EC holds all party meet on Law Commission finances recommendations, NPP pleads for State funding

Prof.Bhim Singh, Chief Patron of National Panthers Party strongly pleaded for state funding of elections to the Lok Sabha as well as State Assembly as is practiced in several countries of the world in the interest of democracy and fair elections. NPP Supremo told the Commission which convened All Party Meeting at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi today that money and muscle power has practically hijacked the electoral process endangering democracy in India. The only way out to save parliamentary democracy is to eliminate money power from the function of democracy. He cited several examples how the big money houses have been used for particular political parties to buy the electorates thus endangering the entire system. He said that many political parties have been converting their black money into political funds by taking out receipts of Rs.10,000/-, 15,000/-, 20,000/- in the name of voters from the electoral list. This way crores of rupees are shown to have been raised from the unnamed individuals as such donors who contribute Rs.20,000 or less are not be mentioned or named.

The NPP Supremo made a strong recommendation that all the donations under 80 GGC/or otherwise should be donated to the Election Commission of India directly. Election Commission of India should evolve a methodology to provide infrastructure, that formed, mobility to the recognized political parties. He said that no political party should be allowed to raise funds or spend directly. He said one day this has to be done. Several political parties including the Congress supported this view. A letter circulated on behalf of Congress President, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi took

English: Sonia Gandhi, Indian politician, pres...

English: Sonia Gandhi, Indian politician, president of the Indian National Congress and the widow of former Prime Minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi. Français : Sonia Gandhi, une femme politique indienne, présidente du parti du congrès indien, et veuve de Rajiv Gandhi, ancien premier ministre de l’Inde. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

the similar view. However, BJP was opposed to state funding. Several national and state recognized political parties participated in this meet.

 

Part-II

Kishtwar riots and Gandhi Commission’s U-turn

            The NC-Congress government appointed one man commission headed by Justice (retd.) Gandhi to hold inquiry into the circumstances that led to communal riots on 9th August, 2013 in Kishtwar killing three persons. This Commission was appointed on the direction of the Supreme Court of India in a petition filed by J&K National Panthers Party.

The Chief Minister, Mr. Omar Abdullah sought resignation from his Minister of State, local MLA from Kishtwar. The interim report of Mr. Gandhi gave clean chit to the local MLA and the Chief Minister restored his ministry.

Interestingly, Mr. Gandhi’s one man commission did not file the final report for nearly more than one year. His final report came only after the defeat of NC-Congress government in which Mr.Gandhi did not find favour with his earlier judgment. Naturally, the local MLA and former Minister with several other police functionaries have been indicted by the Commission. Prof.Bhim Singh who has represented the Panthers Party before the Supreme Court expressed surprise on the Commission’s verdict and told the media that he will be filing a review petition in this regard.

Three judges bench headed by Chief Justice of India, Mr. P. Sathasivam with JJ Mr. Ranjan Gogoi and Mr. N.V. Ramana in their judgment in JKNPP petition dated 07.04.2014 (Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 125/2013) had directed one man commission, Mr. Justce R.C. Gandhi, “To complete its enquiry as early as possible, preferably, within a period of three months from today, if the final report has not already been submitted in the meantime. The Government will naturally be duty bound to take all necessary and consequential steps on the basis of the said report as would be mandated in law”. The final recommendation came only after the formation of the new government, one year after the Supreme Court judgment. This deserves serious attention of all concerned.

Bhim Singh, Fali Nariman , Anil Divan conclude arguments before SC Division Bench of three Judges against NJAC hearing continues

3 Judge Division Bench of SC  heard arguments against  the validity of NJAC (National Judicial Appointment Commission) on Monday and Tuesday. Sr. Advocates Shri Fali Nariman , Prof. Bhim singh and Anil Diwan concluded their arguments on Monday in different writ petition filed by advocates on record, Prof. Bhim Singh , Bar Association of Supreme Court and others challenging the validity of the Act describing the Act as unconstitutional, illegal, inproper and passed without application of mind. The petitioners have also challenge the 1999  Ammendment in article -124 by subsituting  NJAC  inplace of  Chief Justice of India. Article -127, 128, 217 of the constitution have been amended too.

Prof. Bhim Singh appearing in- person argued before a Special Bench Presided Justice Shri Anil R Dave ,  made a submission that JAC is mala fide attempt to buldoze the independence of the judiciary and primacy of chief Justice of India by vesting authority in two members of the commission who shall veto the opinion of the chief justice of India and two other senior Judges. He strongly attacked neo priniciple of jurisprudence thus challenging the universal law of majority rule. Prof. Bhim Singh also submitted that NJAC as well as 99th amendment in the constitution smell rot and introduced an authoritarian concept to reduce the authority of the SC and demolishing the authority as well as descrition of President of India. This system if implemented leaves no option for the President of the Republic in the matter of apointment of Judges of the Supreme Court and the Hight Court. The new law provides that the recommendation made by the National Judicial appointments commission shall be final and the President shall putin his signatures having any descrition to apply his mind.

Prof. Bhim Singh challenged the provision which states that to members out of six shall be eminent persons to be choosen by a committee of three persons namely Chief Justice of India, Prime Minister of India and Leader of the largest group in Parliament. “Eminence” has not been defined. Prof. Bhim Singh inquired whether Ambani or Adani of even Amitabh Bacchan could be member of the Judicial Appointments  Commision because they are also eminent persons. He also questioned the law which introduces a dangerous philosophy of reservation in the regime of judiciary.  He said the impugned Act and 99th amendment can not be accepted. If they are accepted it shall reduce the independence of the judiciary and turn the entire commission into a minority commission.

The hearing in the matter continued for sometime on Tuesday also where some other petitioners agued against the new law. The  next hearing is the next Tuesday. The Attorney General strongly supported NJAC and the 99thamendment.

Sd/-

BS Bllowria