Trump’s refusal makes no difference to India

By

-

October 29, 2018

Over the last four years, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s trips have always created a buzz and majorly in a way of criticism. The most frequently visited country by PM Modi is the United States, where he made five visits including the UN General Assembly meeting in 2014. Indo-US relations were tensed under the second UPA regime, but reportedly it seems to have certainly improved since the entry of Modi.

Modi during his previous visit to Washington in June last year had invited Trump to pay a visit to India on our 70th Republic day in 2019. Although Donald Trump declined India’s invite to be the chief guest for the annual Indian Republic Day parade held in New Delhi. According to multiple government and diplomatic sources, a final decision has been conveyed to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) stating the reason with Trump’s “crowded calendar” being cited as the primary reason for his not accepting the invitation. However, the question here arises that what is the country going to lose if Trump has refused to come to India?

On asking about Trump’s denial for visiting India on Republic Day, Criminal lawyer Abbas Kazmi stated, “Trump’s refusal to accept the Indian government’s Republic Day invitation won’t make any difference to our country. India is a self-reliant nation and things have changed drastically as we don’t depend on other countries now. By threatening to impose sanctions against India, the US is behaving like a goonda which is unjustified.”

While Congress spokesperson Anant Gadgil feels the denial was an insult towards the nation. He commented, “Normally, the government don’t declare the information pertaining to the visit of important dignitaries visiting India unless they get an official confirmation from them. But the government has made a mistake by declaring about Trump’s visit to India on Republic Day. If the government invites other guests just because Trump is not coming then it is really an insult.”

India has always observed a love-hate kind of relationship lately, after Trump being the President of America. A few days ago, Trump had shown his anguished saying that India will soon find out about his decision on the punitive CAATSA sanctions after India signed a $5 billion deal to purchase the much-vaunted S-400 air defence system from Russia. Taking a note of Trump’s statement, India’s foreign ministry chose not to comment on the remarks made by him while interacting with reporters in the White House. He had also threatened not only India but all countries to stop oil imports from Iran or they will face sanctions from the US.

BJP spokesperson Avadhut Wagh mentioned, “Trump might not be coming to India for attending the Republic Day function due to time constraints. As far as the US threatening to impose sanctions on India, our nation is not worried as we have already conducted the Pokhran test. We already have good relations with Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, China and other countries and that is the beauty of Narendra Modi.”

In a recent case, where Trump slammed India for imposing “tremendously high tariffs” on American products stating that New Delhi wanted to have a trade deal with the US primarily to keep him happy. He had announced the key elements of the US-Mexico and Canada Agreement or USMCA, Trump listed out at the trade deals that are under negotiations, including with Japan, European Union, China and India.

Political journalist Nilesh Khare expressed, “Since the US is involved in an economic war with China, they require India to counterbalance China. India is the trade partner of US. Since India has already purchased oil from Iran, hence the question of imposing a sanction against us doesn’t arise.”

Trump also said that the relationship with both India as well as the country’s Prime Minister Modi “is great”. As in a decision by the US President of closing the border for predominantly Muslim countries has created anxiety around the world and it has not left the Indian Muslim migrants. But, the experts of the India-US relations feel that the Indian Muslims need not worry about the decision, though there is a possible worry for the emigrants of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia who are subjected to heavy vetting.

Last year, Trump had made an attempt to make an eccentric personal remark for Modi, when he discovered that Modi would be flying solo on his then June 2017 state visit to the US, he joked that he could play matchmaker for the Indian Prime Minister. Earlier, in an event named World Economic Forum where Modi and Trump both had given a speech, Trump tried to imitate Modi’s way of speaking. In the same year, he had also announced a suspension of “premium processing” of H-1B visas which largely affected Indian IT services companies.

Social activist and former AAP leader Anjali Damania exclaimed, “Trump’s turning down the Indian government’s Republic Day invitation only indicates the strained relations between both the countries. US is not only trying to impose trade sanction but is also imposing curbs on H-1B visa.”

In 2015, when the US President Barack Obama had come to India for the parade, he had been able to negotiate and breakthrough on a pact that allowed the US companies to supply India with civilian nuclear technology. Nonetheless, it is believed that Trump’s visit could make a difference between the two countries relationship.

Social activist Kumar Saptarshi asserted, “It’s Donald Trump’s wish whether he wants to accept Indian government’s invitation for Republic Day function. If he had come to India then the relation between India and US might have improved.”

Nonetheless, Shiv Sena leader Arvind Bhonsale refrained from making any comment on this issue.

NCP to reach villages on “failures” of BJP-led govt in Maha

By

Afternoon Voice

-

October 29, 2018

With the BJP-led government in Maharashtra set to complete four years in power on October 31, the NCP Monday said it would go to each village of the state from November 1 to tell people about its “failures”.

NCP spokesperson Nawab Malik attacked the Devendra Fadnavis-led dispensation, saying the government has failed to address several issues including those related to agriculture, irrigation, industries, law and order, employment generation, public distribution system and healthcare.

The party also released a booklet that picks holes in various schemes and decisions of the state government.

“Not progressive, the state has become regressive in each sphere. The government has failed on all fronts. We will go to each village from November 1 and tell people about the failures of the government,” Malik told reporters.

Malik accused the government of hoodwinking people of the state, particularly peasants, on the farm loan waiver scheme.

He said 8,074 farmers in Maharashtra committed suicide during the tenure of the Congress-NCP government (from 1999 to 2014) as against 10,000 in the last four years.

“The government announced Rs 34,000 crore loan waiver scheme in the name of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj for 89 lakh farmers following their protests. But only Rs 16,000-crore worth loans have been disbursed till date. Where has the remaining amount gone?” Malik said.

He also criticised the ‘Jalyukta Shivar Yojana’ water conservation scheme of the state government, claiming it was launched only “to fill the stomach of BJP workers”.

Malik said Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has talked of bringing Rs 70,000-crore investment in the state through the ‘Magnetic Maharashtra’ programme and giving jobs to two lakh youth.

“He should declare names of at least 2,000 youngsters who have got jobs,” the NCP leader said.

The law and order situation in Maharashtra was “worse than Bihar” as goondaism, instead of industries, has been on the rise.

“The crime rate has become serious. Murders and rapes are on the rise in the state. Over 36,000 women are missing,” he said.

Pawar kin flays Uddhav Thackeray as war of words escalates

By

Afternoon Voice

-

October 29, 2018

The verbal duel between Shiv Sena and NCP, sparked by Sena president Uddhav Thackeray’s Ram temple construction pitch, has intensified with a close relative of NCP chief Sharad Pawar assailing the Sena leader.

Rohit Pawar, son of Sharad Pawar’s nephew Rajendra, hit back at Thackeray over his criticism of former Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar over the temple issue.

Addressing a rally in Jalna last week, Ajit Pawar, nephew of the NCP chief, said Uddhav Thackeray had failed to construct a memorial in the name of his father, Bal Thackeray, but was “harping” on construction of Ram temple in Ayodhya.

The Sena had hit back, with an editorial in party mouthpiece Saamana calling Ajit Pawar a “gutter insect” of Pune politics who lives off his uncle Sharad Pawars fortune as he was left with no importance in Maharashtra politics.

In a counter attack, Rohit, in a Facebook post Sunday, said, “During his last day, Balasaheb had appealed people to look after Uddhav. Yesterday, we learnt what he meant when he made the appeal. His words meant his son was gullible and therefore should be taken care of,” Rohit said.

The late Sena founder was a clever and big leader who had command over language and would attack political opponents through the weekly magazine Marmik and Saamana but those who engage in politics using Bal Thackeray’s name have insulted his pen by launching tirade against Ajit Pawar, Rohit said.

“Uddhav Thackeray neither got elected through public, nor has he toiled to see Maharashtra by stepping out of Matoshree (the Thackeray family residence in Mumbai). While Maharashtra is on fire, this man is hoodwinking people by sharing power (with BJP),” Rohit said.

The Sena, despite being BJP’s ruling alliance partner, has been critical of the Amit Shah-led party. The NCP and other Opposition parties have often asked it to walk out of the government.

No one entitled to more than one house under any Maha govt scheme: HC

By

Afternoon Voice

-

October 29, 2018

The Bombay High Court ruled on Monday that no person, including judges, would be entitled to hold more than one house or tenement at a time in Maharashtra under any state government scheme.

A division bench of justices B R Gavai and Bharti Dangre said there was nothing wrong if the government floated a scheme to allot houses to judges and other persons at a concessional rate, but if a person took advantage of this and obtained more than one house, it would amount to using their position for unjust enrichment.

The court passed its order in a public interest litigation, filed by former journalist Ketan Tirodkar, questioning the state government’s decision to construct a high-rise residential building in suburban Oshiwara for sitting HC judges.

Tirodkar in the petition said the procedure followed in allotting houses in the said society was wrong and that a “pick-and-choose method” was being used.

The building has a total of 63 tenements, of which 39 have been allotted to sitting high court judges.

Tirodkar in his petition claimed that some of the judges who were allotted flats in the building, already had houses under a different scheme of the government.

The high court in its judgement directed the state government to formulate a scheme by which a person, including judges, would be entitled to only one house/tenement under any scheme in the state.

However, if a person wants to upgrade or opt for a flat in any other city, he or she would have to surrender the existing flat to the government so as to be entitled for allotment in a better scheme, the court said.

“It is not possible for judges of this court who, after sacrificing their practice, have answered the call to serve the nation and the society, by becoming a judge, to purchase a flat/house from the open market in a city like Mumbai,” the court said.

As such, there should be nothing wrong if the government floats a scheme for special category for such persons (judges), the order said.

“However, having one house/tenement from any of the schemes floated by the state government or any other authority under its control and having multiple houses/tenements from the state government are two different things,” it said.

“We have no hesitation to observe that if a person gets the advantage of allotment of the tenements/houses from the government at a concessional rate on more than one occasions, it would amount to nothing else but using the office for unjust enrichment,” the court said in its order.

It further observed that judges held an important constitutional office and as such, were expected to be people of the highest moral standards.

The HC added that while it is always said that the judiciary is not answerable to anyone, the answer to this is that the judges are accountable to their own conscience.

The court directed the government to formulate the policy within a period of six months.

Regarding the remaining 24 flats in the said building at Oshiwara, the court directed the registrar general of the high court to draw up a list of sitting HC judges as per seniority and find out from them if they wished to opt for the said allotment and submit the list to the government.

Turned away by 2 civic hospitals, women delivers in local train

By

Afternoon Voice

-

October 29, 2018

A 26-year-old woman delivered in a local train in the city on October 25 after she was allegedly refused admission by at least two civic-run hospitals and was directed to approach another facility in Central Mumbai while she was in labour, her husband alleged Monday.

Taking a serious note, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has decided to set up an enquiry into the “unprofessional and unethical” conduct of the staffers of the hospitals concerned, a senior officer said.

The woman, identified as Surekha Tiwari, delivered a baby in a compartment of a suburban train ahead of the Dadar railway station when she was travelling to Nair Hospital in Central Mumbai along with her husband Sushil Tiwari, after she was allegedly turned away by two civic hospitals in suburban Bhayander and Kandivli.

Nair Hospital is one of the premier medical facilities run by the Mumbai civic body.

Sushil claimed that he first rushed his wife to Tembha civic hospital in Bhayander in the wee hours of October 25, after she went into labour.

“The hospital staffers gave her some tablets and told me to take her to the Shatabdi Hospital in Kandivli (a distance of around 17 kms from Bhayander), saying they don’t want to take risk,” claimed Sushil, who works as a security guard in Bhayander, an extended suburb in the Mumbai metropolitan region.

Sushil claimed when he and Surekha reached the Shatabdi civic Hospital, the nurses there refused to admit her for want of case papers from the Tembha hospital.

“I had no option but to leave my wife in labour pain and rush back to Bhayander to bring the case paper. When I returned to Shatabdi Hospital at around 11.30 am, the doctors there asked me to go to Nair hospital in Mumbai Central, which is located around 33 kms away from Kandivli,” he said.

Sushil claimed that the doctors didn’t give any reason for ordering shifting of Surekha.

“I mustered courage and boarded a local train with my wife to avoid road traffic. As soon we boarded the compartment, my wife started writhing in pain. She delivered a boy when the train was approaching the Dadar station at around 1 pm,” he claimed.

Sushil said other passengers in the compartment advised us to get down at Prabhadevi station and rush to the state-run KEM hospital.

Sushil said he had to rush his wife, who was bleeding, to KEM Hospital with the umbilical chord of the newborn still intact.

He claimed that no passenger came to their help except an RPF (Railway Protection Force) personnel who flagged down a taxi.

“When we reached the KEM Hospital, the doctors cut the umbilical cord of the newborn and admitted him in the ICU,” said Tiwari.

When contacted, a Shatabdi Hospital doctor refused to comment on the allegations. Officials at Tembha hospital could not be contacted.

Doctors at the KEM hospital said the infant weighed just 950 grams at the time of the birth, but is doing fine now.

Chief medical superintendent of BMC-run hospitals Dr Shashikant Wadekar said the incident, if it has happened, is really “unfortunate”.

“An inquiry will be conducted into this unfortunate incident. If hospital staffers are found guilty, then action will be taken against them,” he said.

Maoists’ patrons were Sonia Gandhi’s advisors: RS Prasad

By

Afternoon Voice

-

October 29, 2018

Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar on Monday launched a blistering attack on the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government and said that 10 years of Manmohan Singh government took no effective action against Maoists as their patrons were part of the UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi’s advisory committee.

Prasad said, “We have a clear view that everyone has a right to criticise the government but no one has a right to wish ill for the country. Everyone knows that how many of these urban-Maoists are related to Congress. During the 10 years of Manmohan Singh government, no effective action was taken against Maoists because their patrons were in the advisory committee of Sonia Gandhi.”

He also credited Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led Bharatiya Janata Party government for effectively tackling the Naxal problem.

He said, “Our government has played a pivotal role in decreasing the Naxal problem on the national level. Previously 150 districts of the country were Naxal affected but now the numbers of such districts have come down to 75-80.”

Prasad also lauded the Supreme Court verdict on Bhima Koregaon case and said, “Supreme Court today dismissed a case against urban-Maoists. Who are these people? These people give their blessings to Maoists. They can never fight an election and if they will fight they will lose deposit but they have this thinking that they will only govern the country.”

Blaming the Congress party president Rahul Gandhi for making baseless allegations, the union minister claimed that prices fixed by the NDA government for Rafale deal are 9% less than the price decided by the UPA.

“India got 9% rebate on UPA price. Rahul Gandhi and Congress are playing with the national security,” Prasad said.

Owaisi challenges Modi govt to bring ordinance on Ram temple

By

Afternoon Voice

-

October 29, 2018

All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) president Asaduddin Owaisi on Monday challenged the Prime Minister Narendra Modi led central government to bring an ordinance on Ram temple after the Supreme Court adjourned the Ayodhya case till January 2019.

“Why don’t they bring it (ordinance on Ram temple)? Let them do it. Every time they are threatening that they will bring an ordinance. How long they will bluff people?” Owaisi said.

He, however, said that everyone has to accept the apex court’s verdict.

“I challenge the government to bring an ordinance. How long they will bluff people? The country will run on the Constitution. You are in power. I challenge you to bring it (ordinance),” Owaisi added.

Earlier in the day, the apex court adjourned the Ayodhya title suit till January next year to fix the date of hearing in the matter.

The top court’s decision came after hearing a petition challenging Allahabad High Court’s 2010 verdict which ruled that the disputed land in Ayodhya be partitioned equally among three parties – the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

Sabarimala protest: Over 3500 people arrested

By

Afternoon Voice

-

October 29, 2018

The Kerala Police has arrested at least 3505 protesters till now in connection with violence that broke out in the state earlier this month over Supreme Court’s verdict on Sabarimala Temple.

Besides this, around 529 cases have been registered across the state till Sunday.

Last week, the police had issued a lookout notice for 210 people, suspected to be involved in instigating violence, manhandling journalists and devotees at Nilakkal, Pamba and Sabarimala over the entry of women in the shrine.

Several protests were staged after the doors of the Lord Ayyappa’s temple opened on October 17 for the first time in compliance with the apex court’s verdict allowing women of all ages to enter the shrine.

On September 28, a five-member constitutional bench headed by then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra had allowed the entry of women of a menstrual age (10 to 50) in the temple.

However, not a single woman could enter the shrine owing to the widespread protests across the state. The temple closed down for the month on October 22 after it opened for five days as a monthly ritual in the Malayalam month of Thul.

Court not above Parliament: Swamy on Ayodhya matter

By

Afternoon Voice

-

October 29, 2018

Hours after the Supreme Court adjourned the Ayodhya title suit till January 2019, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy said that the court is not above the Parliament and that he would raise the issue in the upcoming winter session.
Swamy also said that the Parliament has the right to alter laws and the apex court can only consider whether they are in violation of the Constitution or not. He further said that the top court cannot pass any law and only the Parliament can.
“So they have put it off to January, that’s the court’s authority but in my opinion Parliament also has an authority. The court is not above Parliament. This mistake should be removed from the minds of the people. We have the right to alter laws. The Supreme Court can consider whether this is a violation of the Constitution or not. Nothing more than that. Supreme Court cannot pass any law, only Parliament can,” the BJP leader said.
“In my opinion, we should do it (bring an ordinance on the matter). We have waited enough. This is the matter for which it’s very clear that there was a Ram temple. I will raise it in the Parliament session. No question about it that we should bring an ordinance proclaiming a law which says that the 2.67 acres of land be given to Hindu organisations to start building a temple,” he added.
Earlier in the day, the apex court adjourned the Ayodhya title suit till January to fix the date of hearing in the matter.
Sharing details of the case, counsel for Hindu Mahasabha Barun Kumar Sinha said, “The matter was regarding the hearing today but the Chief Justice bench said that this matter be placed before the bench in the month of January when they will decide the dates of hearing.”
The 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court had divided the disputed land in Ayodhya into three parts for each of the parties- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

CBI vs CBI: The game of Corruption – Part IV

By

Vaidehi Taman

-

October 29, 2018

Now, according to sources, Nageshwar Rao had instructed the I.O. Velayutham to give a closure report in the aforementioned RC and accordingly a report stating that the Bank has not suffered any loss, the amount due is recovered and no further action is required and the report has been approved and sent to Delhi by Nageshwara Rao. The sources also reveal that Nageshwar Rao is strongly connected with the Telugu officers in Tamil Nadu and is in the habit of passing on several sensitive information to the officers. One such officer, who is regularly in touch with Nageswara Rao, is former Chief Secretary of TN, Ram Mohana Rao.

Nageshwar Rao, a clever operator, managed to suppress this complaint, with the help of K V Chowdary, the present Central Vigilance Commissioner, who is the nodal authority for induction and repatriation of officers in the CBI. Though the present CBI Director, after making due verification, tried to repatriate Rao, K V Chowdary, shot down his proposal, say sources. The failure of the CBI’s top echelon to properly vet Nageshwar Rao before inducting him into the CBI had proved very costly. In his annual property returns, Nageshwar Rao had declared that during his tenure as IG (Operations), Central Reserve Police Force, his wife Mannem Sandhya had purchased a land at Pedapalakaluru village, in Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh to an extent of 13,668 Sq. Ft, with a built in area of 6563 sq. ft. along with her brother Ratna Babu at her cost of Rs 20 lakhs. The source of funds for this purchase has been shown as loan from a firm named Angela Mercantiles Private Limited, Kolkata.

The firm Angela Mercantiles Private Limited is a shell company functioning from C.A.39, Salt Lake City, Sector I, Parganas North, Kolkatta. Apart from this Angela Mercantiles, several group of shell companies belonging to the same set of accused are reported to be functioning out of two small rooms at C.A.39, Salt Lake City, Sector.I, Parganas North, Kolkatta and another at 5 Clive Row, Room No.42P, Sarvamangala Building, Kolkata. The records of this firm were obtained from Registrar of Companies. Documents revealed that M Sandhya had given a loan of Rs 38,27,141 to this company, which was outstanding as of March 31, 2013. This M Sandhya is none other than the wife of Nageshwar Rao. Mannem Sandhya had suppressed her husband’s name from the RoC records and had instead used her father’s name – Chinnam Vishnu Narayana in all the records.

During his tenure in his parent cadre, Odisha, Nageshwar Rao had in the year 2011, purchased a government land using forged documents at Khurda, Odisha, from a lady. Due to the reasons that remain unclear, the deal fell through and litigation in this regard is pending in 14th Additional Civil Court, Khurda in Civil Suit No. 9211/2015. Sources say, M N Rao entered into an out of court settlement with the seller and got back the money he had paid with a pecuniary advantage of about Rs 7 lakhs over and above his investment. A detailed source report was sent to the CBI Director, Alok Kumar Verma, following which he had ordered a discreet enquiry into allegations on Nageshwar Rao. Alarmingly, the discreet enquiry had thrown up enough material not only to repatriate Nageshwar Rao out of the CBI, but also to launch prosecution against him, add sources. However, due to the backing of Central Vigilance Commissioner K V Chowdary, who put his foot down and refused to permit the CBI Director, to take any sort of action against Nageshwar Rao, nothing could be done.

A helpless CBI Director, decided to save the cases at least from going down the drain. Swiftly, Alok Verma ordered the transfer of the investigation of important cases from Chennai Zone of CBI to the Banking and Securities Fraud Cell (BSFC) of Bengaluru. Nageshwar Rao’s jurisdiction does not extend to BSFC and it works under the direct supervision of a separate Joint Director, meant exclusively for BSFC. Though everyone believes, the CBI, to be an all-powerful and professional agency, too has its own black sheep which it is not able to weed out. In a democracy, the faith on the agencies like the judiciary and the CBI keeps the hopes of common man afloat. Black sheep like Nageshwar Rao will erode that confidence and lead to anarchy. Even in these worst of times, people need something to hold on to. Removal of Nageshwar Rao from the CBI and a thorough follow up investigation alone will rekindle that hope which has hit the rock bottom

Now, the question arises that if at all the both CBI bosses were removed because of corruption charges and to hold a free and fair probe against them, how could the central government and CVC approve of the appointment of an officer like Nageshwar Rao who is himself accused of bailing out the corrupts and is himself is accused of corruption? It is to be noted that in Andhra/Telangana, Tamil Nadu, this man is known for his corrupt practices. Isn’t this the hypocrisy of the government and the CVC? We need these questions to be answered. Meanwhile, Verma has gone to the Supreme Court against this decision of the CVC and the government; his petition has been accepted and the Supreme Court ordered the CVC to complete its enquiry against CBI Director Alok Verma in two weeks under court monitoring and asked interim director M Nageshwar Rao to refrain from taking any policy decisions. If at all the judgement goes in favour of Verma, it will be a monumental embarrassment for the present day government. The game has just begun.

(Any suggestions, comments or dispute with regards to this article send us on feedback@www.afternoonvoice.com)