English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Centre’s Rohingya flip-flop: Affidavit “incomplete”, sent “inadvertently” to lawyers

Published

on

rohingya

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Union home minister Rajnath Singh clarifies that affidavit on the Rohingya deportation issue will be filed with the Supreme Court on Sept 18

In a major embarrassment for the Union government which has been at the receiving end of global criticism for backing demands of deporting Rohingya Muslims back to Myanmar, it appears that an affidavit circulated in the media on Thursday which endorsed this view was only an “incomplete” document which was “inadvertently” sent by the Union law ministry to some lawyers.

On Friday, Union home minister Rajnath Singh was forced to clarify that the Centre will file its affidavit with the Supreme Court on the issue of Rohingya Muslim refugees in India on September 18. Singh’s clarification, however, came amid continued calls for deportation of Rohingya refugees from other members of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s council of ministers.

Rajnath Singh

Sources in the Union ministries of home affairs and law have told APN that the Centre is unlikely to change its purported stand that deporting Rohingya Muslims to Myanmar is “in national interest”. However, the language of the final affidavit is likely to be “minimally altered” keeping in mind the global reaction that India’s effort to banish refugees of the persecuted ethnic minority back to a country where their brethren are being mercilessly butchered by the Junta is likely to attract.

The “incomplete” affidavit that was, on Thursday, sent “inadvertently” to some lawyers who have petitioned the Supreme Court on the Rohingya issue had said that it had been “found by the Central Government that many of the Rohingyas figure in the suspected sinister designs of ISIS/other extremist groups who want to achieve their ulterior motives in India including that of flaring up communal and sectarian violence in sensitive areas of the country”.

The affidavit further said: “a fragile north-eastern corridor (of India) may become further destablised in case of stridency of Rohingya militancy, which the Central Government has found to be growing, is permitted to continue. There is also a serious potential and possibility of eruption of violence against Myanmar government/its diplomatic missions and also against Buddhists who are Indian citizens and who stay on Indian soil by the radicalised Rohingyas”.

Terming the Rohingyas as a “direct threat to national security”, the said affidavit had claimed that providing facilities and amenities to illegal immigrants out of existing national resources “would have a direct adverse impact on Indian citizens” and that “fundamental rights of Indian citizens would be seriously violated” if the refugees were allowed to stay in India.

The affidavit dated September 11 was signed by Ravi Sunder, Deputy Secretary in the Foreigners’ Division of the Ministry of Home Affairs.

However, as news spread of the government filing the said affidavit with the Supreme Court, the Central Agency Section (CAS) of the Union law ministry clarified late on Thursday night that the document was “incomplete”.

The clarification sent to lawyers who were representing two Rohingya petitioners in the Supreme Court has been signed by deputy government advocate BV Balram Das and says: “The CAS has served you a copy of the affidavit… by mistake. In fact, the affidavit was/is in the process of being finalised. Before the affidavit is finalised reflecting the stand of the Central government after consideration of all concerned departments, an unfinalised copy is served upon you inadvertently.”

While it was earlier claimed that the affidavit had also been filed with the Supreme Court to be presented before the Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud which is presiding over proceedings on a bunch of public interest litigations and intervener petitions over the Rohingya issue, the CAS has also clarified that the said document “is also not filed with the Registry of the Hon’ble Supreme Court”.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear, on Monday (Sept 18) a plea filed by two Rohingya immigrants, Mohammad Salimullah and Mohammad Shaqir, challenging the Indian government’s decision to deport illegal Rohingya Muslim immigrants back to Myanmar. The plea, filed by advocates Prashant Bhushan and Sayed Marzook Bafakhi on behalf of the two, claims that Salimullah and Shaqir had taken refuge in India after escaping from Myanmar due to widespread discrimination, violence and bloodshed against the community there.

Opposing the plea, former RSS ideologue KN Govindacharaya has also moved the apex court seeking to make him a party in the case filed by the two Rohingya Muslims. Govindacharya has opposed their plea saying they were “a burden” on the country’s resources and posed a serious threat to national security.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Entertainment

Bharti Singh, Haarsh Limbachiyaa welcome second child after she’s rushed to hospital mid-shoot

Comedian Bharti Singh and her husband Haarsh Limbachiyaa welcomed their second child after she was rushed to hospital during a television shoot.

Published

on

Bharti

Popular comedian and television personality Bharti Singh and her husband, writer-host Haarsh Limbachiyaa, have welcomed their second child. The baby was born on Friday after Bharti was taken to the hospital following a sudden medical emergency earlier in the day, according to media reports.

Emergency during television shoot led to hospitalisation

As per available information, Bharti Singh was scheduled to shoot for the television show Laughter Chefs on Friday morning when her water broke unexpectedly. She was immediately rushed to a nearby hospital, where she later delivered her second child. No further details about the baby have been shared publicly so far.

The news of the delivery comes weeks after the couple announced Bharti’s second pregnancy on social media.

Pregnancy announcement and maternity shoot

Bharti Singh and Haarsh Limbachiyaa had revealed the pregnancy during a family vacation in Switzerland. A few weeks ago, Bharti also shared pictures from her maternity photoshoot, where she was seen wearing a blue silk gown with white floral patterns.

Sharing the photos online, Bharti wrote, “2nd Baby Limbachiya coming soon,” along with a baby emoji.

Family background

Bharti Singh and Haarsh Limbachiyaa became parents for the first time in 2022, when they welcomed their son, Lakshya.

The couple is among the most well-known faces on Indian television. Bharti is widely recognised for her comic timing and distinctive on-screen persona, while Haarsh has made his mark as a writer and host. Apart from their television work, the two also co-host a podcast together.

Continue Reading

India News

Renaming MGNREGA removes core spirit of rural employment law, says Shashi Tharoor

Published

on

Shashi Tharoor

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has strongly criticised the renaming of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), saying the move strips the rural employment programme of its core essence. His remarks came after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, also referred to as the VB-G RAM G Bill.

Speaking to media, Tharoor said the decision to remove Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme “takes out the heart” of the rural employment programme that has been in place for years. He noted that the identity and philosophy associated with Mahatma Gandhi were central to the original law.

Tharoor also objected to the way the new name was framed, arguing that it unnecessarily combined multiple languages. He pointed out that the Constitution envisages the use of one language in legislation, while the Bill’s title mixes English and Hindi terms such as “Guarantee”, “Rozgar” and “Ajeevika”, along with the conjunction “and”.

‘Disrespect to both names’

The Congress leader said that inserting the word “Ram” while dropping Mahatma Gandhi’s name amounted to disrespecting both. Referring to Mahatma Gandhi’s ideas, Tharoor said that for Gandhi, the concepts of Gram Swaraj and Ram Rajya were inseparable, and removing his name from a rural employment law went against that vision.

He added that the name of Lord Ram could be used in many contexts, but questioned the rationale behind excluding Mahatma Gandhi from a programme closely linked to his philosophy of village self-rule.

Protests over passage of the Bill

The VB-G RAM G Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on December 18 and cleared by the Rajya Sabha in the early hours of December 19 amid protests from Opposition members. Several MPs opposed the manner in which the legislation was pushed through, with scenes of sloganeering and tearing of papers in the House.

Outside Parliament, members of the Trinamool Congress staged a sit-in protest near Samvidhan Sadan against the passage of the Bill. Congress also announced nationwide protests earlier this week, accusing the government of weakening rights-based welfare schemes.

Despite opposition criticism, the government has maintained that the new law will strengthen rural employment and livelihood security. The Bill raises the guaranteed employment from 100 days to 125 days per rural household and outlines a 60:40 cost-sharing formula between the Centre and states, with a higher central share for northeastern, Himalayan states and certain Union Territories.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi attacks G RAM G bill, says move against villages and states

Rahul Gandhi has criticised the G RAM G bill cleared by Parliament, alleging it dilutes the rights-based structure of MGNREGA and centralises control over rural employment.

Published

on

Rahul Gandhi

Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi has launched a sharp attack on the Modi government after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Employment and Livelihood Mission (Rural) Bill, commonly referred to as the ‘G RAM G’ bill. He described the proposed law as “anti-state” and “anti-village”, arguing that it weakens the core spirit of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

The new legislation, which is positioned as an updated version of MGNREGA, was passed amid protests by opposition parties and is expected to replace the existing scheme once it receives presidential assent.

‘Bulldozed without scrutiny’, says Rahul Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi criticised the manner in which the bill was cleared, saying it was pushed through Parliament without adequate debate or examination. He pointed out that the opposition’s demand to refer the bill to a standing committee was rejected.

According to him, any law that fundamentally alters the rural employment framework and affects crores of workers should undergo detailed scrutiny, expert consultation and public hearings before approval.

Claim of dilution of rights-based guarantee

Targeting the central government, the Congress leader said the proposed law dismantles the rights-based and demand-driven nature of MGNREGA and replaces it with a rationed system controlled from Delhi. He argued that this shift undermines the autonomy of states and villages.

Rahul Gandhi alleged that the intent behind the move is to centralise power and weaken labour, particularly impacting rural communities such as Dalits, OBCs and Adivasis.

Defence of MGNREGA’s impact

Highlighting the role of MGNREGA, Gandhi said the scheme provided rural workers with bargaining power, reduced distress migration and improved wages and working conditions, while also contributing to rural infrastructure development.

He also recalled the role of MGNREGA during the Covid period, stating that it prevented crores of people from slipping into hunger and debt. According to him, any rationing of a jobs programme first affects women, landless workers and the poorest communities.

Opposition to name change and provisions

The Congress has also objected to the renaming of the scheme, accusing the government of attempting to erase the legacy associated with Mahatma Gandhi. Opposition MPs staged a dharna within the Parliament complex, questioning provisions of the bill that they claim dilute the “soul and spirit” of the original law enacted in 2005.

Under MGNREGA, the government guaranteed 100 days of work in rural areas along with an unemployment allowance if work was not provided. The ‘G RAM G’ bill proposes to raise the guaranteed workdays to 125, while retaining other provisions. However, critics have flagged concerns over employment being linked to pre-approved plans.

The bill was cleared after a midnight voice vote in the Rajya Sabha, following its passage in the Lok Sabha amid protests and walkouts. It will become law once approved by the President.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com