English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

SC to decide Rohingya deportation case on “points of law”, not “emotional arguments”

Published

on

Rohingya

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Govt argues – if Rohingya refugees stay put in India, labour rates would become so low that Indians would suffer”

The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, said it would hear the bunch of petitions filed before it on the issue of deportation of Rohingya Muslims only on the “points of law” and asked the parties – Centre and other petitioners – to desist from advancing “emotional arguments”, noting that the case that concerns “humanitarian cause and humanity” requires to be heard with “mutual respect”.

The Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices DY Chandrachud and AM Khanwilkar also rejected the Centre’s contention that the issue of deporting Rohingya “illegal migrant” to Myanmar was outside the remit of the judiciary. “I, for one, believe, from my past experience of 40 years, that when a petition like this comes to us under Article 32 of the Constitution, the court should be very slow in abdicating its jurisdiction,” Chief Justice Dipak Misra said.

The Bench instead asked the Union government to answer if India can live up to its international commitments and protect Rohingya women, children, the sick and the old who are “really suffering”?

“The concern for humanitarian cause and humanity should come with mutual respect,” the Bench said, while asking the Centre and two Rohingya petitioners to compile all documents and international conventions for its assistance.

The Myanmarese government has given its conditional consent to taking back some of the Rohingya refugees, but that issue did not come up in the hearing on Tuesday, possibly because of a lack of clarity on the assurance.

Three senior advocates have sought the Supreme Court’s direction to the Centre against any move to deport the Rohingya refugees on the ground that the ethnic minority will face imminent threat of persecution in their homeland.

Senior counsel Fali S Nariman referred to the affidavit filed by Government of India in which the Centre has dubbed the Rohingya refugees as a “threat to national security”.  Nariman countered the government’s plan to deport Rohingyas saying: “We have been accepting refugees for ages. This problem is not just with the Union of India, but with all the states as well. The major issue in the affidavit is that the government has already ordered all the states to identify all Rohingya immigrants who crossed the boundary of India illegally, to identify them and deport them expeditiously.”

A legal luminary of international repute, Nariman, who introduced himself to the Bench as a refugee from British Burma (now Myanmar), submitted that the fundamental right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution protected all “persons”, including refugees who fled persecution in their native countries.

He said the obligation to grant asylum was universal. “The Government of India has constantly made efforts to substantiate, enhance the rights of refugees. TheAugust 8 communication (the affidavit filed by the Centre in the SC on the Rohingya issue) is totally contradictory to Article 14. It sticks out like a sore thumb in our nation’s policy towards protecting refugees.”

Nariman informed the court that in December 2011 the then UPA government had sent a document to all the states, saying that the Union government was considering amending all the laws related to refugees in which procedures of getting Indian citizenship will be simplified.

The bench said: “This is the first time we are dealing with a case of this nature. The children and women are really suffering in a harsh environment. India should take certain steps to (ensure the safety of) the large body of humanity.”

Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, however, countered prayers for allowing Rohingyas to stay put in India saying: “If the government allows them, the labour rate will become so cheap that our citizens will start suffering.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Om Birla likely to move motion to revoke suspension of 8 opposition MPs today

The Lok Sabha is likely to revoke the suspension of eight opposition MPs today, with a motion expected to be moved by the government following consensus on maintaining discipline.

Published

on

Om Birla

The suspension of eight opposition Members of Parliament in the Lok Sabha is expected to be revoked on Tuesday, with Speaker Om Birla likely to initiate the process, according to sources.

The MPs, including seven from the Congress and one from the CPI(M), were suspended on February 3 for unruly conduct during the first phase of the Budget session after a resolution was adopted by the House.

Motion to be moved in Lok Sabha

Congress leader K Suresh said that Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju is expected to move a motion around noon seeking revocation of the suspensions.

Although the suspension was initially imposed for the entire session, scheduled to conclude on April 2, opposition parties have consistently demanded reconsideration since the second phase of the session began on March 9.

Agreement on maintaining decorum

At a recent meeting convened by the Speaker, both ruling and opposition sides reportedly agreed on maintaining discipline in the House.

Key understandings include:

  • No member will enter the well of the House to protest
  • Papers will not be torn or thrown toward the Chair
  • MPs will not climb onto officials’ tables

The Lok Sabha Secretariat has also reminded members to keep areas within the Parliament premises obstruction-free to ensure smooth movement.

Speaker raises concern over conduct

Earlier, Om Birla had expressed concern over the use of banners, placards, and inappropriate language by some MPs. In a letter to party leaders, he stressed the need to uphold the dignity and traditions of parliamentary democracy.

He had also indicated that actions like suspension are taken in cases of serious misconduct, such as climbing onto tables during proceedings.

Suspended MPs

The suspended MPs include Gurjeet Singh Aujla, Hibi Eden, C Kiran Kumar Reddy, Amarinder Singh Raja Warring, Manickam Tagore, Prashant Padole, Dean Kuriakose (Congress), and S Venkatesan (CPI-M).

Continue Reading

India News

Maharashtra passes freedom of religion bill with jail term up to 10 years

Maharashtra passes anti-conversion bill with strict jail terms and fines, aiming to curb unlawful religious conversions.

Published

on

Maharashtra faces freedom of bill

The Maharashtra Assembly has passed the Freedom of Religion Bill 2026, introducing stringent penalties to curb religious conversions carried out through coercion, fraud, inducement or marriage.

The bill was cleared by voice vote late Monday, with the government asserting that it aims to protect individuals from unlawful conversions while safeguarding constitutional rights.

Under the provisions, individuals found guilty of conversion through marriage or deceit can face up to seven years in prison along with a fine of Rs 1 lakh. In cases involving minors, women, persons of unsound mind, or those belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the punishment increases to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5 lakh.

Mass conversions will also attract a jail term of up to seven years and a fine of Rs 5 lakh. Repeat offenders could face imprisonment of up to 10 years.

Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said the law is not aimed at any particular religion but seeks to prevent conversions through illegal means. He emphasised that the right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution does not include conversion through coercion or fraud.

He also noted that several states, including Odisha, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka and Jharkhand, have enacted similar laws.

The bill allows complaints to be filed by the affected individual or close relatives, while police can also initiate action in certain situations. The government said this provision is necessary as victims may not always be in a position to approach authorities.

Minister of State for Home Pankaj Bhoyar said the legislation ensures that conversions take place voluntarily and transparently. He addressed concerns over the requirement of giving a 60-day prior notice to the district magistrate, stating that the provision is meant to verify free consent.

The law also mandates informing authorities within 21 days after conversion, failing which it may be treated as invalid. The government described this as a measure for administrative record-keeping and to avoid disputes.

During the debate, members from the opposition raised concerns over possible misuse and vigilantism. Congress MLA Aslam Shaikh argued that the bill could affect constitutional rights, including privacy and equality. Some legislators also demanded that the bill be sent to a joint select committee for further scrutiny.

However, the opposition Shiv Sena (UBT) extended support. MLA Bhaskar Jadhav said the bill does not target any religion and is aimed at preventing unethical practices.

The government maintained that the law does not restrict an individual’s right to change religion voluntarily but is intended to curb unlawful practices and maintain law and order.

Continue Reading

India News

Mamata Banerjee writes to poll chief over officers’ reshuffle, calls move arbitrary

Mamata Banerjee has written to the Chief Election Commissioner, calling the reshuffle of senior Bengal officials arbitrary and raising concerns over constitutional norms.

Published

on

mamta banerjee

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has written to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, raising strong objections to the recent reshuffle of senior bureaucrats in the state ahead of the assembly elections.

In her letter, Banerjee described the move by the Election Commission of India as “arbitrary” and expressed “deep concern” over what she termed a unilateral decision. She urged the Commission to refrain from adopting such measures in the future.

The Chief Minister pointed out that while the Election Commission does have the authority to make administrative changes during elections, past practice has involved consultation with the state government. According to her, the Commission would typically seek a panel of officers from the state and make its selections from that list, maintaining what she called constitutional propriety and administrative convention.

Banerjee warned that bypassing this process could undermine the institutional credibility and long-standing legacy of the poll body, and may also affect the foundational principles of the constitutional framework.

The controversy stems from the Commission’s decision, taken soon after announcing election dates, to remove several top officials from election-related duties. These include the state’s Chief Secretary, Director General of Police, Kolkata Police Commissioner, and Home Secretary.

The Commission has maintained that the reshuffle was aimed at ensuring a peaceful and violence-free electoral process.

Reacting sharply, Banerjee alleged bias in the decision-making, claiming that the removal of the Chief Secretary indicated an anti-women stance. She also accused the Commission of selectively targeting officers, suggesting that the move favoured individuals aligned with the Bharatiya Janata Party.

Meanwhile, the Trinamool Congress escalated its protest, staging a day-long walkout from the Rajya Sabha earlier in the day.

Responding to the criticism, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the Election Commission is a constitutional authority, adding that questioning its decisions in Parliament is inappropriate and unproductive.

The Commission has appointed a new Chief Secretary in place of the outgoing official as part of the reshuffle.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com