What's new

Indian Political Corner | All Updates & Discussions.

PM Modi's Temple Visit in Nepal Sparks Row in Lok Sabha - NDTV

Trinamool Congress MP Sudip Bandyopadhyay, who raised the issue, said the PM should have also wished people on Eid last week.

"The Prime Minister offered Puja at a temple in Nepal. We appreciate that. He must also communicate 'Eid Mubarak'", Mr Bandyopadhyay said to loud protests by BJP lawmakers.

:mad: Sickular TMC at it again ! Hindu leader visitng a temple is communal :mad:
 
.
Right, to be secular you need to abuse the major community. :sick:
1910602_535000456601267_2009762729306213404_n.jpg
 
. .
49 दिन के मुख्यमंत्री का सत्ता के बिना वही हाल है, जैसे नशेड़ी जोश-जोश में चरस छोड़ तो देता है लेकिन कुछ दिन बाद चरस के बिना पागल हो जाता है..:cheesy:

10441434_1509043912640469_7923255214477606034_n.jpg
 
. .
Wonder what the reaction will be if someone started a No Burkha for equality campaign :lol:

Oh wait...secularism.

It should be made a crime for a secular Hindu to open his mouth or express his thought in any form or fashion. Five years prison sentence.
 
. .
Kosi is a mighty river. Seven Himaliyan rivers get together to form this river. She starts from Nepal and enter Bihar where she meets Ganga.Flood in areas around Kosi is a common phenomenon. There was a massive flood in 2008 four Bihar districts as the river changed its course in Nepal. It is said that it was a man made flood.

Recently a natural lake was created in Nepal due to landslide in the river path. The lake was about to burst. Timely intervention from Indian govt. resulted in quick action by Nepalese govt. which avoided flood. In past, due to anti-India sentiment Nepalese authorities were less serious about flood in Kosi bed in Bihar.

We thanks Narendra Modi for completely changing attitude of Nepal.This is first time any government (central or state) has taken a serious stand on flood in Bihar. Secularists and communists are crying over Modi's visit to Pashupati Nath Mandi and offering of sandalwood there. But this has resulted in massive goodwill for Narendra Modi in Bihar.

10525974_342828359201436_3627249411874965322_n.png


Kosi: a flood of praise for Modi - The Hindu
 
.
Restaurateur Pyare Khan said, "The sadhus who frequent the river during the monsoon are saying that it is because of Modi’s gift of 2500kg of Sandalwood to the Pashupatinath Temple in Kathmandu, that Mother Kosi spared us. Why didn't earlier prime ministers think of doing this?"

Now I know why the seculars are angry !! :rofl:
 
.
New Delhi: The Union Cabinet will on Wednesday discuss a proposal which calls for giving more powers to the Juvenile Justice Board to decide on whether a juvenile above 16 years involved in heinous crimes such as rape is to be sent to a correctional centres or tried in a regular court.

Importantly, all Central ministries have given their approval to the proposed amendments to the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and it has now been placed on the agenda for today's cabinet meeting.

The changes in the law come against the backdrop of outrage over the conviction of a minor in the Delhi gang-rape case of December, 2012.

The juvenile accused was tried in a juvenile court last year and sentenced to three years in a reform home.

A lighter punishment given to him despite his involvement in December 16 gang-rape case triggered a nationwide debate on punishment for juveniles convicted of heinous crimes.

However, according to the Bill, in no case the juvenile involved in a heinous crime will be sentenced to death or life imprisonment either when tried under the provisions of JJ Act or under the provisions of IPC.

Apart from that the amendments also include facilitating faster adoption of children and setting up foster care homes. The WCD Ministry intends to make the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) the statutory body, which means it will have powers to regulate inter-country adoptions along with issuing guidelines on adoption and related matter.

Meanwhile, the Amnesty International has voiced serious concerns over the proposed amendment to the Juvenile Justice Act, arguing that children must not be treated as adults under new juvenile justice law being considered by the central government.

“The Indian government must reject proposed amendments to juvenile justice laws that could allow children to be treated as adults in cases of serious crimes,” Amnesty International said ina press release issued today.

“Children can and do sometimes commit crimes as violent as those committed by adults. And the pain and anger of a victim or their family may well be the same regardless of whether a crime was committed by a child or an adult,” said Shashikumar Velath, Deputy Chief Executive, Amnesty International India.

“But children’s culpability, even when they commit ‘adult’ crimes, is different because of their immaturity. Their punishment should acknowledge this difference, reflect children’s special capacity for reform and rehabilitation, and be grounded in an understanding of adolescent psychology,” Velath added.

On 18 June 2014, Ministry of Women and Child Development stated that the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, would be repealed and re-enacted. A bill is likely to be introduced in Parliament soon to replace the Act.

Under the bill, in cases where children aged between 16 and 18 are accused of serious crimes including murder, rape and acid attacks, authorities will conduct an assessment of factors including the “premeditated nature” of the offence and “the child’s ability to understand the consequences of the offence”. Based on the assessment, children can be prosecuted in an ordinary criminal court, and punished as adults if convicted. They cannot be sentenced to death or life imprisonment without the possibility of release.

Union Minister for Women and Child Development has said that the amendments are intended to deter violence against women because “50 per cent of all sexual crimes are committed by 16-year-olds who know the Juvenile Justice Act”. However, according to official data, children were allegedly involved in 5.6 per cent of all registered rape cases in 2013, and in 1.2 per cent of all registered criminal cases.

National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has described the proposed amendments as “retrograde in nature and against the principles of reformative and restorative justice” and said they would “defeat the intent and purpose of the juvenile justice system”. Several child rights organizations have also opposed the changes.

National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro-Sciences (NIMHANS) told the government in a joint submission with the National Law School of India University, “making the argument of maturity based on the nature of crime does not stand scrutiny. Findings in neuroscience and adolescent psychology confirm that juveniles are more susceptible to negative influences and peer pressure, are less likely to focus on future outcomes, are less risk-averse than adults, have poor impulse control, and evaluate risks and benefits differently all of which pre-dispose them to make poor decisions.”

The institute said that offences by children were more likely to happen in “circumstances of neglect, exploitation and abuse, and the child having been socialized in a way where his/her decision making goes awry, rather than in a context of premeditation and criminality.”

The Supreme Court, in judgements delivered in July 2013 and March 2014, supported the position that all children accused of crimes must be tried under juvenile justice laws.

Under international law, anyone under the age of 18 is a child. Any amendment that would lower the age at which juvenile justice rules would be applicable to below 18 years would violate India’s international legal obligations.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child – the expert body which monitors the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), to which India is a state party – has specifically recommended that states not allow 16 or 17-year-old children to be treated as adults.

“The Juvenile Justice Act was introduced in 2000 in part to comply with India’s obligations under the CRC. Any amendment that lowers the age at which juvenile justice rules apply would set India back several years in its treatment of child offenders,” said Shashikumar Velath.

The Justice Verma Committee, set up by the central government in December 2012 to review laws against sexual violence, recommended that the upper-age limit for juvenile justice rules not be reduced from 18 to 16.

With Agency inputs


 
.
New Delhi: The Union Cabinet will on Wednesday discuss a proposal which calls for giving more powers to the Juvenile Justice Board to decide on whether a juvenile above 16 years involved in heinous crimes such as rape is to be sent to a correctional centres or tried in a regular court.

Importantly, all Central ministries have given their approval to the proposed amendments to the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and it has now been placed on the agenda for today's cabinet meeting.

The changes in the law come against the backdrop of outrage over the conviction of a minor in the Delhi gang-rape case of December, 2012.

The juvenile accused was tried in a juvenile court last year and sentenced to three years in a reform home.

A lighter punishment given to him despite his involvement in December 16 gang-rape case triggered a nationwide debate on punishment for juveniles convicted of heinous crimes.

However, according to the Bill, in no case the juvenile involved in a heinous crime will be sentenced to death or life imprisonment either when tried under the provisions of JJ Act or under the provisions of IPC.

Apart from that the amendments also include facilitating faster adoption of children and setting up foster care homes. The WCD Ministry intends to make the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) the statutory body, which means it will have powers to regulate inter-country adoptions along with issuing guidelines on adoption and related matter.

Meanwhile, the Amnesty International has voiced serious concerns over the proposed amendment to the Juvenile Justice Act, arguing that children must not be treated as adults under new juvenile justice law being considered by the central government.

“The Indian government must reject proposed amendments to juvenile justice laws that could allow children to be treated as adults in cases of serious crimes,” Amnesty International said ina press release issued today.

“Children can and do sometimes commit crimes as violent as those committed by adults. And the pain and anger of a victim or their family may well be the same regardless of whether a crime was committed by a child or an adult,” said Shashikumar Velath, Deputy Chief Executive, Amnesty International India.

“But children’s culpability, even when they commit ‘adult’ crimes, is different because of their immaturity. Their punishment should acknowledge this difference, reflect children’s special capacity for reform and rehabilitation, and be grounded in an understanding of adolescent psychology,” Velath added.

On 18 June 2014, Ministry of Women and Child Development stated that the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, would be repealed and re-enacted. A bill is likely to be introduced in Parliament soon to replace the Act.

Under the bill, in cases where children aged between 16 and 18 are accused of serious crimes including murder, rape and acid attacks, authorities will conduct an assessment of factors including the “premeditated nature” of the offence and “the child’s ability to understand the consequences of the offence”. Based on the assessment, children can be prosecuted in an ordinary criminal court, and punished as adults if convicted. They cannot be sentenced to death or life imprisonment without the possibility of release.

Union Minister for Women and Child Development has said that the amendments are intended to deter violence against women because “50 per cent of all sexual crimes are committed by 16-year-olds who know the Juvenile Justice Act”. However, according to official data, children were allegedly involved in 5.6 per cent of all registered rape cases in 2013, and in 1.2 per cent of all registered criminal cases.

National Commission for Protection of Child Rights has described the proposed amendments as “retrograde in nature and against the principles of reformative and restorative justice” and said they would “defeat the intent and purpose of the juvenile justice system”. Several child rights organizations have also opposed the changes.

National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro-Sciences (NIMHANS) told the government in a joint submission with the National Law School of India University, “making the argument of maturity based on the nature of crime does not stand scrutiny. Findings in neuroscience and adolescent psychology confirm that juveniles are more susceptible to negative influences and peer pressure, are less likely to focus on future outcomes, are less risk-averse than adults, have poor impulse control, and evaluate risks and benefits differently all of which pre-dispose them to make poor decisions.”

The institute said that offences by children were more likely to happen in “circumstances of neglect, exploitation and abuse, and the child having been socialized in a way where his/her decision making goes awry, rather than in a context of premeditation and criminality.”

The Supreme Court, in judgements delivered in July 2013 and March 2014, supported the position that all children accused of crimes must be tried under juvenile justice laws.

Under international law, anyone under the age of 18 is a child. Any amendment that would lower the age at which juvenile justice rules would be applicable to below 18 years would violate India’s international legal obligations.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child – the expert body which monitors the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), to which India is a state party – has specifically recommended that states not allow 16 or 17-year-old children to be treated as adults.

“The Juvenile Justice Act was introduced in 2000 in part to comply with India’s obligations under the CRC. Any amendment that lowers the age at which juvenile justice rules apply would set India back several years in its treatment of child offenders,” said Shashikumar Velath.

The Justice Verma Committee, set up by the central government in December 2012 to review laws against sexual violence, recommended that the upper-age limit for juvenile justice rules not be reduced from 18 to 16.

With Agency inputs




Thank god, does that mean that juvenile rapist of 2012 will remain in jail ??

Am confused 50% of sexual crimes done by 16 year olds but according to official data children were responsible for only 5.6% of rape cases ? Is something wrong here ?
 
.
Thank god, does that mean that juvenile rapist of 2012 will remain in jail ??

Am confused 50% of sexual crimes done by 16 year olds but according to official data children were responsible for only 5.6% of rape cases ? Is something wrong here ?
Cabinet Clears Changes to Juvenile Justice Act - NDTV
The cabinet has approved the bill to amend the Juvenile Justice Act, which opens a pathway to treat minors above the age of 16, who are accused of heinous crimes like rape and murder, as adults.

The bill empowers the Juvenile Justice Board to decide whether a minor would be tried in a regular court or sent to a correctional centre. But in case a juvenile undergoes a regular trial, he can't be sentenced to death penalty or life imprisonment.

They should,even if this law if applied retrospectively.
 
. .
Opposition targets Modi for not
greeting nation on Eid
Updated: Aug 5, 2014 05:24 PM , By
Smriti Kak Ramachandran
Prime Minister Narendra Modi gifts
sandalwood to the Pashupatinath
temple in Kathmandhu, Nepal on
Monday. PTI
Raising the issue in the Lok Sabha,
TMC’s Sudip Bandyopadhyay alluded
to Modi’s temple visit in Nepal and
said he should also greet the
followers of other religions.
The Opposition on Tuesday targeted
Prime Minister Narendra Modi for
not extending greetings to the
nation on the occasion of Eid, even
as he has been visiting temples
across the country and more
recently, the Pashupatinath Temple
in Nepal on Monday.
Speaking during Zero Hour, TMC’s
Sudip Bandyopadhyay, who began
with a reference to communal
tensions in the country and asked
the government to remain alert and
cautious, alluded to Mr. Modi’s
temple visit in Nepal and said that
while he appreciates his religious
sentiments, he should communicate
greetings to the followers of other
religions as well. “A new government
has come into power; Government of
India, I think, should remain alert,
cautious and vigilant to prevent
communal tensions; otherwise, safety
and security of the common people
of the country and the secular fabric
of this vast country will be under
threat. The Government should rise
to the occasion and assure the
House,” he said.
He said the Prime Minister visited
Pashupatinath temple and offered
puja with 2400 kg ghee. “…We
appreciate it, but the PM should
have greeted the nation on Eid also.
It was equally expected that the
Prime Minister should communicate
Eid Mubarak to others also.… as
these are the common sentiments,
ethos and feelings of the country. All
castes and creeds, all sections of the
people should be greeted with
happy Vijayadashmi at the time of
Vijayadashmi and Eid Mubarak at
the time of Eid. Why is there such a
difference?” he said.
Mr. Bandyopadhyaya’s observations
drew a sharp reaction from the
Treasury benches and the BJP MPs
objected to the comments. The
Congress, however, wanted to raise
the issue as well, but Speaker
Sumitra Mahajan asked Adhir Ranjan
to associate with the TMC.
At this, the Congress began
protesting and trooped into the well
of the House to raise slogan for not
being allowed to speak despite
having given notices. The House was
then adjourned for 15 minutes.
Later, Mr. Chowdhury again raised
the issue and said the Congress has
no objection to Mr. Modi visiting
temples, but after Independence,
most Prime Ministers, especially Atal
Behari Vajpayee, had followed a
tradition of hosting an Iftar party
during Ramzan. He wanted to know
why this practice was discontinued.
This comment also drew a criticism
from the BJP and the Speaker said
personal matters cannot be raised in
the House.
Parliamentary Affairs Minister M.
Venkaiah Naidu made a statement in
the House, denying that the
government has not treated other
religions on par. “This Government
believes in ‘Sarva Dharma
Sambhava’. The Prime Minister
visited Pashupatinath Temple. He
has also given his greetings to the
whole Muslim community across the
country. It has been widely
published,” he said.
http://thehindu.com/news/national/o...-nation-on-eid/article6284043.ece/?secid=2780

What about this?

 
. .
Back
Top Bottom