Mamata: A case of Marginalization!

When I address my Best friend as the President of India, I see for her- a Big black car, the Silver Trumpet and Edwin Lutyens’ architectural adobe, and not certainly the Politics of Convenience or Opportunistic Smartness… Unfortunately, the Race-2012 turned down to be that- a game where what matters, the most, is: whose move is more Measured and more Calculated. If tomorrow, Independent India sits down to check it’s achieve, it will by all odds spend a few hours on the upshots of 2012 Presidential Election. The Rush from Certainty to Incertitude and again Redo of all mess makes it Special, and not just the magical number - 13, I believe.

If not two months old attempt of Sushma Swaraj, it was V S Sampath’s 12^th June EC News Conference that blew the whistle and Mamata Di was the first one who heard it. When other regional leaders were occupied with their domestic affairs, Mamata appeared to be a Game-Changer in the Capital. She got media attention more than Sunny Leone and her each move became BREAKING NEWS. A quick meeting with the UPA Chairperson and the Declaration of names revealed all secrets. Congress may slam her for Lack of Decorum and Discourtesy but that’s how Mamata Banerjee is. Thanks Di! She ensured every single TMC leaders get an opportunity, at least once in their political career, to climb up to the studios of leading news channels… Disaster! Cataclysmic English and no sense of what’s going on... Anyway, Strategy was crediting her attendance in Akhilesh’s swear-in. All was Well before getting Ill. The M+M Combo (Mulayam and Mamata) was successful in threatening Congress Men and outstandingly came up with an over-the-top proposal i.e. the sitting Prime Minister was proposed to spend his time in the “Retire Bhawan”. Ooopsss.. Rastrapati Bhawan! Amazing! I call it. Nowhere in the history of the world, perhaps!!

Choice was not- ‘what they want’ but off course ‘what they want not’. Any Bengali but not Pranab Da and any Muslim but not Ansari Sahab- was the litmus test. The permutations yielded three names but 7RCR out rightly rejected all of them and Samajwadi Party, forgetting all ethics, backed it. Mamata got her reality checked. She came, She dictated, She periled but she returned Unconquered. Mulayam ditched her, Congress snubbed her and Delhi rebuffed her. Pranab’s victory became the Foregone Conclusion.




Also Visit:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13742999/Is-President-a-mere-head-in-India

...the Judicial Rebuff

Mr. P. J. Thomas
Photo courtesy: The India Today

ONE Big blow and Indian government fainted!! PM has to accept his responsibility and LM has to admit failure of the system.
     “½ +1” will not always do… If you call this mathematical verbalism as democratic go then Democracy is not enough. “If there is majority rule, Rule of law is ensured.” If this is the belief, then E.M. Foster has to come once again to teach this Democracy -“I do not believe in Belief”. On September 03, 2010, Singhji and Chidambaramji might have overruled the opposition leader by a majority but Hon’ble Supreme Court in Centre for PIL & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr., overruled the Overruling, saying the High Powered Committee’s (HPC) selection of Mr. P. J. Thomas as Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) under Section 4(1) of the Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 was “non-est in law”.

“Government is not accountable to the courts in respect of policy decisions. However, they are accountable for the legality of such decisions." While rendering a judgment, which is strictly confined to the legality of the recommendation, the court moved On with these lines… They differentiated ‘legality’ from ‘merit’, and ended up talking about the “larger perspective”, which CVC, DoPT and HPC failed to foresee.

     When No Law is infringed, under Sec 4 of the Act, it was hard for the court to reach a conclusion with regard to Thomas's appointment. The underlying abstraction in the minds of the judges, which can be piled up, is that they were not satisfied with the existing. Something was missing and the entire 73 page judgment was narration of that ‘something’.
….Appointment can’t be based on Bio Data.
...Institution is more important than an individual.
..Eligible persons should be without blemish whatsoever.
All these are valid and justified grounds. But somehow the court reached to the abstract conception of "Institutional Integrity", which is not a reasonable basis. In page 30 of the judgment, Justice Kapadia said,

“…in the present case the recommending authority (High Powered Committee) has gone by personal integrity of the officers empanelled and not by institutional integrity.”

However Section 4 of the Act says nothing about the institutional integrity. But in p. 32 of the judgment, the court categorically stated- the institutional integrity is the primary consideration which the HPC is required to consider while making recommendation and this vital aspect has not been taken into account in the present case. But I failed to understand what institutional integrity they are talking about? Every public office ought to be an office of integrity. It may be CVC, the Election Commission, the CAG or any other office. Is this integrity not appropriate for judiciary? The court should have defined what they meant by it. Do they mean, sacred? public trust? corrupt less? concerned? or what?

Appointments are always made on personal integrity. I agree between 2000 and 2004, the notings of DoPT dated 26th June, 2000, 18th January, 2001, 20th June, 2003, 24th February, 2004, 18th October, 2004 and 2nd November, 2004 have all observed that penalty proceedings may be initiated against Thomas. But at the same time, it cannot be ignored that the CVC vide its letter dated 25th June, 2007 informed the Ministry that:

“The case has been re-examined and Commission has observed that no case is made out against S/Shri P.J. Thomas…”

     It is rightly marked that no reasons are available as to why CVC had changed its earlier stand. But a presumption can’t be made as to Absence of reason means there is something fishy. So, the court should have gone to the extent of getting an answer to this question. Well! I agree when they say, if the selection adversely affects institutional competency and functioning then it shall be the duty of the HPC not to recommend such a candidate.

However the court rightly faulted the HPC for its failure to consider relevant materials. The key word in proviso to Section 4(1) is the word “recommendation”. While making the recommendation, the HPC performs a statutory duty. And the word ‘recommendation’ in the proviso stands for an "informed decision". Therefore the court is right when it looked into the matter as to whether relevant materials and vital aspects were taken into account or not. The observation that those notings were not considered in juxtaposition with the clearance of CVC granted is relevant as the decision to recommend has got to be an informed decision. If HPC, for any reason whatsoever, fails to look into the relevant materials then its decision would stand vitiated on the ground of official arbitrariness.

Secondly, an interesting point was made by the petitioner that the recommendation of the HPC has to be unanimous as the intention was to introduce bipartisanship and political neutrality. In Vineet Narain’s case the Court had observed that the Committee would decide by unanimity or consensus. It is no where stated that the Committee would decide by majority. Moreover, it was argued by Mr. Prashant Bhushan that if unanimity is ruled out then the very purpose of inducting the Leader of Opposition in the process of selection will stand defeated. But the court rejected the submission.

     The Court was right in saying- Conferment of such a power on one of the members would amount to ‘Judicial Legislation’. But I disagree when the court talked about conferment of a “veto right”, because there is provision of recording. A member is not absolved just by showing his hand or objecting, as he has to give reasons. How you found out that Mrs. Swaraj had objected? It was recorded. Ohh! The court itself in its direction also had made a point that member dissenting should give reasons. So, why ‘No’ to unanimity? Mind you, Public confidence will be enhanced.

     Anyway, the bench comprising CJI S H Kapadia, Justice K S Radhakrishnan and Swatanter Kumar laid down stringent guidelines for future appointments and quash the present appointment. This "Judicial Rebuff" can be said as a resurgent judicial activism under the leadership of CJI but somewhere or other, ‘Rule by Law’ have to bob up when ‘Rule of Law’ goes missing in political technicalities.

Flag! (un)Furl!! Force!!! Farce!

Farce! Yes. It really was. Omar’s invitation to BJP was a farce. But who started it? is my ques.. The protagonists of "Ekta Yatra"? Or the chief Minister? The centre? Or the separatists?
The President of this country is right when she said, “26th January is a very significant date in our nation’s calendar... it is a time to introspect about how we have fared so far, and in which direction are we moving.” When the Republic turns 62, the tussle over the tri-colour between the ruling and the opposition is self explanatory.

I don’t see any reason for this integration march and similarly failed to understand the reason for not permitting elected leaders to unfurl the national flag. I don’t know how far we have moved as a democracy but yes! the word ‘opposition’ is replaced with the word ‘suspicion’- where ruling never trust the opposition and the later is more reactionary than responsive.

Not in a mood to justify the necessity of this Yatra neither interested to defend the centre’s move and employment of Force. Jumbling of ideas and correctness in every 1’s justification didn’t allow me to take a stand but to watch the episode being an apolitical. Centre modishly justified saying state is the deciding authority while Omar didn’t want to perturb as the situation is definitely good than ever before. BJP failed to understand whose permission it need to unfurl the very own flag and how many days before it have to apply for getting a visa.

When Ram Mandir issue is ½ solved, price rise concern is not cropping and Supreme Court is there to take care of Black money, the leaders of BJP were smart enough to understand that now UPA is so vulnerable that anything can knock it down. Every1 have the right but the way they chosen made the country afraid as if it is an agenda to attack Kashmir. Are people of this country so foolish to read the political agenda? Using national flag as a political prop is not going to help BJP neither their ironic leader Shyama Prasad Mukherjee is going to assist them in UP or other elections. I agree with Mr. Omar. Summer of 2010 in Kashmir and Summer of 2008 in Jammu should not repeat again. Interestingly the supporters of NDA putdown the blame and M.I.H.Ansari and other opposition leader made a point of match fixing between BJP and National conference.

Likewise, how can unfurling national flag will create problem is an unanswered query. I am not in BJP’s side but somewhere inside my heart, a Man was waiting 2 see his tricolor in the blues endeavouring 2 touch the clouds and tell the world the values of justice and =ty. By the way, BJP was not about to host the flag @ Lahore chowk but Lal chowk and this denial and arrest of cabinet ministers is a national shame. The ruling is no better than English. If it was a law and order problem, why the separatists were not arrested? How dare Yasiv Mallick- A political No body give challenge? If Kashmir is normal, why this arrest then? If Arundhati Roy was wrong saying Kashmir is a separate part, why this centre is now proving her point? Sanjay Kant is right. This status quo in Kashmir should be challenged.

reshuffle..

Reshuffle, Reshuffle, Reshuffle… Uh-huh, there was a RESHUFFLE. A big ceremony! A big get 2gether! and a big Yo @ the Rashtrapati Bhavan! The swearing-in of the new incumbents took place 2day but the attendance sheet shows no absenteeism and the simply reason is no drop out. Neither those who failed to make a +ve mark nor the damage doer were chucked out. No change in big portfolios like Home, Defence, External Affairs and Finance made me ask a why on caps but Well! the Prime Ministerji is very much within his right to do this drama even though it is hard to appreciate the spur and rationality behind this entire workout.

How can a non performer be a performer in another department? When corruption and price rise is at the vertex, aam aadmi forgot the limit of expectation. Yes! Dr. Shakeel Ahmed is right that govt. had not assured anyth Big. But people can’t be bloody politicians. Right? Media reported that this was an interim measure and the month of May will see the second phase of Cabinet change after the Budget session. But what was the reason of acquiring 15*12 cms of every newspaper is still opaque?

ha! ha! bull's eye asked sth.

are indians angry with upa govt.?

We the people of India (the usual dull expression) still after the 60 yrs. of partition, very much interested in the co-habitation with our people living in Pakistan. We still dream about "Akhanda Bharat", when we think of India. We never tried to fight with Pakistanis. We are not angry with UPA. It will hardly take time to hang Kasab or our military to nude Pak... but no!

The blood of Indian is the blood of tolerance, the blood of sympathy, the blood of kindness and the blood of love...and see! we are now the Super power standing before the world and on the contrary the fooled Pak is a failed Pak, unable to secure the life of its citizens and threat to the humanity.

INDIA: THE SUPER POWER and I must also repeat the statement of our lovable PM, "No power on earth can stop an idea, whose time has come."

Why NDA had lost recent elections in INDIA?

I was just searching for an answer regarding international trade law in yahoo answers and suddenly came across the said question. I just jot down the following points and submit in the yahoo answer for the rest of the world to see...
-ve campaigning
lust for power (kurshi fever), without considering welfare
cheap dialogues
hash strategies
communication gap b/w voters and leaders
not secular
to an extent lack of leadership
no youth star
priority to IT rather than EAT (poverty)
no more National Democratic Alliance but Non Democratic Alliance

I believe, this election, as Saba Naqvi had said, told the politicians that regional pride, caste, religion won't bring votes.

see my other answers here

Bak Bak Karne Ka Aadat Padgaya

View more presentations from SatyaRanjanSwain.