*Dear anil *
**
*Perhaps, my knowlege is little. can you tell me, who elected KPCC
president? was it by kerala congress workers? Who elected youth congress
president ? was it by youth congress workers? Who elected the National
congress president ? Is the congress working committee an elected body? *
**
*could you please explain the democracy of congress *
**
*regards*
*Rasheed  *




On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:53 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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