Re: [IAC#RG] IMHO, AAP may be banned after Delhi elections

Although I am not a blind supporter of any political party, after seeing this post, one thing comes to mind.

The Supreme Court is asking for foreign funding of the AAP. The other political parties are also raising questions.

But one thing is clear, that AAP has atleast a known source of all its funding where as most other political parties do not have the known source of funding. It could be even ISI

So why not ban all the political parties in the country who cannot tell you the source of even a single rupee in their fund??

 

Vineet Ruia
President
Bharat Bachao Sangathan
Kolkata

"RIGHT is the right to fight the MIGHT,
MIGHT is never a source to achieve the RIGHT"

On Saturday, 26 October 2013 9:11 PM, Shanti Bhushan <shantibhush@gmail.com> wrote:

A careful look at the definition of foreign source shows that it focusses on the personality of the donor  and not the place from where he is donating. Even if a foreign Citizen comes to India converts his dollars into Indian rupees and donates to a political party it will still qualify as a donation from a forign source.Likewise if an Indian Citizen while on a visit abroad remits a donation from outside India it will not qualify as one from a foreign source .That is why the isisue is beyond any doubt whatsoever.

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 25, 2013, at 7:49 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Sir

There is a vast body of case law on the subject.

For convenience I can refer to the decision in IAC's very own "Veeresh Malik versus Indian Olympic Association" in Delhi High Court - which decision incidentally is the bedrock for political parties being brought under RTI.by CIC. Please read para 44 onwards from the said judgment.

http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/SRB/judgement/20-01-2010/SRB07012010CW8762007.pdf

In short, the term "include" is used to ENLARGE the language of the statute, and it usage is ordinarily not construed/restricted as "means" (as you have used it).

Nonetheless, the language of the statute under examination is perfectly clear on "foreign sources", even if we take the ordinary or dictionary meanings of the 2 terms.

"Foreign" means "from outside". If currency comes from outside India it is "foreign". This aspect was also clearly debated at time of amending the Rep. of Peoples Act in 2010.

Today when an NRI cannot vote from outside India, the question of his donating money from outside for political activity is excluded equally. We saw very well what happened during the Khalistani, Naga, Tamil etc. separatist movements which were foreign funded by NRIs to wage war against the Indian State. As patriots we cannot permit this and neither should we defend such dangerous propositions.

Sarbajit

On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Shanti Bhushan <shantibhush@gmail.com> wrote:

The use of the wotd include further show that if a foreign citizen had to be expressly included an Indian Citzen resident outside India could not be deemed to be included just by implication.Nobody can have the least doubt in the matter.

Sent from my iPad

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in