This is time to concentrate how one can contribute to the
drafting of JAN LOKPAL BILL for being presented before parliament.
There is no use talking on religion, caste, creed,
community in the drafting.
I FEEL THAT THOSE WHO WANT CORRUPTION TO CONTINUE WANT to punish
Bhushan duo, for the CD matter, which is a different matter altogether
and should
not be mingled with the THEME CORRUPTION FREE INDIA.
The committee appointed for drafting the JAN LOK PAL BILL,
must continue as Pranab Dada has stated.
Even if all the 10 members of the committee are corrupt,
will not make any difference for preparing a draft, because the
parliament has to pass it ultimately.
Government has said controversies involving some civil society members of
the joint comm for drafting the Lokpal Bill would not affect its working and
will work with the members to prepare a "strong and sound" anti-corruption
legislation.
After a meeting of Congress' Core Group headed by Sonia
Gandhi with Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh by her side, Finance Minister Pranab
Mukherjee said controversies "won't affect" the working of Lokpal
Bill drafting panel.
"Goverment members of the committee look forward to working with Anna
Hazare and his colleagues on the committee and to draft a strong and
sound Lokpal
Bill to fight corruption," he said.
Dada Mukherjee's remarks came after a 90-minute meeting of the Core
Group that discussed the issues threadbare.
The Prime Minister's remarks that government hopes
to introduce during the monsoon session of Parliament the Lokpal Bill.
YOUR VERSION IS CORRECT THAT 'people who are opposing
the committee and dividing the same on caste and communal lines are
the people who do not want such a bill taking a shape, leave alone
getting it passed in the legislature. ' All their efforts are pointing
towards derailing the entire process. And these are the same people
who have brought us to this sorry state of affairs today.
I FEEL THERE IS NO NEED TO OPPOSE MR. SARABJIT ROY WHO AS
AN INDIAN CITIZEN HAS EVERY RIGHT TO GIVE OPINION. We may agree or
not is a different matter.
But we must unite on one theme that we want;CORRUPTION FREE INDIA
regards
Dr JN Sharma
ADVOCATE/ HUMANRIGHTS ACTIVIST
On 4/25/11, S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoopkumar@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,
>
> Your opinion appears personally & grossly biased towards few persons.
> Whether it is Justice Santosh Hegde or Anna Hazare or the others. You are
> clearly not looking at the bigger picture. Or is it a case of 'severe
> heartburn & nothing else' as mentioned by Mr. Chandra K Jain in his message,
> the message which did not find place on the group message board or
> conveniently removed.
>
> The need of the hour is a strong anti corruption bill that works. The
> existing legislations have proved to be ineffective and have been misused,
> exploited or taken for a spin by our hardcore politicians and bureaucrats.
> Again and again. And you are certainly aware of the same. Our laws have
> been changed with the changing times. And that is required to keep pace
> with the dynamics & laws of motion. Several of the acts have been amended
> and several have been repealed and some have been superseded. If Lok Pal
> Bill can supersede any other weaker laws what is wrong in it ?
>
> You are questioning the fairness in the constitution of the draft committee
> from the civil society side just because it does not include a Muslim, a
> Christian, a Parsi or a Adi Dharmi. I do not know your community but you
> state that you represent a ten million strong community. It is sad this is
> coming from you, of all the people. Now you want the committee to be
> divided and formed on religion lines. Mayawati already raised that the
> committee does not contain someone from dalit community. And she wants the
> committee to be divided and formed on caste lines. Some one else will
> stand out and would demand that each state should have a member in the
> committee (what prevents ?). And every political party would seek
> representation in the committee. After all this is democracy. The
> people who are opposing the committee and dividing the same on caste and
> communal lines are the people who do not want such a bill taking a shape,
> leave alone getting it passed in the legislature. All their efforts are
> pointing towards derailing the entire process. And these are the same
> people who have brought us to this sorry state of affairs today.
>
> Anna Hazare never claimed he was a war hero. He was a driver in the army
> and was a partaker in the 1967 war. And Anna is reported to be using his
> piece of land (gifted to him by the govt.) for the welfare of the community.
> And Anna has earned his respect for the deeds he has done for the
> community. The govt. relented and is in the process of making a Lok Pal
> draft bill all because of Anna's involvement. Any other person would not
> have made such an impact on the government.
>
> If you cannot make a fruitful contribution atleast do not criticize or
> belittle or throw stones at others who are working on it and are trying to
> be open and transparent. And this would be your most constructive
> contribution to the nation. And we would all appreciate it.
>
> Just for your info, Mr. Salman Kursheed is not only a Muslim, but is also a
> Union Minister of Minority Affairs. And he is a member of the draft
> committee.
>
> Regards,
> S. Anoop Kumar.
>
> .
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
> Date: Apr 25, 10:41 am
> Subject: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!
> To: HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005
>
>
> Dear Anoop
>
> You have not understood my arguments in totality.
>
> 1) If the purpose of the Lokpal bill/Act is to curb corruption, then
> what
> about all the existing legislation ? Will these be dumped ?
>
> 2) Santosh Hegde (and I have appeared before him in the SC -- his
> orders
> refer to me as "Ld. counsel" [which BTW is a disparaging term]) is not
> an
> entirely clean judge either. If he was a great legal luminary he would
> be on
> the Law Commission instead of scrabbling about for demeaning post
> retirement
> sinecures like Lok Ayukta.
>
> 3) It is completely incorrect for you to say that the majority of
> Indians
> want a LokPal Bill or that my ideas are impractical. At best these can
> be
> the opinion of a vocal minority. In my own community (which runs into
> the
> millions) we stand for all the issues I listed and hence I speak for
> about
> 10 million secular Indians (which is not a small number).
>
> 4) Why is there not a single Muslim, Christian, Adi Dharmi, Parsi etc
> amongst the 5 persons Anna Hazare nominated ? Which political and
> religious
> forces are behind this army deserter and coward ? Even the so-called
> land
> given to Anna Hazare by the Army is no great evidence of his heroism,
> it is
> under a scheme given to every Army sepoy at the time
>
> Sarbajit.
>
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 5:33 PM, S. Anoop Kumar
> <s.anoopku...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,
>
>> If the civil society members in the draft committee are unbiased in
>> your opinion, then perhaps you have an answer as to which side they
>> are inclined towards and what are their selfish considerations that
>> would benefit them.
>
>> You are disputing the very essence of Lok Pal Bill when majority of
>> Indians are thinking that Lok Pal is what is required and we are
>> already late in having such a law in place. And majority Indians
>> think, wish, hope and pray that such a bill would bring in some change
>> in governance, responsibility and accountability in governance and
>> delivery mechanism.
>
>> And regarding the other alternatives to the Lok Pal Bill quoted by
>> you, you know for sure they are not practical and implementable and
>> still you suggest them. I see a day dreamer in you. It clearly
>> appears you are personally against a set of people and you fail to see
>> the good intentions of these people. And you will oppose anything
>> and everything these people would attempt to do. Just for the sake of
>> opposing. Even if they can bring in some good to the society.
>
>> Regards,
>> S. Anoop Kumar.
>
>> On Apr 24, 11:43 am, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Dear Mr Anoop Kumar
>
>> > 1) I dispute that Anna Hazare and his nominees constitute or represent
>> civil
>> > society.
>> > If we examine the 5, we find that each and every one of them is a former
>> > public servant or the progeny. Wouls any reasonable person classify this
>> as
>> > an unbiased panel.
>
>> > 2) I dispute that we need a LokPal to tackle corruption in the country.
>> What
>> > we need is a Constitutional amendment making military service compulsory
>> for
>> > every citizen below the age of 30 for "x" number of years. What we need
>> is a
>> > movement to throw out / exterminate the foreign parasites and their
>> progeny
>> > who drain our national resources like leeches. What we need is a
>> > constitutional amendment bestowing the right on each citizen to bear
>> > arms
>> /
>> > alternatively the repeal of the Arms Act. What we need is honest and
>> > autonomous police forces. What we need is for corrupt advocates and
>> judges
>> > to be strung up from the nearest lamppost. What we need is a complete
>> repeal
>> > of the Representation of the Peoples Act so that a citizen can only be
>> > an
>> MP
>> > / MLA for 1 term. The wishlist can go on and on. So stop dreaming and
>> start
>> > living.
>
>> > Sarbajit
>
>> > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 11:47 AM, S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoopku...@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>
>> > > Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,
>
>> > > I have been reading your messages which are mostly Anna bashing or
>> > > bashing of the other draft committee members of the proposed Lok Pall
>> > > Bill representing the civil society, that is us. Mr. Anna Hazare,
>> > > Mr. Santosh Hegde, Mr. Arvind Kejriwal, Mr. Shashi Bhushan and Mr.
>> > > Prashant Bhushan are only members of the committee drafting the
>> > > proposed Lok Pal bill. They are neither offered any constitution
>> > > post nor they are aspiring for one. Mr. Santosh Hegde served as
>> > > Judge of Supreme Court of India and is now Lok Ayuktha of Karnataka
>> > > and due to retire soon.
>
>> > > It is a foregone conclusion that India, now considered as one of the
>> > > most corrupt nations, needs a strong anti corruption law, the law
>> > > which can be enforceable, swift, fast and result oriented. For which
>> > > we need to have a strong bill. A deterrent in the first place. The
>> > > bill which is devoid of any short comings and loop holes which would
>> > > be conveniently exploited to their advantage by the mighty and
>> > > powerful. In short, we do not need just another bill which is just
>> > > seen or read on papers but remains absolutely unenforceable or
>> > > powerless. The toothless tiger.
>
>> > > Mr. Shashi Bhushan has been advocating a strong Lok Pal Bill for the
>> > > past 40 years. He understand the dynamics of both politics and also
>> > > law. Mr. Prashant Bhushan and also Santosh Hegde are other legal
>> > > luminaries. Added with social activists like Mr. Anna Hazare and Mr.
>> > > Arvind Kejriwal in the committee, we can atleast hope for a strong and
>> > > enforceable bill that would protect the interests of the citizens of
>> > > our nation.
>
>> > > Instead of criticizing the draft committee members, and every other
>> > > who is supporting the Lok Pal Bill, I wish you concentrate on the
>> > > draft bill with constructive suggestions to make it effective and free
>> > > from errors or legal loop holes, get it tabled before the parliament
>> > > houses and also get it passed. This would be a great contribution
>> > > from your side. To us as a nation and to our coming generations.
>
>> > > Regards,
>> > > S. Anoop Kumar.
>
>> > > On Apr 23, 6:22 pm, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > Dear Sankar
>
>> > > > As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why
>> say
>> > > > Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
>> > > > conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
>> > > > when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally
>> demanding
>> > > > to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
>> > > > that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
>> > > > people will be selected.
>
>> > > > Tomorrow if DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
>> > > > Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep
>> ?
>
>> > > > Sarbajit
>
>> > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Sankar Pani
>
>> > > > <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation
>> > > > > and
>> are
>> > > > > absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be
>> better
>> > > in the
>> > > > > interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the
>> bill
>> > > else
>> > > > > will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute
>> corruption
>> > > free
>> > > > > nation.
>
>> > > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:43 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>
>> > > > >> Your statements are grossly objectionable.
>
>> > > > >> 1) It is EASY to find competent people who are absolutely
>> > > > >> incorruptible and without any credible allegations against them.
>
>> > > > >> 2) The issue is not about the LokPak Bill's contents or the
>> fashion
>> > > > >> it is brought about, BUT about the NEED for it in the first
>> > > > >> place.
>
>> > > > >> 3) Why should we the people of India settle for "RELATIVELY
>> > > > >> LESS CORRUPT or CONTROVERSIAL PEOPLE" ??
>> > > > >> You should reconsider the wisdom of statements you make in a
>> > > > >> public forum.,
>
>> > > > >> Sarbajit
>
>> > > > >> On Apr 22, 8:56 am, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > > >> > If we start finding faults with each and every person, then
>> > > > >> > only
>> god
>> > > if
>> > > > >> > any
>> > > > >> > will be eligible in your scale to the Drafting committee.At the
>> > > present
>> > > > >> > juncture we can choose relatively less corrupt or less
>> controversial
>> > > > >> > people
>> > > > >> > but never possible to find a person who do not have any such
>> > > allegation.
>> > > > >> > to
>> > > > >> > me it seems that we have to accept the best in the existing
>> > > committee
>> > > > >> > and
>> > > > >> > and should judge the objective of the committee.
>
>> > > > >> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:14 AM, sarbajit roy <
>> sroy...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > >> > > Dear Satishji
>
>> > > > >> > > For the same reason that a mongoose wants to kill a snake.
>
>> > > > >> > > Sarbajit
>
>> > > > >> > > On Apr 22, 8:27 am, Satish Kumar Kapoor <
>> kapoorsat...@yahoo.com>
>> > > > >> > > wrote:
>> > > > >> > > > Dear Sarbajit
>
>> > > > >> > > > Why u want to kill drafting committee?
>
>> > > > >> > > > S.K.Kapoor
>
>> > > > >> > > > ________________________________
>> > > > >> > > > sense ?
>
>> > > > >> > --
>> > > > >> > Sankar Prasad Pani
>> > > > >> > A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
>> > > > >> > India
>> > > > >> > PIN-751007
>> > > > >> > Cell- 9437279278http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/
>
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > Sankar Prasad Pani
>> > > > > A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
>> > > > > India
>> > > > > PIN-751007
>> > > > > Cell- 9437279278
>> > > > >http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/
>
No comments:
Post a Comment