well said, jyothibasu ruled pb for 25 years, this kind of miracles was not there even with burjuva political parties like congress and bjp Karthik
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Anil M <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually people should not be concerned about CPM and CPI. They are not > democratic parties and should not be allowed to play any role in a > democratic setup. Their politics/ party structure has been always anti > –democratic. Can anyone imagine a more crooked setup than this PB and party > committees? From local Vayanashala to Lok Sabha , they promote this culture. > This Good VS fighting Bad Pinarai image is just a media creation. Both > factions have nothing do with democratic politics. They are champions of > crooked/scheming politics > > > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 3:00 PM, damodar prasad > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I think all non-CPM poeple should shfit *focus from Governor to >> Governance*. What a terrific mandate people gave to LDF and VS >> Acuthanadan. Now after 3 years.. *entha sthithi*? anything other than >> factional warfare? what was this govt. doing? what was the party doing?-- >> *a big blockade; hindrance.* >> >> FM and IM could perhaps create some impression of doing something. >> Even after the durbbing they rcvd in the elections, I think CPM has >> learned nothing. >> CPI, the second major partner.. They shoulf thank CPM leadership for >> keeping them out of public attention. >> The parrty and its minsiters failed miserably. Poorest of poor >> perfomance.. *pakshe*, *----- no limit to arrogance.. day by day, Sri Sri >> No:2 is learning to perfect it as art of arrogance... * >> ** >> ** >> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 1:54 PM, ranju radha <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Governor has acted against the politically motivated act of LDF govt to >>> protect a corrupt politician. LDF's stand is against the interst of the >>> people of kerala. Governor by "playing his politics" has stood frimly by the >>> intersts of people in Kerala. >>> i support "his politics". >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:28 PM, sunil kumar >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Its simple meaning is nothing, but Communist leaders are above all >>>> 'bourgeois laws'. Because they are fighting against Bourgeoisie! What a >>>> great revolutionary idea! Long live revolution! Long live Lavlin model. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 09/06/2009, damodar prasad <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> *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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> " The so called caste-hindus are bitterly opposed to the depressed >>>>>>> class using a public tank not because they really believe that the water >>>>>>> will be thereby spoiled or will evaporate but because they are afraid of >>>>>>> losing their superiority of caste and of equality being established >>>>>>> between >>>>>>> the former and the latter. We are resorting to this satyagraha not >>>>>>> becasue >>>>>>> we believe that the water of this particular tank has any exceptional >>>>>>> qualities, but to establish our natural rights as citizens and human >>>>>>> beings." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Dr B.R. Ambedkar, Mahad Satyagraha Conference, December 25th , 1927 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Battula Karthik Navayan, Advocate, H.No. 21-7-761, Opp.High Court Post Office, Gansi Bazar, Hyderabad, PIN-500002, AP. Cell:09346677007, email:[email protected] <email%[email protected]> http://karthiknavayan.blogspot.com/ http://www.orkut.co.in/Main#Profile.aspx?uid=10379805095932756525 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
