*Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA)- a Bourgieous enactment to save its
crass compardor public leaders*I...........
 mean the clause clause in PCA invoked on need for the governor's sanction
for prosecution.

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:31 AM, damodar prasad <[email protected]>wrote:

> *But Rasheed, Is not the . *
> *I think by the way you were arguing about the necessity of CPs in
> neo-liberal context in previous mails, you should've argued that CP leaders
> should be above the bourgiuoes law of PCA....... clean and uncontaminated*
> ..
>
> Governors, of course are pawns in the hands of the central governemnt and
> the CBI is no great independent instituion. But is it not desirable that
> Communist Party leader and the CP institution as such should be above such
> posts?
>
> I am afraid that the way CPM has managed Lavalin, since the formation of
> this Govt., has in turn helped the reactionary forces.
>
> The stubborn stance of CPM has enabled the bourgeous parties reap the
> dividends of its mis-managed strategy.
>
> ( I referrred to "formation of this Govt" bocz when Lavalin issue came up
> last time, Com. secy has boldly said that he is ready to face any inquiry.
> The boldness was missing later, :-) :-) :-) only to be found in the words
> of English Desabhimani, I mean the Hindu editorial.)
>
> CPM has given an impression that something is severely rotten by the way it
> handled the issue.
>
> The media syndicate must have done its duty but the stance of CPM as
> regards non-compliance to judicial review only complicated the matter.
>
> As an enthusiast of CPM brand politics and observing politics above
> factional self-ineterests, *you* should be more worrying about the
> moral- voice of CPM at national level.
>
> The red card often held out by the CPM on corrupt practice and tainted
> ministers will no longer be available.
>
> The argument of political fight on legal issues is not only avaliable to
> CPM. Now this will echoed by anyone.. i mean all the "compradors"..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Abdul Rasheed <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>> *That does not mean that Governer is impartial. Sure, advocate General
>> might have party interests. As one who have the right to criticize the AG,
>> we can criticize the Governer too, since both of them are party nominees.
>> *
>> **
>> *But here the Governer acted against the advise of ministry and the
>> advise of AG. He may have the discreetional power to take such a dicision.
>> By doing this, here he became the part of a political game.*
>> **
>> **
>> *regards *
>> *Rasheed *
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:02 AM, damodar prasad 
>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Since Advocate General is elected by the people, to think he will take a
>>> partial decision is against the commonsense.
>>> But never had I thought a post-modern situation would prevail amidst the
>>> feudal factional struggle for Leninist Truth.
>>> What more eveidence needed for a the arrival of political relativism, in
>>> other words, Most-Modern!!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Abdul Rasheed <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> *The Governer is the nominee of the ruling party in centre. To think
>>>> that he will take a completely impartial dicisions will be a stupidity.
>>>> *
>>>> **
>>>> *regards *
>>>> *Rasheed *
>>>>   **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 1:40 PM, sunil kumar <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Governor can sanction Minister's prosecution, says Supreme Court *
>>>>>
>>>>> By Our Legal Correspondent
>>>>>
>>>>>  NEW DELHI, NOV. 5. The Supreme Court today held that the Governor of
>>>>> a State could independently accord sanction for prosecution of a Minister 
>>>>> in
>>>>> prevention of corruption cases without the "aid and advice" of the Council
>>>>> of Ministers.
>>>>>
>>>>> A five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Justice N. Santosh Hegde,
>>>>> observed that "if on facts and circumstances of a case, the Governor 
>>>>> cannot
>>>>> act in his own discretion there would be a complete breakdown of the rule 
>>>>> of
>>>>> law inasmuch as it would then be open for Governments to refuse sanction 
>>>>> in
>>>>> spite of overwhelming material showing that a *prima facie* case is
>>>>> made out."
>>>>>
>>>>> The Bench that included Justice S.N. Variava, Justice B.P. Singh,
>>>>> Justice H.K. Sema and Justice S.B. Sinha said: "If, in cases where [a]
>>>>> *prima facie* case is clearly made out, sanction to prosecute high
>>>>> functionaries is refused or withheld, democracy itself will be at stake. 
>>>>> It
>>>>> would then lead to a situation where people in power may break the law 
>>>>> with
>>>>> impunity safe in the knowledge that they will not be prosecuted as the
>>>>> requisite sanction will not be granted."
>>>>>
>>>>> The Bench gave this ruling while upholding sanction for prosecution
>>>>> accorded by the then Madhya Pradesh Governor against two former Ministers,
>>>>> Rajender Kumar Singh and Hisahu Ram Yadav. A case under the Prevention of
>>>>> Corruption Act was registered against them in March 1998 on the basis of a
>>>>> report from the Lok Ayukta.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sanction sought from the Council of Ministers for prosecuting the two
>>>>> was rejected. The Council of Ministers held that there was not an iota of
>>>>> material available against them for proceeding with the case. The Governor
>>>>> then considered the matter and opined that a *prima facie* case was
>>>>> made out for granting sanction and gave it under Section 197 of the 
>>>>> Criminal
>>>>> Procedure Code.
>>>>>
>>>>> The two Ministers challenged the Governor's decision in the High Court
>>>>> and both a single Judge and then a Division Bench quashed the Governor's
>>>>> order. The special leave petition by the Madhya Pradesh Special Police
>>>>> Establishment was directed against this judgment.
>>>>>
>>>>>  **
>>>>>
>>>>> © Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>  >>>>
>>>>
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to