INDIA: Katju's King has been killed — Asian Human Rights Commission

INDIA: Katju's King has been killed — Asian Human Rights Commission:

The concept of sovereign immunity is incompatible with the notion of democracy. It is an anachronistic relic drawn from the British Common Law principles at odds with the constitutional architecture of a state that claims to respects the supremacy of its people. Integral to democracy is the conviction that a government that draws its legitimacy and mandate from its people. Contrary to this elementary understanding about democracy are the opinions of some jurists like Justice Markandey Katju of India, which contradict the spirit and democratic foundation of the Indian Constitution.

Katju's opinion concerning the dismissal of Pakistan's Prime Minister by Pakistan's Supreme Court should and must remain his private opinion. That Katju is the Chairperson of the Press Council of India is, however, concerning, given the danger that his opinion could be mistakenly interpreted as that of the Press Council of India, an entity that must protect fiercely the rights of the free media and of the citizen questioning his government.

Katju represents an influential community of jurists and policymakers in the region who shower unwarranted accolades upon the British system of administration. The effective British administration that Katju claims is "based on long historical experience" speaks of exploitation, oppression, the arbitrary use of power and colonisation. The administrative setup that the British imported into and enforced in their colonies (India included) is the result of a calculated effort of a coloniser to effectively bleed the colonies of life and resources for the illegal and immoral benefit of a handful. The 1861 Criminal Procedure Code and the 1860 Indian Penal Code are two classic examples of how arbitrary authority could be conferred upon and used by the Empire's representatives to suffocate opposition and act with total impunity and disregard for the law. Sovereign immunity is invoked to protect perpetrators from prosecution. The same lightly amended legislations were subsequently adopted, plainly revealing legislative laziness, lack of political knowledge and will and a dismal absence of basic democratic ideals. This is the advent of neo-colonialism, all the more morally reprehensible for a regime's oppression and exploitation of its own people.

The lack of consultative processes in the drafting of primary criminal laws and the failure to make the public aware at least partially explain the lack of popular resistance when draconian legislations like the 1958 Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, the 1990 Madhya Pradesh State Security Act and the 2005 Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act were enacted. These oppressive laws contravene constitutional guarantees afforded individuals, relegating the duty of reconciling state security and fundamental freedoms and rights to local authorities and actors, who often act on whim. The Supreme Court of India that owes its origin to the Regulating Act of 1773 has thus far failed to effectively obviate in the passage of these legislations although these laws clearly negate the constitutional architecture of fundamental rights and freedoms.

"The King can do no wrong" is a principle rooted in British legal history is tested and proven wrong time and again, most importantly during the trial of Charles I led by Solicitor General John Cooke in 1649, some 342 years since Edward I parented a pro-monarchy proposition lacking legal basis. The excuse that the principle is required to administer a state, even in a democracy, is a ruse to asphyxiate calls for accountability and challenges to arbitrarily exercised authority. Sovereign immunity has been vicariously used in place of law by dictators and tyrants. It is today an indefensible doctrine offering carte blanche and an easy way to cover up crime. Many states that did not initially have sovereign immunity and other executive privileges written into their constitutions have since amended basic laws to claim immunity for the political elite from prosecution for misdemeanours and crimes committed against the people. This pathetic attempt to render valid or reasonable sovereign impunity has met with resistance from international criminal law, the large body of jurisprudence since evolved and universal norms underlying dramatic paradigm shifts in communities all over the world. The trial of Charles Taylor is but one of an expanding number of instances of this change.

The Constitution of India recognises that the government can do wrong and must be held accountable. The concept of sovereign immunity is incongruous with ideals of democracy and rule of law because it permits and shields sovereign impunity, a 'privilege' no individual or regime should possess. To undermine democracy and rule of law, norms Indian is founded upon, is to threaten the very identity and integrity of the Indian state. Constitutional provisions are absolute laws, the letter and spirit of which all other laws should be constructed upon and in harmony with. It describes and prescribes the character of a state as desired by its people. Entertaining and enforcing sovereign immunity renders the judiciary's role of defending the constitution a mockery and all safeguards illusory – this is a fact a jurist like Katju should be keenly aware of and should struggle against becoming reality.

'via Blog this'

BCI Resolution: Lawyers must renew Bar License every 5 years

The Bar Council of India has on June 1, 2012 passed a resolution making it compulsory for all lawyers to renew sanads (license to practice) every five years, reports TOI.

Bar & Bench spoke to BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra. He confirmed that the BCI has made it mandatory for the lawyers to renew their licenses every five years. All the lawyers are required to renew their licenses within 6 months from the date of passing of the resolution i.e. June 1, 2012. Mishra also said that a minimum fee of Rs. 600 will be charged every 5 years out of which Rs. 200 will go to the BCI and the remaining will go to the State Bar Councils.

Mishra, talking about the reason for this decision, said, “A large number of lawyers enroll with the bar councils and then later get involved in other private services, businesses etc. Therefore, this renewal process will help us keep a check on such lawyers and maintain a record of all lawyers”.

Mishra also told that the State Bar Councils are also facing lot of difficulty in implementing the various welfare schemes for practicing lawyers

Mishra further said, “It has been reported to BCI that 5-10 percent of lawyers practicing in various courts hold fake law degrees. This will help us eliminate such fake lawyers”.

As per this resolution, advocates will be required to furnish their details on a performa. Advocates are required to fill up Application form for Renewal prescribed by the BCI in two copies. One copy of the same should be furnished to the State Bar Council and one copy should be sent to the BCI.

Recently, the BCI has also proposed to construct a new BCI web-portal to provide online database of law students, teachers and institutions imparting legal education in the country. According to the BCI, if law students and teachers are registered with the BCI through the proposed web-portal, fake degree holders will not be able to enroll themselves on the Rolls of State Bar Councils.

BCI Resolution: Lawyers must renew Bar License every 5 years:




'via Blog this'

The Hindu : News / National : How mining mafia established a “republic of fear” in Bellary

How mining mafia established a “republic of fear” in Bellary

Sudipto Mondal

An April 2006 image (top) of the Dalmia mines shows a verdant expanse. In the Google Earth image (below) obtained in March 2010, the area is seen ravaged by massive mining.

Witnesses who have testified against Janardhan Reddy and his men fear the mining baron's release from jail

A torrent of calls flooded the CBI unit in Bangalore when T. Pattabhi Ramarao, the CBI judge in distant Hyderabad, granted bail to the jailed mining baron, G. Janardhan Reddy, on May 11.

Many of the frantic calls were from the 300-plus witnesses painstakingly persuaded by the CBI-Bangalore to testify in the case registered against Mr. Reddy's flagship firm, the Associated Mining Company (AMC).

Download PDF — Dalmia mines: April 2006 and March 2010

Mr. Reddy's judicial custody at the Parapana Agrahara Central Prison in Bangalore ends on Monday. On the directions of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, he is likely to be re-arrested as soon as he steps out.

Although path-breaking in its detailed evidence-based indictment of Mr. Reddy, the final Lokayukta report on illegal mining had its limitations. By contrast, the CBI's unique position as a statutory investigative body has enabled it to find the evidence that, it believes, clinches what the Lokayukta could but indicate.

“During the peak of Reddy's reign over Bellary, some witnesses had been kidnapped, others beaten and almost all intimidated by Reddy and his henchmen,” a CBI officer in Bangalore told The Hindu on condition of anonymity. Their testimonies given under oath before the judge of the Special CBI Court in Bangalore would make it difficult for them to retract their statements. But the CBI's fear was some of the witnesses may prefer the wrath of the court to the threat of violence. “Our entire case was on the verge of collapse until the Andhra Pradesh High Court stepped in and suspended Pattabhi Ramarao on charges of accepting a bribe of Rs. 5 crore to grant bail to Reddy,” says a CBI Police Inspector.

Lawyers of Reddy remained tight lipped when asked about whether they would launch a fresh attempt to secure the release of the former BJP minister. C.V Nagesh, senior counsel in the case told The Hindu that he is yet to be briefed by the counsel-on-record representing Mr. Reddy.

Speaking to The Hindu, senior CBI officers offered examples of how the mining mafia established a “republic of fear” in Bellary. Many of these details have not been made public before because the court where witnesses deposed and were cross-examined was out-of-bounds for reporters following the violent clash between lawyers and journalists outside the sessions courts here earlier this year — the last time Mr Reddy was produced in an open court.

For example, one key government employee states under oath: “On April 26, 2011 the Range Forest Officer sent me with my colleagues to the Lokayukta Office and asked me to meet U.V. Singh [Indian Forest Officer and chief investigator who compiled the Lokayukta's illegal mining report]. He asked us how we could issue so many mining permits [to AMC]. We explained [in writing] that there was threat and force from G.J.R. [Reddy] due to which we signed the permits.”

The same witness states that he was summoned on May 9 by Mr. Reddy. [Pooh-poohing the Lokayukta report, Ali Khan, Reddy's pointsman, allegedly stated: “The government belongs to GJR.” The witness deposed that he was forced, under threat of suspension, into signing a letter stating that U.V. Singh had coerced them into submitting statements against Mr. Reddy. Presently sharing space at the Parapana Agrahara Central Prison in Bangalore with Mr. Janardhan Reddy, the 1984-born Mehfouz Ali Khan is an engineer who became one of Mr. Reddy's most trusted enforcers.

AMC — a dead mine

In his testimony, an Assistant Engineer of the Mines and Geology Department said Mr. Ali Khan coerced him to issue false stock certificates to the AMC. He yielded, knowing full well that the AMC owned a dead mine in Hospet, Bellary, which had not yielded highquality iron ore for several years. Mr. Reddy used such false certificates to legitimise ore that he had looted from other mines in the region, the CBI alleges.

Kidnapped, tortured

The testimony of the promoter of the mining firm Tiffins Barytes shows how Mr. Reddy's men used muscle power to take over the operations of other mines.

Mr. Ali Khan and his men forced their way into the leasehold area of Tiffins Barrytes and extracted one lakh tonnes of high-quality ore between January and June 2010, according to a sworn statement by a company employee.

When senior company executive Vinod Jadhav protested, he was kidnapped and tortured at an undisclosed location. His complaints to the police and other authorities yielded no action.

Muscling in

The statement by the owners of the Siddapura Iron Ore Mines further establishes the extent of collusion between bureaucrats and Mr. Reddy, the CBI says. Repeated requests by Shaik Saab, the owner of Siddapura mines, for permission to extract ore from his leasehold area were turned down by forest officials. Meanwhile, Mr. Ali Khan approached him with offers to manage the mine. He promised to get the necessary clearances and in return Mr. Saab gave Mr. Ali Khan a 75 per cent stake in the earnings.

With its implicit threat of violence, it was an offer that Shaik Saab could not refuse. Ironically, Shaik Saab did not even get the 25 per cent that he was entitled to. “I was not even allowed to enter my mine after Ali Khan took over,” he said.

Forced takeover of AMC

The manner in which Reddy and his wife G. Aruna Lakshmi came to be the owners of the Associated Mining Company is a story in itself. In his testimony, K.M. Vishwanath, the former owner of AMC, told the Court he was coerced into handing over all his mining permits to Mr. Reddy. These permits were used by the latter to legitimise ore that he used to allegedly steal from the leasehold area of the Dalmia mines in Hospet. Despite Mr. Vishwanath's protests against this extortion, Mr. Reddy and his wife Aruna Lakshmi forced themselves in as partners in AMC, the CBI alleges. Mr. Vishwanath and his other partners were subsequently edged out, and Reddy and his wife came to be the sole partners by August 2009.

Two scientific surveys commissioned by the CBI — done by the Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) and Singareni Collieries Company Ltd. (SCCL) in April 2012 -- corroborate the Lokayukta report's finding that AMC was a front for illegal mining, and the ore was actually extracted illegally from elsewhere.

Google it

While records with the Forest department, and the department of Mines and Geology state that Dalmia mines are in a state of disuse, satellite enabled images tell a different tale. (See satellite pictures) But the CBI says all the scientific evidence detailed in its chargesheet would have counted for little without the evidence from witnesses in court. A CBI investigator cites the evidence provided by an owner of a firm hired by the AMC to extract and transport ore. He showed investigators the exact spot from where he had extracted 33 lakh tonnes of ore on Mr. Ali Khan's orders.

The investigators plotted the expanse on government maps. “The site was right in the middle of the Dalmia mines, nowhere near the leasehold area of the AMC,” the investigator told The Hindu.

The Hindu : News / National : How mining mafia established a “republic of fear” in Bellary:

'via Blog this'

Delhi HC's ruling on Muslim girls' marriage sparks debate - India News - IBNLive

Delhi HC's ruling on Muslim girls' marriage sparks debate - India News - IBNLive:

'via Blog this'

The Delhi High Court's recent ruling that a Muslim girl can marry at the age of 15 has sparked off a debate in the community. Young Muslims feel that the law of the land should prevail when it comes to the age of marriage. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has, however, welcomed the judgment.

"At 17 you complete school, at 18 you get voting rights. In case of marriage, irrespective of the religion, the law of the land should prevail. A minor is a minor at 15," says 26-year-old Islamic Studies student Sadia Khan.

The recent Delhi High Court ruling that allowed a 16-year-old to remain married, despite opposition from her parents, has sparked off a furious debate in the community. Islamic Scholars have quoted the Hadees to point out the importance of the consent of parents saying the court should have nullified the marriage on those grounds.

"Hadees says Muslim girls need consent of their parents. That's a precondition. If that's not there then the married is invalid," says Maulana Wahiduddin.

Calling the verdict regressive, several Muslims feel the Muslim law board should appeal against it. But though the AIMPLB has welcomed the court's verdict, it is playing down the need for the Uniform Civil Code.

"We welcome the verdict," says Kamal Faruki of AIMPLB. "We want our personal laws to be upheld," adds Sadia Dehelvi of AIMPLB.

As the community debates civil rights, caught between the law and its interpretations are the young Muslims who are doing the tightrope walking trying to balance the demands of the changing times with that of their religion Islam.

LOK SABHA CLEARS THE COPYRIGHT (AMENDMENT) BILL,2012 ,

LOK SABHA CLEARS THE COPYRIGHT (AMENDMENT) BILL,2012 ,:

'via Blog this'

The Lok Sabha on Tuesday during the budget session unanimously voted in support and accorded to the Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2012, which has been pending in Parliament for the last two years, with overwhelming support from members across the political continuum. This Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010 will provide royalty to lyricists, remove operational difficulties and address newer issues related to the digital world and internet. The Bill had been already passed by the Rajya Sabha on 17th of May, 2012.

The Bill makes it mandatory for broadcasters to pay royalty to the owners of the copyright each time their creation is broadcast. It also bans persons from bringing out cover versions of any literary, dramatic or musical work for five years from the first recording of the original creation.

The Bill was originally not listed for voting in revised ‘list of business’ but at the last minute listing HRD Minister Kapil Sibal moving the bill in the lower house said it will do justice to those professionals who had been creating songs for the Hindi films. Even the Leader of Opposition Ms. Sushma Swaraj herself commended the Speaker for accelerating the passage of this very important legislation. She supported the bill and said it was long overdue. "It is a step in the right direction in protecting the interest of the lyricists, who create wonderful songs," she said.

Saha who is a CPI(M) MP from West Bengal informed the House that the Minister had very ‘cleverly’ dropped the parallel imports clause to protect the interests of publishers and demanded that parallel imports be allowed.

Lyricist and nominated member Javed Akhtar had complained earlier while participating in the discussion on the bill in the Upper House that companies have rights over songs and the writers and singers do not get much from the commercial success. He also added that Music companies dictate terms to even noted musicians like A R Rahman and others.

The bill also seeks to bring Indian laws enacted in 1957 in conformity with international norms and World Intellectual Property Organisation guidelines. The amendments will now have to be officially notified into law by the Government of India after which the Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2012 will have the force of law.
 

Source - http://nationalbarindia.org/news/69/lok-sabha-clears-the-copyright-amendment-bill2012/?goback=%2Egde_134181_member_120453139