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

Dear Sarbajit,
     To receive contributions from citizens living abroad holding Indian passports (not all such citizens are NRIs), AAP would have obtained FCRA clearance or would have reported a one time donation. Even if there was a technical violation of any clause, the clearance if applied for can be suspended or cancelled. If clearance was not applied for in advance or the donation was not reported, then the Act would provide for the penalty. Is banning the political party the penalty specified in the Act? All parties would have been banned by now. In my view, anyone holding an Indian passport is excluded from the provision of Section 2. In fact, it can be argued that denial of participation in any political activity would violate the fundamental rights of such citizens. Pavan Nair

On 25 Oct 2013 12:19, "Sarbajit Roy" <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear respected Shanti Bhushanji

I most respectfully amplify your kind explanation to set out, for our subscribers and also your review, the present legal position based on FCRA (2010) in seriatim.

3. (1) No foreign contribution shall be accepted by any—
(a) candidate for election;
..
(e) political party or office-bearer thereof;
..
(f) organisation of a political nature as may be specified under sub-section (1) of section 5 by the Central Government;

####
2(h) "foreign contribution" means the donation, delivery or transfer made by any foreign source,—
..
ii) of any currency, whether Indian or foreign;
..
Explanation 1.— A donation, delivery or transfer of any article, currency or foreign security referred to in this clause by any person who has received it from any foreign source, either directly or through one or more persons, shall also be deemed to be foreign contribution within the meaning of this clause.

(j) "foreign source" includes, —
..
(x) a citizen of a foreign country;

Accordingly, the keyword "includes" in section 2(j) does not "exclude" NRI's as "foreign source". My reporting of what transpired in Court on 11.Oct and 23.Oct before Justice Nandrajog is substantially correct, and the term "includes" was squarely at issue, which was buttressed with submissions from other laws by the Petitioner therein- resulting in the order.

You may also have noticed that the words "delivery" and "transfer" also constitute contraventions, so nobody can deliver or transfer INDIAN CURRENCY on their behalf either.

In the circumstances, and seeing as how there is no restrictions on how political parties SPEND their money on non-political activity (like buying up prime real estate in Delhi), it may be prudent to recoup your personal investment in AAP and dissolve the party.

The banners/platforms of "India Against Corruption", "National Campaign for Political Reform in India" etc. have been carefully maintained for all like minded forces to combat the systemic and all pervasive decay in Constitutional bodies - especially the higher judiciary - and thereby rescue the nation. For eg. it is indeed a sad day for India when a judge of a High Court must openly bribe his seniors to get assigned to "wet" benches, or, the blood relations of judges of a High Court are practicing as designated seniors of the same court - and I can say this as IAC has the certified documents obtained under RTI after considerable struggle from the Court concerned.

With highest regards

Sarbajit Roy.

On 10/25/13, Shanti Bhushan <shantibhush@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sec 2(j)(x) of FCRA only defines a cit...

>>>> Hon'ble Court has set the next date as 10 Dec 2013, 2 days after the

>>>> election
>>>> result.
>>>>
>>>> This may influence AAP to side with Congress in event of a spl...

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