Note the contradiction and confusion in these statements.
The statement in question is in regard to Anna Hazare‘s ‘Lao or Jao’-bring the Bill or Quit to the Government.
Apart from the fact that none in a Democracy can ask the Government to quit as one wishes but only through the due process of Parliament, it speaks volumes of the fascist tendencies in Anna Hazare.( I do not know whether he is even aware of this)
If one were to be frustrated and can make statements which are sheer non sense and naivety, how does it make him qualified to lead a movement of this magnitude, which ,if not handled properly will breed anarchy?
‘I will not be party to any move to overthrow a democratically elected government‘ says Hegde and in the same breath adds..
‘I will not be party to the creation of an institution which is parallel either to the Constitution or Parliament.Every order of the Lokpal will be subject to scrutiny by the Supreme Court.‘ and adds another gem
‘In what way is Parliament supreme There are thousands of laws passed by Parliament and some of them have been questioned in court?.’
He goes on…
‘There will be 11 Lokpals.We have the Prevention of Corruption Act,but how many come forward to file cases ?’
Rightly said.
Then do they not know that it is the individual initiative in fighting Corruption than laws is the key?
This is exactly what I have been saying all along in my blogs-it is not that laws are not there but the individual’s unwillingness to bribe , not to seek easier route and the innate fear of filing complaints against corruption-that is the reason for the rampant corruption.
Detailed blog on Fighting Corruption follows.-which is practical, though besotted with some obstacles.
That can be overcome if fraction of the population follows it rather than enacting a law which again will prove to be useless.
“The statement was not meant to overthrow a democratically-elected government.It was a statement of anger by Hazare because of the treatment meted out to him by the government.It was not intentional but the consequence of frustration building up,and I will not be party to any move to overthrow a democratically elected government.Such a remark happens when the government goes on pretending to play games….
Doesnt the Jan Lokpal bill have features of an all-powerful parallel body of supreme policing
I will not be party to the creation of an institution which is parallel either to the Constitution or Parliament.Every order of the Lokpal will be subject to scrutiny by the Supreme Court.
With corruption rampant,will a Lokpal be able to handle the situation
There will be 11 Lokpals.We have the Prevention of Corruption Act,but how many come forward to file cases
By putting a gun to Parliaments head that the bill be passed by August 30,isnt Team Anna stalling dialogue
Who started the dialogue They are the ones who have pushed us to this situation and we are criticized now as holding a gun to Parliament….
What is Team Annas definition of Parliaments supremacy
In what way is Parliament supreme There are thousands of laws passed by Parliament and some of them have been questioned in court.Article 105(2) of the Constitution says no Member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said,or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee.However,if a public figure is indulging in graft and the Lokpal learns of it,action can be taken.How does it then become interference of the House
What about corruption in the private sector
The jurisdiction of Prevention of Corruption Act is only public servants.In a private sector,if two persons are giving and taking a bribe,nothing can be done unless its between a government agency and private party,where the latter becomes an abettor.The Jan Lokpal Bill covers all NGOs which take aid from the government.”
Do you mean to say Corruption in Private sector is all right?
‘Corruption’ is between two individuals ultimately.
You must be logged in to post a comment.