Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Re: [IAC#RG] CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW RESTRAINT IN HIS OBSERVATIONS

Dear Deepak
Thanks for your query. What I meant was theory of government and social contracts. What I meant the difference between "what is" and "what ought to be" is like difference between "reality" and "wishful thinking" respectively. Let us remember the hunger strike by the Anna Hazare and demonstrations Ram Leela Maidan for punishing corrupt officials and hunger strike and demonstration to continue till enactment of strong law for Lokpal and Lokayukt law. Though it was initially looked like a wishful thinking but later became a reality when the parliament enacted and notified the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 (1 of 2014). During the strike / demonstration those who were in power and those who were in opposition have now reversed their roles. But where is Lokpal and Lokayukta? Has corruption vanished? Answer could be yes, no or don't know. However, one need to ponder as to, why those went on strike and wanted strong law, after assuming power of governance the nation have not appointed Lokpal at the Centre? The amendments were incorporated in Prevention of Corruption Act, functioning of Vigilance Commission, Investigation of corruption case was meant to be on speedy track, Declaration of Assets and Liabilities by public servants under section 44 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 - filing of Returns by public servants etc. was made mandatory etc. When the government system of procurement, tendering, auction, etc. is same, procedures are same, services offered are same etc. how could one presume that corruption which was going on in the public offices before enactment of of Lokpal and Lokayukta has suddenly vanished, merely by change of guard or change of government? Corruption is, therefore, unlikely to be either eliminated or reduced, it is just reporting of corruption cases by media is stopped.
 
 
Dr. Ratnakar Gedam  




From: deepakmalho11 <deepakmalho11@yahoo.co.in>
To: rgedam@yahoo.com; indiaresists@lists.riseup.net
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 10:10 PM
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW RESTRAINT IN HIS OBSERVATIONS

What you are saying is theory ? You are srating that there is fiff between what ought to be and what is. Even though around the world such governance methods of 3 pillars exist the actual situation of functionality differs.  Ib India it is a poor example and deep rooted nexus.  Easy to just comment.on others .anyone  can do that or criticise. .. find the ways to stop it. .only if thoughts germinate they will result in action on ground. .


Sent from Samsung Mobile



-------- Original message --------
From: Ratnakar Gedam <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Date:
To: Indiaresists <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW RESTRAINT IN HIS OBSERVATIONS


Are those commenting upon judiciary, laws, bureaucracy, governance, etc. are qualified to comment. Firstly, one must study "as the things exist", or "as the judiciary is, bureaucracy is, as the law is etc. next step is try to understand why the things are "as they are". There is difference between what aught to be and what is. When one find faults with system in place either it could be lack of proper education or knowledge or unguided person who is unable to focus and identify the root cause and find solution to it. In the world every problem has a solution. Most of the discussion at emanating from the so called India-resists seems to be from confused lot. 

All over the world there are more are less identical common law system where universal principles are same such as separation of power in governance of democratically elected government. That is, executive, legislature and judiciary are three pillars providing check and balance of functions. In common law countries there are rights and privileges conferred on citizens through enunciated guarantee by written constitution. The functions of law making is distributed between federal or central government and states in federal system etc. None of the arguments put forward in the emails circulated have either theoretical or practical or academic basis. It is like self deception.   


Dr. Ratnakar Gedam  




From: ramasamy pitchappan <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net; ravindra malhotra <rnmalhotra_in@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2016 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW RESTRAINT IN HIS OBSERVATIONS

Indian judiciary and governance is a 
systematic vandelism by the (pseudo) elites - wherever they are.

The problem is British left, but not their beuracracy. This applies in the case of judges also. But British have changed, we still have their code of conduct.

Will India become quality based, one day!

Doubtful. Root cause is the failure of our educational system, and failure of our elites. Most are egocentric and do not participate in nation building exercise - global economy a boon for them. This lead to bickering, private education, somehow employed in th Govt, or otherwise, get "alms", amaze wealth, and abuse all innocents, 95% of India, for their favour. With every move, corruption is systematised: a perfect system, including judiciary, has been developed.

India is still the best - we boast - for democracy and  tolerance. But when will a common man get a service from GOVT, without paying a 'price'. 

The light in the tunnel is far away.

Pitchappan
On Friday, August 26, 2016, 20:21, ravindra malhotra <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net> wrote:
Evidently, there are ills  in our judicial system. No use blaming only judiciary for the same. It is a combination of so many factors - some of which that come to mind are as follows -

1. Outdated laws that the executive has failed to update.
2. Very large number of vacancies in Judiciaries for which political bosses and executives are equally responsible as the judiciary itself. Bureaucratic delays in approvals are galore.
3. Government the biggest litigant - responsible the bureaucratic approach - some times Govt goes for litigation for small sums up to supreme court against poor employees / residents.
4. Advocates - who by unscrupulous means keep on extending the proceedings by forcing adjournments for their personnel gains
5. Corruption amongst advocates as well as judiciary

R.N.Malhotra

--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 8/19/16, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:

Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW RESTRAINT IN HIS OBSERVATIONS
To: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Date: Friday, August 19, 2016, 1:31 PM



 




19/8/16



This holier than thou attitude of the Chief justice is
not helpful. It clearly negates any suggestion for
improvement in the working of the judiciary. Corruption is
not an issue for him. Suggestion that there should be court
of Appeals in metropolitan cities
  like Chennai ,Calcutta and Mumbai is not acceptable to him.
Commercial courts for Govt. litigation is not being
implemented.Gram Panchayats and alternative fora to ease the
pendency is not being implemented.Regds  






From:
indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net
<indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of
Venkatraman Ns <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com>

Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2016 7:38 PM

To: indiaresists@lists.riseup.net

Subject: [IAC#RG] CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA NEED TO SHOW
RESTRAINT IN HIS OBSERVATIONS
 














To



India Against Corruption  
   









         
               
               
         CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
NEED TO SHOW  RESTRAINT IN  HIS
OBSERVATIONS
 



In open court, Chief Justice of
India has accused central government of bringing the entire
judiciary to a "grinding halt" by sitting on the
recommendations of the collegium for appointment and
transfer
  of judges to high courts across the country. It is
disturbing that he went to the extent of saying that the
court would not shy away from a confrontation with the
government, if driven to a corner.  He made such
remarks even when the Attorney General assured
  that the issue would be taken up at the highest
level.



Even while the Chief Justice made
such sharp remarks, the law minister has said that 
appointment of number of judges would be finalized very
soon. Is Chief Justice not aware of this?



The collegium issue has been under
discussions for quite sometime now and many have questioned
the judges themselves appointing the judges , when several
judges at various levels have been caught in corruption
  scandals with one former Chief Justice of India
himself  being one of the accused.
Government stand appears  to
be that there must be proper procedure and transparency in
selection of judges. There is nothing wrong with this view.

 Chief Justice rejects the
government's view and insists that he should have the
final say. This stand of the Chief Justice is the origin of
the confrontation.



It would have been appropriate if
Chief Justice has read the mood of the people, who are
increasingly not sure about  the caliber of some of the
judges.


Reflecting such public mood , he
should accept the need for a level of transparency in the
appointment of judges. Threat of confrontation by Chief
Justice is not in tune with the functioning  of the
judiciary.
 



N.S.Venkataraman
Nandini Voice for The
Deprived







-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

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





Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)