Thursday, February 23, 2012

Hindutva and I

Thus Spake Sid Harth

Control Free Speech? Over my dead body!

Hindutva and I

Oops!
A very long comment of mine just vanished in a thin air. My wireless mouse died on account of low (battery) failure.
Oh well.

Sunday, June 5, 2011

BABA RamDev Elopment: Sid Harth

BABA Ram-Dev-Elopment: Sid Harth

Posted on 06/06/2011 by Sid Harth
PICS: #Illyas Kashmiri#Baba Ramdev
IBNLive

Politics News

Ramdev not allowed to hold protest in UP

CNN-IBN
Updated Jun 06, 2011 at 09:22am IST
10Share
Email
Email
Print
New Delhi: Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati has said a firm no to Baba Ramdev to hold protests in Noida or anywhere in the state, according to sources. Ramdev had indicated on Sunday that he will try to hold his Satyagraha in Noida after he was externed from Delhi for 15 days. He said that he will talk to Mayawati for permission to go to Noida, but till then he will continue his fast inside Patanjali peeth in Haridwar.
Ramdev’s followers had also tried to get permission from the Noida Deputy Minister to hold protest in Noida.
Ramdev began his morning teaching yoga to his disciples at Patanjali peeth ashram. He said he will continue his campaign to put pressure on the UPA government to bring back black money. All he needs now is a new venue to relaunch his stir.
Baba Ramdev has appealed to his followers in Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh to join him at Patanjali peeth from Monday onwards. However he maintains that this is temporary.
Ramdev said he will come back to Delhi come what may.
Earlier on Sunday, condemning police action against Baba Ramdev and his supporters “in strongest terms”, Mayawati requested the Supreme Court to order a probe as “justice cannot be expected from the Centre” in the issue.
Mayawati termed the crackdown at the Ramlila Maidan as “inhuman”, “undemocratic” and “condemnable”.
(With additional information from PTI)
WHAT’S YOUR REACTION? IBNLive 15

IBNLive 6

Comments (3)

My following comment was posted but, as yet, not published.
“Baba ke bara baje.” This two legged cockroach thinks that he is an elephant, “gajaraj” the celebrated king of all elephants. Well, he is none of that. He is a common criminal. His crimes are, as yet, not investigated by the government as Government investigative agencies better jobs awaiting for them to do. For instance, finding criminals hidden behind their ministerial chairs, powerful political offices, local warlords’ smoke filled conference rooms, industrialists’ watering holes where their underlings, oops, “chamchas’” frothing around their mouths try to plan strategy sessions to entice those powerful men in order to get first bite at the proverbial cream pie, a definite consent to rob government as well the consumers. Not only Ratan Tata, Mukesh Ambani and his brother engaged in such underhand dealings but in the past “bada baap”, Dhirubhai Ambani did very much the same. Hindus may claim suriority in morality and spirituality for themselves, they, most certainly do, especially, those saffron simians chanting their favorite song and dance routine we often see, oops witness in India. For instance, just a few examples presented here “rathayatras, railroko, chakka bandi, satyagraha,” fast unto death dramas, “hartals,” public rallies and walkathons, sing along sessions, “yagyas and mahayagyas,” performed to propitiate the Aryan deities. All these monkey business proves my point. India sucks, big times.
…and I am Sid Harth
http://sidileak.com/
from uubarale at 10:23, Jun 06, 2011
baba can come to karnataka
from suresh9009 at 09:49, Jun 06, 2011
Whether Ramdev Baba understands what democracy is? Whether BJP and the media agree for an anarchial situation in the country? If it so, why there should be a Parliament and elections be held? Let us revert back to mobocracy and anarchy.
from Sthakur Thakur at 09:46, Jun 06, 2011
sarkar ramdev babaji se dar gayi hai Reply | Offensive
All comments will be published after moderation
IBNLiveIBNLive
IBN7

Also in Politics

BJP to meet Patil, demands special Parl session

BJP leaders will meet President Prstibha Patil on Monday to discuss Baba Ramdev issue. 09:21 AM, Jun 06, 2011

Ramdev not allowed to hold protest in UP

Sources say Mayawati has said no to Ramdev to hold protest in Noida or anywhere in UP. 09:08 AM, Jun 06, 2011

Ramdev crackdown: a strategy or a mistake?

It may seem like a midnight surprise, but government sources say they had it all planned. 09:00 AM, Jun 06, 2011

BJP launches 24-hour Satyagraha

A large number of BJP workers assembled at Rajghat and shouted slogans against the UPA government. 08:24 AM, Jun 06, 2011
IBN7
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Watermark template. Powered by Blogger.

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Hang Baba Ramdev for Sedition: Sid Harth

Hang Baba Ramdev for Sedition: Sid Harth

Posted on 12/06/2011 by Sid Harth
Monday, June 13th 01:32 AM IST
Sun, 12 Jun 2011

Parliament supreme, no one can dictate: Pranab

Shiv Sahay Singh Tags : Lokpal Bill, Anna Hazare, Constitution, Pranab Mukherjee Posted: Mon Jun 13 2011, 00:42 hrs Kolkata:
The government abandoned the last pretence of its uncomfortable peace with Anna Hazare’s activists on the Lokpal Bill this evening and laid down tough new rules of engagement. Pranab Mukherjee, chairman of the joint drafting committee for the Bill, decried the shrill agitation by Team Anna as an attack on the Constitution, and accused Hazare of subverting democracy.Mukherjee also rejected Team Anna’s demand for videotaping the meetings of the joint drafting committee, and said no deadlines could be set on when parliament might pass the Lokpal Bill. During his one-day fast at Rajghat on June 8, Hazare had said he would begin a new agitation if the Bill was not passed by August 15.
“Today we are being threatened that by August 15 the Bill needs to be passed or else there will be fast unto death. It is Parliament’s right to decide on bills and legislations,” Mukherjee told a press conference here.
The government, he said, would try to introduce the Bill in the monsoon session, but “nobody can give a guarantee as to how long Parliament is going to take to pass the Bill or when it will be passed. Parliament is Supreme.”
The civil society agitation against the government amounted to a “sinister move of destroying the fine balance between the three organs of government enshrined in our Constitution”, Mukherjee said. “If someone dictates terms from outside to the government, does it not weaken or subvert democracy? It is a big question.”
“The Constitution,” Mukherjee said in reference to Team Anna’s insistence on pushing through its version of the Lokpal Bill, “has given the power to legislate only to Parliament and the state Assemblies.
… contd.
Express Specials
  • Video therapy

  • Bombs for cancer

  • Be good

  • Job violence

Comments
Be the first to comment.
Privacy Policy | Feedback | Site Map | Advertise With Us | Express Group | Contact Us | Subscribe © 2011 The Indian Express Limited. All rights reserved
  • June 10, 2011, 10:00 AM IST

Politics Journal: How Not to Mix Religion and Politics

By Jyoti Malhotra
Until Saturday night, when one of India’s best-known yoga gurus escaped from a Delhi police crackdown in female clothing — setting off peals of laughter across the country — the ruling Congress-led government looked in danger of being caught in the catatonic thrall of saffron-clad godmen and women.
Instead, we can now credit Baba Ramdev with helping the Congress party rediscover its political spine. His use of unparliamentary language against senior party leaders; his welcoming to the stage of Sadhvi Ritambhara, a Hindu nun whose venomous tirades against Muslims climaxed during the demolition of the Babri mosque in 1992; and his accusation of “treachery” against the government’s interlocutors were more than the Congress party could bear, forcing it to reassert its authority, somewhat brutally, early Sunday morning. Still, Congress should be asking itself how it managed to get into this mess – spinning 180 degrees in a matter of days between welcoming the swami at New Delhi airport to tracking him down despite his feminine disguise (with bushy beard reportedly covered with cloth.) The answer is that they should have seen it coming, since the party has been willfully mixing religion with politics since even before Independence.
In the aftermath of l’affaire Ramdev, Congress leaders have been seeking to transfer responsibility for last week’s wooing onto the government. Two senior party leaders who spoke on the condition of anonymity told me the Cabinet Committee for Political Affairs had decided that negotiations, not confrontation, was the need of the hour and that none other than Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had requested his second-in-command, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, join three other ministers in welcoming Mr. Ramdev at Delhi airport.
Digvijay Singh, a senior Congress leader, went public with the party’s unhappiness Thursday, telling NDTV that Pranab Mukherjee “staked virtually his entire career going to the airport.” Mr. Mukherjee, the Kolkata ‘Telegraph’ reported, accepted his mistake but claimed he was obeying the PM’s orders. Congress President Sonia Gandhi was so annoyed, she reportedly refused to let Kapil Sibal, one of the four ministers who received Ramdev, retell the sequence of events at a party meeting.
If Congress decides to conduct a post mortem on the episode, it could go all the way back to Mahatma Gandhi to understand how and why religion — and later godmen – got mixed up in politics.
The Mahatma was an unabashed supporter of the power of prayer, as he sought to erase the fault lines of caste oppression, establish Hindu-Muslim amity, and end the age of the Raj in India.
At the other end of the spectrum stood his chosen disciple, Jawaharlal Nehru, who implored the Congress party to find an alternative to using faith as an instrument to score political points. Gandhi would chide Nehru’s limited understanding of the word “secularism,” pointing out that in a country like India which is the home of several religions, it could not mean the absence of worship.
A lesser man would not have been to walk the fine line between politics and religion that Gandhi did. He understood the need to invert the power hierarchy, which is why his fast-unto-death method of protest became a weapon in the hands of the weak against the all-powerful British. But he warned that the fast could easily generate into blackmail and thereby lose its potency. He insisted it only be used as an instrument of last resort. You had to lay your body on the line, the Mahatma said, literally and figuratively.
As the British prepared for the end of their rule in India, they used the Congress party’s usage of religious symbolism to further drive a wedge between Hindus and Muslims. To wit, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, a pork-eating, alcohol-swilling, English-speaking early ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity, broke away from the Congress party to become a card-carrying member of the Muslim League. It, in turn, used Gandhi’s overt religiosity as a button to push in its quest to partition India.
After independence too, Congress leaders sought to inject religion into politics, often with catastrophic results.
Indira Gandhi wooed the Sikh religious leader Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale in the early 80s, hoping it could use his influence to expand the Congress party’s following in Punjab. The move backfired and in the decade that followed, thousands of people were killed in the ethnic strife that pitted Hindu against Sikh. Mr. Bhindranwale was killed when the Indian army entered the holy Sikh shrine, the Golden Temple, in June 1984. Mrs. Gandhi fell to the bullets of her own Sikh security guards in October that year, and Pakistan’s intelligence agencies used the opportunity to fuel an insurgency within Punjab.
Indira’s son and successor, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, put another wheel in motion. In 1949, in the brutal aftermath of the country’s partition, a magistrate ordered that locks be installed on a small Hindu temple inside the 15th century Babri mosque in eastern Uttar Pradesh.
In 1987, Rajiv Gandhi was persuaded by his advisers in the Congress to allow the locks to the temple inside the mosque to be opened. They told him that this would gain him the blessings of India’s Hindu majority because of the widespread belief that the Hindu god Ram was born on the site. It would also help air the stink that continued to surround the Swedish Bofors gun scandal that tainted his premiership and neutralize the criticism the prime minister had recently earned from India’s liberal classes over the Shah Bano affair.
Ms. Bano was a Muslim woman in her sixties who had sought reparation from the Supreme Court because her husband had thrown her out of the house after quickly divorcing her. Civil rights activists demanded that Shah Bano’s former husband give her a certain monthly maintenance, but orthodox Muslim groups countered the demand by pointing to the primacy of the Muslim personal law under which the husband had no compulsion to do so. Rajiv Gandhi capitulated in favor of the Muslim orthodoxy.
But Mr. Gandhi’s move on the Babri masjid backfired, too, when the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party mounted a campaign to restore the Hindu god Ram to his rightful place, with the support of millions of devout Hindus. The destruction of the Babri mosque by Hindu fundamentalists in 1992 was a logical culmination of the political machinations of the previous decade, and has since become a key flashpoint of Muslim grievance in the world, let alone India.
To put it bluntly, India’s political bloodstream has been contaminated by the injection of religion for decades, right from its birth in 1947 when communal rioting marred the celebration of the new country. So when the Congress party’s senior leadership rolled out the red carpet for Ramdev last week, in an apparent effort to split him from fellow anti-corruption campaigner Anna Hazare, they should have known better. The trauma of 1947 should have guided their hearts, the upheaval of 1992 their heads.
Jyoti Malhotra is a freelance journalist based in New Delhi. She writes for India’s Business Standard daily and for Pakistan’s Express Tribune.

  • Email
  • Printer Friendly

  • Share:
    • facebook
    • MySpace

Comments (5 of 11)

View all Comments »

      • 11:47 pm June 11, 2011
      • How Not to Mix Religion with Politics wrote:
      [...] [...]
      • 10:17 pm June 11, 2011
      • Amit wrote:
      I was befuddled when the Congress party started supporting the theory that the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai were carried out by the CIA/RSS/Mossad, and even more taken aback when Digvijay Singh criticised Bin Laden’s burial at sea.
      But the reaction to corruption agitations brought into sharp focus that the Congress party’s objective is to attain and retain political power, and not to be a principled player. This is why all types of constituencies are supported, as also why corruption prosecutions like the Bofors case make no headway.
      • 5:53 am June 11, 2011
      • Smarts wrote:
      Very rightly said about India’s politics. This shows failure leadership of world’s biggest democractic country.
      • 8:34 pm June 10, 2011
      • The World Wide (Religious) Web for Friday, June 10, 2011 « GeorgePWood.com wrote:
      [...] “How Not to Mix Religion and Politics.” The story is about India, not America. [...]
      • 6:31 pm June 10, 2011
      • CommonSense wrote:
      The kind of constipated rants from English speaking folks supporting a common lout who wants introduction of technical courses in Hindi shows the kind of people supporting the likes of Ramdev.

About India Real Time

  • Follow Us:

  • India Real Time offers quick analysis and insights into the broad range of developments in business, markets, the economy, politics, culture, sports, and entertainment that take place every single day in the world’s largest democracy. Regular posts from Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones Newswires reporters around the country provide a unique take on the main stories in the news, shed light on what else mattered and why, and give global readers a snapshot of what Indians have been talking about all week. You can contact the editors at indiarealtime@wsj.com or follow India Real Time on Twitter and Facebook.
    Check out the main contributors to the blog and their bios here.

    • India Real Time on Facebook

Now, sedition charges against Digvijay Singh

Jun 6, 2011

Muzaffarpur: Amid the political turmoil over the government’s midnight crackdown at  Ramlila maidan on Saturday, a local court has now accepted a
complaint seeking to register a case of sedition against Congress leader and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Digvijay Singh for allegedly describing Yoga guru Ramdev as a ‘fraud’.
Court accepts sedition case against Digvijay Singh. Screen grab from IBN Live.
Chief Judicial Magistrate R C Malviya accepted the complaint filed by advocate Sudhir Ojha who sought to book Singh under section 154(A) (sedition), 153 (wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot) and 504 (intentional
insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) of the IPC.
Malviya recorded the statement of a witness of the case Aditya Kumar and fixed June 16 as next date of hearing.
Meanwhile, security has been strengthened at the official residence of  Digvijay Singh in Bhopal, in view of the reaction to his statements
following the arrest of Baba Ramdev. A senior police officer said that based on intelligence reports, security had been increased at Singh’s bungalow.
There were reports of some miscreants stoning Singh’s residence, but police dismissed them as rumours. Meanwhile, Singh’s scheduled visit to Ratlam to take part in a Congress rally has been cancelled. The rally will be addressed later in the day by BK Hari Prasad, the Congress General Secretary in-charge of Madhya Pradesh; and the party’s state unit president, Kantilal Bhuria.
PTI
Comments for this page are closed.
Real-time updating is enabled.
    • Please do not forget ,he is a politician,,,,,,a chamelion !!! who will any tomorrow for sake of votes say…Oh Babaji ,i want come to your shivir and learn pranayams.
      He not only need learn pranayams,specially restricting what comes out from his mouth.. but also do” mental check “,before people compulsorily take him to a mental asylum for urgent treatment.
      We will gladly pay all those expenses from public exchequer.
      Any one objecting?
    • Dhawanbathinda 6 days ago
      Dig Vijay Singh face is like a DOG of Vodafone Company, so I suggest him go with that add and earn something.
    • Kumarsans 6 days ago
      DIGVIJAY SINGH IS A MAD DOG WHO BARK ON EVERY ONE AND TRIY TO BITE TO EVERY ONE BUT EVERY TIME HIS OWNER REFUSE TO ACCEPT IT BY SAYING I DIDN’T TOLD HIM TO BARK OR BIT IT WAS HIS OWN ACT………….
    • Ganeshbpai 6 days ago
      what a comment? shahbbas…. jeete raho…mere dost
    • Ratnaakasturi 6 days ago
      Bollywood’s 3 idiots may be a hit. But 3 idiots in Congress (Sibal, Digvijay and Singhvi) will sure make it a flop in coming election.
    • Dighe8 6 days ago
      Digvijay Singh is third class leader of Congress party and he must be punished
    • he should be punished…Only congress can germinate such anti hindu leaders
    • Sachinck 6 days ago
      It is very unfortunate that a national party like congress had a spokesperson Like Digvijay Singh Whose words do have do any good to thier image.
    • Advayaananda 6 days ago
      “AS YOU SOW, SO YOU REAP”
      It is unfortunate for this Great Nation that people who are loyal to their small groups vote Congress to power ….. and ….. those people who are loyal to the nation “hardly” participate in voting.
      INDIA CAN BECOME A SUPER POWER IF,INDIANS DETERMINE TO THROW OUT THIS CHARECTERLESS PARTY……. OF WHICH DIGVIJAY IS A LEADING MEMBER !!!!!!!!
    • Sganu 6 days ago
      His name should be Dog-Vijay singh, who barks on anything or everything against Madam shoos him to …
  • Reader 6 days ago
    D(aeiou)ggyy Babuu. Jinke Ghar Sheeshe ke hua karte hain wo Dusron ke gharo par patthar nahi feka karte…..
  • Guest 6 days ago
    Comment removed.
  • goldenflower 6 days ago
    No need to pay for such kind of people ……. next election or time will tech him…. put your bank balance for any creative work.
  • Rsrawat 6 days ago
    Digvijay Singh should be taught a lesson for making such irresponsible statements
  • Sabiotech 6 days ago
    UPA most corrupt govt, is delicately protecting corruption. Dhitarastra of UPA Govt, MMS still knows nothing.
  • Sapan Sorb 6 days ago
    dikvijay singh as well as Sibal they are working as TAO, chacha of Congress. try to prove everything happening right
  • Tcg1248 6 days ago
    Digvijai singh has lost his balance of mind and sould be sent to banglore for mental treatment.this fool has lost the congress ground to BJP in UP, (gained by Rahul Gandhi) with his foolish statements.He should be suspended immediately if congress want to survive in UP in next election.
  • Tripathi 6 days ago
    congress needs no enemy. digi is doing every thing for it.
  • Dineshdua35 6 days ago
    digvijay is disgrace and embarrassment for con grace
About 162,000 results(0.24 seconds)
The Wikimedia Board of Trustees election ends today at 23:59 UTC. Please vote.
 [Hide]
[Help with translations!]
Indiatimes|The Times of India|The Economic Times|
More
The Economic Times

Politics/Nation

Boeing
News
Stock Quote

You are here: Home » News » Politics/Nation
12 Jun, 2011, 12.21PM IST,PTI

Pawan Kumar Bansal defends midnight crackdown on Baba Ramdev’s protest

NEW DELHI: Charging Ramdev with going back on his words to end his indefinite fast, Union minister Pawan Kumar Bansal has defended the midnight police action against the yoga guru saying it helped in preventing casualties. The parliamentary affairs minister, who was one of the interlocutors who held parleys with Ramdev, also scoffed at suggestions that the government was arrogant in dealing with the situation.
“He (Ramdev) said he would withdraw it (the agitation) in the afternoon of the first day (June 4). And he did not… after a sort of agreement between the government and Ramdev, when we found that the things were getting out of hands, he was sticking to what he had said, the government had to take that action,” Bansal told Karan Thapar in his Devil’s Advocate programme.
The minister also sought to defend the decision to crackdown at Ramlila grounds at the middle of the night.
“If police were to reach that place in the morning when Ramdev was exhorting something to people, the reaction of the people would have been very violent…led to at least a 100 deaths,” he said.
Asked why the people at Ramlila grounds were not given a reasonable deadline to leave the venue, Bansal said midnight was the “only time” when the government could have taken action.
“I feel, had the government waited for the next day and sent some people in the afternoon, you could not have done anything. That time baba would have been sitting there and somehow inciting people there…,” Bansal said.
Ramdev did not “immediately agree or accept to what the authorities had to tell him. He said give me five minutes and I’ll be back. What he does is jump off from the stage, incite people,” he said explaining the run up to the crackdown.
He said policemen at the ground were not armed except for the teargas guns and fired only a few shells that too “not at the people”.
To a poser on whether the government was actually ignorant about Ramdev’s plans of holding indefinite fast while seeking permission for a yoga camp, Bansal replied in a negative but said the government was only giving him a “long rope”.
The minister also blamed the yoga guru for extracting defeat from the jaws of victory.
Asked if he would apologise for the police action which left several injured, he said, “Apology would be if government or government agency has done something deliberately somewhere.”
Bansal, at the same time, said he was saddened that one of the injured, Rajbala, would not be able to walk again.
For Politics/Nation news updates, follow ET on Twitter

Readers’ opinions (5)

pkpal0906 (India) His Master’s Voice.
manish tiwari (gorakhpur) He is so shameless guy. He is saying that take the verdict from medico guyes how’s Rajbala got hurt. Is he so ignorant that he is not able to understand the simple logic. Either she got hurt by police or in stampede the root cause of either is midnight crackdown by police in ramlila ground. What they are trying to justify?
R.R.Pandey (Bangaluru) Mr.P.K.Bansalji I am surprised and shocked to learn that you are justifying the 4thJune11 Midnight crackdown on the fasting innocent one lakh Indian citizens. Force is the bankruptcy of ideas. You had used force seeing the incoming supporters of Baba Ramdeo in crores. You got scared. Your UPA govt. is full of corrupt people and your allies are Mr>Raja.Mrs Konimojhi and Mr. Lalu Yadave. Your own man Mr. SureshKalmandi. There are corrupt persons against whom you cannot dare to file cases. Please introspect and think about the country you will realize that your action against Baba Ramdeo was illegal.unwanted.unethical immoral,and revengeful.
alok (orissa) honestly he also does not like midnight cracdown. but he is saying it because he is in thesame party. ask him if he ever change party
Rajendra Prasad (Delhi) Breach of understanding between two parties cannot be the excuse for the police to be let loose upon sleeping women, children and old men including sanyasis. They were not planning bombing raids or blocking roads. How did the senior officers of Indian Police execute an illegal order of some minister or the other? Police is meant for protection of the weak against the high and mighty. The policemen involved must be severely punished for the barbarities perpetuated on peacefully sleeping crowd.

Have something to say? Post your comment
Comments are moderated and will be allowed if they are about the topic and not abusive.
Hang Baba Ramdev for Sedition: Sid Harth Posted on 12/06/2011 by Sid Harth http://sidileak.com/2011/06/12/hang-baba-ramdev-for-sedition-sid-harth/
India Sedition law in India is a legacy of the colonial era. While the United Kingdom abolished sedition laws in 2010, sedition became a big issue in India the same year as noted writer Arundhati Roy, amongst others, were sought to be charged with sedition for advocating independence for the disputed Kashmir region.
This is by no means the only instance of sedition laws being used in contemporary India. Many human rights activists have found themselves charged with sedition. Binayak Sen MBBS, MD; is an Indian pediatrician, public health specialist and activist was found guilty of sedition. He is the national Vice-President of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL).
On 24 December 2010, the Additional Sessions and District Court Judge B.P Varma Raipur found Binayak Sen, Naxal ideologue Narayan Sanyal and Kolkata businessman Piyush Guha, guilty of sedition for helping the Maoists in their fight against the state.They were sentenced to life imprisonment.However he got bail in Supreme court on 16 April 2011.
There are several important cases of sedition,some of them have been incorporated in this article. Kedar Nath Singh v. State Of Bihar{AIR 1962 SC 955;1962 Supp. (2) SCR 769}:- .-In this appeal the main question in controversy was whether ss. 124A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code … more at above url. …and I am Sid Harth
Share this Comment:
Post to Facebook
Post to Twitter

Sedition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the legal term. For other uses, see Sedition (disambiguation).
In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.
Typically, sedition is considered a subversive act, and the overt acts that may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary from one legal code to another. Where the history of these legal codes has been traced, there is also a record of the change in the definition of the elements constituting sedition at certain points in history. This overview has served to develop a sociological definition of sedition as well, within the study of state persecution.
The difference between sedition and treason consists primarily in the subjective ultimate object of the violation to the public peace. Sedition does not consist of levying war against a government nor of adhering to its enemies, giving enemies aid, and giving enemies comfort. Nor does it consist, in most representative democracies, of peaceful protest against a government, nor of attempting to change the government by democratic means (such as direct democracy or constitutional convention).
Sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or state, giving aid to enemies, or levying war against one’s state. Sedition is encouraging one’s fellow citizens to rebel against their state, whereas treason is actually betraying one’s country by aiding and abetting another state. Sedition laws somewhat equate to terrorism and public order laws.

Contents

[hide]

[edit] History in common law jurisdictions

The term sedition in its modern meaning first appeared in the Elizabethan Era (c. 1590) as the “notion of inciting by words or writings disaffection towards the state or constituted authority”[citation needed]. “Sedition complements treason and martial law: while treason controls primarily the privileged, ecclesiastical opponents, priests, and Jesuits, as well as certain commoners; and martial law frightens commoners, sedition frightens intellectuals.”[citation needed]

[edit] United Kingdom

Sedition was a common law offence in the UK. James Fitzjames Stephen‘s “Digest of the Criminal Law” stated that “a seditious intention is an intention to bring into hatred or contempt, or to exite disaffection against the person of His Majesty, his heirs or successors, or the government and constitution of the United Kingdom, as by law established, or either House of Parliament, or the administration of justice, or to excite His Majesty’s subjects to attempt otherwise than by lawful means, the alteration of any matter in Church or State by law established, or to incite any person to commit any crime in disturbance of the peace, or to raise discontent or disaffection amongst His Majesty’s subjects, or to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different classes of such subjects.
An intention to show that His Majesty has been misled or mistaken in his measures, or to point out errors or defects in the government or constitution as by law established , with a view to their reformation, or to excite His Majesty’s subjects to attempt by lawful means the alteration of any matter in Church or State by law established , or to point out, in order to secure their removal, matters which are producing, or have a tendency to produce, feelings of hatred and ill-will between classes of His Majesty’s subjects, is not a seditious intention.”
Stephen in his “History of the Criminal Law of England” accepted the view that a seditious libel was nothing short of a direct incitement to disorder and violence. He stated that the modern view of the law was plainly and fully set out by Littledale J. in Collins. In that case the jury were instructed that they could convict of seditios libel only if they were satisfied that the defendant “meant that the people should make use of physical force as their own resource to obtain justice, and meant to excite the people to take the power in to their own hands, and meant to excite them to tumult and disorder.”
The last prosecution for sedition in the United Kingdom was in 1972, when three people were charged with seditious conspiracy and uttering seditious words for attempting to recruit people to travel to Northern Ireland to fight in support of Republicans. The seditious conspiracy charge was dropped, but the men received suspended sentences for uttering seditious words and for offences against the Public Order Act.[1]
In 1977, a Law Commission working paper recommended that the common law offence of sedition in England and Wales be abolished. They said that they thought that this offence was redundant and that it was not necessary to have any offence of sedition.[1] However this proposal was not implemented until 2009, when sedition and seditious libel (as common law offences) were abolished by section 73 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 (with effect on 12 January 2010).[2] Sedition by an alien is still an offence under section 3 of the Aliens Restriction (Amendment) Act 1919.[3]
In Scotland, section 51 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 will abolish the common law offences of sedition and leasing-making.[4] This section is not yet in force.

[edit] India

Sedition law in India is a legacy of the colonial era.[5][6] While the United Kingdom abolished sedition laws in 2010, sedition became a big issue in India the same year as noted writer Arundhati Roy, amongst others, were sought to be charged with sedition[7] for advocating independence for the disputed Kashmir region. This is by no means the only instance of sedition laws being used in contemporary India. Many human rights activists have found themselves charged with sedition.[8]
Binayak Sen MBBS, MD; is an Indian pediatrician, public health specialist and activist was found guilty of sedition.[9] He is the national Vice-President of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL).On 24 December 2010, the Additional Sessions and District Court Judge B.P Varma Raipur found Binayak Sen, Naxal ideologue Narayan Sanyal and Kolkata businessman Piyush Guha, guilty of sedition for helping the Maoists in their fight against the state.They were sentenced to life imprisonment.However he got bail in Supreme court on 16 April 2011.[10]

[edit] Australia

Australia‘s sedition laws were amended in anti-terrorism legislation passed on 6 December 2005, updating definitions and increasing penalties.
In late 2006, the Howard government proposed plans to amend Australia’s Crimes Act 1914, introducing laws that mean artists and writers may be jailed for up to seven years if their work was considered seditious or inspired sedition either deliberately or accidentally.[11] Opponents of these laws have suggested that they could be used against legitimate dissent.
In 2006, the then Australian attorney-general Philip Ruddock had rejected calls by two reports — from a Senate committee and the Australian Law Reform Commission — to limit the sedition provisions in the Anti-Terrorism Act 2005 by requiring proof of intention to cause disaffection or violence. He had also brushed aside recommendations to curtail new clauses outlawing “urging conduct” that “assists” an “organisation or country engaged in armed hostilities” against the Australian military. The new laws, inserted into the legislation December 2005, allow for the criminalization of basic expressions of political opposition, including supporting resistance to Australian military interventions, such as those in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Asia-Pacific region.[12]

[edit] Canada

During World War II former Mayor of Montreal Camillien Houde campaigned against conscription in Canada. On August 2, 1940, Houde publicly urged the men of Quebec to ignore the National Registration Act. Three days later, he was placed under arrest by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on charges of sedition. After being found guilty, he was confined in internment camps in Petawawa, Ontario, and Gagetown, New Brunswick, until 1944. Upon his release on August 18, 1944, he was greeted by a cheering crowd of 50,000 Montrealers and won back his position as the Mayor of Montreal in the election in 1944.[citation needed]

[edit] Hong Kong

A Sedition Ordinance had existed in the territory since 1970, which was subsequently consolidated into the Crime Ordinance in 1972.[13] According to the Crime Ordinance, a seditious intention is an intention to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the person of government, to excite inhabitants of Hong Kong to attempt to procure the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any other matter in Hong Kong as by law established, to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Hong Kong, to raise discontent or disaffection amongst inhabitants of Hong Kong, to promote feelings of ill-will and enmity between different classes of the population of Hong Kong, to incite persons to violence, or to counsel disobedience to law or to any lawful order.[14][15]
Article 23 of the Basic Law requires the special administrative region to enact laws prohibiting any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People’s Government of the People’s Republic of China.[16] The National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill was tabled in early 2003 to replace the existing laws regarding treason and sedition, and to introduce new laws to prohibit secessionist and subversive acts and theft of state secrets, and to prohibit political organisations from establishing overseas ties. The bill was shelved following massive opposition from the public.

[edit] New Zealand

Sedition charges were not uncommon in New Zealand early in the 20th Century. For instance, the future Prime Minister Peter Fraser had been convicted of sedition in his youth for arguing against conscription during World War I, and was imprisoned for a year. Perhaps ironically, Fraser re-introduced the conscription of troops as the Prime Minister during World War II.[17]
In New Zealand‘s first sedition trial in decades, Tim Selwyn was convicted of sedition (section 83 of the Crimes Act 1961) on 8 June 2006. Shortly after, in September 2006, the New Zealand Police laid a sedition charge against a Rotorua youth, Christopher Russell, 17, who was also charged with threatening to kill.[18] The Police withdrew the sedition charge when Russell agreed to plead guilty on the other charge.[19]
In March 2007, Mark Paul Deason, the manager of a tavern near the University of Otago, was charged with seditious intent[20] although he was later granted diversion when he pleaded guilty to publishing a document which encourages public disorder[21] Deason ran a promotion for his tavern that offered one litre of beer for one litre of petrol. At the end of the promotion, the prize would have been a couch soaked in the petrol. It is presumed the intent was for the couch to be burned — a popular university student prank. Police also applied for Deason’s liquor license to be revoked.
Following a recommendation from the New Zealand Law Commission,[22] the New Zealand government announced on 7 May 2007 that the sedition law would be repealed.[23] The Crimes (Repeal of Seditious Offences) Amendment Act 2007 was passed on 24 October 2007, and entered into force on 1 January 2008.[24]

[edit] United States

[edit] Civilian

In 1798, President John Adams signed into law the Alien and Sedition Acts, the fourth of which, the Sedition Act or “An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes against the United States” set out punishments of up to two years of imprisonment for “opposing or resisting any law of the United States” or writing or publishing “false, scandalous, and malicious writing” about the President or the U.S. Congress, but specifically not the Vice-President. This Act of Congress was allowed to expire in 1801 after the election of Thomas Jefferson to the Presidency. He had been the Vice-President at the time of the Act’s passage.
In the Espionage Act of 1917, Section 3 made it a federal crime, punishable by up to 20 years of imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000, to willfully spread false news of the American army and navy with an intent to disrupt their operations, to foment mutiny in their ranks, or to obstruct recruiting. This Act of Congress was amended Sedition Act of 1918, which expanded the scope of the Espionage Act to any statement criticizing the Government of the United States. These Acts were upheld in 1919 in the case of Schenck v. United States, but they were largely repealed in 1921, leaving laws forbidding foreign espionage in the United States and allowing military censorship of sensitive material.
In 1940, the Alien Registration Act, or “Smith Act“, was passed, which made it a federal crime to advocate or to teach the desirability of overthrowing the United States Government, or to be a member of any organization which does the same. It was often used against Communist Party organizations. This Act was invoked in three major cases, one of which against the Socialist Worker’s Party in Minneapolis in 1941, resulting in 23 convictions, and again in what became known as the Great Sedition Trial of 1944 in which a number of pro-Nazi figures were indicted but released when the prosecution ended in a mistrial. Also, a series of trials of 140 leaders of the Communist Party USA also relied upon the terms of the “Smith Act” — beginning in 1949—and lasting until 1957. Although the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the convictions of 11 CPUSA leaders in 1951 in Dennis v. United States , that same Court reversed itself in 1957 in the case of Yates v. United States, by ruling that teaching an ideal, no matter how harmful it may seem, does not equal advocating or planning its implementation. Although unused since at least 1961, the “Smith Act” remains a Federal law.
There was, however, a brief attempt to use the sedition laws against protesters of the Viet Nam war. On October 17, 1967, three demonstrators, while engaged in a ‘sit in’ at the Army Induction Center in Oakland, Ca., were arrested and charged with sedition by deputy US. Marshall Richard St. Germain. U.S. Attorney Cecil Poole changed the charge to trespassing. Poole said, “three guys reaching up and touching the leg of an inductee, and that’s conspiracy to commit sedition? That’s ridiculous!”
The inductees were in the process of physically stepping on the demonstrators as they attempted to enter the building, and the demonstrators were trying to protect themselves from the inductees’ feet.
Attorney Poole later added, “We’ll decide what to prosecute, not marshals.”[25]
Laura Berg, a nurse at a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs hospital in New Mexico was investigated for sedition in September 2005[26] after writing a letter[27][28] to the editor of a local newspaper, accusing several national leaders of criminal negligence. Though their action was later deemed unwarranted by the director of Veteran Affairs, local human resources personnel took it upon themselves to request an FBI investigation. Ms. Berg was represented by the ACLU.[29] Charges were dropped in 2006.[30]
On March 28, 2010, nine members of the militia Hutaree were arrested and charged with crimes including seditious conspiracy.[31]

[edit] Military

Sedition is a punishable offense under the United States Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 94.[32]

[edit] Civil law jurisdictions

[edit] Germany

Volksverhetzung (“incitement of the people”) is a legal concept unique to Germany. It is sometimes loosely translated as sedition.[33]

[edit] See also

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ a b The Law Commission, Treason, Sedition and Allied Offences (Working Paper No.72), paragraph 47 [1977] EWLC C72, BAILII
  2. ^ Coroners and Justice Act 2009
  3. ^ section 3, Aliens Restriction (Amendment) Act 1919
  4. ^ Criminal Justice & Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010, section 51.
  5. ^ “We are all seditious now but when did this start?” Kafila.org, 6 December 2010 http://kafila.org/2010/12/06/we-are-all-seditious-now-but-when-did-this-start/
  6. ^ “On Sedition: Sarim Naved,” Kafila.org, 7 December 2010 http://kafila.org/2010/12/07/sedition-law-india-dissent-history-courts/
  7. ^ Geelani, Arundhati to be booked under sedition charge- The Times of India, 25 October 2010 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Geelani-Arundhati-to-be-booked-under-sedition-charge/articleshow/6810983.cms#ixzz1Awt7adshttp://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Geelani-Arundhati-to-be-booked-under-sedition-charge/articleshow/6810983.cms
  8. ^ “The Logical Urges of Sedition,” Vij, Shivam, Kafila.org, 31 December 2010 http://kafila.org/2010/12/31/the-logical-urges-of-sedition/
  9. ^ http://news.oneindia.in/2011/02/10/binayaksens-mother-breaks-down-on-hearing-hcverdict-aid0126.html
  10. ^ http://www.indianexpress.com/news/It-s-the-first-step-towards-justice–says-Sen-Release-Committee/776831/
  11. ^ Satire used to counter new sedition laws, ABC‘s Lateline transcript, 24 October 2006
  12. ^ Australia’s new Sedition Laws, Mike Head, World Socialist Web Site, 27 October 2006
  13. ^ [1]
  14. ^ Cap 200 s 9
  15. ^ Cap 2601 s 6
  16. ^ Chapter 2, Basic Law
  17. ^ Today in History: 22 December 1916 – Future PM Fraser charged with sedition, nzhistory.net.nz, History Group of the New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage.
  18. ^ Law advice body wants to scrap crime of sedition, New Zealand Herald, 17 October 2006
  19. ^ Sedition by Example XXII: Christopher Russell, No Right Turn weblog, 28 February 2007
  20. ^ Police move to cancel ‘beer-for-petrol’ publican’s licence, Infonews.co.nz, 11 April 2007
  21. ^ Diversion over petrol-soaked couch promo, Crime.co.nz, 29 March 2007
  22. ^ Law Commission recommends abolition of seditious offencesPDF (68.8 KiB), New Zealand Law Commission, 5 April 2007
  23. ^ “Sedition law to be repealed”. Radio New Zealand. 2007-05-07. Retrieved 2007-05-05.[dead link]
  24. ^ “New Zealand repeals sedition law”. Wikinews. 2007-10-24. Retrieved 2007-10-24.
  25. ^ San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 21, 1967, pg 7, UPI – Independent Journal of Marin, Oct 21, 1967, pg 4
  26. ^ VA nurse’s letter to newspaper prompts sedition probe, Associated Press, published on First Amendment Center, February 8, 2006
  27. ^ Big Brother is Watching: A letter printed in the Alibi leads to the investigation of a local VA nurse for “sedition”, Alibi.com, February 9–15, 2006
  28. ^ Speaking Truth to Power: An interview with Laura Berg, Alibi.com, March 9–15, 2006
  29. ^ ACLU of New Mexico defends VA employee accused of ‘Sedition’ over criticism of Bush Administration, ACLU, January 31, 2006
  30. ^ http://www.reason.com/news/show/117345.html
  31. ^ http://www.adl.org/NR/exeres/6636B995-3355-4D28-9FD0-07B7FA2FE153,DB7611A2-02CD-43AF-8147-649E26813571,frameless.htm
  32. ^ Uniform Code of Military Justice
  33. ^ [2]

[edit] References

Wikinews has related news: Auckland man convicted of sedition
Search

Sedition: An Offence against the State

February 10th, 2011 → 11:33 am @ Sakshat Bansal
0

Introduction

With the trial of Dr. Binayak Sen(a human right activist) who has been charged with sedition , we have come across the word “sedition”  for umpteen  times and  it is of utmost importance to let people get well acquainted with the basics of Sedition, This article  will help people keep abreast of the same. It also holds significance because in India a legal maxim is followed (IGNORNTIA  JURIS  NON EXCUSAT) (“ignorance of the Law  excuses no one”) is a legal principle holding that a person who is oblivious  of law may not escape liability and get away for violating that law merely because he or she was unacquainted  of its content. The premise of this article is to widen the domain of knowledge and to apprise the people about sedition so that they should have cognition about the speeches or writings or signs or visible representations that fall under the ambit of sedition.

Meaning of Sedition

It needs to be adverted that the word “sedition”  does not turn up anywhere in the Indian Constitution and is an offence against the state as enumerated in the IPC, in which Article 19 of the Indian Constitution holds great relevance. The contemporary discernment of sedition in India encompasses all those practices, whether by word, deed, or writing, that are reckoned to disturb the tranquility of the State and lead ignorant persons to debase the government. Chapter VI of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with “offences” against the State. Section 124A of the IPC defines Sedition as follows:- Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for  life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.

Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression vis-à-vis Sedition

Article 19(1)(a) of Indian Constitution says that all citizens have the right to freedom of speech and expression. The right to freedom of speech and expression incorporates protection for austerely censuring existing government structures, policies, and administrative schemes, coupled with protection for suggesting and recommending the development of other system. Article 19 (2) of Indian Constitution says that, every citizen of the country  holds the  right to air his or her opinion through the printing  or the electronic media with restrictions imposed.
In a benchmark  judgment of the case Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India{ AIR 1978 SC 597.}, the Apex Court held that the freedom of speech and expression is not confined to geographical limitations and it carries with it the right of a citizen to gather information and to exchange thought with others not only in India but abroad also. The censuring of public policies in order to ameliorate the condition  or estate of the people, without instigating the  feelings of antipathy and disloyalty which results in  public disorder or the use of violence, would fall under the ambit of reasonable limits and would be consistent with the constitutionally sanctioned freedom of speech and expression.

Historical background of Law relating to Sedition in India

The controversy and altercations over the clamor regarding the imposition of the charge of sedition against Dr Binayak Sen, has accentuated the problems with this archaic sedition law. A laconic outline of the historical background of sedition law in India is significant to understand the amplitude of the law. This law was proposed in India in 1870 in riposte to increasing Wahabi activities between 1863 and 1870. It was modified in 1898, the framework of this section was taken from several sources- the Treason Felony Act (1848, Britain), the Common law of seditious libel( Libel-defamation in permanent form), and English law pertaining to seditious words.
Whoever has cognition about the India’s freedom struggle would be well acquainted of the British mistreatment of the law associated with sedition. It is uncogitable to ponder over that the British Officials tried to crush the Indian Freedom Struggle with an Iron hand and in retaliation to the protest against them some of the active instrumentalists of Indian freedom struggle were Charged with Sedition.
The first in a sequence of sedition cases against editors of national newspapers was the trial of Jogendra Chandra Bose in 1891, followed with the trial of Bal Gangadhar Tilak, he  was tried under this law (section 124A of the Indian Penal Code,).An another famous and important sedition trial was of Mahatma Gandhi, who was an advocator of passive resistance,  and  always abstained himself and his followers from adopting the violent methods was tried in 1922 along with Shankerlal Banker, the owner of Young India for the articles published in the magazine.

Important Cases relating to Sedition in India

There are several important cases of sedition,some of them have been incorporated in this article.
Kedar Nath Singh v. State Of Bihar{AIR 1962 SC 955;1962 Supp. (2) SCR 769}:- .-In this appeal the main question in controversy was whether ss. 124A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code have become void in view of the provisions of Art. 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The speech was {“To-day the dogs of the C. I. D are loitering round Barauni. Many official dogs are sitting even in this meeting. The people of India drove out the Britishers from this country and elected these Congress goondas to the gaddi and seated them on it. To-day these Congress goondas are sitting on the gaddi due to mistake of the people. When we drove out the Britishers, we shall strike and turn out these Congress goondas as well……….}
After recording a substantial volume of oral evidence, the learned Trial Magistrate convicted the accused person both under S. 124A and 505(b) of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The convicted persons preferred an appeal to the High Court of Judicature at Patna, the Court upheld the convictions and the sentence and dismissed the appeal. Finally it was held that, Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code which makes sedition an offence is constitutionally valid. Though the section imposes restrictions on the fundamental freedom of speech and expression, the restrictions are in the interest of public order and are within the ambit of permissible legislative interference with the fundamental right.
Interested readers can go through other cases of sedition like:-
• Keho Bam Hazarika vs The Government Of Assam{1951 CriLJ 68}
• Manubhai Tribhovandas Patel And Ors. Vs State Of Gujarat And Anr{ 1972 Cri.L.J 388, (1971) GLR 968}
• Uttamrao S/O Keshavrao Patwari vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr,
• State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Baleshwardayal And Ors.{1967 CrilJ 1110}
Some Recent Cases of Sedition are:-
• Bilal Ahmed Kaloo vs State of Andhrapradesh(1997)
• Balwant Singh vs Stateeof Punjab(1995)

The need to evolve the law relating to Sedition

The present India has evolved up to a great extent as compared to the early 18th and 19th centuries. With the advent of Modern Technology and globalization the conditions have changed and most importantly the attitude of people towards the Government or ruling class has revolutionized and people can get the policies and schemes amended in order to improve their estate. As it has already been mentioned in article that The Law of Sedition was enacted in the later 1800’s and it is an overt truth that the Law on Sedition enacted by the Brtishers was to quell and oppress the Indian Freedom struggle and it was enacted in the context of a totally different kind of India.
The basic essence of the Law is to regulate the human conduct and it should grow in order to placate the needs of the people and keep abreast with the developments taking place in the country. The concerned authorities need to take a bold step in order to evolve Laws suitable to the conditions prevailing in India.

What needs to be done?

The yardstick to assess that a person has excited or attempted or desired to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection should be more clearly defined as it was held in Kedar Nath’s case that censuring or disapprobation of actions of government without exciting the aforesaid feelings not be penal and the matters where intention is or has to be inferred is also a debatable issue which requires attention and more importantly that hatred ,contempt and disaffection are the consequences of the concerned speech, writings, signs or visible representations as it is quite palpable that people might have any one of the hatred, contempt or disaffection towards the government when they get acquainted with the deformities of any action of Government through the concerned content, so this area needs to be revisited as at the present Day after more than 60 years of independence it is evident that the India as well as the Ruling authority has transposed. People should also ponder over the content before its publication with their main objective as the amelioration in the estate of the larger number of people. One acquainted with the defects of any action of government can apprise the common people about the same to get it rectified by having the support of larger number of people so that it appears a genuine demand with censuring or disapproval of actions of the State in such a way that might not result in pubic disorder.
(This article is written by Sakshat Bansal, a UG student from Chanakya National Law University, Patna.)
12 June 2011 | Last updated less than one minute ago
Submit :
News                      Photos                     Just In                     Debate Topic                     Latest News                    Articles                    Local News                    Blog Posts                     Pictures                    Reviews                    Recipes
Follow Us
Home > India > Article
India dumbfounded by Geelani’s seditious speech
In the healthy democratic ambience, some separatists are trying to commit the serious crime of sedition by taking freedom of speech guaranteed up to an irrational limit. They indirectly sponsor terrorism by giving seditious speeches.
Mon, Oct 25, 2010 15:40:33 IST
Views: 
558
Comments:



1

Rate: 1 out of 5 2 out of 5 3 out of 5 4 out of 5 5 out of 5 5.0 / 2 votes
EXTENSION OF freedom of speech does not mean the right given to people in a country get involved in sedition which corresponds with a crime in order to create revolt, disturbance or violence against lawful civil authority. It is impossible that the Constitution in any country in the world, can guarantee freedom of speech without abridging sedition.
In India, the government of the people both at the Centre and the states are duly elected by the people for the people themselves. But in a healthy democratic ambience, some separatists are trying to commit the serious crime of sedition by taking freedom of speech for granted up to an irrational limit. They indirectly sponsor terrorism by giving vengeful speeches inside and outside the assembly.
One of  the partners in the UPA is the National Conference of Omar Abdullah and of late  he has made an almost  seditious comment that Jammu and Kashmir has acceded to India and not merged to it. It may be a fact  that according to External Affairs minister S M Krishna, but  an exaggeration of a vital fact which will surely encourage the secessionists all over the country. Such comments may not be seditious but they gain a cynical edge when they are misused by terrorist organisations and the leaders of the moderate extremists.
The so-called ‘Azadi’ slogans have already misled the people in the Valley enough to rise in revolt against Indian sovereignty. In the name of demanding ‘self-determination for the Kashmiri people’, they are trying to incite rebellion and chaos. In the name of freedom of speech , they are advocating secession everyday. Liberal activists are now turning fiercer in their slogans and chaotic movements are being organised to keep the people in a continuous tremor. Stability is being disturbed.
In the wake of all these unprecedented yet planned events, Geelani’s authority of freedom of speech was manipulated in such a manner that in the end it ended up having a negative connotation to it in the very capital of the country, New Delhi. Who gave him the permission for this commotion or ruckus? It is certainly not wise to allow the extremists and separatists  fiddle when Kashmir is burning. In the name of free expression, sedition is being exercised openly and the Home Ministry is in slumber.
In this age of powerful electronic media, he takes time to analyse what Geelani had said by sitting besides the authoress of the God of Small Things, Arundhati Roy. Small things happened or not – the question is now irrelevant when people dare to talk for ‘Azadi’ openly in India.
The Kashmiri pandits are accused of  hurling shoes at Geelani, during his seditious speech. What was necessary instead of hurling shoes was to immediately put him behind the bars. Merely lodging an FIR is only an eyewash or exposing the weakness of India as a nation. Those, who talk against integrity and sovereignty of India under any pretext cannot be excused or condoned. Action should be taken against them without eying on the Muslim votes in Kashmir or elsewhere in India.
Politicking cannot be allowed to override the national interests. Those, who try to defend Geelani by highlighting the importance of freedom of speech in a democratic country, should know that freedom of speech too has constitutional limits. In Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, Antony gradually motivates the mob against the idealist Brutus only by using his freedom of speech. People of India should not bow down before the pressure of a misguided mob, who demand secession and separation in the name of self-determination.
Kashmir is very much an integral part of India. Geelani’s speech in Delhi on October 21 is attuned to this seditious line of thought. So he must be arrested immediately for sedition for giving people the questionable message about our sovereignty.
India is a vast country in which federation has a  flexibility but it cannot be compromised with secession. Geelani’s anti- India speech has unquestionably crossed the limits of constitutional decorum. His voice should be gagged immediately for the sake of sovereignty and integrity of India as a nation.
Omar Abdullah sparked off this controversy in the Assembly itself by questioning the state’s integration with India. In America, the US congress passes the U.S. Sedition Act which outlaws ‘any disloyal, profane,scurrilous , or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or Constitution of the United States’. But in India no such stipulation seems to be there. The freedom of speech and of the press does not confer an absolute right to express without any responsibility.
Clause (2) of Article 19 of the Indian constitution enables the legislature to impose reasonable restrictions on free speech under following heads:
I. security of the State,
II. friendly relations with foreign States,
III. public order,
IV. decency and morality,
V. contempt of court,
VI. defamation,
VII. incitement to an offence, and
VIII. sovereignty and integrity of India.
Geelani’s speech should be condemned and censored because it has disturbed security of the state. It incites the separatists to the offence of committing violence and over and above it clearly goes against sovereignty and integrity of India.
It defeats any rational understanding why the Central government allowed a group of separatists to get together in the very heart of the capital to hold a seminar to promote sedition and invite a person like Geelani to address seditiously without any restraint. That such things can happen under the nose of the government has stunned the nation. In a democracy, the right to secede cannot be accepted in the garb of right to free speech.
See Also
Post your comment
Posted comments (1)
Christan NGO Suzanne A. Roy supports Naxilites and must be jailed for talking against a State of INDIA. She is a Christan and she hates HINDUS and HINDUSTAN.

jawan | 25 October 2010


Photos on India
The Wikimedia Board of Trustees election ends today at 23:59 UTC. Please vote.
 [Hide]
[Help with translations!]

Freedom of expression in India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 This article is written like a personal reflection or essay and may require cleanup. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (December 2007)
Crystal Clear app kedit.svg
 This article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia’s quality standards. You can help. The discussion page may contain suggestions. (May 2009)
The Constitution of India contains the right to freedom, given in articles 19, 20, 21 and 22, with the view of guaranteeing individual rights that were considered vital by the framers of the constitution. The right to freedom in Article 19 guarantees the Freedom of speech and expression, as one of following six freedoms:[1]

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Constitutional law

Main Article Fundamental Rights in India
In a landmark judgment of the case Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India,[2] the Supreme Court held that the freedom of speech and expression has no geographical limitation and it carries with it the right of a citizen to gather information and to exchange thought with others not only in India but abroad also.
The constitution of India does not specifically mention the freedom of press. Freedom of press is implied from the Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Thus the press is subject to the restrictions that are provide under the Article 19(2) of the Constitution. Before Independence, there was no constitutional or statutory provision to protect the freedom of press. As observed by the Privy Council in Channing Arnold v. King Emperor:[3] “The freedom of the journalist is an ordinary part of the freedom of the subject and to whatever length, the subject in general may go, so also may the journalist, but apart from statute law his privilege is no other and no higher. The range of his assertions, his criticisms or his comments is as wide as, and no wider than that of any other subject”. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution ensures to all its citizens the liberty of expression. Freedom of the press has been included as part of freedom of speech and expression under the Article 19 of the UDHR. The heart of the Article 19 says: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
In Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras,[4] Patanjali Shastri, CJ observed: “ Freedom of speech and of the press lay at the foundation of all democratic organisations, for without free political discussion no public education, so essential for the proper functioning of the process of popular government, is possible.”
The Supreme Court observed in Union of India v. Assn. for Democratic Reforms:[5] “Onesided information, disinformation, misinformation and non information, all equally create an uninformed citizenry which makes democracy a farce. Freedom of speech and expression includes right to impart and receive information which includes freedom to hold opinions”.
In Indian Express v. Union of India,[6] it has been held that the press plays a very significant role in the democratic machinery. The courts have duty to uphold the freedom of press and invalidate all laws and administrative actions that abridge that freedom. Freedom of press has three essential elements. They are:1. freedom of access to all sources of information,[7] 2. freedom of publication, and 3. freedom of circulation.[4]
In India, the press has not been able to exercise its freedom to express the popular views. In Sakal Papers Ltd. v. Union of India,[8] the Daily Newspapers (Price and Page) Order, 1960, which fixed the number of pages and size which a newspaper could publish at a price was held to be violative of freedom of press and not a reasonable restriction under the Article 19(2). Similarly, in Bennett Coleman and Co. v. Union of India,[9] the validity of the Newsprint Control Order, which fixed the maximum number of pages, was struck down by the Court holding it to be violative of provision of Article 19(1)(a) and not to be reasonable restriction under Article 19(2). The Court struck down the plea of the Government that it would help small newspapers to grow.
In Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras (1950 SCR 594, 607; AIR 1950 SC 124), entry and circulation of the English journal “Cross Road”, printed and published in Bombay, was banned by the Government of Madras. The same was held to be violative of the freedom of speech and expression, as “without liberty of circulation, publication would be of little value”. In Prabha Dutt v. Union of India ((1982) 1 SCC 1; AIR 1982 SC 6.), the Supreme Court directed the Superintendent of Tihar Jail to allow representatives of a few newspapers to interview Ranga and Billa, the death sentence convicts, as they wanted to be interviewed.
There are instances when the freedom of press has been suppressed by the legislature. The authority of the government, in such circumstances, has been under the scanner of judiciary. In the case of Brij Bhushan v. State of Delhi (AIR 1950 SC 129), the validity of censorship previous to the publication of an English Weekly of Delhi, the Organiser was questioned. The court struck down the Section 7 of the East Punjab Safety Act, 1949, which directed the editor and publisher of a newspaper “to submit for scrutiny, in duplicate, before the publication, till the further orders , all communal matters all the matters and news and views about Pakistan, including photographs, and cartoons”, on the ground that it was a restriction on the liberty of the press. Similarly, prohibiting newspaper from publishing its own views or views of correspondents about a topic has been held to be a serious encroachment on the freedom of speech and expression.[10]

[edit] Restrictions

The freedom of speech and of the press does not confer an absolute right to express without any responsibility. Lord Denning, in his famous book Road to Justice, observed that press is the watchdog to see that every trial is conducted fairly, openly and above board, but the watchdog may sometimes break loose and has to be punished for misbehaviour.[11] With the same token Clause (2) of Article 19 of the Indian constitution enables the legislature to impose reasonable restrictions on free speech under following heads:
  • I. security of the State,
  • II. friendly relations with foreign States,
  • III. public order,
  • IV. decency and morality,
  • V. contempt of court,
  • VI. defamation,
  • VII. incitement to an offence, and
  • VIII. sovereignty and integrity of India.
Reasonable restrictions on these grounds can be imposed only by a duly enacted law and not by executive action.[12]
Security of the State: Reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the freedom of speech and expression, in the interest of the security of the State. All the utterances intended to endanger the security of the State by crimes of violence intended to overthrow the government, waging of war and rebellion against the government, external aggression or war, etc., may be restrained in the interest of the security of the State.[13] It does not refer to the ordinary breaches of public order which do not involve any danger to the State.[4]
Friendly relations with foreign States: This ground was added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act of 1951. The State can impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression, if it tends to jeopardise the friendly relations of India with other State.
Public order: This ground was added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 in order to meet the situation arising from the Supreme Court’s decision in Romesh Thapar, s case (AIR 1950 SC 124). The expression ‘public order’ connotes the sense of public peace, safety and tranquillity.
In Kishori Mohan v. State of West Bengal, the Supreme Court explained the differences between three concepts: law and order, public order, security of State. Anything that disturbs public peace or public tranquillity disturbs public order.[14] But mere criticism of the government does not necessarily disturb public order.[15] A law punishing the utterances deliberately tending to hurt the religious feelings of any class has been held to be valid as it is a reasonable restriction aimed to maintaining the public order.[16]
It is also necessary that there must be a reasonable nexus between the restriction imposed and the achievement of public order. In Superintendent, Central Prison v. Ram Manohar Lohiya (AIR 1960 SC 633), the Court held the Section 3 of U.P. Special Powers Act, 1932, which punished a person if he incited a single person not to pay or defer the payment of Government dues, as there was no reasonable nexus between the speech and public order. Similarly, the court upheld the validity of the provision empowering a Magistrate to issue directions to protect the public order or tranquillity.[17]
Decency and morality: The word ‘obscenity’ is identical with the word ‘indecency’ of the Indian Constitution. In an English case of R. v. Hicklin,[18] the test was laid down according to which it is seen ‘whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscene tend to deprave and corrupt the minds which are open to such immoral influences’. This test was upheld by the Supreme Court in Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1965 SC 881). In this case the Court upheld the conviction of a book seller who was prosecuted under Section 292 , I.P.C., for selling and keeping the book The Lady Chatterley’s Lover. The standard of morality varies from time to time and from place to place.
Contempt of court: The constitutional right to freedom of speech would not allow a person to contempt the courts. The expression Contempt of Court has been defined Section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The term contempt of court refers to civil contempt or criminal contempt under the Act. But judges do not have any general immunity from criticism of their judicial conduct, provided that it is made in good faith and is genuine criticism, and not any attempt to impair the administration of justice. In In re Arundhati Roy ((2002) 3 SCC 343), the Supreme Court of India followed the view taken in the American Supreme Court (Frankfurter, J.) in Pennekamp v. Florida (328 US 331 : 90 L Ed 1295 (1946)) in which the United States Supreme Court observed: “If men, including judges and journalists, were angels, there would be no problem of contempt of court. Angelic judges would be undisturbed by extraneous influences and angelic journalists would not seek to influence them. The power to punish for contempt, as a means of safeguarding judges in deciding on behalf of the community as impartially as is given to the lot of men to decide, is not a privilege accorded to judges. The power to punish for contempt of court is a safeguard not for judges as persons but for the function which they exercise”. In E.M.S. Namboodripad v. T.N. Nambiar ((1970) 2 SCC 325; AIR 1970 SC 2015), the Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the High Court, holding Mr. Namboodripad guilty of contempt of court. In M.R. Parashar v. Farooq Abdullah ((1984) 2 SCC 343; AIR 1984 SC 615.), contempt proceedings were initiated against the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir. But the Court dismissed the petition for want of proof.
Defamation: The clause (2) of Article 19 prevents any person from making any statement that injures the reputation of another. With the same view, defamation has been criminalised in India by inserting it into Section 499 of the I.P.C.
Incitement to an offence: This ground was also added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951. The Constitution also prohibits a person from making any statement that incites people to commit offence.
Sovereignty and integrity of India: This ground was also added subsequently by the Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 1963. This is aimed to prohibit anyone from making the statements that challenge the integrity and sovereignty of India.
In the opinion of Brajesh Rajak, author of ‘Pornography Law: XXX Must not be Tolerated’ “Freedom of speech and expression can not be an excuse for distribution of indecent and immoral content to average person of the society”. [19]

[edit] Practical Constraints and Curtailments

  • Freedom of speech and expression, which enable an individual to participate in public activities. The phrase, “freedom of press” has not been used in Article 19, but freedom of expression includes freedom of press. Reasonable restrictions can be imposed in the interest of public order, security of State, decency or morality.
According to the estimates of Reporters Without Borders, India ranks 120th worldwide in press freedom index (press freedom index for India is 39.33 for 2007).[20] The Indian Constitution, while not mentioning the word “press”, provides for “the right to freedom of speech and expression” (Article 19(1) a). However this right is subject to restrictions under subclause (2), whereby this freedom can be restricted for reasons of “sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, preserving decency, preserving morality, in relation to contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence”. Laws such as the Official Secrets Act and Prevention of Terrorism Act [21] (POTA) have been used to limit press freedom. Under POTA, person could be detained for up to six months before the police were required to bring charges on allegations for terrorism-related offenses. POTA was repealed in 2004, but was replaced by amendments to UAPA.[22] The Official Secrets Act 1923 remains in effect.
For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major constraint on press freedom. Indira Gandhi famously stated in 1975 that All India Radio is “a Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ…” [23] With the liberalization starting in the 1990s, private control of media has burgeoned, leading to increasing independence and greater scrutiny of government. Organizations like Tehelka and NDTV have been particularly influential, e.g. in bringing about the resignation of powerful Haryana minister Venod Sharma. In addition, laws like Prasar Bharati act passed in recent years contribute significantly to reducing the control of the press by the government.

[edit] Sedition

According to the English Law, Sedition embraces all the practices whether by word or writing which are calculated to disturb the tranquillity of the State and lead an ignorant person to subvert the Government.[24] Mere criticism of the government does not amount to sedition, if it was not calculated to undermine the respect for the government in such a way so as to make people cease to obey it and so that only anarchy follows.[25] Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code defines the offence of sedition as follows: “Sedition. Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine”. But Explanation 3 says “Comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section”.[26] In Kedar Nath v. State of Bihar (AIR 1952 SC 955), the court upheld the constitutional validity of the Section 124A of I.P.C and also upheld the view taken in Niharendu’s case.

[edit] Bibliography

  • Callamard, Dr. Agnes, Freedom of Speech and Offence: Why Blasphemy Laws Are not the Appropriate Response, (18 June 2006), www.google.com (as a pdf)
  • Cohen, Henry, C.R.S. Report for Congress: Freedom of Speech and Press: Exceptions to the First Amendment, (27 August 2003), www.google.com ( as a pdf ).
  • Liang, Lawrence, Reasonable Restrictions and Unreasonable Speech, (2004), www.google.com ( as a pdf ).
  • Pandey, J. N., Constitutional Law of India, 42nd ed. (2005), Central Law Agency, Allahabad.
  • Singh, M. P., Constitution of India, 10th ed. (2001), Eastern Book Co., Lko.
  • Tiwari, Dr. Mahendra, Freedom of press in India: Constitutional Perspectives, (2006), www.supremecourtcases.com.
  • Rajak, Brajesh, Pornography Law; XXX Must not be Tolerated, (2011) Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ Constitution of India-Part III Article 19 Fundamental Rights.
  2. ^ AIR 1978 SC 597.
  3. ^ AIR 1914 PC 116, 117.
  4. ^ a b c Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 124.
  5. ^ Union of India v. Assn. for Democratic Reforms,(2002) 5 SCC 294.
  6. ^ Indian Express v. Union of India,(1985) 1 SCC 641.
  7. ^ M.S.M. Sharma v. Sri Krishna Sinha, AIR 1959 SC 395.
  8. ^ Sakal Papers Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1962 SC 305.
  9. ^ AIR 1973 SC 106; (1972) 2 SCC 788.
  10. ^ Virendra v. State of Punjab, AIR 1957 SC 896; Express Newspapers v. Union of India, AIR 1958SC 578, 617.
  11. ^ See Dr. Mahendra Tiwari “Freedom of press in India : Constitutional Perspectives” available on internet.
  12. ^ Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala, (1986) 3 SCC 615.
  13. ^ State of Bihar v. Shailabala Devi, AIR 1952 SC 329.
  14. ^ Om Prakash v. Emperor, AIR 1948 Nag, 199.
  15. ^ Raj Bahadur Gond v. State of Hyderabad, AIR 1953 Hyd 277.
  16. ^ Ramjilal Modi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1957 SC 622; 1957 SCR 860.
  17. ^ Babulal Parate v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1961 SC 884.
  18. ^ LR 3 QB 360.
  19. ^ Rajak, Brajesh (2011). Pornography Law: XXX Must not be Tolerated. ISBN 8175349999
  20. ^ Worldwide press freedom index 2007 Reporters Without Borders
  21. ^ “The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002″.
  22. ^ Kalhan, Anil et al. (2006). Colonial Continuities: Human Rights, Antiterrorism, and Security Laws in India. 20 Colum. J. Asian L. 93. Retrieved 2009-03-24.
  23. ^ “Freedom of the Press”. PUCL Bulletin, (People’s Union for Civil Liberties). July 1982.
  24. ^ R. v. Salliven, (1868) 11 Cox Cases 55.
  25. ^ Niharendra v. Emperor, AIR 1942 FC 22
  26. ^ Section 124A of the Code
…and I am Sid Harth

This entry was posted in News, Views and Reviews. Bookmark the permalink. Edit

Leave a Reply…and I am Sid Harth
Thursday, February 23rd 11:26 PM IST

Baba Ramdev claims Supreme Court judgement a victory

FP Staff Feb 23, 2012



Ram Jethmalani, counsel for Baba Ramdev in the Ramlila Ground police high handedness case over his followers, said the Supreme Court’s decision was a victory for the yoga guru.
Ramdev said he had asked his followers to remain peaceful. Reuters
“The Supreme Court completely held that the crowd was a peaceful crowd and it was the police that was aggressive. Someone should resign from the government for this,” the lawyer told a press conference.
There is no doubt that the actions of the police were unwarranted, he said.
Jethmalani also questioned the role of the Home Minister P Chidambaram in the case saying that the minister had acted as an enemy of the constitution and free speech.
Jethmalani said that the role of the Home Minister in the “most aggressive, immoral and almost criminal operation” with regard to the 6 June police action should be looked into.
“I want to know who has given power to the Home Minister…The police was found guilty of aggression. This should make somebody resign…Delhi Police is not the real culprit. Real guilty are the political masters,” Jethmalani said.
Yoga guru Ramdev claimed that he had instructed his followers to remain peaceful throughout the protests.
“I told everyone there not to attack the police, even if they hit you, you should not strike back,” the yoga guru said.
The Delhi police were only acting on the instructions of the Central government, he said.
Both Ramdev and Jethmalani said they would continue the battle against black money being stashed away in foreign banks.
The lawyer said that he was planning to file a contempt proceedings against the government to disclose the names of people with money stashed away abroad illegally.
A Supreme Court bench today observed that the police and the state could have avoided that tragic incident in which one person died and several were injured.
“It is a glaring example of trust deficit between the people governing and the people being governed,” the bench said.
Police action was meant to bring peace but in this case they breached the peace themselves, the court said.
The apex court blamed both Ramdev and the Delhi Police for the midnight crackdown at the Ramlila Maidan last year and directed criminal prosecution of police personnel and Ramdev’s supporters who had behaved violently during the incident.
However, the bench noted that the cops had assaulted sleeping victims and the police and state could have avoided the incident.
There was abuse of power by the Delhi Police and the fundamental rights of people were violated, the bench said.
Watch video

with inputs from PTI

8 comments

Comment

Share on
Real-time updating is paused. (Resume)
  • Delhi, like Washington, DC is a separate entity. More like a state within a state.Ramdev and the government of India, not the state of Delhi, were negotiating. Ramdev accepted the deal. Whatever that may be. However, on second thoughts, refused to abandon his proposed agitation. In the meantime, both the central government and Ramdev supporters carried a public discourse over the terms of engagement in this valid agreement.
    Ramdev is guilty of sedition.
    A harsh word, perhaps but perfectly legal in all legal sense. He was creating, in his own words, an army of volunteers, to be fully trained by him, personally, in armed insurrection to democratically elected government of India.
    Under these circumstances, (State) of Delhi police acted promptly. With or without, as yet not proven in the court of law, instigation from the government of India or their point men, ministers of Congress party lords and masters, including but not limited to, Sonia Gandhi.
    I see a clear case of justified intervention, not a case of police brutality.
    …and I am Sid Harth@sidileak.com
  • Ramanvr 2 minutes ago
    SC faulted Ramdev on the ground that his followers became violent.  I think SC expects all indians to be like a Mahathma Gandhi.  One should not react to unprovoked violence.  A very noble thought indeed.  Considering that the police lathi charged and tear gassed ( in confined place ) SC expecting people not to react is incomprehensible.
  • Surendra rawat 59 minutes ago
    Very timely and satisfactory judgement by the court. How long before the Home Minister owns up responsibility for Delhi Police crackdown on 6th June on Baba Ramdev and his supportersn and several other misdeeds of late where his name is implicated including Raja’s own admission in 2G case in allotment of spectrum licences, NCTC imbroglio etc.  High time the PM and  Soniaji take note and advise Mr. Chidambaram suitably if they cannot sack him.
  • prakashbharti Most popular 3 hours ago
    Good…lets give the Italian Mafia hell.
  • The decision of Supreme court is hundred % accurate.But regarding Lathicharge court keep mum.No doubt Baba Ram Dev is slightly responsible but the cruelty shown by the Delhi Police it can easily observed that  in India Police always please their masters (Politicians) .Anyway Baba will continue his fight Haathi chalte Hai Dhool udti Hai).Where there is will there is way.
  • B Patel 5 hours ago
    That’s it honorable judges?A penalty was handed down for the victims of violence. What is the punishment for the violation of my fundamental right to free speech? Is anyone in the government going to go to jail for violating my fundamental right to peacefully protest? Is anyone in police going to lose their job? If not, then the honorable court has set a terrible precedent. Now, anyone can violate the fundamental rights of the citizens of India without worrying about consequences.
  • Dinesh 5 hours ago
    USELESS JUDGEMENT, THE RULING FAVOURS/PENALISES BOTH PARTIES.NO-ONE AT FAULT, WHAT A JUDGEMENT, IS IT A JOKE SAME WAS WITH 2G,ADARASH, AND …
  • Unfortunately, the shameless, mindless, unmoral, unethical UPA govt. wont do anything unless directed by the SC to do so.Fortunately, there still is a functioning SC in India. There is Hope!

[+] Hot Topics:
Delhi, like Washington, DC is a separate entity. More like a state within a state.
Ramdev and the government of India, not the state of Delhi, were negotiating. Ramdev accepted the deal. Whatever that may be. However, on second thoughts, refused to abandon his proposed agitation.
In the meantime, both the central government and Ramdev supporters carried a public discourse over the terms of engagement in this valid agreement.
Ramdev is guilty of sedition.
A harsh word, perhaps but perfectly legal in all legal sense. He was creating, in his own words, an army of volunteers, to be fully trained by him, personally, in armed insurrection to democratically elected government of India.
Under these circumstances, (Stete) of Delhi police acted promptly. With or without, as yet not proven in the court of law, instigation from the government of India or their point men, ministers of Congress party lords and masters, including but not limited to, Sonia Gandhi.
I see a clear case of justified intervention, not a case of police brutality.
…and I am Sid Harth@sidileak.com
NDTV.com homepage Updated: February 23, 2012 23:29 IST
You are here: Home » India»

Supreme Court on Ramlila crackdown: Highlights

NDTV Correspondent, Updated: February 23, 2012 18:28 IST
$4.95 Domain Names – From The Original Domain Registrar. Hurry, $4.95 Domain Offer Ends Soon
www.NetworkSolutions.com
New Delhi:  Pronouncing its order on Delhi Police’s midnight crackdown on yoga guru Baba Ramdev’s camp in New Delhi, the Supreme Court today rapped the State and the Delhi Police on its knuckles in what it termed as a case of “police excess”. The court also held the yoga guru guilty of negligence.

Here are the highlights of what the court said:
  • The court said police restrictions were unreasonable and unwarranted
  • The State could have avoided the clash
  • There was undue haste by Delhi police
  • A sleeping congregation can’t be held unlawful
  • The yoga guru was guilty of negligence as he couldn’t maintain law and order
  • Real sufferers were the public
  • Ramlila crackdown victim Rajbala’s family to be paid Rs. five lakh compensation
  • Supreme Court directs criminal prosecution against police personnel and Ramdev’s supporters who behaved violently during the incident.
For NDTV Updates, follow us on Twitter or join us on Facebook
Story first published:
February 23, 2012 13:27 IST
  • Comments
Comments
NDTV Social
Become friends with your favourite NDTV people and shows. Start now »
  • Siddharth Vinayak Patankar
    Treat for 2 lucky CNBions from NCR. Wanna experience BMW Driver Training this wknd? Tell me from whr to whr I 1st drove new X3 last yr? SVP 3 hours ago
    ReadReply
  • Mehraj Dube
    SC in the Ramdev judgement ‘To disturb sleep… wld amount to torture …a violation of human right…It’d b similar to a 3rd deg method’ 4 hours ago
    ReadReply
NDTV
UPDATES
WITH
© Copyright NDTV Convergence Limited 2012. All rights reserved.
NDTV.com homepage Updated:February 23, 2012 23:36 IST

Who is Baba Ramdev?

NDTV Correspondent, Updated: November 15, 2011 16:00 IST
$4.95 Domain Names – From The Original Domain Registrar. Hurry, $4.95 Domain Offer Ends Soon
www.NetworkSolutions.com

New Delhi: As Swamis go, he is rather young – turned 45 last year. Before Baba Ramdev became the latest crusader against corruption, he was best known for his efforts to popularise yoga among increasingly health conscious Indians.Ramdev is largely a television and video phenomenon. He fired the imagination of an entire segment of TV watchers, who tuned out of daily soap opera to tune into and do yoga with Baba Ramdev. Now, thousands turn up at his camps to do mass yoga with him. A wiry man with a full flowing black beard, hair parted and tied back, in red robes, the abiding vision of Ramdev is of a man demonstrating very difficult yoga asanas. He has a considerable following and people flock to his institutes in Haridwar, near Dehradun. The yoga guru claims to cure many ailments through yoga and ayurveda and has courted controversy with his claims of curing AIDS and cancer with yoga, though he later clarified that he had only said yoga helped provide relief to those with AIDS.
As his popularity has grown in the era of multiple television channels, Ramdev has found not just celebrity, but political ambition too. A year ago he announced that he would launch a new political party – the Bharat Swabhiman – to “cleanse the system.” Ramdev said that he would not contest elections but that his party would contest all 543 Lok Sabha seats in the next elections on a manifesto that shall address black money and corruption as the key issues.
And those are the issues that Ramdev has brought out now. In a change of plans, he said he would launch a satyagraha instead of a party. He is do that today in the national capital. With a hunger-strike, much in the manner of social activist Anna Hazare, who had galvanized mass support with his hunger strike against corruption two months ago. Both Ramdev and Anna are part of a citizens effort to goad the government into making more stringent laws against corruption.
Ramdev  was born in 1965 in a Haryana village called Alipur. He was named Ramkishan Yadav. Various biographies say Ramkishan attended school till class 8 and then joined a gurukul where he learnt Sanskrit and Yoga.
He later became a sanyasi (one who renounces the world) and took the name Baba Ramdev  and began to teach yoga. He later moved to Haridwar, where he continued to offer free yoga lessons. His followers claim he has studied the Hindu scriptures deeply and even taught them in various gurukuls.
Ramdev has set up several trusts, gurukuls and foundations and conducts yoga camps and classes throughout the world. He is known for his focus on pranayama, the ancient breathing exercises that are a fundamental part of yoga.
Baba Ramdev muscled his way into India’s consciousness in 1995 when his mass yoga sessions started being televised. He used his classes to preach against corruption in the system, and occasionally to promote a swadeshi ideology that was welcomed by saffron groups.
For NDTV Updates, follow us on Twitter or join us on Facebook
Story first published:
June 03, 2011 15:19 IST
  • Comments
Comments
NDTV Social
Become friends with your favourite NDTV people and shows. Start now »
  • Siddharth Vinayak Patankar
    Treat for 2 lucky CNBions from NCR. Wanna experience BMW Driver Training this wknd? Tell me from whr to whr I 1st drove new X3 last yr? SVP 3 hours ago
    ReadReply
  • Mehraj Dube
    SC in the Ramdev judgement ‘To disturb sleep… wld amount to torture …a violation of human right…It’d b similar to a 3rd deg method’ 4 hours ago
    ReadReply
NDTV
UPDATES
WITH
© Copyright NDTV Convergence Limited 2012. All rights reserved.

Ramdev

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Swami Ramdev
स्वामी रामदेव
Born January 1971 (age 41)
Ali Saiyad Pur (Alipur), Mahendragarh, Haryana, India
Birth name Ram Krishna
Guru Acharya Pradumn
Philosophy Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam[citation needed]
Swami Ramdev (Hindi: स्वामी रामदेव; born Ram Krishna on 11 Jan 1971)[1] alias Baba Ramdev, has gained popularity through ventures in yoga, ayurvedic medicine and agriculture, as well as his advocacy on Indian political issues.[2]

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Early life

Ramdev was born as Ram Krishna to Gulab Devi and Ram Nivas in the Alipur village of Mahendragarh district in Haryana state of India. While living in Kalva Gurukul of Jind district in Haryana, he offered free yoga training to villagers for some time. Then he moved to Haridwar, Uttarakhand and spent several years studying ancient Indian scriptures at Gurukul Kangri Vishwavidyalaya. This included a rare book of Aurobindo Ghosh, Yogik Sadhan[3], translated from Bangla into Hindi by Pandit Ram Prasad Bismil. After reading this small booklet योगिक साधन[4] he went to the caves of Himalaya and practised intense self-discipline and meditation.

[edit] Beginning of Public Life

He shot into prominence when he started the Divya Yog Mandir Trust with the company of Acharya Balkrishna at Kankhal Haridwar. In 2003, Aastha TV began featuring him in its morning yoga slot. Within a few years, he had gathered a huge following.[5] The New York Times called him “an Indian, who built Yoga Empire, a product and symbol of the New India, a yogic fusion of Richard Simmons, Dr. Oz and Oprah Winfrey, irrepressible and bursting with Vedic wisdom.”[6]
A large number of people and many celebrities in India and abroad have attended his yoga camps[7]. He has taught yoga to many actors including Amitabh Bachchan and Shilpa Shetty.[8] He has also taught yoga in the British Parliament[9], at the MD Anderson Cancer Center affiliated to the University of Texas[10][11] and at the seminary of Muslim clerics at Deoband in Uttar Pradesh, becoming the first ever non-muslim to publicly address the deobandi Muslim clerics.[12].
Apart from making Yoga a household word in India, he has also taught Yoga in Britain, USA and Japan among other countries. Soon after getting popular outside India, he was invited by Kofi Annan in 2006 to deliver a lecture on poverty alleviation in a United Nations conference.[13][14]

[edit] Patanjali Yogpeeth and Research on Yoga

A view of Patanjali Yogpeeth in Haridwar (Uttara Khand) India
The flagship project of Baba Ramdev is Patanjali Yogpeeth. Since its inauguration in 2006, it has been one of the largest centers for research on Yog and Ayurved in India. The vision of the research institution as mentioned on the Patanjali Yogpeeth website is “To evaluate the physiological and clinical effects of Yog and Pranayam as taught by Swami Ramdevji and the Ayurvedic medicines formulated by Acharya Balakrishanji”.[15] Apart from running free yoga classes and providing free ayurvedic consultancy in the premises of the yogpeeth, the Patanjali Yogpeeth website claims to run 20,000 free yoga classes and 2000 chikitsalayas all over the country.[16] The facilities at the Yogpeeth comprise a 300-bed multi specialty hospital, a yoga research center[17], a university[18], an ayurvedic pharmacy[19] and a food park[20].
Patanjali YogPeeth has acquired a Scottish Island for about £2 million which was donated by Mr.Sam and Mrs. Sunita Poddar, originally from India and living in Scotland for 25 years, have been running the UK branch of the Patanjali Yoga Peeth Trust.[21] The Little Cumbrae Island, off the fishing town of Largs in Scotland, will also serve as the Patanjali Yog Peeth’s base overseas, where yoga will be taught. This project will be run by Patanjali Yogpeeth (UK) Trust.[22] They have plans to set up a wellness retreat there.

[edit] Books authored

Swami Ramdev, apart from being a social and political activist, has also authored several books, most prominent among them being
  1. Yoga Sādhanā evam Yoga Chikitsā Rahasya (Yog Its Philosophy & Practice ISBN 9788189235154)
  2. Prāṇāyāma Rahasya (Pranayama Its Philosophy & Practice ISBN 9788189235017)
  3. Aushadh Darshan (Aushadh Darshan ISBN 9788189235246)
  4. Jeevaniya & Vayasthapan Paudhe (Vitality Strenghtening Astavarga Plants ISBN 9784049800043)
The books explain in detail about the basics of Ashtanga Yoga and Acupressure. The third book describes, among other things, the use of several medicinal herbs in curing some diseases which modern medicine is unable to cure. Baba Ramdev claims to have proper documented proofs of all the claims he makes, along with those in these books.

[edit] Political and social campaigns

Ramdev has clarified that he has no political ambitions and is not interested in starting a political party, but feels it’s his obligatory duty to reform social and political ambiguities apart from popularising yoga and thus strengthen the country.[23][24]
He has raised a number of political, social and economic issues through his yoga camps (in Hindi Yog Shivir). Most of the issues raised by him demand a drastic change in the governance policies of India.

[edit] On agriculture and dietary practices

In many yog shivira (yoga camps), he has raised the issue of increased consumption of fast foods, packed foods and soft drinks by the people. According to him these products can cause diseases and so they must not be eaten. He has also claimed that commercially available aerated drinks are harmful to due to the presence of phosphoric acids, preservatives, unknown chemicals and emulsifiers. He claims that these drinks are very harmful to the entire body and especially the stomach lining if consumed. He has also made statements along the lines of “Cold Drinks means Toilet Cleaner” and has claimed that these cold drinks are more effective at cleaning toilets than commercially available toilet cleaners.[25] He urges people in his public meetings to pledge not to consume commercial aerated drinks, to protect individual health as well as to avoid Indian wealth being transferred to multinational companies. Instead he advices the public to consume hot water, milk or traditional Indian juices only so that India may become prosperous.
He has also claimed that the use of fertilizers and pesticides has led to an undue economic load on farmers and increased the profits of large business houses involved in the business. He also claims that these practices are harmful to the general public, since the farming produce is contaminated with inorganic fertilizers and pesticides.[26] Due to this practice, the farming land is also becoming barren. He also blames corrupt practices for the miserable conditions of the poor farmers and other backward class of the society. He says that although agriculture is the biggest area which can contribute enough to India’s economy yet it’s farmers are the most poverty stricken class of the country. He says if villages improve then there will be a completely different India[27]

[edit] Views on homosexuality

According to Newsweek magazine, Ramdev “detests gays”.[28] In July 2009, when Delhi High Court gave a verdict under decriminalizing homosexuality in Delhi, the swami called a press conference and said, “This verdict of the court will encourage criminality and sick mentality. … This is breaking the family system in India. Homosexuality is not natural and can be treated. If the government brings this law, I will take this matter to the streets of Delhi in protest.”[29] In 2011 he petitioned the court to overturn the ruling.[30] He said that “(Gay sex) is against our Vedic culture.”[31] Ramdev has said that he can cure homosexuals within six months using “yoga, pranayam and other meditation techniques”.[32][33] He has offered to cure Manvendra Singh Gohil, an openly gay prince.[34] His views have attracted criticism.[35]

[edit] Protests against black money

Baba Ramdev raised the issue of black money publicly in Ramlila Maidan on 27 Feb 2011[36] Estimations indicate a total of Rs. 400 lakh crore, or nearly 9 trillion USD, of Indian black money outside the country. It is claimed but not proven that this is so much money that every Indian constituency could get up to 50 thousand crore for development. The money has been pulled outside the country via physical and technical means, with hawala, under/over invoicing being some common methods. Money laundering started on a large scale since 1990.
In April 2011 Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, confirmed that there are Indian names on Swiss bank accounts.[37] Switzerland is not the only tax havens where Indian black money is stashed. Other tax havens include Dubai, Liechtenstein, USA, UK, and others.[36] Switzerland has officially rejected any “fishing expeditions” by the Indian government but are willing to be more cooperative in investigations where specific evidence is provided. An approach had been made by Indian government but was refused on the basis that it was a fishing expedition without any evidence. Baba Ramdev has said that most of the money belongs to the ministers, government officials and bureaucrats.[36]
Apart from this, there is an estimated Rs. 100–150 lakh crore of black money in India’s internal economy. India’s total GDP is in the range of 60 lakh crore and at least twice of this amount is circulating in black, which is roughly between 100 and 150 lakh crore.[36] Ramdev has suggested many measures to curb the amount of black money circulating inside the internal economy. Baba Ramdev pointed out that total currency note circulation in India is 10 lakh crore. If the GDP is 60 lakh crore, then currency note circulation should be 1/50 of that amount, which is only 2 lakh crore. A basic economy concept states that a currency note can travel 50 to 100 transaction points over a year. Hence if RBI has circulated 10 lakh crore of currency then the total Indian economy should be at least 50 × 10 lakh crore = 500 lakh crore. This clearly indicates that there is huge amount of black money circulating inside the internal economy and an equally high amount of unaccounted wealth is being siphoned out of the country every year by corrupt ministers and bureaucrats.
Swami Ramdev has been associated with the 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement and was involved in the Jan Lokpal agitation[38]
In February 2011, he gave the following steps for eradication of black money:[39]
  1. Declare all Indian wealth lying outside the country illegally as national wealth.
  2. Agree to and accept the U.N. Convention against Corruption – pending since 2006.
  3. Access, monitor and disrupt payment gateway servers enabling corrupt people to manage money in tax havens.
  4. Scrutinizing accounts of people having credit/debit cards of foreign banks without any foreign work/relation.
  5. Disabling operations of any bank from a tax haven country.
  6. Withdrawal and demonetizing of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 currency notes – so as to avoid misuse of unaccounted money and quick arrest of the entire locally circulated black money, bribing, and fake note traffic.
  7. Death penalty provision for the corrupt persons in Indian Penal Code.
Many countries like USA, Germany and other smaller African countries have attempted to adopt certain steps to recover their black money yet at the same time they have retained their own havens, for example, the USA has Delaware, the UK has the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, France has Monaco. However in India the government calls Ramdev’s idea as impractical as many of Indias largest corporations trade in Switzerland and much needed investment into India from overseas funds is routed through Mauritius. The practicality of such steps has been called into question.[23]
He has raised the issue of Indian money stashed away illegally in Swiss banks, which is estimated to be anywhere between 1 and 1.5 trillion USD. He says that the government must take immediate action and bring back the money as it belongs to the people of India. Not only this, he openly charges that this black money has been taken out of the country illegally and also very strongly demands a capital punishment to all those Indians or non-resident Indians, who acquire, handle and stash black money.
He suggests that Mauritius route is a tax haven for black money operators in India and this route should be cut effectively by the Indian government but ignores the fact that all UK and US funds use Mauritius to invest in the Indian stock-market and in India. He had also demanded (as early as September 2009) the removal of currency of denominations of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000, saying that this would curb corruption, black money and terrorism.[40][41]

[edit] Anti-corruption rally on 27 February 2011 at Ramlila Maidan

On 27 February 2011 Baba Ramdev held a large rally of over 1 lakh people at the Ramlila Maidan, New Delhi to protest against corruption. Those present at the rally included Baba Ramdev, Acharya Balkrishna, Ram Jethmalani, Anna Hazare, Arvind Kejriwal, Kiran Bedi, Swami Agnivesh and many others.[42] All members spoke and explained how corruption was rampant in the country and how the government itself was indulging in it. The most highlighted topic was Indian black money lying in tax havens of Switzerland. A striking feature of this rally was that all the major media houses boycotted it.

[edit] Bhrashtachar Mitao Satyagrah 4 June 2011 at Ramlila Maidan

[edit] Preface

Baba Ramdev launched the Bhrashtachar Mitao Satyagrah which was held at Ramlila Maidan, New Delhi on 4 June 2011. Key demands were[43]:
  1. Declare all illegal wealth/black money lying in foreign countries, which belong to Indians as National Property.
  2. Declaring money laundering as a National Crime and should be punishable.
  3. Investigate and shut down the Mauritius route of foreign investment.
  4. Sign and ratify the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, pending since 2006
  5. Recall Rs. 1000 and Rs. 500 notes to curb corruption, bribery and illegal flow of money in the internal economy of the country.
  6. Enact a strong Lokpal bill.
  7. Establish infrastructure to deliver medical and engineering education in Indian Languages.
  8. Enact Public Service Delivery Guarantee Act to enable all citizens to avail government/public services easily and quickly
  9. Enact the Kisan Vetan Ayog to establish standards for payment of wages to farmers and classify farming as skilled labour.

[edit] Protest at Delhi

Baba Ramdev declared to go on an Anshan (indefinite fast) on June 4, 2011 at Ramlila Ground Delhi[44] to pressure the Central Government to root out corruption from India and bring back the black money stashed away in various financial institutions abroad. After this declaration the government was said to have set up a panel to suggest steps to curb black money and its transfer abroad, in an apparent bid to placate Ramdev.[45]
When Ramdev arrived at Delhi airport on June 1, four senior ministers of the UPA government met him on the airport and tried to persuade him by telling of the government’s initiative on corruption.[46] On 4 June morning 65,000 followers of the yoga teacher had gathered at Ramlila Ground[47] By noon queues extending up to 3 km from the entry point of Ramlila Grounds and were seen chanting ‘Vande Mataram’. In the evening a press conference was organised by Kapil Sibbal made public a letter from Ramdev’s camp to call off their agitation. Ramdev took it as a betrayal of the Government and hardened the position by declaring not to take back his Satyagrah until a proper government ordinance is announced in place of forming a committee.
Satyagrah was going on even in the night of 4 June 2011. Sources informed Baba Ramdev that a huge police force can try to clear Ramlila Ground and if it is not done they can also kill him in a fake encounter or set fire in the tents.[48] At midnight, a huge team of 10,000 officers of the Delhi Police and RAF raided the ground when most of the Satyagrahis were sleeping on the and Ramdev was also sleeping on the dias along with his core group.[49] A large police force lobbed tear gas shells and lathicharged to evict the crowd from 1a.m. to 4 a.m. The tent was set on fire at many places. Cold water was thrown over power generators to create complete darkness to prevent any video recording of the whole attack. However most media persons recorded what was going on.
Police had arranged buses to drop supporters at railway stations and bus stands in advance; had ammunition ready and all the policemen were in battle-gear wearing vests and helmets and kept some ambulances on standby. Ramdev was arrested while attempting to disguise himself in women’s clothing.[50]
Delhi Police forcefully detained Ramdev at Safdargunj Airport in complete isolation for a few hours and then deported him to his Ashram in Haridwar via helicopter.[51] Police fired tear gas, lathcharged people who were reportedly peacefully fasting. 53 persons were injured and treated at the Lok Nayak Jai Prakash (LNJP) hospital, AIIMS trauma center, and Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital.[52][53][54] Government stopped media person or anybody to enter the hospital to check the injured. Protesters huddled near the Metro station, bus depots and railway stations. Many walked down to Gurdwara Bangla Sahib and other nearby Ashrams.[55] According to New Delhi railway station authorities, supporters continued to leave in batches through the course of the day. While several supporters spent the day in a park near Ramlila Maidan, others took shelter in Arya Samaj at Paharganj.[56]
Baba Ramdev was taken by police out side Delhi and was banned from entering Delhi for 15 days. After being banned from entering Delhi for the next 15 days, Union Home Secretary G. K. Plillai said the Baba was on his way to his Ashram at Haridwar under police custody.[57] On reaching Haridwar, Swami Ramdev declared in a press conference that his fast unto death will continue.
About 5,000 supporters were still missing according to Baba Ramdev.[58] Dr. Jaideep Arya, a key advisor of Ramdev’s team, said that about 19 girls students from the Chotipur Gurukul, who were seated near the dais, are estimated to be still missing.[59] Suman, women’s representative of the Trust, said many of these girls were roughed up when the police tried to reach Swamiji and were crying since police officials were pulling their hair, dragging them badly and their clothes were torn. Police, however, said no one was missing.[59] A senior police officer reported that they were forced to retaliate after Baba Ramdev’s supporters started throwing stones and flower pots at them.[60] Police also released CCTV footage to prove that no woman was beaten by them.[61] TV channels were telecasting the footage of the scene in Ramlia Ground. Rajbala, who suffered a crippling spinal injury and was undergoing treatment at G. B. Pant Hospital died following cardiac arrest. The hospital authorities refused to give a death summary and other relevant papers, and even asked to file an RTI application. Baba Ramdev, in a statement, said “Her sacrifice is an irreparable loss to the whole organisation…..and her death will not go in vain. We will continue to fight for a corruption-free India[62].”

[edit] Aftermath of the Delhi protest and fast unto death

Ramdev accused the government of cheating him, and alleged that there was a conspiracy to kill him and that he was threatened during a meeting with senior ministers.[63] All political parties other than the Congress Party condemned the police action, called it undemocratic and naked fascism,[64] deplorable and shortsighted.[65][66] It was even compared it with the Emergency[64] and the Jalianwala.[64] Apart from politicians, he was also supported by civil societies as well. Activist Anna Hazare termed the crackdown of the agitation a strangulation of democracy. He said: “There was no firing otherwise the eviction was similar to Jallianwala Bagh massacre“.[67] He boycotted his lokpal panel meeting with the government on 6 June and decided to go on a one day fast on 8 June. His allies RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal, former Law Minister Shanti Bhushan, and Swami Agnivesh also criticised the police action to evict the hunger strikers forcefully[68] Protests were held in many different parts of the country.[69] Protest were held in Bangalore, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Jammu and Lucknow as well as among other several cities of India.[70]

[edit] End of hunger strike

Baba Ramdev ended his fast on the ninth day by drinking a glass of juice at Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, Dehradun, where he was recuperating from the seventh day of his fast. After repeated request from Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and various other activisst he ended his fast.[71] Political reactions came in from all major parties expressing their happiness about ending the fast. BJP Spokesperson Ravi Shankar Prasad said they have a “sense of satisfaction” that the fast has ended. Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy said that the fast was “successful” and termed the government as “monstrous”. While the ruling party Congress spokesperson Janardan Dwivedi gave a reaction by saying it as “good”.[72]

[edit] Allegations of corruption and tax evasion

Hours after 4 June, the Congress-led UPA government started a massive campaign against Baba Ramdev, Acharya Balkrishna and Patanjali Yogpeeth Trust. Multiple allegations were raised against Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna.
Some of them being:
  1. Baba Ramdev is involved in tax evasion.
  2. Baba Ramdev exports products that are banned in USA.
  3. Donations received by Baba Ramdev consist of black money.
  4. Acharya Balkrishna has fake passport.
  5. Acharya Balkrishna is a Nepali criminal who fled from Nepal to India.
  6. Acharya Balkrishna has violated the Arms Act
The Indian National Congress lead United Progressive Alliance launched a booklet to criticise and expose Ramdev during its election campaign in Uttar Pradesh for the 2012 elections[73][74]. Acharya Balkrishna was later cleared of fake passport charges.[75].
It is said[by whom?] that there are a maze of companies that are run and maintained by Ramdev´s key men. Over 200 businesses[citation needed] from broadcasting companies to food parks are run by his allies Acharya Balkrishna and Swami Muktanand. Baba Ramdev is also facing charges of land grab as it was reported[by whom?] that Patanjali Yog Peeth had grabbed government land. In 2011, a report released by India Today cited some of the firms running under the guidance of Baba Ramdev as being scanned by government authorities for the above mentioned allegations.[76][77].

[edit] Controversies and criticisms

[edit] Alleged involvements in activities prohibited for non-profit in USA

Ramdev and his non-profit firms are alleged to involve in activities prohibited for non-profit tax-exempt organisations in USA.[78]

[edit] Alleged links with RSS and BJP

Baba Ramdev, being a Hindu is demonised in India by congress as being a part of long-standing organisations such as Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) by many politicians. Lalu Yadav said in a press conference- “Sadhvi Ritambhara was the first one to share the stage (with Ramdev at ramlila protest). She was the one who was responsible for the Babri Masjid demolition”.[79] Digvijay Singh, Congress general secretary alleged that all the five-star arrangements at Ramlila ground protests were done by right activist group RSS and Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP).[80] Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi said-”Some people with vested interest are hijacking and remote controlling the protest by RSS and BJP”. He also alleged that nation wide protest by Ramdev is being financed by RSS. Baba Randev has responded to these allegations by saying that, every patriot and well-wisher of the nation is supporting him, if RSS is one of them, so be it.
Initially RSS leader Ram Madhav made distance on this issue.[81] But later on RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat said- “The RSS was not behind the stir launched by Ramdev seeking repatriation of the black money stashed illegally in foreign banks but have extended all support to it (agitation).” He added- “RSS cannot remain a mute spectator to the social revolution taking place against corruption and black money. Therefore, it has asked its cadres to join the agitation”[82]

[edit] Exemplar yog empire

Baba Ramdev is allegedly called as business tycoon, has built a global yog empire that stretches from India to a remote island in Scotland, with declared revenues since 1995 of 11 billion rupees ($220 million). “I’ve become so powerful, I can uproot a government. I don’t have financial or legal power, but in a democracy I have the power of the people,” he declared in an interview with Indian magazine Tehelka last year.[83][84] Though there were discussions in public domain that various media and political parties are questioning his credibility and raising allegations, making Ramdev a fun object, calling him a thug and in possession of Black Money, instead of debating about the issues raised by him.[85] To clear the allegations that his trust has accumulated Black Money, he made available the audited balance sheets of all his trusts on the website of Patanjali YogPeeth.[86]

[edit] Labour law violations and animal parts in medicines

In March 2005, 113 employees of Divya Yoga Mandir Trust, Haridwar started an agitation for minimum wages and employees’s rights such as coverage under the Provident Fund and Employees’ State Insurance schemes. After a tripartite meeting, an agreement was reached between the workers, management and the district administration. However, some agitating workers were dismissed by the Trustees after being alleged to be responsible for sabotage. Their case was taken up by the Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU), affiliated to the Communist Party of India (Marxist). They are still to be reinstated.[87][88]
Brinda Karat, a senior leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) was involved with the protesters and was told by disgruntled workers that animal parts were used in the manufacture of some medicines. In January 2006, she accused the Divya Pharmacy, owned by Divya Yog Mandir Trust for using human and animal bones in their medicines. Samples of the medicines Kulya Bhasm (Mixture) and Yauvanamrit Vati purchased from Brahmakalp Chikitsalaya- the Trust’s Hospital at Haridwar were allegedly tested at government labs and the presence of animal materials in the sample was confirmed.[87] However, the source of the samples was disputed, as these had been supplied by Karat to the labs and not procured by government officials. Karat produced what were claimed to be the prescription and cash receipt obtained from the medicine counter for the samples provided.[87][88][89]
Her controversial remarks drew strong condemnation from several politicians in North India, like Sharad Pawar, Mulayam Singh Yadav and Narayan Dutt Tiwari.[90] Subsequently she received a legal notice on the behalf of a BJP leader in Faridabad.[91]
A few months later in 2006, four samples were sent to the government recognized Shriram Institute of Industrial Research in Delhi. Negating the report from this institute the Union Health Ministry said to have found animal DNA in the samples, although most of the newspapers carried reports to the contrary.[92]

[edit] Views on AIDS and sex education

In December 2006, Swami Ramdev claimed to improve the condition of patients suffering with AIDS through yoga and ayurvedic drugs sold by his Divya Yoga Mandir Trust. He also went on to suggest that sex education should be replaced by yoga education, as his way to AIDS awareness and prevention.[93] “Sex education in schools need [sic] to be replaced by yoga education,” Ramdev told reporters at the state health minister’s residence. As a consequence of these public statements he was sent a cease and desist order by the Indian Union Health Ministry to avoid making such claims in the future, and the civil society threatened legal action.[94] In response, Ramdev paraphrased his statement and said the claims were not directly his, but those of patients who practiced yoga.[95]

[edit] Claims of curing cancer

Other press reports quoted him as claiming to have a cure for cancer of the breast, liver, prostate, uterus, pituitary gland, and brain, as well as leukemia, by practicing breathing exercises. Swami Ramdev has claimed to have documented proof of his successes.[96] In fact, he frequently declares that he has been able to cure many types of cancers through Yoga, Pranayaam and ayurvedic medicines and also challenges the skeptics to disprove him.

[edit] Awards and recognitions

  • March 2010 – Honored with Degree of Doctorate of Sciences by Amity University, Noida, Uttar Pradesh.
  • April 2010 – Honored with honorary degree of Doctor of Science by Dr D. Y. Patil Deemed University, Pune, Maharashtra.
  • January 2011 – Honored with Sri Chandrashekharendra Saraswati National Eminence Award by Maharashtra Governor K. Shankaranarayanan.[98]

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ “बाबा रामदेव ने भी गलत तथ्यों से बनवाया पासपोर्ट!”. Jagran Yahoo!. June 30, 2011. Retrieved February 21, 2012.
  2. ^ [1] New York Times – April 18, 2011
  3. ^ Sarfaroshi Ki Tamanna( Research work on Ram Prasad Bismil in 4 Volumes), Delhi, Praveen Prakashan, 1997 Volume-3
  4. ^ KRANT:बिस्मिल का क्रान्ति-दर्शन
  5. ^ . http://zeenews.india.com/news710304.html.
  6. ^ Polgreen, Lydia (18 April 2010). “Indian Who Built Yoga Empire Works on Politics”. The New York Times.
  7. ^ What makes Baba Ramdev so influential IBN Live
  8. ^ “Yoga heals Bollywood”. The Times of India. 28 January 2008.
  9. ^ Swami Ramdev gives yoga tips to British lawmakers Times of India
  10. ^ Yoga guru Ramdev to set up massive centre in Houston(Read the last paragraph)
  11. ^ Swami Ramdev at M. D. Anderson cancer centre(This was telecasted on TV)
  12. ^ “Swami Ramdev promotes yoga at Deoband Gathering”. Zee News. 3 November 2009.
  13. ^ Baba Ramdev to address UN meet Rediff News
  14. ^ Baba Ramdev to address UN meet in NY Mumbai Mirror
  15. ^ Department of Yoga Research & Development
  16. ^ Free Services
  17. ^ Patanjali Yoga Research
  18. ^ Patanjali University
  19. ^ Patanjali Ayurveda
  20. ^ PATANJALI FOOD & HERBAL PARK
  21. ^ Meet Baba Ramdev, the swami who owns a Scottish Island – 4. News.in.msn.com. Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  22. ^ Baba Ramdev buys Scottish island – Hindustan Times. Hindustantimes.com (2009-09-28). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  23. ^ a b Godfellas I – A series on gurus and their politics, Tehelka Interview, May 2011
  24. ^ “Baba Ramdev won’t launch political party – Times Of India”. The Times Of India. 2011-04-21.
  25. ^ Cola Means Toilet Cleaner, Ramdev Says It Again – India Daily. Indiadaily.org (2006-12-28). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  26. ^ Balkrishna, Acharya. Yog Sandesh. Haridwar (India): Divya Yog Mandir Trust. p. 29.
  27. ^ Balkrishna, Acharya. Yog Sandesh(English). Haridwar (India): Divya Yog Mandir Trust. p. 20.
  28. ^ Guha, Ramachandra (June 20, 2011). “When the Saints Go Marching In: As corruption runs amok in India, a colorful cast of activists takes on the politicians.”. Newsweek 157 (25).
  29. ^ “Gay is bad, chorus maulanas, saffron brigade & Church”. DNA.
  30. ^ “SC adjourns hearing on decriminalising homosexuality”. United News of India (New Delhi). 19 Apr 2011.
  31. ^ “Gay sex is no crime, says court, religious leaders protest”. The Hindustan Times (New Delhi). 02 July 2009.
  32. ^ “Quack bazaar abuzz with gay cure therapies”. Mail Today (New Delhi). 12 July 2011.
  33. ^ “Unnatural Thinking”. Financial Express (New Delhi). 05 July 2011.
  34. ^ Dave, Jitendra (02 Feb 2010). “Ramdev accepts challenge, says he will cure gay prince: But prince Manvendra Singh Gohil says Baba Ramdev’s knowledge of yoga is not adequate”. DNA (Daily News & Analysis) (Mumbai).
  35. ^ Addley, Esther (28 Sep 2009). “National: Guru sets out to heal the world with yoga on Scottish island”. The Guardian (London (UK)): p. 8.
  36. ^ a b c d Yog Sandesh (Divya Yog Mandir Trust Haridwar) June 2011 issue
  37. ^ “Indian names in Swiss bank data list, says Julian Assange”.
  38. ^ Baba Ramdev seeks sufficient powers for Lokpal | Jan Lokpal Bill | Baba Ramdev | Indian Express. Expressbuzz.com (2011-04-14). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  39. ^ Swami Ramdev gives easy solutions for black money issue | Bharat Swabhiman Andolan- Swami Ramdev Baba. Bharat-swabhiman.com (2011-02-26). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  40. ^ Ban Rs 1000, Rs 500 denomination notes: Baba Ramdev. Zeenews.com (2010-05-12). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  41. ^ Remove Higher currency denominations – Swami Ramdev. Bharat-swabhiman.com (2009-09-20). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  42. ^ Yog Sandesh (Divya Yog Mandir Trust Haridwar) May 2011 issue
  43. ^ Yog Sandesh (Divya Yog Mandir Trust Haridwar) May & June 2011 (special issue)
  44. ^ “Ramdev to launch people’s movement to root out corruption”. The Hindu (Chennai, India). 14 April 2011.
  45. ^ Before Ramdev black money fast, panel set up. Hindustantimes.com (2011-05-29). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  46. ^ Baba Ramdev’s fast looms over government. Ndtv.com (2011-06-02). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  47. ^ “Ramdev eviction: Advani and co pull an all-nighter in protest at Rajghat”. Ndtv.com. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  48. ^ Congress’ Midsummer Folly: Rajat Sharma. Indiatvnews.com (2011-06-14). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  49. ^ “Swoop not sudden, cops trailed Baba Ramdev for 3 days – Economic Times”. Economictimes.indiatimes.com. 2011-06-06. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  50. ^ Burke, Jason (5 June 2011). “Indian police break up yoga guru’s anti-corruption protest”. The Guardian (London). Retrieved 4 July 2011.
  51. ^ “Politics/Nation”. Economictimes. 6 June 2011. Retrieved 6 June 2011.
  52. ^ “Indian police storm yoga guru’s corruption protest”. The telegraph (London). 7 June 2011. Retrieved 7 June 2011.
  53. ^ “30 injured in police sweep at Ramlila Maidan – The Times of India”. The Times Of India. 2011-06-05.
  54. ^ “30 injured in police sweep at Ramlila Maidan – Times Of India”. Articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com. 2011-06-05. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  55. ^ “Baba Ramdev arrested: Ramlila ground never saw so much drama – Economic Times”. Economictimes.indiatimes.com. 2011-06-06. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  56. ^ Sumegha Gulati, Ananya Bhardwaj. “After crackdown, Ramdev’s followers split”. Express India. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  57. ^ “‘Baba Ramdev was hiding in a saree’ – Rediff.com India News”. Rediff.com. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  58. ^ “Delhi kisi ke baap ki nahi hain: Ramdev – Rediff.com India News”. Rediff.com. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  59. ^ a b Ananya Bhardwaj, VijaitaSingh, Pritha Chatterjee. “Girls who ‘shielded’ Baba were told he wants to bless them”. Express India. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  60. ^ “Didn’t baton-charge Ramdev supporters: Delhi Police”. Deccan Herald (Delhi, India). 17 June 2011.
  61. ^ “Ramlila Ground footage recovered”. newsbullet.in (Delhi, India). 7 June 2011.
  62. ^ “Rajbala, seriously injured in Ramlila crackdown, dies”. The Hindu (Chennai, India). 2011-09-26.
  63. ^ Baba Ramdev targets Cong, Sonia; says agitation will continue. Indiatoday.intoday.in (2011-06-05). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  64. ^ a b c Oppn, Hazare slam govt on Ramdev. Indiablooms.com. Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  65. ^ CPI-M deplores police action against Ramdev[dead link]
  66. ^ “It is an attack on democracy: BJP – The Economic Times”. The Times Of India. 2011-06-05.
  67. ^ “Anna to fast in support of Baba Ramdev”. New Delhi: The Hindustan Times. June 5, 2011. Retrieved 6 June 2011.
  68. ^ “Civil society activists criticise police action at Ramlila Grounds”. The Hindu (Chennai, India). 5 June 2011.
  69. ^ “City buzzes again, this time for Ramdev – Times Of India”. Timesofindia.indiatimes.com. 2011-06-05. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  70. ^ “Thousands fast in Maharashtra in Ramdev’s support”. Hindustan Times. 2011-06-04. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  71. ^ “Baba Ramdev ends fast, will be in hospital for 2–3 days”. The Times Of India. June 12, 2011.
  72. ^ Manorama Online | Home | TheWeek LATEST NEWS. Week.manoramaonline.com (2009-11-13). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  73. ^ “Congress booklet counters Ramdev’s black money claims”.
  74. ^ “Congress booklet counters Ramdev’s black money claims”.
  75. ^ “Balkrishna cleared of fake passport charge”.
  76. ^ U.S. launches preliminary fact-finding investigation into alleged Ramdev wealth sources. AHN. June 11, 2011
  77. ^ “U.S. launches preliminary fact-finding investigation into alleged Ramdev wealth sources”.
  78. ^ Tehelka. 14 June 2011. http://www.tehelka.com/story_main49.asp?filename=Ws140611RamdevBaba.asp. Retrieved 28 June 2011.
  79. ^ “Ramdev is linked with RSS says Lalu”. Times Of India. 5 June 2011. Retrieved 7 June 2011.
  80. ^ “Ramdev’s five-star satyagraha engineered by VHP, RSS: Digvijay”. The Hindu (Chennai, India). 4 June 2011. Retrieved 7 June 2011.
  81. ^ “Congress takes on Ramdev; slams BJP, RSS”. IBN. Retrieved 7 June 2011.
  82. ^ DNA. 6 June 2011. http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_yes-we-supported-baba-ramdev-rss_1551978. Retrieved 7 June 2011.
  83. ^ “Ramdev’s Rs 1100 cr empire under scanner”. IBN7. Retrieved 8 June 2011.
  84. ^ “Meet India’s political yoga star Swami Ramdev”. dailytelegraph.com.au. Retrieved 8 June 2011.
  85. ^ Movement of RamDev proceeding as wanted by Government. Timesofassam.com (2011-06-10). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  86. ^ Balance Sheets of Ramdev’s trusts
  87. ^ a b c “In the name of Ayurveda”. The Hindu.
  88. ^ a b “How Karat-Ramdev War began”. ExpressIndia.com.
  89. ^ “Guru accused of ‘human bone’ drug”. bbc.co.uk. 4 January 2006. Retrieved 6 January 2010.
  90. ^ |title=Pawar appreciates work of Ramdev |The Hindu – 9 January 2006
  91. ^ Legal Notice over Ramdev Issue. Bio-medicine.org. Retrieved on 2011-10-16.
  92. ^ “The republic and the wayward rationalist”. The Hindu (Chennai, India). 27 January 2006.
  93. ^ “Yoga can cure AIDS: Ramdev”. timesofindia.com. 2006-12-20. Retrieved 20 Dec 2006.
  94. ^ “Yoga effect on AIDS? Swami Ramdev has ‘proof’”. moneycontrol.com. Retrieved 21 March 2007.
  95. ^ “I made no claims of curing AIDS: Ramdev”. expressindia.com. Retrieved 21 March 2007.
  96. ^ “I’ll stay away from politics: Ramdev”. ibnlive.com. Retrieved 21 March 2007.
  97. ^ “Doctorate degree for Yoga Guru Ramdev”. punjabnewsline.com. Retrieved 21 March 2007.
  98. ^ Lata Mangeshkar, Baba Ramdev to be given Eminence award. News.webindia123.com (2011-01-21). Retrieved on 2011-10-16.

[edit] External links

Ram Jethmalani

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ram Jethmalani
Ram Jethmalani
Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha)
Member of Parliament
for Rajasthan
Minister of Law and Justice
In office
June 1999 – July 2000
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee
Preceded by Thambi Durai
Succeeded by Arun Jaitley
Minister of Urban Development
In office
19 March 1998 – 14 June 1999
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee
Union Minister of Law, Justice and Company Affairs
In office
16 May 1996 – 1 June 1996
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee
Personal details
Born 14 September 1923 (age 88)
Shikharpur, British India
Political party Bhartiya Janata Party
Spouse(s) Ratna R.
Residence Hyderabad
Alma mater S.C. Shahani Law College, Karachi
Profession Lawyer
Website http://164.100.47.5:8080/members/website/Mainweb.asp?mpcode=29
Ram Jethmalani (Hindi: राम जेठ्मलानी, Sindhi: رام جيٺملاڻي), born 14 September 1923, in Shikharpur in Sindh, British India, (now in Pakistan)) is an Indian lawyer and politician. He has served in various posts such as Union Law Minister and Chairman of Bar Associations. He has represented a sweep of cases from the high-profile to the controversial for which he has often faced severe criticism. He is the highest paid Indian lawyer.[1] The family inherits its surname Jethmalani from Shri Jethmal who was a personality in Shikarpur, Pakistan and later a minister in Afghanistan.
Ram Jethmalani is known as a legal personality. Jethmalani is considered a maverick and has many distinctions to his credit. He completed his law at an early age of 18 and started professing law there until the partition of India after which when left his hometown and shifted to Bombay as a refugee. He came to India with his family and began his life fresh. He married Ratna Jethmalani, his first wife, in 1947, and Durga, his second wife. He has 2 sons and 2 daughters, two of whom, Mahesh Jethmalani and Rani Jethmalani are also well known lawyers.
He was elected a member of parliament in 6th and 7th Lok Sabha on a BJP ticket from Mumbai. He has served as Law Minister of India and also as Minister of Urban Development during the Prime Ministership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee against whom he later on contested election in General Elections 0f 2004 from Lucknow constituency. However in 2010 he came back to Bharatiya Janta Party and was elected to Rajya Sabha on its ticket from Rajasthan. He has also been criticised as being opportunistic because of this.[2]
He is a well known face amongst the legal community in India. Even though he is primarily known as only a criminal lawyer, he has appeared in many high profile cases. On 7 May 2010 he was elected to be the president of Supreme Court Bar Association.[3][4]

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Life History

Ram Jethmalani got a double promotion in school and completed matriculation at the age of 13. He secured an LLB degree at the mere age of 17. At that time the minimum age for becoming a lawyer was 21 but special resolution allowed him to become a lawyer at 18.
Ram Jethmalani was married at an age of little above 18, to Durga. Ratna Shehani, a lawyer by profession was his second wife who he had married secretly on the eve of partition. Polygamy was then allowed in Pakistan. His family included two wives and four children — three from Durga (Rani, Shobha, Mahesh) and one from Ratna (Janak).[5]

[edit] As a Lawyer

Ram Jethmalani started his career as a professor in Pakistan before partition.[6] He started his own law firm in Karachi with his friend A.K. Brohi who was senior to him by six years.[7] In February 1948, when the riots broke out in Karachi, he fled to India on the advice of his friend Bodhi who later turned to be the Law Minister of Pakistan
Ram Jethmalani first came to spot light with his appearance in the famous K. M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra case in 1959 with Yeshwant Vishnu Chandrachud, later to become Chief Justice of India. His later defence of a string of smugglers in the late 1960s established Jethmalani’s image as a ‘smuggler’s lawyer’. Even back then, he would point out that he was only doing his duty as a lawyer.[8]
In 1953 he became a part-time professor at the Government Law College, Mumbai for both graduate and post graduate studies. He also taught Comparative law at International Law at Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan.[9] He has also been the Chairman of Bar Council of India for four tenures both before and after the emergency. He was also a member of International Bar Association 1996.

[edit] Political career

In 1971, Ram Jethmalani contested as an independent candidate from Ulhasnagar supported both by the Shiv Sena and Bharatiya Jan Sangh but he lost the elections.[10] During the Emergency period of 1975-1977, he was the chairman of the Bar Association of India. He heavily criticized the then Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi. An arrest warrant was issued against him from Kerala. It was stayed by the Bombay High Court when over 300 lawyers led by Nani Palkhivala appeared for him. However the stay was nullified by the famous Habeas Corpus judgment (Additional District Magistrate of Jabalpur v. Shiv Kant Shukla) and Ram Jethmalani exiled himself in the Canada carrying on his campaign against the Emergency. He returned 10 months later after Emergency was lifted. While in Canada, his candidature was filed from Bombay North-West constituency. He won the election and retained the seat in 1980 General Elections, but lost to Sunil Dutt of the Indian National Congress in 1985. In the 1977 general elections after the Emergency, he ousted the serving Law Minister H.R. Gokhale from Bombay in the Lok Sabha Elections and hence started his political career as a Parliamentarian.[11] However he was not made law minister himself as Morarji Desai disapproved of his lifestyle.[12]
He became a member of Rajya Sabha in 1988. He became The Union Minister of Law, Justice and Company Affairs in 1996 in the Government of India led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee. During the second tenure of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, he was given the portfolio of Union Minister of Urban Affairs and Employment in 1998. But on 13 October 1999 he was again sworn in as the Union Minister for Law, Justice & Company Affairs. However he was asked to resign by the Prime Minister following differences with the then Chief Justice of India Adarsh Sein Anand and Attorney General of India Soli Sorabjee. It is believed that Jethmalani never enjoyed the confidence of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. He was inducted into the Cabinet on Home Minister Lal Krishna Advani‘s insistence.[13]
He had also announced his candidature for President of India stating “I owe it to the nation to offer my services’” and launched his own political fronts, the Bharat Mukti Morcha, launched as a ‘mass movement’ in 1987 and in 1995 he launched his own political party called Pavitra Hindustan Kazhagam, with a motto to achieve “Transparency in functioning of Indian Democracy.”[14]
In the General Elections of 2004, he contested against Atal Bihari Vajpayee from the Lucknow constituency as an independent candidate. Indian National Congress and Samajwadi Party did not field their candidates in this election. However he lost. Later on, in 2010, he was given a Rajya Sabha ticket by Bharatiya Janta Party from Rajasthan and he was selected.[15]

[edit] Controversies

Ram Jethmalani has often been surrounded by controversies.

[edit] Defence of High profile cases

He has a number of high profile defense cases to his credit as a lawyer (citation). , people involved in market scams (Harshad Mehta and Ketan Parekh), and a host of gangsters and smugglers including the British citizen Daisy Angus who was acquitted of hashish smuggling after serving 5 years in jail. He has also defended death sentence of Afzal Guru a Pakistani terrorist convicted for 2001 Indian Parliament attack. He also defended L.K Advani in Hawala Scam. Recently he was in the news for taking up the defense of Manu Sharma, prime accused in the Jessica Lall murder case, however, he failed to get Manu Sharma acquitted. He is now going to be defending Lalit Modi – former IPL Chairman and Commissioner.[16][17][18][19]
  • Defence of Rajeev Gandhi’s killers in Madras High Court in year 2011.
  • Defence of Indira Gandhi’s killers
  • Harshad Mehta‘s defence in stock market scam
  • Ketan Parekh‘s defence in stock market scam
  • Underworld don Haji Mastan
  • Defended death sentence of Afzal Guru
  • L K Advani‘s defence in Hawala Scam
  • Manu Sharma‘s defence in Jessica Lall murder case
  • Amit Shah‘s (Gujarat’s former Minister of State for Home) defence in Sohrabuddin fake encounter case.
  • Amit Jogi’s defence (son of Ajit Jogi) in the case of Ramavatar Jaggi murder case.
  • Kanimozhi‘s defence in Spectrum 2G case
  • Y. S. Jaganmohan Reddy‘s special leave petition on stay for CBI probe on money laundering in his companies.
  • Yeddyurappa‘s case on illegal mining scam[20]
  • AG Perarivalan, T Suthendraraja alias Santhan and Sriharan alias Murugan – convicted in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.
  • Ramdev‘s defence on use of force on the followers of Baba Ramdev at Ramlila gounds on June 4, 2011[21]
However Ram Jethmalani is of the opinion that he is someone who thinks independently, who has not mortgaged his soul or intelligence to anybody. He says “I decide according to my conscience who to defend. A lawyer who refuses to defend a person on the grounds that people believe him to be guilty is himself guilty of professional misconduct.”
After he joined Bharatiya Janta Party in 2010, when he was asked why he had defended Afzal Guru against his death sentence when his party was in support of it, he replied that he had meant that such indoctrinated elements (like Afzal) shouldn’t be allowed to die easily, but they should made to rot in jails[22]

[edit] Controversy during his Ministerial term

  • There was a clash between him and then Attorney General of India, Soli Sorabjee. Jethmalani felt Soli Sorabjee was exceeding his brief and flaunting his political clout. There were exchanges of rude letters and a series of accusations on both sides. This finally cost him his ministerial berth.[23]
  • Chief Justice A.S. Anand took exception to not being consulted on the appointment of MRTP commission head. Jethmalani felt the judiciary was poaching on the executive’s turf. The exchange of letters turned acrimonious and culminated in Anand making a formal complaint to Vajpayee.[24]
  • Jethmalani antagonised the legal fraternity with his brash handling of the lawyer’s strike this year. He was even expelled from the Bar Association.
  • As Union Minister of Urban Affairs and Employment in 1998-99, Jethmalani’s decision in the MS Shoes case landed him in controversy. Following a Central Bureau of Investigation inquiry, the Government concluded he was guilty of an administrative error but not criminal conspiracy.
  • The Supreme Court of India made adverse comments on the Government’s doublespeak on the Srikrishna Commission report. This was interpreted as evidence of the judiciary’s exasperation with the law minister.

[edit] Awards and Achievements

  • International Jurist Award[25]
  • World Peace Through Law Award
  • In 1977 he received Human Rights Award instituted by World Peace Through Law for his fight against authoritarianism at Philippines.[26]

[edit] Books

  • Biography: Ram Jethmalani : The Authorized Biography by Nalini Gera
  • In April 2007 at the time Prime Minister Manmohan Singh released one of his books titled Conscience of a Maverick.[27]
  • Big Egos, Small Men, Har Anand Publications.

[edit] References

  1. ^ http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/87820/50%20Power%20People%20of%20India/Ram+Jethmalani:+Argumentative+Indian.html Indian Today: Ram Jethmalani: Argumentative Indian
  2. ^ http://attorneylawyer.me/karan-thapar-ram-jethmalani-latest-part-2/
  3. ^ http://www.hindu.com/2010/05/08/stories/2010050863661600.htm
  4. ^ http://www.legallyindia.com/20100507792/The-Bar-and-Bench/breaking-ram-jethmalani-elected-as-scba-president-to-repair-damage-done
  5. ^ http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi-times/Ram-Jethmalani-In-black-and-white/articleshow/9580860.cms Ram Jethmalani: In black and white: Times New Network, 12 May 2002
  6. ^ http://www.ramjethmalani.com/about_us.php
  7. ^ http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi-times/Ram-Jethmalani-In-black-and-white/articleshow/9580860.cms Ram Jethmalani: In black and white: Times New Network, 12 May 2002
  8. ^ http://www.hindustantimes.com/Devil-s-advocate-Jethmalani/Article1-171537.aspx Devil?s advocate: Jethmalani
  9. ^ http://www.ramjethmalani.com/about_us.php
  10. ^ http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi-times/Ram-Jethmalani-In-black-and-white/articleshow/9580860.cms Ram Jethmalani: In black and white: Times New Network, 12 May 2002
  11. ^ http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi-times/Ram-Jethmalani-In-black-and-white/articleshow/9580860.cms Ram Jethmalani: In black and white: Times New Network, 12 May 2002
  12. ^ http://www.hindustantimes.com/Devil-s-advocate-Jethmalani/Article1-171537.aspx Devil?s advocate: Jethmalani
  13. ^ http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20000807/cover.html The Wrath of Ram: India Today
  14. ^ http://www.hindustantimes.com/Devil-s-advocate-Jethmalani/Article1-171537.aspx Devil?s advocate: Jethmalani
  15. ^ http://buzzytimes.com/bihar-rajya-sabha-polls-results-ram-vilas-paswan-rajiv-pratap-rudy-win-rajya-sabha-seats-from-bihar/
  16. ^ The Indian Express
  17. ^ [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRr5gBa-J8I>
  18. ^ http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/iplarticleshow/5845088.cms
  19. ^ http://www.hinduonnet.com/2003/01/05/stories/2003010502270800.htm
  20. ^ http://ibnlive.in.com/news/hegde-has-been-misled-ram-jethmalani/178740-60-115.html
  21. ^ http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/couldnt-police-wait-till-morning-for-crackdown-supreme-court-on-ramdev-camp-151794
  22. ^ http://www.hindustantimes.com/Devil-s-advocate-Jethmalani/Article1-171537.aspx Devil?s advocate: Jethmalani
  23. ^ http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20000807/cover.html The Wrath of Ram: India Today
  24. ^ http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20000807/cover.html The Wrath of Ram: India Today
  25. ^ http://www.ramjethmalani.com/news.php?first=0
  26. ^ http://www.ramjethmalani.com/about_us.php
  27. ^ http://www.hindu.com/2010/11/08/stories/2010110856051100.htm Ram Jethmalani – 87 not out : The HIndu

[edit] External links

[edit] See also

Political offices
Preceded by
M. Thambi Durai		 Minister of Law and Justice
June 1999-July 2000		 Succeeded by
Arun Jaitley
Political offices
Preceded by Minister of Urban Development
19 March 1998 – 14 June 1999		 Succeeded by

Political offices
Preceded by Minister of Law and Justice
16 May 1996 – 1 June 1996		 Succeeded by
Arun Jaitley
Tagged with:
Categorised as: Uncategorized
Edit

Leave a Reply

Logged in as admin. Log out?
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Posted by at

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)