Dear Niraj,
Burning effigies, pelting stones, shouting slogans, forcing closure for general strike are all aspects of street fight which is a brute show of belligerence, pugnacity & combat. Definitely not akin to civilised society. Here, demand for Lokpal bill & institution of Lokpal is being espoused within the framework of The Constitution of India, as we have observed, The constitutional functionaries do not have accountability to people of India as no such provision exists.
When we, the people of India have not succeeded in ensuring that the persons we chose to govern ourselves are accountable to us for all these 6 decades & more, how can anyone be sure that an appointed functionary of LOK PAL (People's Commissioner) will be courageous, free, equitable & direct the barrel of the Gun of law enforcement on those who have appointed him/her? He or she will be eternally obliged to the appointers. Do you want that to happen? Do you want history to repeat? Lokpal will be another sham just as information commissions & lokayuktas, human right commissions, CJI's of Supreme & High Courts, Presidents, Prime Minister & other ministers etc.. They would exist but not perform. Despite being in democracy which means participation by all, it has become degenerated to dictation by a few. Do you want it to repeat? Hence the suggestion for Chosing Lokpal by referendum with accountability to people!
All of us were exhilerated that RTI Act 2005 has given people of India empowerment concomittant of true democracy. Little did we realise that Right to information is an inherent, inalienable, axiomatic, fundamental right of people in democracy & there is also implied relation of Master & servants between the People & the Government in Indian Democracy.
Have we been able to achieve anything substantial by this RTI Act 2005? No Public Authority has disclosed information that has to be mandatorily disclosed under section 4 of RTI Act 2005. Former CJI Supreme Court, Justice KG Balakrishnan, ruled that RTI cannot be used to question a Judge & it became an enforceable law as per Art. 141 of The Constitution of India, despite that decision by being unconstitutional & ultravires his powers! After retirement he has been instaled as chairman of NHRC. Take the case of Lokayuktas. Has any Lokayukta been able to impose penalty on any public servant of functionary? Has any Information Commissioner made accountable to public? Parliament has ruled (will of the people) that decisions of Information Commissions cannot be adjudicate by Courts. Courts have been annuling decision of Information Commissions gay abandon! Despite being public Servants Information Commissioners made accountable to their functioning ewhich has been counter productive to the right of people? No! Why for all of them are appointed & they are crushed under the benevolence of appointers!
Any person who has done wrong has to be punished. However, doing wrong does not restrain a person from making rational statements. E.g. whatever be the allegations against Digvijay Singh, he has advocated that President, Governors & CJI's should be within the ambit & scanner of LOKPAL. I had suggested it too. I have endorsed these statements by Digvijay Singh. It does not mean or connote that I have endorsed all wrong Digvijay Singh is accused of foe which if found guilty he has to be punished. So there is clear demarcation between wrong aspect of Digvijay Singh's personality & his advocation of President, Governors & CJI's to be within scanner of LokPal.
Remember, all political parties exist with implicit consent of people of India. We should contain them. It is wrong to say that one party or few parties are underminig LokPal bill & others are promoting it. Have we lost faith in Democracy? let us realise our inherent right & strength.
Read the following.
1. The cardinal principle in Jurisprudence is:
Ignorantia juris non excusat or Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Latin for "ignorance of the law does not excuse" or "ignorance of the law excuses no one") is an universal legal principle/doctrine holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because he or she was unaware of its content. However, Ignorentia facti, excusat meaning, ignorance of fact is excusable in jurisprudence.
This connotes that not only this Doctrine exists as a deterrent for offenders of law from pleading not guilty owing to not having the knowledge of law that an act or omission is an offence, but also that it lays impetus that everyone should know law.
2. Preface of The Constitution of India declares that:-
Constitution is a living document, an instrument which makes the government system work. Its flexibility lies in its amendments.
3. The Constitution of India, in its Preamble, states, "WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a 1[SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC] and to secure to all its citizens:
JUSTICE, social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the 2[unity and integrity of the Nation];
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twentysixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.
Note that what is in bold letters. One would observe;
3. The Government is formed in a Democracy by the Elected Representatives of People having support of majority of like political ideology holders, for in a Democracy all the people cannot rule all the people; hence, this system.
Sovereign stands for Supreme or highest in power; superior to all others
Socialist stands for common ownership. This means the resources of the world being owned in common by the entire global population.
Secular stands for not controlled by a religious body or concerned with religious or spiritual matters.
Democratic stands for with equal participation by all; characterized by free and equal participation in government or in the decision-making processes of an organization or group.
Republic stands for a political system or form of government in which people elect representatives to exercise power for them.
4. The body of elected representatives is known as the Parliament (Meaning platform to speak) for the people; as all the people cannot speak for all the people. "Parlare" meaning to speak.
5. The Parliament consists of two houses a. The House of People b. Council of states.
6. The House of People consists of directly elected representatives by the People.
7. The Council of states consists of secondary representatives of people i.e. representatives of representatives of people.
8. Parliament enacts laws which are construed & deemed as De Facto reflect the will of People as they are enacted with the consent of majority of elected representatives of people. Although, nowhere in the Constitution of India it is expressly stated, it can be inferred, if an enactment seeks to withdraw, abrogate & diminish the inherent rights of people, in a democracy, people have the right to express their dissent to the parliament by a memorandum & indicate the need to change or modify that enactment. If by chance if the dissenters are in majority, Parliament is bound to change it. This can be inferred by understanding the power of people in a democracy. Although has not yet happened, it is an inalienable right of people! Although, the constituent power of Parliament provides it the mandate to amend the Constitution by Art. 368 of it, such amendments should not in any manner abrogate the inherent, inalienable, axiomatic, fundamental those are essential identities of a Democracy. This aspect has never been delved into in 63 years of independent India!.
9. From the contents of the Preamble of The Constitution of India & other aspects deducted therefrom, one would agree that the People of India have installed the Constitution of India & the Government therewithin for themselves & to govern them. Hence, in Democracy, the Government is defined as A GOVERNMENT BY A PEOPLE; OF THE PEOPLE & FOR THE PEOPLE. People are hence Supreme & not the Government in a Democracy, as the Government is installed by the people to govern themselves. Hence, Government in a Democracy exists at the pleasure of THE PEOPLE.
10. There is also implied relation of Master & servants between the People & the Government in Indian Democracy. Hence, every Government functionary from President, Governor, Prime Minister, Cabinet of ministers to an attender at Village Panchayt as well as functionaries of judiciary including Chief Justice of Supreme Court of India & High Courts are all Public Servants. This is reiterated in section 21 of Indian Penal Code 1860, Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 & in states where there is Lokayukta, under The Lokayukta Act. This is an inherent, inalienable, axiomatic, fundamental & essential relation between People & Government in Indian Democracy.
11. What is stated above in 10 is reiterated & reaffirmed in the preface of RTI act 2005 as follows:
An Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority.
Whereas the Constitution of India has established democratic Republic; And whereas democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed.
12. Hence, the Government & all its functionaries are accountable & answerable to the People of India. Hence, the People of India have a right to question the Government that they have installed within the framework of the Constitution on its acts & omissions. This is otherwise known as the Right to Information. No Government by any law, can withdraw this right & if it happens it would be SUBVERSION OF DEMOCRACY.
13. Art. 12 of the Constitution of India defines "The State" as "In this part unless the context otherwise requires, "The State" includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government & Legislature of each of the States and all local and other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India. Here though not expressly so stated, the entire gamut of Judiciary in India is included in "The State". "The State" hence, comprises of The Legislature, The Executive & The Judiciary.
14. Parliament has superintendence over The State i.e. The Legislature, The Executive & The Judiciary. (Including all Courts, Supreme Court & High Courts & functionaries therewithin too)
15. Will of the people (determined by simple majority) reigns supreme on the State (with State as defined in Art. 12 of the Constitution of India)
16. That is to say, the three facets of "The State" i.e., 1. LEGISLATURE 2. THE EXECUTIVE & 3. THE JUDICIARY & all the concomitant functionaries whose existence is by the express mandate/implicit mandate of THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, are answerable, accountable & subservient to THE PEOPLE OF INDIA. If these ceases or attempted to cease, it is to be construed as DEMOCRACY IS SUBVERTED or is attempted to be SUBVERTED.
17. The master & Servant relationship precludes the State from doing anything that would destroy this essential, axiomatic status of right of the people. For State exists in fiduciary trusteeship for People of India.
18. State is the Guardian of The Constitution of India & the Laws enacted by The Legislature or The Parliament. Hence, State has to function within this framework.
19. The Judiciary too has a bounden duty to be the guardian of The Constitution of India & laws enacted by The Parliament. While delivering any judgement any Judge who does so, has a mandatory responsibility that is imperative to ensure that his or her judgement is not repugnant to or violates or is inconsistent to any of the provisions of The Constitution of India or laws enacted by The Parliament. Supreme Court is however, empowered to determine the validity of any enactment with respect to the provisions of the Constitution of India on a reference made to it. However no judge can deliver a judgement dictated by his or her idiosyncrasies'. If contrary to that happens, people in India can dissent to it as no judgement can withdraw what is essentially an inalienable, axiomatic, fundamental, inherent & essential right of the People! Though nowhere stated, this is inferred as otherwise Democracy is meaningless.
20. It is also the duty of State to protect & safeguard the Fundamental Rights & Civil Liberties of the People enshrined in The Constitution of India.
Regards,
WEDS
From: NIRAJ <nirajklko@yahoo.com>
To: rti4empowerment@googlegroups.com; Bimal Khemani <bimal.khemani@gmail.com>; DSouza Wilberious Evanglist <wilevades@yahoo.co.uk>; Jagnarain Sharma <jagnarain.sharma@gmail.com>; virender johar <virender.johar@gmail.com>; Sandeep Jalan <legallyspeaking.jalan@gmail.com>; ramdasnaikadv@gmail.com; sabhapathiur@gmail.com; majorravi@gmail.com; vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in; Santosh Nargund <spnargund@yahoo.com>; urvashi sharma <aishwaryaj.hpage@gmail.com>; Abhimanyu <who.will.file.rti@gmail.com>; Bhaskar Prabhu <mahitiadhikarmanch@gmail.com>; Manoj Pai <manojpai@yahoo.com>; Dr.V.N. Sharma <vnsh44@gmail.com>; parivartan_india@rediffmail.com; kabir.rti@gmail.com; ash.aswathi@gmail.com; info@annahazare.org; Karmayog.org <info@karmayog.org>; Krishnaraj Rao <sahasipadyatri@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, 21 April 2011, 22:29
Subject: Re: [rti4empowerment] LOKPAL should be appointed by a referendum- ReplyFwd: Anna Hazare- A point of View
To: rti4empowerment@googlegroups.com; Bimal Khemani <bimal.khemani@gmail.com>; DSouza Wilberious Evanglist <wilevades@yahoo.co.uk>; Jagnarain Sharma <jagnarain.sharma@gmail.com>; virender johar <virender.johar@gmail.com>; Sandeep Jalan <legallyspeaking.jalan@gmail.com>; ramdasnaikadv@gmail.com; sabhapathiur@gmail.com; majorravi@gmail.com; vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in; Santosh Nargund <spnargund@yahoo.com>; urvashi sharma <aishwaryaj.hpage@gmail.com>; Abhimanyu <who.will.file.rti@gmail.com>; Bhaskar Prabhu <mahitiadhikarmanch@gmail.com>; Manoj Pai <manojpai@yahoo.com>; Dr.V.N. Sharma <vnsh44@gmail.com>; parivartan_india@rediffmail.com; kabir.rti@gmail.com; ash.aswathi@gmail.com; info@annahazare.org; Karmayog.org <info@karmayog.org>; Krishnaraj Rao <sahasipadyatri@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, 21 April 2011, 22:29
Subject: Re: [rti4empowerment] LOKPAL should be appointed by a referendum- ReplyFwd: Anna Hazare- A point of View
| This is definitely a pre planned attempt by certain political leaders in sheer disgust. In Lucknow today we have publicly burnt the effigy of Mr. Digvijay Singh inspite of all efforts by the Police to restrain us from doing so. Once we have taken the vow we are prepared to get it implemented till we can breathe our last. No one can question about the integrity of the members of Civil Society. The Corrupt NETAS who are afriad if such a JAN LOKPAL BILL is implemented then tomorrow they also will be behind bars, are just making such baseless irressponsible statements. REMEMBER JAB MAST HATHI CHALTA HAI TO KUTTEY BHONKTEY HAI. Let them BARK. The day is not far when the AAM ADMI will teach them a good lesson. There is no reason to get disheartened. EEK DIN HUM HONGEY KAMYAB
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.