Brief about the notice of the state governments:

The State governments issued the impugned directive amidst preparations for the annual Kanwar Yatra, a pilgrimage undertaken by Shiva devotees during the monsoon season known as Kanwarias or “Bhole.” In this pilgrimage, the devotees travel to key Hindu pilgrimage sites such as Haridwar, Gaumukh, and Gangotri in Uttarakhand and Ajgaibinath in Sultanganj, Bhagalpur, Bihar, to fetch holy water from the Ganges River. The yatra, traversing through cities including Muzaffarnagar and Ghaziabad, culminates in Delhi.

Initially described as ‘voluntary,’ the state governments’ directive has been widely endorsed by state officials and is now being rigorously enforced across all districts of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Additionally, the Uttarakhand Government has issued an oral advisory aligning with this directive as of July 19/20, 2024.

In Uttar Pradesh, on July 18, 2024, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarnagar, issued a directive requiring all eateries along the Kanwar route to display the owners’ names. This direction was extended statewide on July 19, 2024.

On July 20, in the face of the growing criticism, UP Chief Minister, Yogi Adityanath, had issues a statement sternly ordering for the enforcement of the said directive to ensure that names and identities of proprietors are displayed to avoid confusion among pilgrims during the Kanwar Yatra. an Uttar Pradesh government spokesperson had also confirmed that the chief minister had issued this directive to ensure that participants of the procession did not get disturbed during their pilgrimage. Additionally, the spokesperson had also provided that CM Yogi will be initiating action against those selling and promoting Halal-certification products. This comes after a directive was issued by the state in November 2023 wherein questions were raised against Halal certification made mandatory by certain organizations for the sale of different products, including vegetarian FMCG (fast growing consumer goods) products and cosmetics products, which don’t require any Halal certification.

On July 21, the civic body in Madhya Pradesh’s Ujjain also directed all shops in its jurisdiction to display their owners’ names and mobile numbers to ensure “customer safety”.

Brief about the petition filed by Apoorvanand Jha and Aakar Patel:

As per a report of LiveLaw, the petition filed by Jha and Patel alleges that the said directive goes against Article 14, 15 and 17 of the Constitution, which ensure that no one is discriminated against and everyone is equal before law, and results in disproportional intervention by the state. 

          “The directives issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh and State of Uttarakhand cause disproportionate intervention and affect rights under Articles 14, 15 and 17.”

It is essential to note that post the issuance of the impugned directives, reports had emerged stating that Muslim employees were being fired in the state, especially till the Kanwar Yatra is over. The petition further emphasises upon the negative role that police officers play with such arbitrary powers in their hands, by stating that aggressive police officers have frequently enforced the contested commands with force, and non-compliance has apparently resulted in detentions. Referring to the same, the petition highlights the violation of Article 19(1)(g), which grants an individual the right to practice and profession, as well as Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. 

        “Further the directives also effect rights of those Muslim men who have been fired pursuant to the issuance of the above directives, which is in violation of Article 19(1)(g). Lastly the directives are also in violation of peoples’ right to privacy and to dignity, and consequently violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.”

The petitioners have also maintained that the public notice and its subsequent enforcement are unconstitutional and that the “advisory,” which is then also implemented violently, is an excess of state power.

       “Impugned directives encourage discrimination on grounds of caste and religion and cannot be seen to serve any ‘legitimate purpose.’ These directives promotes discrimination solely based on religious and caste identity, as they do not require the display of food items being served or a statement that no non-vegetarian or non-satvik food is being served, but only the display of religious or caste identity explicit in one’s name. This directly breaches Article 15 of the Constitution of India”, the petitions contended, as per LiveLaw.

Furthermore, the petition also highlighted the impact that such practices will have on the marginalised community as displaying the names of the staff will have the potential to increase the myriad incidents of caste-based discrimination. In view of the same, the petition states that the said directive will bring back the practice of “untouchability,” which is expressly forbidden “in any form” by Article 17 of the Indian Constitution. The petition states that the directive will violate Article 17 forbids the imposition of any kind of handicap resulting from “untouchability” as it would promoting the custom of refusing to accept services from members of particular castes and religions. 

Lastly, the said petition points to the fundamental right to privacy that has been guaranteed to the citizens of India, which will be infringed by the said notice as by forcing the owners and workers of shops and eateries to put out their personal information, including contact details and addresses, might expose them to danger, making them targets.

        “These directives promote discrimination solely based on religious and caste identity, as they do not require the display of food items being served or a statement that no non-vegetarian or non-satvik food is being served, but only the display of religious or caste identity explicit in one’s name. This directly breaches Article 15 of the Constitution of India.”

Brief about the petition filed by MP Mahua Moitra:

As provided by the said petition, the impugned directive and the actions undertaken thereby will exacerbate communal discord and threaten the livelihoods of affected individuals. will worsen social unrest and jeopardize the livelihoods of those impacted. According to the petition, food entrepreneurs give their stores names that appeal to out-of-town visitors, such as pilgrims from Kanwar, but the mandate compels them to alter these names to reflect the entrepreneur’s religious identity.

        “Assuming that the legitimate State aims in question are ensuring respect for dietary choices and maintaining communal harmony, there is no rational nexus between the said aims and the compelled disclosure of the names of the proprietors and staff of eating establishments along the pilgrimage route. There are multiple incidents where non-Muslim food entrepreneurs have failed to comply with the dietary restrictions required by Kanwar Yatris.”

It has been contended by the petitioners that by issuing such directives, the UP government is openly and deliberately targeting Muslim-owned companies, which will led to intimidation and broad economic boycotts. The petition also provides that the said instance of state-sanctioned exclusion or otherisation of the Muslim community will further the divides that have been existing in our society. Since June 2023, anti-social individuals have spread fabricated stories and edited videos online, accusing Muslims of contaminating the food provided to pilgrims. Even during the COVID pandemic, Muslim vendors were demonised on allegations of spitting in food, with the objective of spreading COVID amongst the population. These allegations had resulted in mass targeting and boycott of the Muslim community by the populace. 

         “Since June 2023, the Respondent No. 1 (State of UP) continued to empower and embolden the anti-social elements by actively targeting Muslim owned businesses based on fabricated and malicious information circulated by the anti-social elements. The Respondent No. 1, through acts of commission and omission, created conditions for the complete economic boycott of Muslim minorities on the pretext of their ‘impure’ dietary choices”.

The petition also highlights the issue of mob lynching over the bogey of “beef and cow slaughter”, creating a climate of hatred and intimidation by certain elements. As per the said petition, it is these elements, the far-right extremist groups, that demanded the closure of meat shops along the yatra route. The petition claims that anti-social elements, empowered by the State’s inaction, have propagated inflammatory messages targeting Muslim-owned establishments, leading to a nationwide menace of mob vigilantism and the targeting of Muslim minorities.

The petition further points to threats that Muslim eatery owners received regarding threats of closure in July 2023 and July 2024. There were also reported incidents of WhatsApp messages circulating after identifying Muslim-owned eateries in Muzaffarnagar to prevent Kanwar Yatris from purchasing food from them.

In similar vein as the other petition, the petition filed by Moitra also highlighted the violation of Article 14, 15, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(g) and 21 as the ground for challenging the impugned directive of the UP and the Uttarakhand government. 

In regards to violation of Article 15, the petition contends that the directives constitute pretextual discrimination on grounds of religion as the directives compel the disclosure of personal details, creating an economic boycott of Muslim shop owners and workers.

         “In forcing the disclosure of the names of proprietors and even those of their staff, on the stated ground of respecting pilgrims’ dietary choices, makes it clear that “dietary choices” is a pretext, or a proxy, for the compelled disclosure of personal – and, in this case, religious – identity, through the disclosure of names. The upshot of this is to create a socially-enforced economic boycott on Muslim shop-owners and workers, and the loss of their livelihoods”.

The petition argues that the directives are manifestly arbitrary, disproportionate, and lack any determining principle, violating the right to equality. The petition argues that the directives violate the right to privacy, including informational privacy. The compelled disclosure of personal information lacks legislative authorization and exposes individuals to social persecution, as per the petition. In furtherance to this, the petition submits that the facts of the present case show a legitimate fear of economic reprisal, loss of employment, threat of physical coercion, and public hostility. This is evidenced by intimidatory threats of closure to Muslim-owned eateries, circulation of identifying WhatsApp messages and doctored clips, widespread layoffs of Muslim staff, and coercive closures of dhabas with religion-neutral names, the petition states.

Additionally, the petition asserts that the directions impose unreasonable restrictions on the business activities of eatery owners and food sellers, infringing upon their freedom to carry on any occupation, trade, or business.

         “It is the State’s affirmative obligation to maintain public order. The State cannot outsource or abdicate its obligations by requiring citizens to give up their rights to free speech in order that public order is maintained. This inverts the relationship between the State and the citizen, and amounts to giving in to the “heckler’s veto””.

Related:

“Vigilantism is not permissible, needs to be checked”: SC, following up Tehseen Poonawalla case

Opposition leaders, activists demand suspension of SP, Kolhapur and judicial inquiry into Vishal-gad Kolhapur violence

June 2024: 10 violent attacks against cattle transporters and 14 cases of communal violence in various states across India

The post Two petitions filed in SC challenging UP and Uttarakhand governments’ directive to display name of shop owner and staff for being unconstitutional appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This time, a total of 797 women candidates had contested the Lok Sabha elections and over 30 have won from their seats. While the number of women who won from their respective constituencies is considerably lower than the 2019 Lok Sabha polls when 78 women candidates had won, many of these women, especially those who fought from within the ranks of the political opposition, have had to put up a great fight in the face of adversity to emerge victorious in this election. The listicle below provides a little insight into the fight put up by some of these women:

1. Mahua Moitra: Mahua Moitra, the Trinamool Congress (TMC) candidate from West Bengal’s Krishnanagar seat, made a triumphant political comeback after winning from constituency seat by 56,705 votes. Mahua’s sharply political speeches in Parliament –her maiden speech on June 26, 2010 on “signs of fascism” brought her accolades on social media have earned her a nationwide following. Her landslide victory against her Bharatiya Janata Party rival, Amrita Roy, speaks volumes of her resilience as well as the trust of the people that she enjoys. One should not forget how important this win for Moitra was as she had been expelled from her Lok Sabha seat in 2023 over a controversial cash-for-query case. Throughout this entire whole period, Moitra had denied the allegations that had been levied against her. Rather, she had accused the ruling BJP party of attempting to silence her voice as she had raised many questions on the nexus between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and industrialist Gautam Adani. Now, with a resounding mandate of the people behind her, Moitra will once again be able to sit in the Parliament, this time –in all probability –facing an un-fanged National Democratic Alliance (NDA). As Moitra herself said while accepting her victory- this win is not just a personal triumph for her, but a fitting response to those who sought to suppress her voice.

You shut the door. We broke the wall down. pic.twitter.com/wZuMmjV4hO

— Mahua Moitra (@MahuaMoitra) June 5, 2024

Thank you Krishnanagar, thank you @mamataofficial thank you INDIA pic.twitter.com/PIUUulcRq2

— Mahua Moitra (@MahuaMoitra) June 4, 2024

2. Varsha Eknath Gaikwad: Dalit feminist leader Varsha Eknath Gaikwad, who was fielded by the INC, won from Maharashtra’s Mumbai North Central constituency after putting a tough fight against BJP’s Ujwal Nikam. Varsha, whom people lovingly refer to as Varsha Tai, won by a margin of 16,514 votes. Till the end of the counting, the fight between Varsha and Nikam had kept everyone on their toes, with Nikam leading in few rounds, but it was Varsha with whom the mandate of the people rested. It is essential to note that Varsha, who was backed by Shiv Sena (UBT), is the sole Congress candidate from the entire Mumbai Metropolitan Region (Bhushan Patil lost to erstwhile union minister Piyush Goyal from Mumbai North) . Many political observers called Varsha’s win to be “against all odds”, as an AIMIM candidate had also been fielded from her seat, though it also failed to make a significant dent in her votes. Varsha, who is the daughter of Congress veteran Eknath Gaikwad, has a lot of hopes piled on her back as she comes with a background of serving as a social workers and had even served as Maharashtra’s education minister from 2009-2010. Her principled stand with the people of Dharavi in neighbouring Mumbai South Central constituency has also won her lasting support.

आम्ही रक्षक संविधानाचे
आम्ही लढवय्ये न्यायाचे
आम्हाला आशीर्वाद जनतेचा
आम्हावर विश्वास जनमानसांचा
विजय गुलाल आपलाच..!

हा ऐक्याचा, आघाडीचा, सत्याचा, लोकशाहीचा, जनमानसाचा विजय..!

माझ्यावर, काँग्रेस पक्षावर आणि इंडिया-महाविकास आघाडीवर दाखवलेल्या विश्वासाबद्दल मी मुंबई उत्तर… pic.twitter.com/vFBvTt07aY

— Prof. Varsha Eknath Gaikwad (@VarshaEGaikwad) June 4, 2024

Congratulations to @VarshaEGaikwad Ji in the Lok Sabha elections! Here’s to your ongoing achievements and a prosperous journey ahead!#VarshataiGaikwad #ElectionResults pic.twitter.com/2Xf5oZbEm2

— Rais Shaikh (@rais_shk) June 4, 2024

3. Kanimozhi Karunanidhi: Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK)’s Kanimozhi Karunanidhi, who was contesting from Tamil Nadu’s Thoothukudi constituency, was able to retain her seat by constituency by bagging 5,40,729 votes. Her victory against opponents S.D.R Vijayaseelan of NDA and All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam’s (AIADMK) Sivasami Velumani, had fortified the DMK’s stronghold under CM Stalin’s leadership. Notably, Kanimozhi is the daughter of former chief minister, the late M Karunanidhi. Kanimozhi had campaigned rigorously during the now concluded elections, appealing to the people to prevent a “dictatorial” government from coming to power in Tamil Nadu, a state that had repeatedly rejected the saffron party from making any inroads.

#TamilNadu
DMK’s Kanimozhi Karunanidhi wins Thoothukudi Lok Sabha constituency by 3,92,738 votes.#ElectionsWithIndependentMedia pic.twitter.com/GxPJC36KIW

— TheNewsMinute (@thenewsminute) June 4, 2024

4. Iqra Munawar Hasan: The state of Uttar Pradesh was the game changer in the Lok Sabha elections, and Iqra Hasan is the new star that as emerged in the Western Uttar Pradesh. Iqra Hasan, a London-educated postgraduate in International law from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studied, who was fielded by the Samajwadi Party from Kairana constituency, won with a margin of 69,116 votes against BJP’s Pradeep Kumar and Bahujan Samaj Party’s Sripal. Iqra is the daughter of two-time MP and two-time MLA late Munawwar Hasan. One must also note that Iqra, who is 28 years old, is a feminist, who fought this election to uphold her family’s “legacy of service”. 

Coming from a family who have been deeply invested and involved in politics of the state, Iqra had sought to change the politics back to issues of the people, especially those affecting women, and bridge the gap that has been formed between people due to the communal politics of BJP. In a report of the Indian Express, voters had described Iqra as yuva, shikshit, bebaak aur bedaag (young, educated, fearless and spotless). In an interview with the Hindu, Iqra had told that the issues she would majorly want to for work in UP revolve around farmers and women’s education.

धन्यवाद कैराना pic.twitter.com/QidAZvj6o2

— Iqra Munawwar Hasan (@Iqra_Munawwar_) June 4, 2024

5. Geniben Nagaji Thakor: A notable win for the Congress, and the INDIA alliance, was the win that INC candidate Geniben Nagaji Thakor clinched the Banaskantha Lok Sabha seat, defeating BJP’s Rekha Chaudhary by a margin of 30,000 votes. Even though only one seat was bagged by the Congress in Gujarat, Thakor’s victory was crucial as it shattered the BJP’s ambition to sweep all 26 seats in Gujarat for the third straight term. One should also note that Banaskantha has traditionally been a BJP stronghold. In a state where the BJP candidate in Surat had won uncontested, for an INC candidate to win after a decade meant a dent in the state where no opposition had a fair chance. It is essential to note that Thakor was one of the 16 MLAs suspended by the Gujarat Assembly last year for protesting against the suspension of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi as an MP. Pursuant to this, in February 2024, Thakor and 10 other Congress MLAs were suspended again for speaking about fake government offices in the state. As her victory went viral, reports had emerged how in 2024, Thakor had, despite facing financial constraints, decided to contest the general elections. Her campaign for the 2024 Lok Sabha polls was crowdfunded after Congress said it wasn’t in a position to financially back its nominees.

Geniben Thakor of Congress won historic seat in Banaskantha, Gujarat. She had to crowdsource funds to contest.

Such stories needs to be cherished. pic.twitter.com/MvZtlxtmqK

— Nehr_who? (@Nher_who) June 4, 2024

HISTORY CREATED IN GUJARAT

Congress party has opened its account in Gujarat after decade.

Geniben Thakor has won with over 40,000 votes from Banaskantha #ElectionsResults pic.twitter.com/aJv0oza2uk

— Ankit Mayank (@mr_mayank) June 4, 2024

6. Supriya Sule: Supriya Sule of the Nationalist Congress Party (SP), daughter of Sharad Pawar, had to overcome many challenges, from having her party name and symbol being snatched away to compete against estranged family members in the now concluded Lok Sabha elections. But in the end, she was able to retain her Baramati Lok Sabha seat by more than 1.55 lakh votes. Sule received 7,32,312 votes, while Sunetra Pawar managed to bag 5,73,979 votes, as per the data of the Election Commission of India.

This battle of high stakes was fought and won by Sule against her sister-in-law Sunetra Pawar, wife of Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar and a political debutante. Odds seemed to be against Sule as Ajit Pawar, Sule’s cousin who rebelled against her father Sharad Pawar last year and split the party, has been known to enjoy a lot of support in the family bastion of Baramati. And yet, Sule was able to win her seat for the fourth consecutive time. Sule is known for her exemplary parliamentary engagements and has taken a stand on many issues, such as female foeticide, and has also been an ardent support of the LGBTQIA+ rights.

पक्ष कार्यालय, मुंबई 04-06-2024

मुंबई येथे आयोजित पत्रकार परिषदेतून लाईव्ह https://t.co/MNe91xDJwI

— Supriya Sule (@supriya_sule) June 4, 2024

Thank you @Jayant_R_Patil @Rohini_khadse pic.twitter.com/uhkpFJomid

— Supriya Sule (@supriya_sule) June 4, 2024

7. Priya Saroj: The youngest woman candidate to win the Lok Sabha elections was Priya Saroj, who fought for the Uttar Pradesh’s Machhlishahr seat on Samajwadi Party’s ticket. Saroj is the daughter of three-time MP Toofani Saroj and is a practicing lawyer. She emerged victorious against sitting BJP MP Bholanath by a margin of 35,850 votes. There were 12 contestants in the fray, including BSP’s Kripa Shankar Saroj, who got 157,291 votes. The remaining nine candidates could not cross four figures and received fewer votes than NOTA, which had 9,303 votes.

मछलीशहर की जनता ने इतिहास रच दिया है,
यह संविधान की जीत है, यह इंडिया की जीत है
ये लोकतंत्र की जीत है!
धन्यवाद मछलीशहर pic.twitter.com/a295jCAmtg

— Priya saroj ( socialist ) (@PriyaSarojSP) June 5, 2024

“आपके प्रेम और आशीर्वाद के लिए मैं दिल से आभारी हूँ। धन्यवाद मछलीशहर ” pic.twitter.com/gTacjbJej5

— Priya saroj ( socialist ) (@PriyaSarojSP) June 4, 2024

8. Misa Bharti: Misa Bharti, who is daughter of RJD leader Lalu Prasad Yadav, won against Union minister and incumbent MP from Bihar’s Pataliputra Ram Kripal Yadav by 85,174 votes after having been defeated twice before by small margins. Her win was essential as Pataliputra seat, which covers the rural areas of Patna district, is also the constituency that Lalu Yadav had lost once, in 2009. It is to be noted that PM Modi had himself campaigned against Bharti, who is the eldest daughter of Lalu Yadav and Rabri Devi.

जीत आपकी
जीत पाटलिपुत्र की!#पाटलिपुत्र के प्रत्येक मतदाता, @RJDforIndia के प्रत्येक कार्यकर्ता, आदरणीय @laluprasadrjd जी एवं @yadavtejashwi जी समेत तमाम नेतागण, समर्थकों एवं शुभचिंतकों का बहुत बहुत धन्यवाद! pic.twitter.com/MhWlubNf7R

— Dr. Misa Bharti – विजयी पाटलिपुत्र! (@MisaBharti) June 5, 2024

9. Dr Prabha Mallikarjun and Priyanka Jarkiholi: A total of six candidates were fielded by the Congress party in the state of Karnataka out of which, Dr Prabha Mallikarjun and Priyanka Jarkiholi won from Davangere and Chikkodi constituencies respectively. While Priyanka is the daughter of Minister of Public Works Department Sathish Jarkiholi, Dr Prabha is the wife of Mines and Geology Minister S S Mallikarjun. Both suggest the political legacy that accompanied both the women.

Related:

Unboxing the Inbox: Decoding the “Viksit Bharat Sampark” Controversy and its Shadow over Indian Elections

Duddhi By-election focuses on land, women & Adivasi Rights

Rising tide of hate speech marks India’s general assembly election campaigns

The post Against the tide: The women who fought and won in the 18th Lok Sabha against the ruling regime appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The statement, dated November 15, 2023 states that, “From news reports (https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/lok-sabha-ethics-panel-suggests-disqualification-for-tmc-mp-mahua-moitra/article67516744.ece), we understand that Ms Moitra may face expulsion from the Parliament on the basis of certain allegations which are yet to be subjected to strict  Parliamentary and judicial scrutiny in compliance with established norms of natural justice.”

Further, citizen state that, “There are larger issues that arise from this with regard to the necessity of the political executive remaining accountable to the Parliament and the public at large.We feel that the issues arising in the case of Ms Moitra cannot be viewed narrowly as being an inter-corporate conflict of interest. They are more in the nature of issues arising in the case of one corporate entity and the people of India. Unless those issues are examined as outlined below in their entirety, we feel that the Parliament will be doing a grave injustice to itself and also to Ms Moitra.  

“When there are reports of a corporate entity failing to comply with the rule of law and established norms of corporate governance, should the executive and/or a Joint Parliamentary Committee as demanded by several political parties, instead of enquiring into the veracity of those reports and placing the facts before the Parliament and the public, use its power of privilege with is meant for public good to question those who raise those concerns, intimidate them and gag dissent? Does not such conduct on the part of the executive hurt the public interest? 

“At one time, the Companies Act prohibited corporate donations to political parties. As electoral corruption and profligacy in election expenditure started increasing, successive governments chose to dilute that Act to permit private companies to fund elections. During the last nine years, the present government went far beyond that and opened the floodgates to corporate donations, including donations from foreign sources. As if that was not enough, it introduced a highly regressive system of Electoral Bonds that have permitted political parties to receive donations from anonymous individuals and corporate bodies, which in turn deprived the citizens of their “right to know” under Article 19 of the Constitution. This has made it easy for private companies to fund the political parties and, in turn, influence them to grant them quid pro quos in terms of dilution of environmental and other laws and compromising institutions to suit their interests. 

“In the instant case, the manner in which the political executive has responded to questions on instances of irregularities in corporate governance highlights the strong nexus that exists between the political executive and big businesses and its deleterious implications for the public interest. 

“Ms Moitra’s participation in the Parliamentary proceedings brought to light many issues of importance that the people of this country would never have been privy to. Her threatened  exit from the Parliament will certainly create a void in the continuing discourse on such issues. 

“With specific reference to the matter concerning Ms Moitra, we wish to place on record the following concerns: 

1.    Natural justice requires that a person facing an accusation be given adequate opportunity to have access to all evidence put forward in support of such an accusation, cross-examine witnesses, if any, who have made such an accusation and present his/her case in detail, without which the process of considering the veracity of that accusation may stand vitiated from the point of view of the principles of natural justice

2.    If an accused person were to be penalised, the penalty needs to be in proportion to the extent the accusation is established beyond all doubt

3.    The expulsion of a member of any legislature is a serious matter which has wider implications for our democracy. It calls for a careful examination and circumspection on the part of the Parliament and the other legislative bodies before such a far reaching decision is taken. 

Finally “placing on record our serious concern at the reported action to expel her from the Parliament,” the signatories have expressed the “h hope that the Hon’ble Speaker to whom Ms Moitra has addressed a detailed letter (https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/peeping-tom-government-anyone-who-speaks-up-is-being-targeted-mahua-moitra-to-india-today-2456559-2023-11-01) will allow her to continue as a Member of the Parliament and add value to its proceedings.” 

Signatories include : 

1. E A S Sarma, IAS (Retd)
2. M G Devasahayam IAS (Retd)
3. Prabhat Patnaik, Professor Emeritus, JNU New Delhi
4. Thomas Franco, Former GS, AIBOC & Dy. Chair, Global Labour University
5. Anil Sadagopal, Former Member, CABE, Educationalist, Bhopal
6. A. Selvaraj, IRS (Retd.)
7. Abha Bhaiya, Social Activist.
8. Abhijit Sengupta, IAS (Retd)
9. Aditi Mehta, IAS Retd. Former Addl. Chief Secretary, Rajasthan.
10. Aloysius Irudayam, Researcher & Human Rights Activist, Madurai
11. Amanullah Khan, Former President, All India Insurance Employees Association
12. Amita Buch, Ahmedabad
13. Anita Agnihotri, IAS (Retd)
14. Aruna Roy, Mazdoor Kissan Shakthi Sankatan
15. Arundhati Dhuru, National Alliance of Peoples Movements.
16. Arvind Kaul, IAS (Retd), Former Chief Secretary, Himachal Pradesh
17. Asha Mishra, General Secretary All India Peoples Science Network, N. Delhi
18. Ashok Choudhary, Peoples Union of Forest Rights
19. Ashok Kumar Sharma, IFS (Retd)
20. Ashok Vajpayee, IAS (Retd.)
21. Ashoke Chatterjee, New Delhi
22. Asmi Sharma. Jan Sorokar
23. Aurobindo Behera, IAS (Retd.)
24. Bobby Ramakant, CNS and Socialist Party (India)
25. Brijesh Kumar, IAS (Retd.)
26. Brinelle D’Souza, Academic & Activist, Mumbai, Co-Convener Jan Swasthya Abhiyan
27. C. K. Ganguly (Bablu) Former & Social Worker
28. Captain S. Prabhala IN (Retd), Bangalore
29. D Gopalakrishnan, Socialist Party of India, Karnataka
30. Deb Mukharji, IFS (Retd.)
31. Delfina K. S. Gender Rights Activist, NIRANGAL, Chennai
32. Dr. Anirban Bhattacharrya, Financial Action Network of India
33. Dr. Archana Prasad, Jawaharlal Nehru University
34. Dr. Dinesh Abrol, AIPSN & People First
35. Dr. Indira Jayasingh, Senior Council, Supreme Court
36. Dr. Janakarajan, Former Professor, Madras Institute of Development Studies
37. Dr. M. C. Rajan, Human Rights Lawyer, Madras High Court
38. Dr. Nityanand Jayaraman, Chennai Solidary Group
39. Dr. P. Sainath, Journalist, Peoples Archives of India
40. Dr. Praveen Jha, Jawaharlal Nehru University
41. Dr. Prof. Jagdeep Chokker (Rtd) – Association for Democratic Rights
42. Dr. Ram Puniyani, All India Secular Forum
43. Dr. S. P. Udayakumar, Pasumai Thamizhaham
44. Dr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, Retd Scientist, IISC. Science Communicator
45. Dr. Satinath Choudhary, social-political activist
46. Dr. Sebastian Morris, Goa Institute of Management Former Professor IIM, Ahmedabad
47. Dr. Sreedhar Ramamurthi, Environics Trust
48. Dr. Suman Sahai, Gene Campaign
49. Dr. Sushil Khanna Professor Retd, IIM Kolkatta
50. Dr. T. M. Thomas Issac, Former Finance Minister of Kerala
51. Dr. Vasanthi Devi, Former VC, Manonmaniam Sundharanar University, Tamilnadu
52. Dr. Venkatesh Athreya, Prof. of Economics (Retd) Bharatidasan University, Trichirapalli.
53. Dr. Vivek Monteiro, Trade Unionist, Science Educator, Mumbai
54. F.T.R. Colaso, IPS (Retd)
55. G. Sundar Rajan, Poovulagin Nanbargal, Tamilnadu
56. Gopalakrishnan D. General Secretary, Socialist Party, Karnataka
57. Gopalan Balagopal, IAS (Retd.)
58. Gurjit Singh Cheema, IAS (Retd.)
59. Harsh Mander, IAS (Retd.)
60. Henri Tiphague, People’s Watch, Madurai, Working General Secretary. HRDA
61. Inamul Harsan, Social Harmony Foundation, Chennai
62. Ish Kumar, IPS (Retd.)
63. Jawhar Sircar, IAS (Retd) Member of Parliament & Former Secretary, GOI
64. Joe Athialy, Financial Accountability Network of India
65. John Dayal, Writer & Activist, Delhi
66. Jothi S. J. Kolkata
67. Kavitha Kabeer, Social Activist, FAN India
68. Kavitha Kuruganti, Social Activist, Bangalore
69. Lakhwinder Gill. IAS (Retd).
70. Mahi Pal Singh, Secretary, Indian Renaissance Institute, New Delhi
71. Maj. Gen. Dr. Sudhir Vombatkare, Mysuru
72. Malay Mishra, IFS (Retd.)
73. Maxwell Pereira, IPS (Retd.)
74. Meena Gupta, IAS (Retd.)
75. Meera Sanghamitra, National Alliance of People’s Movements
76. Mira Pande, IAS (Retd.)
77. Nagalsamy, IA&AS (Retd.)
78. Navrekha Sharma, IFS (Retd.)
79. Nikhil Dey, MKSS
80. Noor Mohammad, IAS (Retd.)
81. P. Joy Oommen, IAS (Retd.)
82. P.R. Dasgupta, IAS (Retd.)
83. Padamvir Singh, IAS (Retd.
84. Pamela Philipose, senior journalist, New Delhi
85. Paranjoy Guha Thakurtha, Independent Writer, Publisher & Filmmaker
86. PMS Malik, IFS (Retd.)
87. Prakash Louis, Social Activist
88. Pramod Gouri, Associate Professor (Rtd) Haryana
89. Premkumar Menon, IAS (Retd.)
90. Priyadarshini, Delhi Forum in Solidarity
91. Prof Jagmohan Singh, Chairperson, All India Forum for Right To Education
92. Prof Prajit K. Basu (Retired)
93. Prof Sandeep Pandey, General Secretary, Socialist Party (India)
94. Prof Shobha Shukla, Lucknow
95. Prof. Raghavan Rangarajan
96. Professor Surinder Kumar, Institute of Social Sciences
97. Raghavan Srinivasan, Lok Raj Sangathan
98. Ranjan Solomon, Goa
99. Ravi Vira, IAS (Retd.)
100.  Raynah Marise, National Convener, Indian Christian Women’s Movement
101. Rosamma Thomas, Social Activist
102. Rudi Warjri, IFS (Retd.)
103. S.K. Guha, IAS (Retd.)
104. S.P. Ambrose, IAS (Retd.)
105. S.P. Shukla IAS (Retd) Former Secretary, GOI
106. Sandeep Pandey, General Secretary, Socialist Party (India)
107. Sankar Singh, MKSS
108. Satwant Reddy, IAS (Retd.)
109. Sehjo Singh, Rights Activist, Maharashtra
110. Shabnam Hashmi, Social Activist, ANHAD
111. Sharad Behar, IAS (Retd.)
112. Sobha Nambisan, IAS (Retd.)
113. SR Darapuri IPS (Retd)
114. Sudhir Kumar, IAS (Retd.)
115. Sundar Burra, IAS (Retd.)
116. Surendra Nath, IAS (Retd.)
117. Suresh K. Goel, IFS (Retd.)
118. T.R. Raghunandan, IAS (Retd.)
119. Umasankari Naren, Farmer &Social Activist
120. V. P. Raja, IAS (Retd)
121. V. Sridhar, Journalist
122. Veppala Balakrishnan, Former Spl. Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat, GOI
123. Vishwas S. Bhamburkar, Socialist Party

The post Expulsion of Mahua Moitra is against public interest: statement by 123 citizens appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Activists and civil society members have released a joint statement condemning how Presiding Officer Rama Devi conducted herself on February 4 when Trinamool Congress Member of Parliament (MP) Mahua Moitra was delivering a speech critical of the government before the Parliament. “Ms Moitra was participating in the motion of thanks on the president’s address to a joint sitting of Parliament when the presiding officer, Rama Devi stopped her and asked her to speak with ‘love’ not ‘anger.’ This, in our view, is a clear attempt to stifle the voice of the political opposition,” said the activists.

Signatories to the statement include crafts activist and designer Laila Tyabji, Aruna Roy from the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, journalist and human rights defender Teesta Setalvad, lyricist Javed Akhtar, actors Naseeruddin Shah and Shabana Azmi, writer activist Javed Anand, social scientist Rajeev Bhargava and a whole host of academics, journalists, former bureaucrats and civil society members.

Even during the course of the speech, Moitra was interrupted multiple times. “It is the fundamental duty of the presiding officer to not just permit all shades of political opinion but ensure that these are not stifled by brute displays of majoritarianism,” they said, further condemning what transpired after the speech.

“We as vocal citizens of India wish to protest and condemn the subsequent attempts by Speaker Om Birla, to invoke constitutional privilege and threaten action against Ms Moitra when the presiding officer, Ms Rama Devi is in fact responsible for violating the privilege accorded to the Speaker’s chair,” they said, adding, ” It is imperative that all voices and shades of political opinion find dignified space of expression in Indian Parliament.”

The entire statement may be viewed here:

The post Citizens condemn conduct of Presiding Officer Rama Devi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Mahua Moitra, a first-time Trinamool Congress MP, has, once again, set twitter aflutter. A video of hers has gone viral on social media again after a video clip of her response to senior journalist Rajdeep Sardesai started being shared widely on Twitter. At a recent event hosted by India Today at the Nehru Memorial in Delhi, Sardesai had asked the West Bengal MP about the opposition’s lack of a common ideology, its “blind anti-Modism”, and asked her whether she was exaggerating the “fear factor”.

Moitra was quick and to the point. She responded by saying that no common ideology was needed to “save the soul of the country”. “The need of the hour is to save the soul of this country. What Modi and the BJP are doing to this country is splitting it into two. So, I don’t think it’s about ideology or anything like that,” she said.

She added that the opposition is fighting with its back to the wall and doing whatever it can to “save the country”. “We’ll be judged in 50 years as the only ones who sat in the face of this spine-chilling scary atmosphere and fought back,” she said.

When Sardesai asked her if she was exaggerating the “fear factor”, she gave the examples of snooping on journalists, the reading down of Article 370 and the rushed swearing-in of the CM in Maharashtra.

“Are you trying to tell me, Rajdeep, that when so many of your colleagues have been snooped upon, when people are in jail without trial, when a government gets sworn in at 5:47 am, when a minister stands on the floor of the house and lies as to what legal interception is, when we are told someday by the governor of a state that nothing is about to happen and on a Monday the state is split into a union territory, are you trying to tell me, in the face of all of this, that we are living in an India where I am exaggerating Rajdeep? You report on all of this, I am merely commenting on it,” she said.

Moitra, whose maiden speech in the parliament about early signs of fascism went viral earlier this year, is known for her fiery speeches and sharp responses to questions from journalists.

The post It is we who will be judged, 50 years on as the ones who fought back: Mahua Moitra, TMC MP appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy: Bar & Bench

Moitra filed the case before a Metropolitan Magistrate at Patiala House, New Delhi on July 15, after Chaudhary alleged that the MP’s maiden parliamentary speechwas plagiarised.(See here)

She Said, He Said

Mahua Moitra, of the opposition Trinamool Congress Party (TMC), said she had seen a list of the early warning signs of fascism on a poster in the Holocaust Memorial Museum in the US.

On June 25, Moitra had made a passionate speech before the parliament on the ‘Seven Signs of Fascism’. It was inspired by a poster she came across at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum which contained a list of the 14 early warning signs of fascism.In her speech, Moitra applied seven of the signs to India and attributed this original source to her speech.

Moitra’s speech immediately gained considerable internet traction and was lauded on social media. (See here and here.)

Zee News anchor Sudhir Choudhary alleged on national television in the network’s “DNA Test” segment that Moitra had plagiarised the speech from anarticle by American commentator Martin Longman on the American President Donald Trump.The Wire reported that Chaudhary had broadcast a programme saying Moitra’s speech was plagiarised from Longman’s article, and that Moitra’s views were not her own but only were “copy-pasted” from this article.

Chaudharyalso tweeted this at the time of covering the story:

It reads, “This is the website article that Trinamool Congress Member MahuaMoitra stole to use in her speech. She used the exact same wording of the article, verbatim. The integrity of the Legislature is in danger.”

On Twitter, Longman rejected the claim that the Trinamool MP had plagiarised his work, stating “I’m internet famous in India because a politician is being falsely accused of plagiarizing me. It’s kind of funny, but right-wing a******s seem to be similar in every country.”

As the controversy grabbed public attention, multiple sources fact-checked Chaudhary’s claims and concluded them to be false. (See this, this, this, and this.)

Legal on-goings

On July 15, Moitra filed her defamation case against Chaudhary and Zee News.At the time of filing, Moitra had stated in a public statement, “I have immense respect for freedom of speech, as guaranteed under the Constitution, but I also fear tremendously the power of fake news. … In this day and age of 24*7 news channels, without proper fact-checking, and spring-boarding of such broadcasts in the minds of the general public, it is all the more important that individuals who make statements that are false to their knowledge, be brought to book.”

Moitra has also moved a motion in parliament against Zee News and Chaudhary for a breach of parliamentary privilege. The Hindu reported that Speaker Om Birla disallowed the motion when the MP named the channel and the editor, the speaker did not allow it because the journalist was not a member of the house.

Chaudhary raised objections to the case on the ground that the Metropolitan Magistrate proceeded with the defamation case without hearing the application that he had filed against Moitra. He had initiated criminal action against Moitra under Section 340CrPC for her “false” criminal defamation case and for “playing fraud” with the court. The application also contended that the Moitra’s writ petition was not maintainable since its prayer would require the High Court to extendits limited power in the exercise of the writ of certiorari.

Subsequently, the Additional Sessions Court heard Chaudhary’s application and stayed the proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate. Aggrieved by the stay, Moitra had moved the High Court, where she argued that the order of the Sessions Court was erroneous as it had no power to stall pre-summoning proceedings under revision jurisdiction.
 
Related:

1. MahuaMoitra files defamation case against Zee News anchor
2. ‘BJP has ‘lust to divide’, says Trinamool MP MahuaMoitra in a fiery maiden speech in Parliament
3. GauharRaza slaps notice on Zee News, Seeks Compensation and Apology

The post Delhi HC sets aside stay in Mahua Moitra’s defamation case against Zee’s Head Honcho appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Mahua Moitra files defamation case against Zee News anchor appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Constitution is under threat and India is “being torn apart”, declared Mahua Moitra, the first-time parliamentarian from Trinamool Congress as she lashed out at the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party in her maiden speech in Lok Sabha on Tuesday. Interrupted by heckling from the Treasury benches, the MP from Krishnanagar in West Bengal listed seven signs indicating that “there is a danger of fascism rising in India”.

These signs, she said, were contained on a poster in the lobby of the Holocaust Museum in the US.

— sarah rose (@1SarahRose) January 30, 2017
Moitra was addressing the Lok Sabha to oppose the Motion of Thanks to the President’s address. She began by acknowledging the BJP’s enormous victory in the elections and said that “the very nature of the overwhelmingess of this mandate makes it necessary for the voices of dissent to be heard” because it lacks the “natural check and balance woven into the narrative”.

She invoked freedom fighter Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s address from the 1940 Ramgarh session of Congress: “It is India’s historic destiny that many human races and cultures and religions should flow to her, finding a home in her respectable soil and that many a caravan should find rest here, where our cultures, our languages, our poetry, our literature, our art, the innumerable happenings of our daily life shall bear the stamp of our joint endeavour.”

This ideal is embedded in India’s Constitution, which every MP had sworn to protect, she said. But it is under siege, she claimed, and went on to explain why.

1) Superficial nationalism
Moitra drew attention to Assam’s initiative to update its National Register of Citizens, which requires people who have been living in the country for 50 years to produce proof of their citizenship while “ministers cannot produce degrees”. This seemed to have been a dig at Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Minister of Women and Child Development Smriti Irani, whose educational qualifications have been the matter of much speculation.

2) Disdain for human rights
Moitra noted that hate crimes have increased ten-fold increase between 2014 and 2019. “It is like a valuation of an e-commerce start-up,” she said. “There are forces in this country that are sitting there just pushing this number up.”

3) Media control
The MP alleged that five of the largest media organisations in the country are “either indirectly controlled or indirectly indebted to one man”. She said that fake news had become the norm. “This election was not fought on farmers’ distress, this election was not fought on unemployment but this election was fought on Whatsapp, on fake news and on manipulating minds,” she claimed.

4) An obsession with national security
The obsession with national security and the identification of enemies has resulted in :fear pervading everywhere”, she said. “The achievements of the Army are being usurped in the name of one man,” Moitra said.

Despite this, she said, terrorist attacks have gone up. “There has been a 106% increase in the death of jawans in Kashmir,” she said.

5) The intertwining of religion and government
Highlighting the flaws in the National Register of Citizens and the Citizenship Amendment Bill, Moitra alleged, “We are making sure that it is only one community that is the target of anti-immigration laws.”

6) Disdain for intellectuals and the arts
This, the MP said, was the most dangerous sign. “There is a suppression of all dissent,” she said, even as funding is being cut for liberal education. But the spirit of dissent is “integral to India”, she said, going on to quote Hindi poet Ramdhari Singh Dinkar’s Krishna Ki Chetavani (Krishna’s Warning) to emphasise her point.

7) Erosion of independence in the electoral system
During the Lok Sabha polls of 2019, the Election Commission of India was embroiled in multiple controversies where it was accused of siding with the BJP.

“The Election Commission is being used to transfer key officials,” she said. “Rs.60,000 crore were spent on this election of which Rs.27,000 crore, 50 per cent, were spent by one party.”

The post ‘BJP has ‘lust to divide’, says Trinamool MP Mahua Moitra in a fiery maiden speech in Parliament appeared first on SabrangIndia.