English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

PMO misusing official machinery for polls – Indira Gandhi’s election was cancelled for it

Published

on

PMO misusing official machinery for polls – Indira Gandhi’s election was cancelled for it

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]There are a couple of days left for Election Commission to decide all the pending complaints of violation of Model Code of Conduct by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and BJP president Amit Shah.

A significant complaint among the lot – most of which are about seeking votes for actions of armed forces – is one relating to a kind of charge that had led to former prime minister Indira Gandhi’s 1971 election being declared null and void and her disqualification from holding elected office for six years.

This is about misuse of official machinery by the Prime Minister for electoral purposes, reported first by a news portal after which Sitaram Yechury, General Secretary of Communist Party of India (Marxist) complained to Sunil Arora, Chief Election Commissioner, Election Commission of India last Wednesday (May 1).

Yechury wrote: “Across the country, there is a growing concern about the manner in which the Election Commission of India is dealing with the complaints regarding the gross violation of the Model Code of Conduct by Shri Narendra Modi.”

Citing a news article in Scroll.in, Yechury said, “Now a web magazine has published an article showing the manner in which government infrastructure and machinery has been brazenly used by the Prime Minister’s Office for securing information from various ministries, as well as, concerned state and district administration to provide inputs for preparing his election speeches.”

Former prime minister Indira Gandhi had been disqualified for violation “of far less import than … those committed by Shri Narendra Modi,” Yechury added, mentioning an article by another web magazine.

Expressing unhappiness with EC approach in dealing with complaints against PM, Yechury said: “…the question is, is Shri Narendra Modi, a BJP candidate from  Varanasi constituency in Uttar Pradesh and a star campaigner  for the BJP, is needed to be treated differently from the enforcement of MCC for the simple reason that he happens to be the incumbent Prime Minister?  We are constrained to raise this question because of want of appropriate response from the Commission in the past, which is adequately empowered by the Constitution to deal with this in a firm and decisive manner.”

The Election Commission’s Model Code of Conduct, which has been in place since March 10, states that “ministers shall not combine their official visit with electioneering work and shall not also make use of official machinery or personnel during the electioneering work.”

The report on news portal Scroll was about an email message showing that the government’s NITI Aayog think tank asked bureaucrats in Union territories and at least one BJP-ruled state to send the Prime Minister’s Office inputs on local area knowledge ahead of the leader’s visits to these places.

If confirmed, this would mean that PM Modi has violated not just the model code of conduct (MCC) – but also the same law under which former prime minister Indira Gandhi was convicted. That conviction, in June of 1975, led the Allahabad high court to debar her from parliament, and precipitated her declaration of a state of Emergency.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1556886085585{border-top-width: 10px !important;border-right-width: 10px !important;border-bottom-width: 10px !important;border-left-width: 10px !important;padding-top: 10px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #cecece !important;border-radius: 10px !important;}”]The email obtained by Scroll.in appears to be from Pinky Kapoor, the NITI Aayog’s economic officer (coordination of states), addressed to bureaucrats, including some chief secretaries, in the Union Territories. On April 8, she allegedly wrote:

“Hon’ble Prime Minister is likely to visit UTs very shortly. The Prime Minister’s Office has desired a write-up on the following by 2.00 Pm tomorrow evening i.e. 09.04.2019 on the following:

Write-up on:

Highlights and important features of UTs – Historical, local heroes, Culture, Religious, Economic (including details like major crops, industry, etc.).

II Profile of UTs with special reference to Tourism, Agriculture and employment/ livelihood

It is requested to kindly provide positively the requisite information/ write-up / materials positively by 2.00 pm tomorrow i.e. 09.04.2019 at [email protected].”

Scroll.in claims to have also seen evidence of a similar request to a collector in BJP-ruled Maharashtra. Shortly before prime minister Modi addressed rallies in the state – in Wardha, Gondia and Latur – the collector of Gondia district, KadambariBalkawade, had sent a note to the NITI Aayog profiling the district. The subject line of the email was: “Write up/information for Gondia District for Prime Minister’s Office”.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Indira Gandhi’s case:

In the general election of 1971, Indira Gandhi’s Congress had won by a historic landslide. Indira won her seat from Rae Bareli, defeating the socialist candidate Raj Narain, who then took her to court for violating the Representation of the People Act.

At issue was section 123(7)(a) of the Act, which deems it a “corrupt practice” for a candidate or their agent – or anyone acting with the candidate’s consent – to obtain any assistance from gazetted officers “in furtherance of the prospects of that candidate’s election”.

It was alleged that Indira Gandhi had appointed a government official, Yashpal Kapoor, as her campaign organiser. It was also alleged that local officials and police had been directed to arrange her campaign meetings.

Kapoor had put in his resignation from the prime minister’s secretariat. The question before the Allahabad high court was whether his resignation had been formalised before his work on her personal campaign began.

On June 12, 1975, the Allahabad high court found the prime minister guilty under section 123(7)(a) of the Act, and “disqualified her for a period of six years” from holding elected office – and thus, from being prime minister.

Indira appealed. Yet, the opposition protests and outcry for her resignation drove her to declare the Emergency two weeks later, on June 25.

In PM Modi’s case, the alleged violation took place between end-March and early April, with some gazetted officers asked to assist the ruling party’s campaign just two days before voting began.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

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

India News

AAP dominates Punjab zila parishad polls, leads in most panchayat samiti zones

AAP has won 201 out of 317 declared zila parishad zones in Punjab so far and is leading in a majority of panchayat samiti seats, with counting still underway.

Published

on

Punjab Zila Parishad Polls

The ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has recorded a strong performance in the Punjab zila parishad elections and is leading in the majority of panchayat samiti zones, as per results declared so far on Thursday. The counting process is still underway and complete results are awaited, officials said.

Polling for the rural local bodies was held on December 14 to elect representatives across 347 zones of 22 zila parishads and 2,838 zones of 153 panchayat samitis in the state.

AAP secures clear edge in zila parishads

According to the available results, outcomes have been declared for 317 zila parishad zones so far. Of these, the AAP has won 201 zones, placing it well ahead of other parties.

The Congress emerged second with victories in 60 zones, followed by the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) with 39 zones. The BJP won four zones, the BSP secured three, while independents claimed 10 zones.

District-wise data shows that the AAP won 22 zones in Hoshiarpur, 19 each in Amritsar and Patiala, 17 each in Tarn Taran and Gurdaspur, and 15 zones in Sangrur. The Congress registered its best performances in Gurdaspur and Ludhiana with eight zones each, followed by Jalandhar with seven zones. The SAD performed strongly in Bathinda with 13 zones, while the BJP managed to win four zones in Pathankot.

AAP leads in panchayat samiti results

In the panchayat samiti elections, trends declared so far indicate that the AAP is leading in a majority of zones. However, officials clarified that counting is ongoing and the final picture will be clear only after all ballot papers are tallied.

Kejriwal, Mann reject opposition allegations

Reacting to the trends, AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal said the party’s performance reflected strong rural support for the Bhagwant Mann government’s work. Addressing the media in Mohali along with Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, Kejriwal dismissed allegations of irregularities raised by opposition parties.

He said the elections were conducted in a fair and free manner and claimed that the results so far showed a clear wave in favour of the AAP in rural Punjab. Kejriwal stated that nearly 70 per cent of the zila parishad and panchayat samiti seats had gone in favour of the party.

Congress, SAD question poll conduct

The Congress and the Shiromani Akali Dal, however, accused the ruling party of misusing official machinery. Punjab Congress chief Amrinder Singh Raja Warring alleged that the AAP had “stolen” the rural mandate and claimed that the results did not reflect genuine public support.

Opposition parties had earlier also accused the AAP government of high-handedness during the polling process, allegations that the ruling party has strongly denied.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com