Oh just now i read the article by Arundhati Roy published in Outlook. I am preparing for judicial services for an year. I have been studying law for last 8 years and to be very honest this time ( I love her way of expression) I couldn’t find anything in her article which can offend sensibilities of a person belonging to right wing. At most they can blame her for drawing bad analogy or saying what is not true. But contempt of court? Really? I am confused whether the judges are insensitive (for cancelling Prof. Saibaba’s bail) or hyper-sensitive?
by the way here is the link o the article :http://www.outlookindia.com/article/professor-pow/294265
Law is no stranger to prejudice or moral anxieties. Judicial pronouncements can sometimes cast aside constitutional values and defer to societal biases masquerading as righteousness. The recurrence of “collective conscience” in terror cases, where the threat of terrorism looms so large that it can overshadow the lack of evidence, is only too well known. Even so, the December 23 order of the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court takes one’s breath away. It rejected the regular bail plea moved by the lawyers of Delhi University professor, Saibaba, cancelled his interim bail which allowed him to receive treatment till December 31, and ordered him to surrender within 48 hours. Besides, the court issued a notice of criminal contempt to Arundhati Roy for her article, ‘Professor, POW’, published in Outlook magazine. The order will be remembered for its naked display of contempt for civil rights, partisanship and renunciation of judicial independence.
Rajya Sabha should be abolished. In recent pasts I have heard or read this argument especially from people belonging to right wing. the reason put forward is that loksabha which consists of directly elected members of parliament are real representatives and if a party has majority in loksabha, it should be allowed to pass certain bills successfully without being obstructed by rajya sabha (in which ruling party doesnt have sufficient majority) whose members are indirectly elected. The article I read says that the argument is flawed. firstly because the very purpose of creating another house of parliament is prevent the hasty legislation and secondly because in a first-past-the post-system, lok sabha members cant claim themselves to be only real and true representatives of majority.
Syria’s Western-backed opposition agreed on Monday to attend planned peace talks in Geneva but said President Bashar al-Assad could play no part in a transitional government aimed at ending the 2-1/2-year-old civil war.
The Syrian National Coalition also demanded the release of women and children from Syrian jails and an easing of military sieges of rebel-held areas as a precondition for going to Geneva.
The coalition statement said the Geneva talks should be based an international accord agreed in the Swiss city on June 30, 2012, which endorsed the idea of a transitional government.
Assad himself, after months of steady gains on the battlefield, has given no suggestion that he is ready to step down and his ministers have repeatedly said that the government would not show up in Geneva simply to surrender power.
He has also refused to talk to rebels viewed by Damascus as terrorists and said no one who backs foreign political or military intervention in Syria can sit at the negotiating table.
The Democratic Republic of Congo is set to sign a peace deal Monday with M23 rebels, a week after the group announced it was halting its fighting to pursue its goals through political means.
The Congolese army is backed by a 3,000-soldier U.N. “intervention brigade,” authorized to undertake offensive operations against the rebels. They seized the last of M23’s strongholds in North Kivu province last week, leading to the group announcing the end of the rebellion it launched in April 2012.
M23 consists of fighters who joined the Congolese army in a 2009 peace deal but later defected after complaining of poor treatment. Congo has accused neighboring Rwanda and Uganda of supporting M23, an allegation both countries deny.
Polling ended in the Maldives, where voters had Saturday made their third attempt to elect a president, hoping to put behind them two failed polls as a constitutional deadline approached.
“Voting was concluded across the country without major incidents,” a spokesman for the election commissioner’s office said.
In a major blow to the fundamentalist Jamaat-e-Islami ahead of polls in Bangladesh, the Election Commission on Thursday said the party cannot participate in the general election in line with a court order. Election Commissioner Shah Nawaz said the Jamaat would not be able to participate in the polls as the High Court had declared its registration illegal.
Banning the Jamaat may find support in some sections of Bangladesh’s civil society, but the action reeks of political persecution, coming as it does on the eve of elections. If the Jamaat’s attempts at stoking communalism for electoral gain are detestable, the guardians of Bangladesh’s secular character must ask themselves why it has been successful in this pursuit. In June, the BNP-Jamaat alliance trumped the AL comprehensively in elections to four major city corporations. Thanks to its lacklustre performance in office, Sheikh Hasina’s government has grown increasingly unpopular; banning the Jamaat will not resuscitate its poll prospects. In fact, doing so will not only deepen the theological-secular divide in Bangladesh, but also ensure the scars of 1971 remain open.