English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Judiciary and Executive spar in open court over judges’ appointments

Published

on

Judiciary and Executive spar in open court over judges' appointments

A case relating to judges’ vacancies in high courts of states of Manipur, Meghalaya and Tripura on Friday, May 4, witnessed an open clash between the judiciary and the executive in a manifestation of the tension that has built up between the two branches of the State over appointment of judges.

The Supreme Court bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta, hearing a transfer plea of a litigant from Manipur, pulled up the Centre for not clearing the names recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium for appointment as judges, causing undue harassment to litigants. Terming it “an unfortunate situation”, the SC had issued notice to the Centre on April 17.

On Friday the Attorney General KK Venugopal assured the court that appointments to high courts in the northeast would be made soon, but said that will not resolve the problem of vacancies in all high courts. “Collegium has to look at the future. Recommendations need to be made keeping in mind vacancies that will arise six months later,” Venugopal said, pointing out that though some High Courts had 40 per cent vacancy, only a few names were being recommended for appointments. “Collegium doesn’t send us the names and the government is told it is being tardy in processing,” he said.

“Why is the Collegium recommending fewer names when there are so many vacancies in high courts?” asked Venugopal.

The bench told Venugopal that this did not give the government the liberty to sit over names sent long back.

The two-judge bench asked the AG: “Tell us, how many names (recommended by the Collegium) are pending with you.”

The AG replied: “I will have to find out”.

The bench shot back: “This is the problem with you (the government). When it comes to attacking (the) judiciary, you have the data. But when it comes to the government then you say you don’t have the figures.”

The petitioner wanted the Supreme Court’s permission to challenge an order of a single judge of the Manipur High Court before the Gauhati High Court. He claimed he could not file an appeal in the Manipur High Court since it had only two judges, one of whom had given the order. The Supreme Court had sought the Attorney General’s assistance in the matter.

Venugopal said that on April 19, the Collegium recommended a name for appointment as Chief Justice of the Manipur High Court. He said he had spoken to the authorities and they had promised that the appointment would be notified “shortly”.

“Your shortly… can be several months. What are you doing?” the bench asked the AG.

Venugopal replied the government was serious about the appointment and that the same would be done in 10 days, said a report in The Hindustan Times (HT).

The bench said the situation in the North-East was ‘critical’. “In Meghalaya, there is only one judge against four. Even Tripura has just two against four. Recommendation was also made for Meghalaya. What happened to that?… People of North-East are suffering… What are they supposed to do? Should they come here to get their cases transferred to other High Courts and spend money to hire lawyers there?” the bench said.

The Attorney General remarked, in a lighter vein, that the National Judicial Appointments Commission — the NJAC Act was invalidated by the Supreme Court in 2015 — may have been more suitable for dealing with the appointment of judges.

Justice Lokur said the bench was only concerned with appointments to High Courts in the North-East and asked the Attorney General to file an affidavit explaining the position in the next 10 days.

Justice MB Lokur is one of the senior-most judges of the Supreme Court and a member of the collegium that nominates judges to the apex court. This was the first time a member of the collegium has spoken out over the stand-off between the collegium and the government on the appointment of judges, said the HT report.

Last week, while the Centre cleared the appointment of Indu Malhotra as a judge of the Supreme Court, it asked the Collegium to reconsider the recommendation that Justice KM Joseph from the Uttarakhand high court be elevated to the top court. The Collegium had recommended names of both judges together, in the first week of January.

India News

Canada fact checks own media, rejects report claiming PM Modi knew of Nijjar murder plot

The clarification comes after a Canadian newspaper cited an unnamed national security official, claiming the alleged plot to murder Nijjar was orchestrated by Union Home Minister Amit Shah.

Published

on

Canada fact checks own media, rejects report claiming PM Modi knew of Nijjar murder plot

The Canadian government clarified that there is no evidence to connect Prime Minister Narendra Modi or his top officials to any criminal activity in Canada, including the killing of Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar.

The clarification comes after a Canadian newspaper cited an unnamed national security official, claiming the alleged plot to murder Nijjar was orchestrated by Union Home Minister Amit Shah. The media report further alleged that PM Modi, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, and National Security Adviser Ajit Doval were informed about the plan.

Nonetheless, the same report acknowledged that the Canadian government had no direct evidence to support these claims against PM Modi. Issuing a statement, the Canadian government distanced itself from these allegations, mentioning that there was no substantiating evidence.

The statement underlined that on October 14th, because of a significant and ongoing threat to public safety, the RCMP and officials took the extraordinary step of making public accusations of serious criminal activity in Canada perpetrated by agents of the government of India.

It added that the government of Canada has not stated, nor is it aware of evidence, linking Prime Minister Modi, Minister Jaishankar, or NSA Doval to the serious criminal activity within Canada. It remarked that any suggestion to the contrary is both speculative and inaccurate.

Earlier, India furiously rejected the Canadian daily’s report as ludicrous, terming it detrimental to diplomatic ties that have been frosty since Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau first accused India of involvement in Nijjar’s killing last year.

Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said that they do not normally comment on media reports, but such ludicrous statements made to a newspaper purportedly by a Canadian government source should be dismissed with the contempt they deserve. He added that smear campaigns like this only further damage our already strained ties.

Diplomatic ties between India and Canada weakened when the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) accused Indian government agents of involvement in criminal activities on Canadian soil, including murder, extortion, and intimidation. As the diplomatic rift intensified, both the countries expelled top envoys in response.

Hardeep Singh Nijjar was gunned down outside a gurdwara in Surrey, British Columbia, in June 2023. Earlier in 2024, Canadian authorities arrested and charged four Indian nationals for the murder.

Continue Reading

India News

Parliament winter session: Government lists 15 bills, including Waqf bill

The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.

Published

on

The government has listed five new ones and one to amend the contentious Waqf law out of 15 bills for the winter session of Parliament. The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.

The government has introduced five new bills, including the Coastal Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to promote coasting trade and increase the participation of Indian-flagged vessels owned and operated by Indian citizens for both national security and commercial purposes.

Another significant legislation that will be introduced by the government is the Indian Ports Bill, 2024. This bill is designed to implement measures for the conservation of ports, enhance security, and manage pollution, ensuring compliance with India’s international obligations and statutory requirements.

Additionally, the government plans to introduce the Merchant Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to meet India’s obligations under maritime treaties and support the development of Indian shipping while ensuring the efficient operation of the Indian mercantile marine in a way that serves national interests.

Pending legislation includes the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, which is awaiting consideration and passage after the joint committee of both Houses submits its report to the Lok Sabha. The committee is expected to report by the end of the first week of the winter session.

Currently, there are eight bills, including the Waqf (Amendment) Bill and the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill, pending in the Lok Sabha, while two additional bills are in the Rajya Sabha.

Furthermore, the government has also listed the Punjab Courts (Amendment) Bill for introduction, consideration, and passage, which seeks to increase the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of Delhi district courts from Rs 3 lakh to Rs 20 lakh.

The Merchant Shipping Bill, along with the Coastal Shipping Bill and the Indian Ports Bill, is slated for introduction and eventual passage.

Continue Reading

India News

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes

The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.

Published

on

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes

The International Criminal Court (ICC) today issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare. The leaders allegedly restricted essential supplies such as food, water, and medical aid to civilians in Gaza, resulting in severe humanitarian crises and deaths, including among children.

Last year in October, Israel had launched attacks on Gaza in retaliation for the surprise attack by Hamas. The Israel-Hamas war has led to the death of thousands of civilians, while lakhs have been displaced. The major infrastructures in Gaza, including hospitals and schools, were also destroyed as Israel vowed to wipe out Hamas.

The International Criminal Court stated that it found reasonable grounds to believe the accused intentionally targeted civilians and limited medical supplies, forcing unsafe medical procedures, which caused immense suffering. This ruling was based on the findings from at least October 8, 2023 until at least May 20, 2024.

The court remarked that it has assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that PM Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza.

Furthermore, it also noted that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and medical supplies created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, leading to death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration.

Additionally, the International Criminal Court dismissed two challenges by Israel against its jurisdiction in the situation in the State of Palestine.

Notably, Israel had contested the ICC’s jurisdiction, claiming it could not be exercised without Israel’s consent. Nonetheless, the Chamber ruled that the Court has jurisdiction based on Palestine’s territorial scope, including Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. It further noted that Israel’s objections were premature, as jurisdictional challenges under the Rome Statute can only be made after an arrest warrant is issued.

Reportedly, Israel had also requested a fresh notification regarding the investigation, started in 2021. Denying the request, the court stated that Israel had earlier declined to request a deferral, making additional notifications unnecessary.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com