[ An extract from an earlier comment posted on the last Feb. 26: One may find the following comment of mine as a part of (rather short) note, posted on June 9 last year - exactly two weeks after Modi had been sworn in, on another list, somewhat relevant: ***"In the days immediately ahead, there will be four main sites of contest: (i) the parliament, which will legislate new laws and deliberate executive actions; (ii) the law courts, where various human/democratic rights and environment related issues, and such other matters, will have to be brought up; (iv) the society in general, including the media and and the streets; and (iv) the forthcoming state assembly election, the outcomes of which will further help legitimise or delegitimise the Modi regime."***
So, determined resistance needs be offered on all the four fronts. There will be a number of players, with divergent roles, characters, ideologies and goals. Nevertheless. *At this point of time*, the forthcoming Bihar assembly election is thus quite critical. And, of course, so is the ongoing budget session itself. (***Also, Teesta's and Priya Pillai's cases before the courts*** [emphasis added now].) End (see: <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/india-unity/conversations/topics/55579>.) It goes without saying that the Delhi High Court judgement has come as a small and yet significant victory for the democratic forces in India. Never mind that the Union Government may yet approach the Supreme Court to reverse the order. So, the struggle continues!] I/III. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/high-court-quashes-look-out-circular-against-greenpeace-activist-priya-pillai/ HC rules in favour of Greenpeace Pillai: State can’t muzzle dissent Priya Pillai, greenpeace activist (Source: Twitter) Written by Aneesha Mathur | New Delhi | Updated: March 13, 2015 2:06 am Sending a terse message to the government against “muzzling” voices of dissent, the Delhi High Court directed authorities Thursday to expunge the “offload” remark from the passport of Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai, remove her name from a database and allow her to travel abroad. Stating that the right of free speech and expression “necessarily includes the right to criticise and dissent”, Justice Rajiv Shakdher, in a 39-page order, said: “Criticism, by an individual, may not be palatable; even so, it cannot be muzzled. Many civil right activists believe that they have the right, as citizens, to bring to the notice of the state the incongruity in the developmental policies of the state. The state may not accept the views of the civil right activists, but that by itself, cannot be a good enough reason to do away with dissent.” RELATED Greenpeace Activist Would Do Anti-National Activities: Govt Tells HC HC Issues Notice To Centre, IB On Greenpeace Activist's Plea Against Her Offloading From Plane Offloaded Greenpeace Activist Priya Pillai Was Last-Minute Addition To Immigration List Pillai’s right to travel abroad, the judge said, “cannot be impeded only because it is not in sync with policy perspective of the executive”. Welcoming the order, senior advocate Indira Jaising, who represented Pillai in the case, said the decision had “elevated” the right to dissent to a constitutional right. “In today’s context, where there is a majoritarian government, the citizen must have a right to dissent,” she said. Pillai was stopped at Delhi airport on January 11 while heading to London to speak on the alleged violation of forest right of tribals in the Mahan coal block area of Madhya Pradesh. She was later told that her name was in a database of persons who were not allowed to leave the country. During the hearing in court, the Centre said she was stopped because her speech before a UK parliamentarian group would have created a “negative image” of India abroad and “whittle down foreign direct investments”. The government claimed that she was involved in “anti-national activities”. Justice Shakdher said dissent with regard to development models are “always there” but “travelling abroad and espousing views” without any criminal intent “cannot, in my opinion, put Ms Pillai in the category of an anti-national element”. “Contrarian views held by a section of people on these aspects cannot be used to describe such section or class of people as anti-national,” he said. “If the view advanced on behalf of the respondents is accepted, it would result in conferring uncanalised and arbitrary power in the executive, which could, based on its subjective view, portray any activity as anti-national. Such a situation, in a truly democratic country, which is governed by rule of law, is best avoided.” Justice Shakdher said “anti-national” activities under the Passports Act will “have to be confined to activities of persons who fall in the category of ‘counter-intelligence suspects and/or terrorists’ as it would be defined under reasonable restrictions to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(2) of the Constitution”. II/III. http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/hc-quashes-look-out-circular-against-greenpeace-activist/article6985900.ece HC quashes look out circular against Greenpeace activist PTI NEW DELHI, MAR 12: The Delhi High Court today set aside the look out circular issued against Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai who was offloaded from a flight to London two months back, saying her fundamental right to travel cannot be curtailed. Justice Rajiv Shakdher, while upholding her right to travel abroad, also said Pillai has every right to hold a different opinion on development policies and this cannot be the sole ground to restrict her movement. The court set aside the look out circular (LOC) issued by Intelligence Bureau (IB) and asked the government to remove her name from the database containing names of individuals barred from leaving the country. It also directed Bureau of Immigration to expunge the endorsements made on the activist’s passport while offloading her from a flight on January 11 while she was going to London to make a presentation before British MPs on alleged human rights violation at Mahan in Madhya Pradesh. The court, however, declined to order inquiry against officials involved in her offloading. The judge, meanwhile, has not granted any compensation to Pillai saying she can ask for the same before an appropriate bench. The high court had on February 19, reserved its judgement on Pillai’s plea claiming that her right to freedom of speech and expression was being curtailed by an unlawful order of the executive. Justifying the government’s decision, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain had said that her visit to London was a serious threat to the nation and the speech she was going to make there is against the nation and had “potential for mischief” against India’s economic interests. He had said that the travel tickets financed in her name were from an organisation which is on the watch list of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). The ASG had claimed that diplomatic relations were “fluctuating” and existing good relations were no guarantee against “something undesirable” later. The high court had earlier expressed concern over Pillai not being allowed to visit London, saying government has to draw a line between “nationalism and jingoism”. The court had said the government decision was not appropriate as there are many people, who indulged in various anti-national activities, but were travelling abroad. 37-year-old Pillai, who was stopped from flying to London on the basis of the circular had moved the high court on January 27. Pillai, in her plea, had sought permission to travel to London to make a presentation before British MPs on alleged human rights violation at Mahan, which she claimed was the reason for her to be offloaded from the flight at Delhi’s IGI Airport. The activist had also demanded a compensation of ₹1 crore and had contended that disallowing her from travelling to London was “completely unlawful and mala fide and without any authority of law” and that the LOC should be quashed. Senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for Pillai, had said that an enquiry should be ordered into the “illegal, wrongful and mala fide conduct” of the officials and sought that the wrongdoers be punished if found guilty. (This article was published on March 12, 2015) III. http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-priya-pillai-case-will-see-if-we-have-to-appeal-says-kiren-rijiju-2068303 Priya Pillai case: Will see if we have to appeal, says Kiren Rijiju Thursday, 12 March 2015 - 8:48pm IST | Place: New Delhi | Agency: ANI Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiren Rijiju on Thursday stated that his ministry has fully honoured the Delhi High Court judgement with regards to activist Priya Pillai's name being blacklisted, however adding that they would see if the case needs to be further appealed or not. File Photo Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiren Rijiju on Thursday stated that his ministry has fully honoured the Delhi High Court judgement with regards to activist Priya Pillai's name being blacklisted, however adding that they would see if the case needs to be further appealed or not. "This is not a final order, and we have not taken a call. We will see if we need to appeal or close the case here. Only one thing I'd like to say is, we give utmost importance to the fundamental rights and the freedom of individuals. At the same time, we should see that India's interest is also protected and India's case shouldn't be fought outside nation. Whatever issues we have, we should deal within the country," said Rijiju. "If some corrective steps are to be taken, we will definitely honour the court," he added. Earlier in the day, the Delhi High Court quashed the 'look-out' notice against Greenpeace activist Pillai and directed the authorities to expunge the 'offload' stamp on her passport and take her name off the Intelligence Bureau (IB) blacklist. Related read: Delhi HC quashes lookout circular issued against Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai This judgment comes after Pillai was barred from boarding a flight to London at the Indira Gandhi International Airport in New Delhi. She was stopped at immigration and her passport was stamped with 'offloaded'. Pillai was scheduled to address British Parliamentarians on January 14 on the rights of forest communities in India. Pillai had challenged the government's action in the court saying she had the right to express her opinion on issues, both within and outside India. The activist hailed the judgment saying it was a victory for democracy. -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
