Updated Feb 10, 2012 at 03:57pm IST
Age row: General VK Singh withdraws his petition
New Delhi: Army Chief General VK Singh has withdrawn his petition filed in the Supreme Court on the controversy over his date of birth. General Singh's counsel UU Lalit told the two-judge bench of Justice RM Lodha and Justice HL Gokhale that they do not wish to press the matter any further in the court. The apex court also asked the General to give an undertaking that he would accept his date of birth as May 10, 1950 within the next 48 hours.
The petition was withdrawn after Attorney General Goolam E Vahanvati told the apex court that the government had never questioned the bonafide or integrity of General Singh and contesting the petition did not reflect any lack of confidence in the Army Chief.
Earlier, Vahanvati had told the bench that even though the government was resisting General Singh's plea, it was not against the highly decorated soldier.
General Singh's lawyer Puneet Bali said that the petition was withdrawn as the Army Chief was fighting for his honour and integrity. Claiming that the petition was not about General Singh's tenure, Bali said that the petition was only about determining the correct date of birth.
"The Government of India and the General sorted out the matter gracefully and amicably. Right from the time the petition was filed in the court, it was a matter of integrity. This petition was not meant for extension of service. We are satisfied with the court's ruling as the honour and integrity (of the General) has been restored. The honour and integrity is restored, and it wasn't meant to be beyond that for us. The matter has been amicably solved and we have withdrawn the matter," said Bali.
Adding that "this is the end of the matter", he said that they don't plan to agitate further on the matter.
Earlier, in a major setback to General Singh, the Supreme Court directed him to accept May 10, 1950 as his date of birth and asked him to withdraw his plea or else the court would pass an order on it. The General would complete his tenure as Army Chief on May 31, 2012 and retire on the same date.
click here to read more
Friday, February 10, 2012
Home Minister agrees that Police are Corrupt
February 7, 2012, 9:24 AM IST.Chidambaram: Poor Conditions ‘Dehumanize’ Police.
In an interview, India’s Minister for Home Affairs P. Chidambaram, the country’s top law enforcement official, addressed the issues of corruption and lawlessness in the police force and described his government’s reform efforts. This post accompanies a front-page article by WSJ Mumbai reporter Geeta Anand on corruption in India’s police force published today. An edited transcript:
WSJ: What has your Congress Party-led government done to improve law enforcement in India?
P.C.: At the level of administration of criminal justice and the level of policing, these are matters which fall exclusively under the states’ jurisdiction. We have tried to help, or, if you wish, put in checks and balances by creating a number of institutions — for example, the human rights commission — at the national level and at the state level. Then there are commissions that deal with the most vulnerable sections, the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, women and children. There are commissions on each one of these sections at the national level, but most states have commissions at the state level as well.
The Supreme Court has laid down a set of minimum measures for police reform. Now, we impress upon the states the need to put in place these mechanisms. For example, a committee to decide on transfers and postings at the state level, another committee to deal with complaints against police. Many states have put in place these committees, some have not.
Even where states have put in place these committees, many of them are not quite functional and don’t really exercise the authority that they are expected to exercise. The Supreme Court continues to hear the cases and pull up the states (that) have either not set up committees, or, having set up the committees, have not empowered them. We fully support these reforms, which the Supreme Court has laid down.
WSJ: One frequent criticism is the corruption of the police forces. Former Mumbai Police Commissioner Julio Ribeiro, among others, told me that corruption has become systematized in hiring so that applicants for the position of constable are routinely asked to pay bribes in order to get the jobs. That money goes to state politicians, who not only influence hiring, but also the discipline, transfers and postings of officers on the entire police force, these critics say. They say police commissioners feel compelled to heed the wishes of politicians because they control postings and transfers of the police commissioners. This scenario means the police commissioner doesn’t control his men and there’s little discipline in the force, these critics say.
P.C.: Well, I accept the criticism. I accept the criticism but I would have liked the critics to have implemented reforms when they were in office, not criticized their successors when they have retired. All of these very fine police officers headed police offices at some time or another and that is when they should have implemented reforms.
Click here to read the full transcript: Chidambaram: Poor Conditions ‘Dehumanize’ Police
Comment: What has the Home Minister done to investigate the secret swiss bank account holders. Most criminals are protected by Politicians and some of them are criminals themselves. Can Politicians cleanse the Police when both are working in tandem?
In an interview, India’s Minister for Home Affairs P. Chidambaram, the country’s top law enforcement official, addressed the issues of corruption and lawlessness in the police force and described his government’s reform efforts. This post accompanies a front-page article by WSJ Mumbai reporter Geeta Anand on corruption in India’s police force published today. An edited transcript:
WSJ: What has your Congress Party-led government done to improve law enforcement in India?
P.C.: At the level of administration of criminal justice and the level of policing, these are matters which fall exclusively under the states’ jurisdiction. We have tried to help, or, if you wish, put in checks and balances by creating a number of institutions — for example, the human rights commission — at the national level and at the state level. Then there are commissions that deal with the most vulnerable sections, the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, women and children. There are commissions on each one of these sections at the national level, but most states have commissions at the state level as well.
The Supreme Court has laid down a set of minimum measures for police reform. Now, we impress upon the states the need to put in place these mechanisms. For example, a committee to decide on transfers and postings at the state level, another committee to deal with complaints against police. Many states have put in place these committees, some have not.
Even where states have put in place these committees, many of them are not quite functional and don’t really exercise the authority that they are expected to exercise. The Supreme Court continues to hear the cases and pull up the states (that) have either not set up committees, or, having set up the committees, have not empowered them. We fully support these reforms, which the Supreme Court has laid down.
WSJ: One frequent criticism is the corruption of the police forces. Former Mumbai Police Commissioner Julio Ribeiro, among others, told me that corruption has become systematized in hiring so that applicants for the position of constable are routinely asked to pay bribes in order to get the jobs. That money goes to state politicians, who not only influence hiring, but also the discipline, transfers and postings of officers on the entire police force, these critics say. They say police commissioners feel compelled to heed the wishes of politicians because they control postings and transfers of the police commissioners. This scenario means the police commissioner doesn’t control his men and there’s little discipline in the force, these critics say.
P.C.: Well, I accept the criticism. I accept the criticism but I would have liked the critics to have implemented reforms when they were in office, not criticized their successors when they have retired. All of these very fine police officers headed police offices at some time or another and that is when they should have implemented reforms.
Click here to read the full transcript: Chidambaram: Poor Conditions ‘Dehumanize’ Police
Comment: What has the Home Minister done to investigate the secret swiss bank account holders. Most criminals are protected by Politicians and some of them are criminals themselves. Can Politicians cleanse the Police when both are working in tandem?
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Spare the General and save the Nation
09 Feb 2012
The face-off between the government and the Army Chief General V K Singh is not in the interest of the nation. While there appears to be a concerted attempt to depict Gen. Singh in bad light, a close scrutiny of available information seems to be in favour of the Army Chief.
Defence minister AK Antony says the government exercised maximum restraint and patience on the issue of determining Gen. Singh’s date of birth and wants to wait for the final verdict of the Supreme Court. There is no legal issue involved for the apex court to lay down any law.
A confidential memo A/4501/01(GEN/MS(1) dated 01 July, 2011, from the Military Secretary’s Branch sent to the Ministry of Defence on the DoB of IC 24134 General VK Singh PVSM, AVSM, YSM, ADC, by Lt.-Gen. GM Nair, Military Secretary observed, says: “On scrutiny of past records pertaining to Selection Boards, it has been that the MDSs pertaining to Gen. VK Singh which were drawn up at the time of his consideration for promotion to select ranks reflect the date of birth of the General Officer as 10 May, 1951.”
The memorandum said that copies of the relevant MDS sheets were available with the Ministry of Defence for verification and that this had been brought to the notice of the Defence Minister for due consideration.
This memo flies in the face of Antony’s claim that Gen. Singh accepted 1950 as his year of birth when former Army Chiefs asked for it before his promotion as Major-General and Lt.-General.
What was the need for their asking when the Selection Board’s records show his year of birth as 1951?
Gen. Singh earned the wrath of Home Minister P Chidambaram and the powerful mining lobby for his principled opposition to the deployment of the Army to decimate the tribal population of Dandakaranya forests to hand it over to MNCs by saying: “We cannot do this to our own people. Maoists are not secessionists.”
The hard line adopted by the Army Chief against the erring officers in the Adarsh co-operative housing society scandal did not make him popular among his peers in the Army.
The corruption-ridden UPA government has no place for an upright officer like Gen. Singh, particularly at a time when large arms deals are going to be signed.
Gen Singh's service track-record vouches for his integrity
An error committed by VK Singh while filling an application form for entrance to the National Defence Academy when he was just 14 years old has been ferreted out to change his DoB as 10 May, 1950, and the government is sticking like a leech to this piece of paper to deny justice to the chief of the world’s third largest Army.
To add insult to injury, the government is trying to portray him as someone fiddling with his date of birth to hang on to the power and pelf of the high office.
The President, in her capacity as the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, has a duty to safeguard the honour of soldiers like Gen. Singh, who has lived up to the credo embossed in Chetwood Hall of the Indian Military Academy.
“The safety, honour and welfare of your country comes first, always and every time; The honour, welfare and comfort of the men you command come next; Your own ease comfort and safety come last, always and every time.” – TWL Bureau
Click here to read the full article
The face-off between the government and the Army Chief General V K Singh is not in the interest of the nation. While there appears to be a concerted attempt to depict Gen. Singh in bad light, a close scrutiny of available information seems to be in favour of the Army Chief.
Defence minister AK Antony says the government exercised maximum restraint and patience on the issue of determining Gen. Singh’s date of birth and wants to wait for the final verdict of the Supreme Court. There is no legal issue involved for the apex court to lay down any law.
A confidential memo A/4501/01(GEN/MS(1) dated 01 July, 2011, from the Military Secretary’s Branch sent to the Ministry of Defence on the DoB of IC 24134 General VK Singh PVSM, AVSM, YSM, ADC, by Lt.-Gen. GM Nair, Military Secretary observed, says: “On scrutiny of past records pertaining to Selection Boards, it has been that the MDSs pertaining to Gen. VK Singh which were drawn up at the time of his consideration for promotion to select ranks reflect the date of birth of the General Officer as 10 May, 1951.”
The memorandum said that copies of the relevant MDS sheets were available with the Ministry of Defence for verification and that this had been brought to the notice of the Defence Minister for due consideration.
This memo flies in the face of Antony’s claim that Gen. Singh accepted 1950 as his year of birth when former Army Chiefs asked for it before his promotion as Major-General and Lt.-General.
What was the need for their asking when the Selection Board’s records show his year of birth as 1951?
Gen. Singh earned the wrath of Home Minister P Chidambaram and the powerful mining lobby for his principled opposition to the deployment of the Army to decimate the tribal population of Dandakaranya forests to hand it over to MNCs by saying: “We cannot do this to our own people. Maoists are not secessionists.”
The hard line adopted by the Army Chief against the erring officers in the Adarsh co-operative housing society scandal did not make him popular among his peers in the Army.
The corruption-ridden UPA government has no place for an upright officer like Gen. Singh, particularly at a time when large arms deals are going to be signed.
An error committed by VK Singh while filling an application form for entrance to the National Defence Academy when he was just 14 years old has been ferreted out to change his DoB as 10 May, 1950, and the government is sticking like a leech to this piece of paper to deny justice to the chief of the world’s third largest Army.
To add insult to injury, the government is trying to portray him as someone fiddling with his date of birth to hang on to the power and pelf of the high office.
The President, in her capacity as the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, has a duty to safeguard the honour of soldiers like Gen. Singh, who has lived up to the credo embossed in Chetwood Hall of the Indian Military Academy.
“The safety, honour and welfare of your country comes first, always and every time; The honour, welfare and comfort of the men you command come next; Your own ease comfort and safety come last, always and every time.” – TWL Bureau
Click here to read the full article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
