Ramanisblog

Tag: BJP

  • Joint Parliamentary Committee(JPC)

    In a JPC,PM may be forced to come and testify and there lies the catch.

    In a Parliamentary Committee you can hush up;in JPC very difficult

    The very fact a PM has been asked to testify may make the opposition to demand his resignation.

    JPC can even summon Sonia Gandhi.

    Story:

    Mandated to inquire into a specific subject, a JPC is constituted either through a motion adopted by one House and concurred by the other, or, through communication between the presiding officers of the two Houses. The members are either elected by the Houses or nominated by the presiding officers. As in the case of other parliamentary committees, they are drawn from different groups. The strength of a JPC may vary. For instance, one JPC comprised 15 members, while two others had 30 members each. The Lok Sabha share is double than that of the Rajya Sabha.

    When a committee is unable to complete its work before the expiry of its term or before the dissolution of the Lok Sabha, it reports that fact to the House. In such cases, any preliminary report, memorandum or note that may have been prepared by the committee is made available to the succeeding committee.

    Powers of a JPC?

    A JPC can obtain evidence of experts, public bodies, associations, individuals or interested parties suo motu or on requests made by them. If a witness fails to appear before a JPC in response to summons, his conduct constitutes a contempt of the House.

    The JPC can take oral and written evidence or call for documents in connection with a matter under its consideration. The proceedings of parliamentary committees are confidential, but in the case of the joint committee which went into “Irregularities in Securities and Banking Transactions”, the committee decided that considering the widespread public interest in the matter, the chairman should brief the press about deliberations of the committees.

    Ministers are not generally called by the committees to give evidence. However, in case of the Irregularities in Securities and Banking Transactions probe again, an exception was made, with the JPC, with the permission of the Speaker, seeking information on certain points from ministers and calling Ministers of Finance and Health and Family Welfare.

    The government may withhold or decline to produce a document if it is considered prejudicial to the safety or interest of State. The Speaker has the final word on any dispute over calling for evidence against a person or production of a document

    .

    There have been only four investigative JPCs so far.

    The first was instituted to inquire into the Bofors contract on a motion moved by then defence minister K C Pant in the Lok Sabha on August 6, 1987. The Rajya Sabha endorsed it a week later. The committee, headed by B Shankaranand, held 50 sittings and gave its report on April 26, 1988. Opposition parties boycotted the committee on the ground that it was packed with Congress members. The JPC report was tabled in Parliament, but it was rejected by the Opposition.

    The second investigative JPC, headed by former Union minister and senior Congress leader Ram Niwas Mirdha, was set up to probe Irregularities in Securities and Banking Transactions in the aftermath of the Harshad Mehta scandal. The motion was moved by then minister for parliamentary affairs Ghulam Nabi Azad in the Lok Sabha on August 6, 1992. The Rajya Sabha concurred with it the next day. The recommendations of the JPC were neither accepted in full nor implemented.

    The third investigative JPC was assigned to probe the market scam. Then parliamentary affairs minister Pramod Mahajan piloted a motion in the Lok Sabha on April 26, 2001, to put it in place. Senior BJP member Lt Gen Prakash Mani Tripathi (retd) was named the chairman. The committee held 105 sittings and gave its report on December 19, 2002. The committee recommended sweeping changes in stock market regulations. However, many of these recommendations were diluted later.

    The last JPC was set up in August 2003 to look into pesticide residues in soft drinks, fruit juice and other beverages and to set safety standards. The committee, headed by NCP chief Sharad Pawar, held 17 sittings and submitted its report to Parliament on February 4, 2004. The report confirmed that soft drinks did have pesticide residues and recommended stringent norms for drinking water.

    Why does the Opposition want a JPC?

    The Public Accounts Committee of Parliament is supposed to conduct a detailed examination of the reports of the Comptroller and Auditor-General (CAG), scrutinising the yearly accounts of the Government. Having 15 members of the Lok Sabha and seven members of the Rajya Sabha, the chairmanship of the PAC conventionally goes to a nominee of the main opposition party. The PAC calls upon ministries to explain cases of financial irregularities. The Opposition argument is that the 2G spectrum scam goes far beyond accounting. A JPC can spread its net wider and go into the larger gamut of allocation and look into the role of various players. More, once a JPC gets going, it would help the Opposition keep the heat on the government through consistent reporting of proceedings. The moot point is that PAC chairman Murli Manohar Joshi is already waiting in the wings to go into the CAG report. In case the government accepts the demand for a JPC, in effect, it may mean both a JPC and PAC.

    http://www.indianexpress.com/news/jpc-probe-a-goblet-of-fire/713146/0


    Related:

    Parliamentary Committee.

    Broadly, Parliamentary Committees are of two kinds – Standing Committees and ad hoc Committees. The former are elected or appointed every year or periodically and their work goes on, more or less, on a continuous basis. The latter are appointed on an ad hoc basis as need arises and they cease to exist as soon as they complete the task assigned to them

    http://india.gov.in/knowindia/parliamentary.php

    The government on Wednesday offered to hold a special session of Parliament to discuss the Opposition demand for a joint parliamentary committee (JPC) to probe the 2G spectrum allocation scandal.

    It was a direct response to the call for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh‘s resignation made earlier in the day at the National Democratic Alliance rally on the Ramlila maidan here that focussed on the numerous scams that have surfaced in recent months. Opposition leaders said the government must agree to a JPC probe or else the Prime Minister must resign.

    http://hindu.com/2010/12/23/stories/2010122359120100.htm

  • Kumaraswamy on horse trading by BJP-Video.

    This file is a cropped version of File:Dmitry ...
    Image via Wikipedia

     

    Hurling a fresh charge against Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yeddyurappa, the JD(S) today alleged his family had sold Rs 20 crore worth land and raised doubts about its ownership. Rubbishing the charge, Yeddyurappa’s son B Y Raghavendra, MP, said “there is no irregualarity in transfer of funds to

     

    Kumaraswamy, who has been coming out with alleged land scams involving Yeddyurappa’s family, told reporters here that Raghavendra, the chief minister’s another son B Y Vijendra and his son-in-law Sohan Kumar had Rs 20 crore tansferred to their accounts from a mining firm in Toranagallu in Bellary district in August towards the sale of six acres at a tech Park here.

    http://www.hindustantimes.com/Kumaraswamy-makes-another-land-scam-charge/Article1-628929.aspx

    Related:

    Beleaguered Karnataka Chief Minister B.S. Yeddyurappa, who is heading the shakiest government in the history of the state is hurtling from one trouble to another. The latest trouble for him has come in the form a sting operation done by his arch rival former chief minister H D Kumaraswamy of JDS, who has vowed to end his once coalition partners BJP rule in the state.

    http://ibnlive.in.com/news/the-season-of-sting-in-karnataka/133552-37.html?from=tn

  • சட்டம் ஒரு கழுதை.

     

    தகுதி நீக்கம் செய்யப்பட்ட உறுப்பினர்கள் நிலை தெளிவாகாத நிலையில் இந்த வோட்டெடுப்பு கேலிக்கு உரியது .அவர்கள் நீக்கப்பட்டது சரி என்றால் ,( அது தவறு -PRC  schedule  10படி சுயேச்சை MLAS  Anti -Defecttion சட்டத்தில்  வர மாட்டார்கள் ,மேலும் கொரடாவின் ஆணையை மீறாதவரை மற்ற MLAk க்க ளுக்கும் இந்த சட்டம் பொருந்தாது ),

    இப்போது…

    நீதி மன்றம் வழங்கும் எந்த தீர்ப்பும் அபத்தமாகத்தான் இருக்கும்.

    செய்தி.

    கர்நாடக ஐகோர்ட் தீர்ப்பால் நிலைமை மாறும் அபாயம்? இரண்டாவது முறையாக நடந்த நம்பிக்கை ஓட்டெடுப்பில் முதல்வர் எடியூரப்பா தலைமையிலான பா.ஜ., அரசு வெற்றிபெற்றாலும், வரும் 18ம் தேதி ஐகோர்ட் தீர்ப்பை எதிர்பார்த்து காத்திருக்கிறது. 11 பா.ஜ., எம்.எல்.ஏ.,க் களின் நிலைமை குறித்து கர்நாடகா ஐகோர்ட் அறிவிக்கும் தீர்ப்பினால், கர்நாடகா அரசியலில் மீண்டும் பரபரப்பான சூழ்நிலை உருவாகலாம். கர்நாடகா சட்டசபையில் கடந்த 11ம் தேதி நடந்த நம்பிக்கை ஓட்டெடுப்பில் முதல்வர் எடியூரப்பா, குரல் ஓட்டெடுப்பின் மூலம் வெற்றி பெற்றதாக சபாநாயகர் போப்பய்யா அறிவித்தார். இதற்கு எதிர்ப்பு தெரிவித்து தகுதி நீக்கம் செய்யப்பட்ட 11 பா.ஜ., எம்.எல்.ஏ.,க்கள் மற்றும் ஐந்து சுயேச்சை எம்.எல்.ஏ.,க்கள், கர்நாடக ஐகோர்ட்டில் வழக்கு தொடர்ந்தனர். இதில் 11 பேரிடம் விசாரணை முடிந்து தீர்ப்பு ஒத்திவைக்கப்பட்டது. ஐந்து பேர் தொடர்ந்த வழக்கில், வரும் 18ம் தேதி விசாரணை நடக்கும் என்று அறிவிக்கப்பட்டது.

    http://www.dinamalar.com/News_Detail.asp?Id=106493

    AfrikaansAlbanianArabicBelarusianBulgarianCatalanChineseCroatianCzechDanishDetect languageDutchEnglishEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGermanGreekHaitian Creole ALPHAHebrewHindiHungarianIcelandicIndonesianIrishItalianJapaneseKoreanLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalayMalteseNorwegianPersianPolishPortugueseRomanianRussianSerbianSlovakSlovenianSpanishSwahiliSwedishThaiTurkishUkrainianVietnameseWelshYiddish⇄AfrikaansAlbanianArabicBelarusianBulgarianCatalanChineseCroatianCzechDanishDutchEnglishEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGermanGreekHaitian Creole ALPHAHebrewHindiHungarianIcelandicIndonesianIrishItalianJapaneseKoreanLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalayMalteseNorwegianPersianPolishPortugueseRomanianRussianSerbianSlovakSlovenianSpanishSwahiliSwedishThaiTurkishUkrainianVietnameseWelshYiddish

    Detect language » Hungarian

  • BJP-A confused House?

    The BJP logo
    Image via Wikipedia

    Exquiiste logic by Venkiah Naidu.
    There is no crisis in BJP;only divergent views between Advani,Rajnath Singh,Arun Shourie;one man proposes ,many disagree, the decision is called unanimous;Advani did not say any thing about Jaswant’s expulsion, but did say he need not be sacked;Advani has his views but he agreed to others views;there is no crisis in BJP;we discuss many issues;Advani is not depressed;he is very much acitve;ho does not talk,because he has nothing to say;he may quit;may not; BJP shall have no problem in finding a successor,we will decide in party meet;Vasundara has been asked to resign;not resigned;she may or may not;party may ask her again,again may not;Arun Shourie should not have spoken/written;but no issues.;Advani’s image is in tact;it suffered because of some news.
    Can anybody tie himself in knots better than this?
    Venky,Keep it up,Delhi is yours.
    You are in competition with Karunanidhi in expressing your views, which even God can not unravel!

    Story:
    Is the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) or its leadership in crisis? That’s the key issue Karan Thapar explored with the former president of the party and a man that many believe could be the future president as well – Venkaiah Naidu.

    Karan Thapar: Mr Naidu, let’s start with LK Advani. He has been unaccustomedly quiet and withdrawn since the elections, he is hardly seen or heard these days, is he depressed?

    M Venkaiah Naidu: Who said it? He is very much active. He will be there in Maharashtra for the election campaign. He is guiding us on every matter. Should he go on speaking without any need unless there is a reason?

    Karan Thapar: Is LK Advani going through a personal political crisis?

    M Venkaiah Naidu: Not at all. Where is the crisis? He is the man who is responsible for building the party and guiding the party upto this level. Winning and losing happens in elections. Do you mean to say that once you lose elections, there is a crisis?

    Karan Thapar: Many believe that LK Advani is constantly caught up in controversies one after another. For instance, do you believe as he now claims that at the parliamentary board meeting on August 19 in Shimla, he was against the decision to expel Jaswant Singh?

    M Venkaiah Naidu: My point is do we need these issues to be discussed time and again? People have other important works also. That has been clarified by himself.

    Karan Thapar: When you say he ‘clarified it,’ I am quoting what he said, “These reports are correct that I was not in an agreement with the decision to expel Jaswant Singh.”

    M Venkaiah Naidu: My point is why are you trying to rake up another controversy. It’s a known fact that in a democratic party everybody has the right to express their views. Views were expressed and a unanimous decision was taken. We heard his view, which he has said.

    Karan Thapar: Then it wasn’t a unanimous decision?

    M Venkaiah Naidu: Why?

    Karan Thapar:Because he was opposed to the decision to expel Jaswant Singh.

    M Venkaiah Naidu: You mean to say that one man purposes and everybody agrees is a unanimous decision? In the BJP, we discuss issues, we listen to various views and finally we come to a conclusion, we call it the unanimous decision. There was no dissenting voice in the Shimla meeting.

    Karan Thapar: Do you confirm that LK Advani expressed an opinion stating that expelling Jaswant Singh was not the right thing to do?

    M Venkaiah Naidu: Yes.

    Karan Thapar:Because the reason I ask you is this. Rajnath Singh went on record after the expulsion to say that it was unanimous decision and there was no dissent. Rajnath had gone further and said that no one had spoken against it. You are now clarifying that Mr Advani had expressed an opinion against it?

    M Venkaiah Naidu: Expelling a colleague who had been in the party for over 25-35 years is a painful thing but there is no other way and the party colleagues have discussed it and then Advaniji heard everybody and finally it was a unanimous decision.

    Karan Thapar: But Advaniji’s first position was against the expulsion?

    M Venkaiah Naidu: My point is let us not go back to each and every issue which are not relevant today. Yes, I say that initially his views were different. He had said whether there was a need for expulsion and were there no other alternatives. This sort of discussion took place. Members felt that Jaswant Singhji’s book contained many objectionable references. The view in the meeting was that in no way we could keep quiet on this book and we had to take action. And everybody agreed, Advaniji also agreed.

    Karan Thapar: Was Mr Advani persuaded to change his mind or did he simply agree to go ahead with the consensus of everyone else?

    M Venkaiah Naidu: Advaniji is a democratic person. He may have his own views but once the colleagues discuss and he understands the mood of the people and the general consensus, he goes by it. That day also the same thing happened.
    http://ibnlive.in.com/news/devils-advocate-naidu-on-advani-bjp-crisis/103069-37-single.html