the issue of election and proposed the Commonwealth to send diversified election observers to oversee the next parliamentary polls”, Foreign Minister Dr AK Abdul Momen told a news briefing.  In reply, the Commonwealth secretary general said they want to help Bangladesh in holding the next general election in a peaceful, fair and participatory manner, Momen added.

Countering Modi magic? Facts and factors

Shankeresh
-
0
Countering Modi magic? Facts and factors

Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India has gained significant fame and recognition for various reasons. Here are some factors that contribute to his popularity:

  1. Leadership: Narendra Modi possesses strong leadership qualities and an engaging speaking style that resonates with many people. His ability to connect with the masses through his speeches and public appearances has helped him build a significant following.
  2. Development agenda: Modi’s emphasis on development and economic growth has appealed to many people. His focus on initiatives such as “Make in India,” “Digital India,” and “Skill India” has garnered support from those who see him as a leader dedicated to improving the country’s infrastructure, economy, and quality of life.
  3. Strong communication skills: Modi is known for his effective communication skills. His ability to articulate his vision and ideas clearly has helped him connect with a wide range of audiences. His regular use of social media platforms has also allowed him to reach a vast number of people directly.
  4. Populist policies: Modi has implemented several populist policies that have gained him support from various segments of the population. Initiatives such as the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (financial inclusion program), Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (LPG gas connections to underprivileged households), and Ayushman Bharat (healthcare scheme) have helped improve the lives of many people, especially those in marginalized communities.
  5. Strong governance and decisive leadership: Modi is seen by many as a decisive leader who takes bold steps to implement policies and reforms. He has shown a commitment to good governance and has taken measures to streamline bureaucracy, eliminate corruption, and promote transparency.
  6. Nationalist appeal: Modi’s focus on national pride and promoting a strong and self-reliant India has resonated with a section of the population. His emphasis on patriotism, defence modernization, and border security has gained him support among those who prioritize nationalistic values.
  7. Effective election campaigning: Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has run successful election campaigns that have effectively utilized social media, ground-level mobilization, and targeted messaging. These campaigns have helped create a strong and loyal voter base.
  8. Prior experience as Chief Minister of Gujarat: Before becoming Prime Minister, Modi served as the Chief Minister of Gujarat for over a decade. During his tenure, he was credited with implementing pro-business policies and attracting investment to the state. His track record as Chief Minister has contributed to his popularity and provided him with a reputation for effective governance.

It’s important to note that public opinion can vary, and not all individuals may view Modi’s popularity in the same light. Factors such as political ideology, socioeconomic background, and regional considerations can influence people’s perceptions of political leaders.

Digression from constitutionalism by constitutional authorities

sukritigupta24
-
0
Digression from constitutionalism by constitutional authorities

INTRODUCTION

There has been a mistrust between the Executive and Judiciary, that led to instances of conflict between these two branches of government. The Supreme Court’s AOR v. Union of India, 2015 case, known as NJAC ruling, has sparked discussion among these the democratic institutions[1]. This decision concerns both the independence of the Indian judiciary as well as the nomination of judges by other judges.

The National Judicial Appointment Commission was a constitutional body established particularly to handle the task of selecting and transferring judges. It was suggested to take the place of the long-standing Collegium method of appointing judges[2].

In place of the collegium system, these statutes set forth the establishment of a commission to name justices to the Apex Court and high courts.

ANALYSIS

Changes proposed –

The Constitution (99th Amendment) Act altered clause 2 of Article 124 and added three important new Articles—124 A, B, and C—to replace the collegium system. The National Judicial Appointments Commission was established by Article 124A. The NJAC was given the power to nominate judges to Apex Court and the several high courts under Art. 124B, and Parliament was given the authority to enact legislation governing the NJAC’s operation under Article 124C. The NJAC was to consist of six individuals:

  • Chief Justice of India — the ex officio Chairperson
  • Two senior-most Supreme Court Judges — ex officio members
  • Union Minister of Law and Justice — ex officio member
  • A committee made up of the Chief Justice of India, the Prime Minister of India, and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha will nominate two famous members of civil society; one of the eminent members must be a member of the SC/ST/OBC/minority or female group. These candidates couldn’t be nominated again after their initial three-year term.

The NJAC Act also stated the selection process for judges. The NJAC was to suggest judges for the SC and HC on the basis of competence, merit, and “other factors stated in the regulations” whereas the Chief Justices of India and the high courts were to be suggested on basis of seniority. Any 2 NJAC members could veto a proposal if they were not satisfied with it.

ISSUE-

“The 99th Amendment of the NJAC”, Act’s legality were contested before the Supreme Court. The petitioners contested it on the grounds that the Act broke the Constitution’s fundamental principles[3]. In 2014, many petitioners petitioned the Supreme Court to declare the NJAC Bill and the 99th Amendment unconstitutional. The Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) made complaint in initial months of 2015, arguing that both Acts provisions were illegal and void.

It stated that this Amendment undermined “primacy of the collective view of the Chief Justice of India and the two senior-most Judges of the Supreme Court of India” by allowing a “majority of three non-Judge members” to veto or suspend their collective recommendation. The fundamental framework of the Constitution, of which the autonomy of the court was a key component, had been “gravely” undermined by the Amendment.[4]

Additionally, it argued that because the NJAC Act was approved by both Houses of parliament while Articles 124(2) and 217(1) as authentically established were still in effect and the “99th Amendment” had not been approved by the President, it was “invalid” and “ultra vires” to the Constitution.

JUDGEMENT

A constitutional bench of 5 judges ruled against the NJAC act, invalidating the 99th constitutional amendment, with a vote of 4:1. The panel decided that NJAC was “unconstitutional” and gone against the “foundational framework of the constitution” as laid down by Kesavananda Bharati case.[5]

According to Judge Kehar, the veto power can be detrimental to the selection of judges. Because “eminent persons” might not concur with the decision made by the commission’s judges that a candidate is qualified for nomination, the candidate will not be appointed. In his opinion, it is troublesome since “eminent persons” may not have any legal expertise. The judges ruled that the Amendment Act was “blatantly unconstitutional” because “eminent persons” were not subject to any qualification requirements. The court held that the Constitution provided for the supremacy of judiciary in appointment of judges.[6]

The court also considered the Union law minister’s participation on the panel to be troubling. Due to the fact that the government files the majority of cases in higher courts, the court believed that their involvement could result in a possible conflict of interest. The court believed that the Minister’s presence jeopardised the autonomy of the law-making authority and the division of powers, which were fundamental elements of the Constitution.

The NJAC Act was deemed unconstitutional for 2 main reasons: First, the Constitution requires that the judiciary be given priority and sovereignty in the nomination of judges to higher courts. Second, judicial precedence is a fundamental element of the Constitution.

CONCLUSION

It could be concluded that the attempt of NJAC was a good step in the field of improving judicial accountability in the form of collegium system, however, it was not free from loopholes as discussed. Whether or whether not this decision represents a textbook case of judicial overreach, judicial activism preserved the sovereignty of judiciary and protect its survival. Since the judiciary is the only branch of constitutional bodies that has the power to overturn laws, its importance cannot be understated.

So, this ruling looks to me was an attempt to keep the judiciary as far away from any political influence as possible. Perhaps the judges worry that any political interference will expose them to undue risk and that the principle of reciprocity may be applicable. It is right that the government is one of the most active litigants in Indian courts, and if the government had a say in the selection of judges, the decision might have been subconsciously influenced.

Here, the 99th Amendment was tipping the scales in favour of the executive, posing a possible danger to judicial autonomy, which is unquestionably imperative to the fundamental principles of the constitution and a precondition for a productive and unbiased judicial structure. As a result, this amendment is undermining the foundation of the constitution.

Though this judgement reinstates the pre-existing verdict, it also determined to address the issues regarding the same. Thus, the procedure of collegium system in appointing the judges should have been more transparent and impartial. The body of NJAC should have kept in mind their authority in exercising their powers and duties regarding this matter.

So, this case gave us a clear picture of “DIGRESSION FFROM CONSTITUTIONALISM BY CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITIES”.

[1] The Supreme Court’s AOR v Union of India (supreme court)

[2] Singh A (The Need for a National Judicial Appointment Commission and the Appointment of Jurists January 6, 2023)

[3] Sengupta A, “Judicial Primacy and the Basic Structure: A Legal Analysis of the NJAC Judgment” (November 28, 2015) <Vol. 50, No. 48 (NOVEMBER 28, 2015), pp. 27-30>

[4] Subramanium G, “The NJAC Case and Judicial Independence” [2018] Appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court of India 168

[5] Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala on 24 April, 1973 (4 SCC 225 1461)

[6] Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Ass’n v Union of India, (2016) 4 SCC (Supreme Court)

An open letter to Naseeruddin Shah

Suniel Parihar
-
0
An open letter to Naseeruddin Shah

Dear Naseer Bhaijaan,

I am an ardent fan of yours since your early days in Hindi cinema. What a talented actor you are ! Despite your average looks , you have managed to find a place amongst the top actors in the film industry. Unfortunately, because of your plain looks you couldn’t really establish yourself as a mainstream romantic hero and failed to achieve super star status.

Just too bad. But, you managed to create your own niche, so why be jealous of the all time romantic superstar Rajesh Khanna? Jealousy being a negative emotion isn’t good for health and being your fan I am concerned about your well being, hence the unsolicited advice.

It’s sad that a highly talented actor like you is not getting any worthwhile roles in films of late. Please rest assured it’s Bollywood’s loss and not yours. They are missing out on your proven talent while signing mediocre actors because of nepotism or whatever. But you have achieved so much in your career, which very few in the industry have. So enjoy your success rather than making stupid comments to remain in the limelight. You don’t get it? Okay, like saying things such as “I will not watch The Kerala Story because films like that are setting a dangerous trend”. Or words to that effect. My dear, if you haven’t seen the movie, how can you condemn it? I personally have no issues with that but then I hate it when people say you make comments like these after smoking weed.

And you must try and rein in Bhabhijaan as well. She too has become a loose canon these days, and as such contributing to your unpopularity. That reminds me, sometime around 1993, while doing an army course in Pune, putting my course assignment on hold I went to see your play Othello in the open air. Bhabijaan was managing the lights. You of course were your usual best but she too did a great job with the lighting. Needless to say, am a big fan of her’s too. I specially liked her in Sarabhai versus Sarabhai. She did full justice to her role of a snob.

Cutting it short due to the constraints of time and space, I wonder why can’t you be like your brother and my brother officer Lt Gen Zameer Uddin Shah? He generally keeps quiet and makes no nonsensical comments.

Bhaijaan, I can go on and on but I am sure you get the drift. Please enjoy your sunset days in peace and avoid making pointless and uncalled for comments on issues that you don’t understand.

Have a great life ahead.

Your ardent fan and well-wisher,

Suniel Parihar

Enacting laws against insulting heads of state in India: Learning from Germany’s example

Mohan MURTI
-
0
Enacting laws against insulting heads of state in India: Learning from Germany’s example

Freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental right in any democratic society. However, it is important to strike a balance between the exercise of this right and the protection of public figures, especially heads of state, from unwarranted insults and defamation. Given the present instances of Rahul Gandhi and other politicians from several opposition parties insulting an elected Prime Minister, I strongly suggest we will explore the significance of enacting laws against insulting heads of state in India, taking inspiration from Germany’s legal framework.

Respecting the Dignity of Heads of State:

The heads of state, as the highest representatives of a nation, embody its dignity, sovereignty, and values. They play a crucial role in fostering unity, stability, and international relations. It is therefore imperative that they be shielded from personal attacks, slander, and offensive remarks that may undermine their authority or harm the nation’s reputation.

The German Model:

Germany has implemented a law that penalizes the act of insulting foreign heads of state, demonstrating a strong commitment to safeguarding the dignity of public officials. This law, known as Section 103 of the German Criminal Code, makes it a criminal offense to insult a foreign head of state. By establishing legal consequences for such actions, Germany sends a clear message that disrespectful behavior towards heads of state will not be tolerated.

Adopting a Similar Legislation in India:

India, as the world’s largest democracy, could benefit from enacting a similar law to protect the dignity of heads of state. While India does have laws against defamation, they do not specifically address insults targeted at heads of state. Introducing legislation that explicitly criminalizes such insults would provide a stronger deterrent and ensure the respect and decorum befitting the office.

Preserving International Relations:

Insulting a head of state can have severe consequences for bilateral relations between nations. It can strain diplomatic ties, disrupt trade partnerships, and impede collaborative efforts on global issues. By enacting laws against such insults, India can send a message of respect and professionalism, strengthening its international image and fostering cooperation with other countries.

Balancing Free Speech and Legal Protection:

Critics of laws against insulting heads of state often argue that they curtail freedom of speech. However, it is essential to strike a balance between protecting public officials and maintaining the right to express opinions and engage in constructive criticism. A well-crafted law should focus on intentional and malicious insults rather than genuine criticism or satirical expressions, ensuring that it does not become a tool for suppressing dissent.

Safeguarding Democracy and Public Order:

Insults against heads of state can create social unrest, encourage hostility, and incite violence among citizens. The state has a responsibility to maintain public order and prevent the escalation of such situations. By enacting laws against insulting heads of state, India can promote a harmonious society that values civility, respect, and responsible exercise of freedom of expression.

India, with her rich democratic tradition, must recognize the need to enact laws that protect the dignity of heads of state while upholding freedom of speech. Drawing inspiration from Germany’s legal framework, India can strike the right balance between safeguarding public figures from insults and preserving the essence of a vibrant democracy. Such legislation would help in maintaining strong bilateral relations, fostering a culture of respect, and ensuring the smooth functioning of the nation.

Reply to literary review published in Hindu Daily on 30/04/23 Sunday given by Ziya Us Islam on book Politics of Hate authored by Farahnaz Isphania

DR. ABHISHEK SINGH
-
0
Reply to literary review published in Hindu Daily on 30/04/23 Sunday given by Ziya Us Islam on book Politics of Hate authored by Farahnaz Isphania

The article started by highlighting the fact of judicial activism of apex court of Pakistan which ordered to register FIR over 90 person responsible for the attack on Hindu temple aftermath release of Hindu minor boy accused of blasphemy. Further highlighted, that on order of SC the Hindu temple was constructed and handed over the Hindu minority in Pakistan. (Well it is certainly an exception under international pressure of wiping the fundamentalist approach of the country).

I would like to unearth certain facts which may be a paradox to the above declarations and totally rebut these sorts of literary works which place a half baked reality to the readers. In 1971 religious minorities constituted 10% of total population, 27 years hence in 1998 it declined to 4% of which 1.6% were Hindus rest population was divided among Christians, Ahmadis etc. In census of 2017 released in 2021, Pakistan Muslim majority further rose to 96.47% of which Hindu population remained constant to 1.6%, 1.6% of Christians and others in rest of population percentage.

The 2021 report on International Religious Freedom published on June 2nd, 2022 states that out of 1830 temples and gurudwaras across the only 31 were operating. (And construction of one temple, that too, due to international pressure makes Pakistan pat their back).

Recently, the then PM Imran Khan had launched nationwide Single National Curriculum that standardised the primary school instruction across the country. It was criticised by the minority group including Hindu. While law requires to teach Islamic studies to Muslim students, sources continued to report many non Muslims had participated on these courses because their schools did not offer parallel course.

Many religious minorities like particularly lower caste Hindu & Christians report cases of forceful eviction from their homes and villages by government officials assisting individuals desiring their land. Minority religious group continue to face discrimination in government hiring. Endorsing the statement, in 73 years of independence of Pakistan only one Hindu Women will become a part of Pakistan Administrative Services.*

A report says 1000 Hindu and Christian girls are abducted and converted to Islam forcefully. Some Islamic seminaries teach that forcibly converting Hindu girls is equivalent to Haj e akbari or greatest religious duty for Muslims targeted persecution of Hindus among other religions has led to continuous fleeing to India. In July 2020 the partially built wall of proposed Hindu temple was demolished by Islamists.

The government took initiative to allow construction but succumbed to pressure from Islamists. Similarly mob vandalised and burned sacred Hindu scriptures at Mata Rani temple and it was seen that the connivance of Pakistan government. The Islamists extremists imbibe hatred towards the Hindus even among children of young age and this statement can be corroborated with many video clips circulated on social media.

She further contrasted the incident of Vadodra shobayatra riots with action of Pakistan apex court on protection of minority rights in Pakistan. But she is unable to explain or write about the initiation of this clash. The stones were pelted hurled on shobayatra from the roofs of Muslim household. Does the rain God shower these stones and petrol bombs only on Muslim household and not on other houses of locality? As it happened in Delhi riots in 2020 in wake of protest against CAA and the date was chosen possibly on arrival of American president in India.

The perpetrators carried out their actions with a significant amount of impunity and continue to enjoy the same in every part of India playing the victim card despite being assailant most of the times. There are gruesome accounts of many people being shot by firearms, stabbed with knives & swords, body cut into pieces and dumped in a drain and people being burnt alive in the fire. Media reports have carried chilling confessions of self proclaimed ‘rioters’.

In contrast, not a single incident of clash can be cited on Moharram julus in any part of India. Over the top, clashes do happen among shia and sunni julus. Vadodra incident was planned conspiracy and so was Bengal shobayatra riots.

Why don’t Muslim essayist, columnist preach their fellow Muslim to refrain from violence. Why don’t they write upon forced conversion by Islam, why don’t they preach peace in violence ridden Middle East Islamic countries like Syria, African Islamists countries and go in the den of ISIS and tell them adopt the policy of democracy and let the rule of law prevail? The answer is clear and blatant- the fear of Islamic fundamentalist. The stone pelting and targeted violence against Hindus or other religion by Islamic perpetrators are well thought of conspiracies to instill fear in minds of other religions.

Ispahani further blames that CAA of 2019 which granted citizenship to non Muslims of Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan  is anti minority. First of all, I would like to quote as the Act says it talks about “persecuted” non Muslims of Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. The persecution is the act of harassing or oppressing a person or a group of people, especially because of their identity or religion. 

And if even Muslims of these Islamic countries are persecuted then what else to say and write. She further takes a stand on Ahmadiyas creed, which Pakistan government itself do not count them into Muslims, so it’s become the liability of India under CAA to accept them as ‘persecuted non Muslims’.  One of the Muslim sects facing identity crisis among Islamists countries does not become a reason to be accepted in the secular country like India which already has more than 2,00,000 refugees (these are registered entries) as per 2014 report of UNHCR.

In accordance with national interest and resource availability, India has welcomed refugees from a variety of neighboring nations.  India’s attitude towards refugees has always been accommodating. But no refugee intake can be at the cost of indigenous population. Half truth is more dangerous than lie as lie can be detected at some stage but half truth will surely mislead you for long. And these type of misleading information shared on print media need to be admonished.

In respect of cow vigilantes clash out this is certainly not the first time that religious thoughts and practices have influenced society as well as science either directly or indirectly. Cow is as much holy for Hindus as the boar or pig is haram for Muslims. Has there any need arisen for Muslims to be pig vigilant in such diversified society for trade of pig meat based food products.

The pork is forbidden for Muslims because it says in the Holy Quran that some food is allowed, while others are explicitly declared haram, which means forbidden. And pork is one of those forbidden foods. The food industry is paying increasing attention to various Muslim requirements as well as religious sentiments and modern forms of halal production, trade and consumption are proliferating on a global scale. The beef trade is not banned in India neither are slaughter houses.

According to FSSAI all meat shop and slaughter houses need to apply for FSSAI license to run their business. How many of these cow porters have this license? They are smuggling the bovines and on top of it playing the victim card again!

Faizur Rehman’s chapter of ‘Muslimphobia in India’ is wrongly titled and it should ‘Global Issue of Muslimphobia’. Until and unless Muslims themselves will not come against Islamist barbarism and religious fundamentalism, every part of the world will face Muslimphobia. China and Japan both disallow mosques and any efforts to convert are outlawed. China actively campaigns against Islam. No voices are raised in China or any part of the world.

In many parts of the world like Hungary, Islam is often depicted as a violent religion, and Islam and Islamic fundamentalism are often equated and used interchangeably. Ruling FIDSZ KDNP party of Hungary, officials and far-right actors have linked immigrants and Islam to crimes and terrorism, and often depict Muslim refugees and migrants as invaders, who want to force their culture on the peoples of Europe and establish an Islamic caliphate on the continent. Islam has not yet been officially recognised by the state of Angola. To conclude I would I like to end with a quote of Thomas Hobbes ‘Man is a wolf to himself’

1...222324...890Page 23 of 890

Contact: [email protected]

About us

User generated chapter of OpIndia. Selected articles submitted here are published at main English or Hindi websites of OpIndia.

ऑपइंडिया

OpIndia

© OpIndia.com