- 6 weeks ago
This programme examines the 130th Constitution Amendment Bill, a proposed legislative measure seeking to remove a Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or Minister from office if arrested for more than 30 consecutive days in a serious criminal case.
Category
š
NewsTranscript
00:00Good evening. Union Home Minister Amit Shah today launched a frontal attack on the Congress and the opposition,
00:07saying standards of morality cannot be linked to victory and defeat in elections.
00:12He mounted a strong defence for the 130th Constitution Amendment Bill that talks about removing any minister,
00:19whether in the centre or the state, any chief minister or even the prime minister,
00:24if they're in jail for more than 30 days in a serious case including corruption and with a sentence of 5 years or more.
00:40Home Minister Shah tears into opposition on graft.
00:44Reminds Rahul of his anti-graft Raga.
01:03Shaslam's political double-speak.
01:23Opposition mocks Home Minister's morality message.
01:39He's speaking about morality is the greatest joke in this century. Mr. Amit Shah is speaking about morality.
01:46Criminal Letha's builds showdown. That is our top focus on India First.
01:53The 130th Constitution Amendment Bill has been referred to a JPC or a Joint Parliamentary Committee.
02:04This has 31 members. 21 from Lok Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha.
02:08Amit Shah insists a democratically elected government has the right to table any bill including a Constitution Amendment Bill
02:15and any points if the opposition has, they should make it in the JPC or during debate.
02:21Anyway, it requires two-thirds majority to be passed to become a law.
02:26If the government has numbers, it will pass.
02:28But why is the opposition, according to the minister, shying away from a debate?
02:32And the question we're asking is, is the opposition shying away from a debate on the Constitution Amendment Bill?
02:39Is the bill an attempt to bring constitutional morality in public life?
02:43Or, as the opposition puts it, is it against the principles of natural justice?
02:49Manish Tiwari is a Member of Parliament from Chandigarh, former Information and Broadcasting Minister in the UPA government
02:55and a lawyer by profession, joins me on India First.
02:59We'll tell you all about this bill and all sides of the debate.
03:03I'm Gaurav Savant. As always, let's get started with the headlines on India First.
03:12Prime Minister Narendra Modi on a two-day trip to Gujarat emphasizes that small entrepreneurs, farmers, cattle rears,
03:20are his government's top priority, assures the nation no harm will come to them.
03:26No matter the pressure, a way will be found.
03:29A Noida woman is burnt alive in front of her child for dowry.
03:56Sources say her husband objected to her Instagram reels.
04:00Nikki's father breaks down demands death penalty.
04:04All four accused, including husband, Vipin Bharti, arrested.
04:12Big revelation in the Delhi Chief Minister attack case.
04:15Police alleges Rajesh and his friend Tehseen plotted the knife attack on the Chief Minister.
04:21The attacker threw his knife after seeing high security at a residence.
04:26His friend Tehseen has also now been arrested.
04:32TNC leader arrested by the enforcement directorate in the teacher recruitment scam for not cooperating with the probe.
04:39Jiban Krishna Saha threw his phone in a pond during the raid.
04:43He tried to escape.
04:44He jumped from the first floor of his house, scaled the roof, but the ED was waiting.
04:50India's space hero, group captain Srivanshu Shukla, gets a hero's welcome in Lucknow.
05:00Meets Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, who announces the state will launch a scholarship in Srivanshu Shukla's day.
05:07Can a government be run from prison?
05:21Union Home Minister Amit Shah today strongly defended the 130th Constitution Amendment Bill,
05:26insisting constitutional morality and public trust have to be upheld.
05:32No Chief Minister, no Minister, whether in the centre or in the state,
05:37or even the Prime Minister in this country can run a government if they're in jail for 30 days or more.
05:44He hit out at what he called was Rahul Gandhi's double standards.
05:49He tore the ordinance in 2013 that protected those convicted of crimes with the punishment of two years or more.
05:56And today, the Congress is opposing the 130th Amendment Bill.
06:00The opposition came out all guns blazing, targeting the Home Minister's defence of the bill.
06:06Our Political Bureau gets you our top story.
06:08After mega-showdown in Parliament, the political battle over anti-criminal Neta Bill has escalated sharply.
06:20Union Home Minister Amit Shah defended the proposed law that seeks to oust Prime Minister,
06:25Chief Ministers and Ministers held in custody for 30 consecutive days on serious criminal charges.
06:33Shah, in a hard-hit encounter, argued that the country cannot be run from jails,
06:38taking a direct swipe at opposition parties for what he called political double-speak.
06:45I want to ask the country and the whole Vipaks to the people,
06:49whether any prime minister, any prime minister or any minister can run in jail and run by the government.
06:57And if there is a government after 30 days, then they can take it again.
07:02We have a multi-party parliamentary democratic system.
07:09So, when you have to be a legal system, you can have to make a government if you have to make a government,
07:11you can take it again.
07:12And when you have to make a government, you can take it again.
07:13You can take it again.
07:14foreign
07:28foreign
07:42Amit Shah pointed out that the bill even includes the Prime Minister's office and reportedly at Prime Minister Modi's insistence.
08:12Home Minister Shah cited his own example and said that he had himself quit after facing charges
08:38and did not return to Cabinet before being cleared by the court.
08:44Shah also hit out at Rahul Gandhi's shifting stance on morality,
08:48recalling how he once publicly tore up an ordinance protecting convicted lawmakers like Lalu Prasad Yadav.
08:55And I am today that the Congress Party is being protected by his attention.
09:01I am saying that I am saying that the extent of the Congress Party was the same.
09:04When the U.P.A. government, Sri Manmohan Singh was the Prime Minister and Lalu Prasad Yadav was the Prime Minister.
09:15Lalu Prasad has been punished.
09:18Manmohan government took an ordinance and said that if it is the last two years, it is still the appeal stage.
09:25So, it does not go to their attention.
09:28Amit Shah expressed confidence of getting the bill passed in Parliament and said that many opposition leaders will support the bill on moral grounds.
09:38But opposition parties are not buying it.
09:41Arvind Kejriwal, who spent 160 days in Tihar jail in liquor scam case and still served as Delhi Chief Minister,
09:49hit back at Amit Shah, defending running his government from jail and calling the charges a political conspiracy.
09:55Opposition called Shah's talk of morality a joke.
09:59As the debate continues, the question lingers.
10:25Will this amendment safeguard governance or become a tool for political vendettas?
10:32Here are a report, India Today.
10:41Let's dive straight into this debate.
10:43Joining me on India first is Manish Tiwari, Member of Parliament from Chandigarh,
10:48former Union Minister, Information and Broadcasting,
10:51former Member of Parliament from Ludhiana and Anandpur Sahib.
10:55You are a lawyer yourself, a lawyer par excellence, who has authored four books.
11:00Sir, welcome on India first.
11:03Thank you very much, Gaurav.
11:04Thank you for inviting me.
11:06Sir, you are not only a multi-term MP, you are a leading lawyer.
11:12You understand the constitutional jurisprudence very well.
11:16You have called this bill, you have called this bill squarely destructive.
11:21Why so, sir, when the Union Home Minister asks,
11:24should anyone run the government from jail?
11:28Either get bail within 30 days or take over whenever you get bail.
11:33Governments cannot be run from prison.
11:35Gaurav, that's a very malicious way of even framing the debate for the Hopenister
11:46and allow you to explain and contextualize why.
11:51Going back to the times of the ancient Greeks and the ancient Romans,
11:59when the fundamental postulates of common law started evolving,
12:07there is one Grundnorm or basic postulate.
12:12That is, you are innocent until proven guilty.
12:17These constitutional amendments or this constitutional amendment
12:23and consequential amendments in the Union Territories Act
12:27and the Jammu and Kashmir Organization Act
12:30stands that fundamental maxim on its head.
12:34Essentially, it holds you to be guilty
12:39without even as much as charges being framed against you.
12:45That is number one.
12:46Number two, Article 21 of the Constitution of India
12:50guarantees that you will not be deprived of your life and liberty
12:56except in accordance with the procedure laid down by law.
13:01This is the due process clause.
13:03So, therefore, under those circumstances,
13:07the registration of an FIR,
13:10an arrest if required,
13:13investigation,
13:15filing of a charge sheet
13:17and even framing of charges
13:20is absolutely no evidence of any culpability or guilt.
13:29In fact, you only plead not guilty once charges are framed against you.
13:32That's when the trial formally commences.
13:35So, what this constitutional amendment is doing
13:39is standing the fundamental jurisprudence of Article 21 on its head.
13:45Number three,
13:47there is a collective responsibility
13:50which the cabinet has to the legislature.
13:55So, therefore,
13:56under those circumstances,
13:58the constitutional scheme as it is structured
14:02does not contemplate
14:04that the collective responsibility of the Council of Ministers
14:08lies to anybody except the legislature.
14:12In this particular case,
14:15the whole concept of collective responsibility has been turned on its head.
14:21And then all constitutional safeguards
14:24with regard to due process,
14:27with regard to disqualification,
14:30are only after conviction
14:32and that too by the highest court of the land.
14:35Everything has been upturned.
14:38And you cannot enforce morality by law.
14:44And that is the experience of the 10th schedule
14:47or the so-called anti-defection law
14:50or the amendments which were carried out
14:53with regard to open voting for the Council of States.
14:56But, sir, shouldn't morality in public life
14:59be supreme, 0.1, 0.2?
15:02And all the objections that anyone may have
15:05and especially our honourable lawmakers,
15:07shouldn't they be debated in Parliament and in the JPC?
15:11The Home Ministers argued
15:13that elected government in Parliament
15:15can bring any bill.
15:17They can bring constitutional amendment.
15:19What objection can the opposition have
15:22in a bill being tabled
15:24on the floor of the House?
15:26Why tear it into pieces
15:28or what's that effect?
15:29And I want to ask you, sir,
15:31he says, discuss it in JPC,
15:34put it to vote, express your opinion.
15:37It's a constitutional amendment.
15:38Two-third majority would be required.
15:40Why is the opposition not keen to go through
15:42that entire parliamentary process?
15:45For the simple reason,
15:48beyond the 7th schedule,
15:51Article 246,
15:53the Union, State and the Concurrent List,
15:56lies the basic structure doctrine
15:58of the Indian Constitution.
16:00And the basic structure doctrine holds
16:03that there would be rule of law.
16:06And rule of law
16:07or implicit or explicit in that rule of law
16:11or the foundation of that rule of law
16:13is the presumption of innocence.
16:16Until proven guilty in a court of law.
16:19Number four, you cannot,
16:21the government cannot bring legislation
16:24which hits at the basic structure
16:27of the Constitution.
16:28Number two, democracy has been held
16:31to be a basic structure
16:33of the Constitution.
16:34And here, you are actually throwing
16:39the rights of the elected representatives
16:43completely to the winds
16:45by making an investigating officer
16:49the boss of the Prime Minister of India.
16:52Try and countenance the implications
16:56of what this is.
16:57Suppose I am the chief minister
17:00of an A state.
17:01Yes.
17:02Hypothetically speaking.
17:03And I travel to B state.
17:05And I am arrested there.
17:07I am put behind bars for 30 days.
17:11Bail is not granted.
17:13My chief ministership is gone.
17:15And let me extrapolate even further.
17:19God forbid,
17:21if you have a situation
17:22where you have a mischievous chief minister
17:25and he does the same to a prime minister.
17:29So, try and imagine the implications
17:31of what you have really brought.
17:36Today, you have two chief ministers
17:37of Punjab and Haryana
17:38who live in the union territory of Chandigarh,
17:41which is controlled
17:42by the central government.
17:44Once this constitutional amendment
17:46comes into force,
17:48which I hope it doesn't do
17:50because it is completely egregious
17:52and unconstitutional,
17:56you will find both of them
17:57will not live in Chandigarh.
17:59One will go and live in Mohali
18:00and the other one will go
18:01and live in Panchkula.
18:03Okay.
18:03So, therefore,
18:05and therefore,
18:06the weaponization
18:07of our law enforcement instrumentalities,
18:12both at the center in the states,
18:14is a reality.
18:16Right?
18:16It is not as if
18:17you are living
18:19in a completely utopian system
18:21whereby everybody is acting
18:23in accordance with law.
18:25But, sir,
18:26a police officer,
18:27even if he were to arrest somebody,
18:29there are courts of law
18:31at every level.
18:33A trial court,
18:34a superior court,
18:35high court,
18:36division bench,
18:37supreme court.
18:38There are so many avenues
18:40of grievance redressal.
18:42And is this debate
18:43about constitutional morality
18:45and public trust?
18:47I mean, look at,
18:48it's about the prime minister,
18:49the chief minister,
18:50and the ministers.
18:51Caesar's wife should be
18:52above suspicion principle.
18:54Shouldn't that be adopted
18:55in public life
18:56if it leads to charges
18:58and arrest,
18:59secure bail
19:00from multiple courts on law?
19:02And, sir,
19:02you as a lawmaker
19:03in parliament
19:04who understands law so well,
19:06you can bring in systems
19:08where safeguards
19:09and checks and balances
19:10can be inbuilt
19:11into this law.
19:12I'm sorry, Gaurav.
19:14this constitutional amendment
19:16is, A,
19:18extremely mischievous,
19:20but from purely
19:21a constitutional standpoint,
19:23anything which stands
19:26the presumption of innocence
19:28until proven guilty
19:30on its head
19:31and then triggers action
19:34based upon that
19:35is completely
19:37and absolutely unacceptable.
19:38I was giving you
19:39the example
19:39of the 10th schedule.
19:40You brought in
19:42the anti-defection law
19:43with all good intentions
19:45in 1985.
19:46What happened?
19:47A retail activity
19:49first became
19:50a wholesale activity,
19:51then became
19:52a supermarket
19:53and now has become
19:55a mega mall.
19:56Have you been able
19:57to enforce
19:58constitutional morality
19:59through law
20:00with the 10th schedule?
20:03You brought in
20:04open voting
20:05in the Council of States
20:06in order to ensure
20:08that there is
20:10no cross-voting
20:11or voting does not
20:12take place
20:13for extraneous
20:14considerations?
20:16Has it really
20:17stopped people
20:18who allegedly
20:20possibly may not
20:22have the most
20:23honorable of credentials
20:24from coming
20:26into the Council
20:27of States?
20:27The answer is no.
20:30So, therefore,
20:30the simple reason
20:31is constitutional
20:33morality
20:34or morality
20:35is purely
20:36a personal choice.
20:38You cannot
20:39enforce it
20:40by the rigors
20:41of law.
20:42If I feel
20:43that I should
20:44step down,
20:45if at all
20:46I have been
20:47rightly or wrongly
20:48charged or something,
20:49that's entirely
20:50my prerogative.
20:52You cannot stand
20:53the entire
20:54judicial system
20:55of the country
20:56on its head
20:56just because
20:58you want
20:58to enforce
20:59some principle
21:00of spurious
21:02or extremely
21:03dubious morality.
21:05Okay.
21:05And how do you
21:06see the parallel
21:07that the Home
21:08Minister tried
21:08to draw between
21:09the 39th
21:11Amendment
21:11protecting
21:12President,
21:12Vice President,
21:13Speaker,
21:14and of course
21:14the Prime Minister
21:15being brought
21:16in, you know,
21:17into that
21:17from judicial
21:18review
21:18to the
21:20130th
21:20Amendment
21:21where the
21:23Prime Minister
21:23wants to bring
21:24himself under
21:25review.
21:26No insulation
21:27even for the
21:28Prime Minister,
21:29the Home Minister
21:30said.
21:31Well, you already
21:31have the Lokpal.
21:33That is why
21:34you created
21:34the Lokpal.
21:36You created
21:37an institution
21:38over and above
21:39the elected
21:40political executive
21:42primarily because
21:44of such
21:44dubious reasoning.
21:47Even at that
21:47point in time,
21:49I was in a
21:50minority of one
21:51and I strongly
21:52opposed the
21:53constitution of
21:54the Lokpal
21:55primarily
21:56because I
21:58felt that
21:59you cannot
21:59have an
22:00overarching
22:01authority
22:01over and
22:03above the
22:04political
22:04executive
22:05when you
22:06have a
22:06complete
22:06investigative
22:07machinery
22:08and a
22:09judicial
22:09system
22:10which is
22:10independent
22:11of the
22:12executive.
22:13So,
22:13therefore,
22:14I keep
22:15stressing
22:15that you
22:16cannot have
22:17a situation
22:18whereby
22:19because it
22:21suits you
22:21at a certain
22:22point in
22:22time or
22:24because you
22:25feel that
22:26these
22:26constitutional
22:27instrumentalities
22:29can be
22:29weaponized
22:30against your
22:30political
22:31opponents,
22:32you do
22:33it for
22:34short-term
22:35gain.
22:36the
22:36implications
22:37of these
22:38amendments
22:38are
22:39absolutely
22:40potentious
22:41and ominous
22:42and they
22:43will reverberate
22:44beyond the
22:45tenure of
22:46all these
22:46governments.
22:48So,
22:48essentially,
22:50when you
22:51sow the
22:51wind,
22:52you reap
22:52the whirlwind
22:53and these
22:56constitutional
22:58amendments
22:59and I've
23:00only outlined
23:01some of
23:02the implications
23:03of these
23:04amendments
23:04if at
23:05some point
23:06in time
23:06I can
23:07chapter and
23:07verse
23:08narrate
23:0810 more
23:09potentious
23:11implications
23:11of how
23:13if these
23:14amendments
23:15ever actually
23:17become law,
23:18what they
23:19would do
23:19to the
23:20political
23:20system.
23:21So,
23:21on the
23:22charge,
23:22collective
23:24responsibility
23:25of the
23:26cabinet,
23:28whether at
23:29the central
23:30level or
23:30the state
23:30level,
23:31is not
23:32to an
23:33investigating
23:33officer.
23:35It is
23:35to the
23:36legislatures
23:37and here
23:38you are
23:39saying,
23:39if you are
23:40arrested,
23:41absolutely on
23:42a false
23:42charge perhaps
23:43and you
23:44are not
23:45able to
23:45get bail
23:46for 30
23:46days,
23:47either the
23:48chief minister
23:48will sack
23:49you or you
23:50get automatically
23:51sacked or
23:52if you are
23:52the chief
23:52minister,
23:54if you do
23:54not resign,
23:55you will
23:55automatically
23:56go.
23:56The same
23:57applies to
23:57the union
23:58legislature.
23:59Sir,
24:00but explain
24:00this to me.
24:01If a person
24:02arrests you
24:04wrongly,
24:04arrests a
24:05minister,
24:06chief minister
24:06or prime
24:07minister wrongly,
24:08there are
24:08multiple levels
24:09of courts
24:10of law who
24:11will go into
24:11those arrests
24:12and if that
24:13arrest is
24:13wrong, grant
24:14bail, if not
24:15in 30 days,
24:16in 35 days,
24:1740 days is the
24:18point the
24:18home minister is
24:19making.
24:19Point one.
24:20You have
24:23provided for
24:25safeguards in
24:26the Prevention
24:26of Corruption
24:27Act by
24:28inserting
24:29section 17
24:30saying that
24:31without sanction
24:32you cannot
24:33register
24:34FIRs against
24:35public servants
24:36and here
24:37you are
24:38turning that
24:39entire
24:40safeguard
24:41completely on
24:42its head
24:43by saying
24:44that you can
24:45be picked
24:45up at any
24:46point in
24:46time in
24:48possibly a
24:49false FIR
24:50and if you
24:51are not able
24:51to secure
24:52bail in 30
24:53days, you
24:54know, off
24:54you go and
24:56tomorrow when
24:57that case goes
24:59to trial and
25:00your innocence
25:01is established,
25:03who is really
25:04going to account
25:05for the
25:05reputational
25:06damage?
25:07And over
25:08and above
25:08that, what
25:09is the
25:10dangerous precedent
25:11you are setting?
25:13The dangerous
25:13precedent you are
25:14setting is that
25:16thousands of
25:17years of
25:18jurisprudence
25:19which says
25:20innocence is
25:22the fundamental
25:23maxim.
25:25You have to
25:25be proven
25:26guilty beyond
25:27reasonable doubt
25:28in a court of
25:29law.
25:30The moment
25:31you have a
25:32situation whereby
25:34there is an
25:34arrest and
25:36after 30 days
25:37there is a
25:37resignation,
25:38you have
25:39explicitly or
25:40implicitly turned
25:41that principle on
25:42its head.
25:43But didn't
25:43the Honorable
25:44High Court
25:44also say
25:45exactly the
25:45same thing
25:46in reference
25:46to a
25:46chief
25:47minister
25:47that he
25:48should
25:49ideally
25:49have
25:50resigned
25:50but
25:51the High
25:52Court
25:52said so
25:53that they
25:53believed he
25:54should resign
25:54on moral
25:55grounds but
25:55there is no
25:56provision in
25:56the current
25:57law to
25:58make him
25:58do so.
25:59The Home
25:59Minister in
26:00this interview
26:01says that
26:02his party and
26:03the Prime
26:03Minister
26:04believe that
26:05no CM
26:05minister or
26:06PM can run
26:07the country
26:07while being in
26:09jail.
26:09when the
26:10constitution was
26:11debated, the
26:13makers of the
26:14constitution did
26:15not imagine
26:15in his words
26:16such shamelessness
26:19that such a
26:19chief minister
26:20would continue
26:21to operate from
26:22jail as
26:23chief minister
26:24and that is
26:25why this
26:25amendment is
26:25required.
26:27Well what
26:28about the
26:28shamelessness of
26:30all those
26:30people who
26:31triggered up
26:32investigations
26:33against people
26:34who ultimately
26:35were not even
26:37charged at the
26:38end of the
26:40entire process
26:41and had to
26:42spend two and
26:43a half, three
26:43years in jail?
26:45Who is going to
26:45account for their
26:46reputational damage?
26:48You know
26:48unfortunately the
26:49law of torts is
26:50not developed in
26:51this country.
26:52Otherwise if these
26:53investigating
26:54agencies who
26:55act in an
26:56arbitrary and
26:57malicious manner
26:57would have been
26:58slapped with
26:59damages like it
27:00happens in the
27:01United States of
27:02America and
27:03some other
27:03jurisdictions of
27:05millions and
27:06millions of
27:07dollars, you
27:08know all this
27:08would stop
27:09immediately if
27:10they would be
27:10made personally
27:11culpable that
27:13God forbid
27:13tomorrow you
27:14know your
27:15investigation is
27:16found to be
27:16tardy and the
27:18person ends up
27:20getting acquitted
27:20you will be held
27:22responsible and
27:23as to why did
27:24you initiate the
27:25process in the
27:26first place?
27:27There you have
27:27given protection
27:28for actions in
27:29good faith.
27:31What is the
27:31conviction rate of
27:32your agencies?
27:34What is the
27:34conviction rate of
27:35your police
27:37forces?
27:39Ultimately the
27:41difficulty in this
27:42country is the
27:43process is the
27:44punishment.
27:45So therefore you
27:46make the process
27:47so excruciating and
27:50you know full of
27:51harassment that
27:52eventually you know
27:54when a person gets
27:55discharged and if
27:56he happens to be a
27:57public person the
27:59arrest would be
28:00splashed on the
28:01front page of
28:02every newspaper and
28:04would be headlines of
28:05television channels for
28:06days to an end and
28:08the acquittal would be
28:09buried in probably a
28:11little ticker running
28:13at the bottom of your
28:14screen or maybe on
28:17the 17th page in the
28:1928th column of some
28:21newspaper.
28:21So sir should this
28:23come up in the JPC
28:24would the Congress in
28:26your view you know go
28:27go through this process
28:29because there are some
28:30political parties part of
28:31the India bloc that are
28:32indicating there will not
28:33be a part of this
28:34process at all.
28:36If you personally ask me
28:37that's a call which the
28:38Congress leadership has
28:39to take but if you
28:41personally ask me these
28:43these amendments are
28:45absolutely excessive
28:46because experience has
28:49shown Gaurav as I
28:50pointed out with the
28:5110th schedule or the
28:53open hand voting in the
28:55Council of States that
28:58morality cannot be
29:00imposed through a legal
29:03process.
29:04Morality is absolutely
29:06an intrinsic instinct.
29:10Either you have it or
29:11you don't.
29:12And if you try and impose
29:14it from outside you
29:15will it will meet the
29:18same fate what the
29:2010th schedule has met
29:21whereby government after
29:23government has been
29:24toppled by dubious
29:26means where you have
29:27presiding officers who
29:29do not decide on
29:30petitions you know for
29:32years to an end you
29:35know terms of the
29:35assembly end the
29:37person goes from one
29:38party to another comes
29:39back to his original
29:40party but the
29:42defection petition keeps
29:43is pending.
29:45Okay.
29:46Okay.
29:46So under those
29:47circumstances what
29:49really are we talking
29:50about here?
29:52Eventually ethics and
29:54morality does not come
29:56out of legal coercion.
29:59Ethics and morality
30:00comes out of an
30:02individual's sense of
30:05whether he or she feels
30:07whether he or she feels
30:09or thinks that since
30:11they are a public
30:12person irrespective of
30:15the fact that they may
30:17have been very horribly
30:18wronged they would like
30:20to step aside you know
30:21till the process plays
30:23itself out.
30:24That's still an
30:25individual choice.
30:26in our leadership
30:27and especially our
30:29ministers, chief
30:30minister and prime
30:32minister if this law
30:33you know goes through
30:34that process and that
30:36will remain extremely
30:37interesting to see what
30:38happens in the days and
30:40weeks ahead.
30:40But for joining me with
30:42your thoughts and your
30:43opinion on this
30:45Manish Tiwari former
30:46union minister and a
30:48lawyer par excellence.
30:50So morality cannot be
30:55enforced.
30:56It's intrinsic to your
30:58system.
30:58It has to come from
30:59within.
31:00That's what Manish
31:00Tiwari believes.
31:01Now let me throw it
31:02open for a wider
31:03political debate.
31:04Joining me on the
31:04show Dr. Shama
31:05Mohamad is the
31:06national spokesperson
31:07of the Congress
31:08party.
31:08Tu Hinson is the
31:09national spokesperson
31:09of the BJP and
31:11for a legal perspective
31:12I have Dilji Talawalia
31:13a senior advocate in
31:14the Supreme Court of
31:15India.
31:16I want to begin by
31:16asking you Tu Hinson
31:17Congress leader
31:18Pawan Khera
31:19on social media
31:21he says enforcement
31:22directorate or CBI
31:23they are like pet
31:24agencies.
31:25Through them the
31:27government or
31:27words to that effect
31:28they will get the
31:28opposition leaders
31:29arrested.
31:30They will not get
31:31bailed in 30 days
31:32and on the 31st day
31:33they will have to
31:33resign.
31:34And they say it
31:35applies to the
31:36prime minister too.
31:37Tell me one minister
31:38he asks.
31:39One minister.
31:40In the past 11
31:41years against whom
31:41the ED or the CBI
31:42have taken any
31:43action in the past
31:4511 years sir.
31:49Well good evening
31:51Gaurab, good evening
31:52everybody.
31:53You know the
31:54Congress party I
31:55don't know why is
31:56so scared of you
31:58know facing the
31:58law because in
32:002013 when Rahul
32:02Gandhi tore apart
32:04an affidavit or
32:04maybe you know a
32:05paper replicating the
32:06affidavit he very
32:07clearly was against
32:08protection being given
32:10to Lalu Yadav.
32:11Now that you know
32:11he is contesting
32:12elections in Bihar
32:13with Lalu Yadav his
32:15stand is completely to
32:16the contrary.
32:17I heard Manish
32:18Tiwari.
32:18Manish Tiwari says
32:19that morality cannot
32:21be imposed.
32:22Yes ideally in an
32:23ideal situation and
32:24that is precisely why
32:26for the last 75
32:27years morality was
32:29not imposed because
32:29you know you know
32:31the those who
32:32drafted a constitution
32:33never imagined a
32:34situation like this
32:34would come today.
32:35But today it needs
32:37to be imposed because
32:38for the opposition
32:40parties depravity is
32:41a norm.
32:42You know imagine you
32:44know where does
32:45the need for this
32:46law come from.
32:47You would recall
32:48that last year when
32:49when you know there
32:50was a plea to remove
32:52Arvind Kejival as CM
32:53when he was in jail.
32:55The high court's
32:55observation was very
32:57clear that yes
32:58ideally he should go
33:00but there is no such
33:01precedent to decide
33:02whether his going is
33:04mandated by law.
33:06And therefore there
33:06was a need for such
33:07law even in
33:08Central Balaji case
33:09in Tamil Nadu.
33:10So let's take this
33:11one by one.
33:12You've raised two
33:13points.
33:14Sir those instances
33:16we are playing out
33:16on television
33:17you've raised two
33:18very valid points
33:19let me get Dr.
33:19Shama Mohammed
33:20to respond.
33:21Shama Mohammed
33:22Amit Shah is
33:24talking about
33:24upholding
33:25constitutional morality
33:27and bringing in
33:28public trust.
33:29No chief minister
33:30no minister
33:31or PM he says
33:33can function
33:33from prison.
33:35Now
33:35it's not party
33:37specific
33:37applies to every
33:38minister
33:39every CM
33:40every PM
33:40why oppose
33:42something that
33:42the government
33:43says or believes
33:44will bring
33:45constitutional morality
33:46in public life
33:47ma'am?
33:49So
33:49Gaurav
33:50there are a couple
33:51of things in it
33:52maybe Tuheen
33:52doesn't understand
33:53the law
33:54Tuheen doesn't
33:55understand constitution
33:56because I can
33:56understand the
33:57party he comes
33:58from they don't
33:58understand anything.
34:00You are going
34:01to arrest a CM
34:02for 30 days
34:04he will throw
34:05out opposition
34:06CM from states
34:08without charge
34:09sheet
34:10without bear
34:11earrings
34:12without a trial
34:13without a verdict
34:15without a judicial
34:16process.
34:17Let's understand
34:18that.
34:19So 30 days
34:19none of these
34:21and you know
34:22what we don't
34:23need prosecution
34:23anymore because
34:25the prosecution's
34:26job will be done
34:26by the investigative
34:27agency which
34:29will be the
34:30arm of the
34:31government of
34:32the day.
34:32So can you
34:34imagine after
34:3540 or 60
34:36days you
34:37this particular
34:39person has
34:39resigned and
34:40then you find
34:41out he's been
34:42accused of
34:43corruption the
34:44CM or the
34:45minister.
34:45Then you find
34:46out that he
34:47is innocent.
34:48Who is going
34:48to compensate
34:49for him?
34:50Is there anybody
34:51going to
34:51compensate?
34:52Will the
34:53person who
34:53put him behind
34:54bars be
34:55punished?
34:56Will there be
34:56some sort of
34:57law for that
34:58that they be
34:58punished also?
35:00So this
35:00goes against
35:02every tenant
35:03of a
35:04democracy.
35:06Basically
35:06Amit Shah
35:07wants India
35:08to be North
35:09Korea and
35:10he's King
35:10Jong-un.
35:10That is what
35:11he wants because
35:12I fail to
35:12understand how
35:13it happens.
35:14And if you
35:14look at ED
35:15cases from
35:162015 to
35:192025 around
35:215,994
35:23cases, 0.1%
35:25of conviction.
35:27173 opposition
35:28leaders, cases
35:30against them.
35:30How many
35:31convictions?
35:32Two.
35:32He spoke
35:32about the
35:33tearing by
35:35Rahul Gandhi.
35:36That is when
35:37people are
35:37convicted.
35:38One other
35:39thing I want
35:39to remind him.
35:40On morality
35:40basis, Ashwini
35:42Kumar resigned.
35:43On morality
35:44basis, our
35:45former chief
35:46minister of
35:47Maharashtra
35:48resigned.
35:48On morality
35:49basis,
35:50Pavan Bansal
35:51resigned.
35:51On morality
35:52basis, which
35:53minister, which
35:56CM of this
35:58party resigned,
35:58let's not
35:59forget Vyappam.
36:01I will never
36:01forget Vyappam.
36:02Maybe it's
36:03behind, but
36:03Vyappam is
36:04still there.
36:05Fair enough.
36:06For the benefit,
36:07I want to bring in
36:10Dilji Talawalia.
36:12We'll just take
36:13these points as
36:14many as we can.
36:15Dilji Talawalia,
36:16is there merit in
36:17the union home
36:18minister saying
36:18opposition leaders
36:19can approach
36:20courts of law
36:21for direction,
36:22for an FIR to
36:24be filed against
36:25ruling party
36:26ministers, should
36:27agencies not
36:28act against
36:29them?
36:29Amit Shah says
36:30there are multiple
36:30instances and
36:31examples even
36:32from the UPA
36:33era.
36:36No, essentially
36:37this 103
36:38bill which has
36:40come, Constitution
36:41Amendment bill,
36:42this is the one
36:45which is directed
36:46towards the ED
36:48and CBI.
36:49Because you're
36:49not going to
36:50have a situation
36:50wherein the
36:51police of a
36:52state is going
36:52to go against
36:53a ruling
36:53minister.
36:54That is the
36:55first part.
36:55The second
36:56thing is,
36:56although the
36:57intent might
36:57be laudable
37:00because you
37:00cannot have a
37:01chief minister
37:02running the
37:02government from
37:03the jail or
37:05even a minister
37:06doing that,
37:06I agree with
37:07that.
37:08But kindly look
37:08at it that
37:09this is
37:10violative of
37:10the basic
37:11structure of
37:11the Constitution.
37:13Article 21
37:13has a
37:14presumption of
37:15innocence.
37:16Now here in
37:1730 days the
37:18presumption goes
37:19for a toss and
37:20before his bail
37:21application also
37:22is taken up
37:23by the trial
37:23court.
37:23Even if it
37:24is taken up
37:24by the trial
37:25court, he
37:25has no
37:26redress to
37:26go to the
37:27high court
37:27and attempt
37:28to get bail
37:29from there.
37:3031st day he
37:31is removed.
37:32Now this is
37:32no solace that
37:33the proviso
37:34says the
37:34moment you
37:35come out of
37:35jail you
37:35can come
37:36back into
37:37your saddle.
37:38The question
37:38is that where
37:40is the
37:40safeguard?
37:42Look at the
37:42way it is
37:43worded that
37:44on arrest and
37:46detention for a
37:48period of 30
37:49consecutive days
37:50on allegations
37:51of offences
37:53which may be
37:54up to five
37:54years, right?
37:56He shall be
37:56removed.
37:58I mean on
37:58the 31st day
38:00if the
38:00chief minister
38:01or the
38:01prime minister
38:02does not give
38:02a recommendation
38:0332nd day he's
38:04out.
38:05So I feel
38:06that this
38:06particular bill
38:07whatever be
38:08the intent,
38:09intent may be
38:10correct.
38:11I don't
38:11dispute the
38:12intent but
38:13the way it
38:14is fanned out
38:14is violative of
38:15the basic
38:16structure of the
38:16constitution.
38:17Fair enough.
38:18Tuhin Sinha,
38:19respond.
38:20Respond.
38:22The fact that
38:22the opposition
38:23is raising and
38:24some legal
38:25experts are
38:26raising, you
38:27know take for
38:27example Arvind
38:28Kejriwal as
38:28an armed
38:29Admi party
38:29leader.
38:30He says if
38:30somebody is
38:31falsely
38:31implicated in
38:32a case,
38:33sent to
38:33jail and
38:34later acquitted,
38:35how many
38:35years of
38:36imprisonment
38:36should the
38:38minister who
38:38falsely had
38:39him implicated
38:40face?
38:41These are...
38:42Isn't this
38:45a fair question?
38:46Where is
38:46accountability on
38:48the part of
38:49the government
38:49or the
38:49prosecution
38:50agency?
38:54Well,
38:55Gaurav,
38:56Caesar's wife
38:57should be
38:57above suspicion.
38:59You know,
38:59the Congress
38:59is peddling
39:00presumptions but
39:01fact is that
39:02similar situations
39:03have existed
39:04forever.
39:06Amit Shahji
39:06quit the
39:07moment
39:08summons were
39:09issued against
39:09him.
39:10You know,
39:11he was arrested
39:12on a Sunday
39:13in 2010.
39:15He quit as
39:16minister on
39:17the previous
39:17day on
39:18Saturday.
39:19L.K.
39:20Edwani,
39:21L.K.
39:21Edwani ji
39:22had, you
39:22know, his
39:23name was
39:23merely mentioned
39:24in the
39:24Jain Hawala
39:25case diary
39:26and he
39:27refused to
39:28contest elections
39:28till his name
39:29was completely
39:30cleared.
39:30Even Lalu
39:31Yadav quit
39:31in the
39:32Fordos camp
39:33in 1997.
39:36Lalu Yadav
39:36quit before he
39:38was arrested.
39:39Heman Sorain
39:39quit.
39:40So, I
39:40think, you
39:40know, it's
39:41the Congress
39:41Party which
39:42wants to
39:42set a
39:43completely
39:44different
39:44precedent
39:45inspired by
39:46Arvind K.
39:46Jival, but
39:47this depravity
39:48has no, you
39:50know, has no
39:50place in
39:51Indian democracy.
39:52And for that
39:52matter, I
39:53think, you
39:53know, they
39:53should feel
39:54some shame.
39:55The Prime
39:56Minister has
39:57personally
39:57insisted that
39:58he should
39:58equally be
39:59included in
40:00the, you
40:01know, in
40:01the ambit of
40:02this bill.
40:03Compare it
40:03with amendment
40:0439th
40:06constitutional
40:07amendment
40:07where the
40:08Prime
40:08Minister and
40:09President was
40:10specifically kept
40:11away from
40:12judicial scrutiny.
40:13So, this
40:14Congress Party
40:15has no moral
40:15authority to,
40:16you know, to
40:17lecture us, to
40:18pontificate on
40:19these issues.
40:21Dr. Shama
40:21Mohammed, two
40:22points.
40:23Can a
40:24Chief Minister
40:25function out
40:27of jail?
40:28You know, the
40:29rights of the
40:30Chief Minister,
40:31people are
40:31wanting to
40:31protect, but
40:32what about the
40:32rights of the
40:33people of this
40:34state?
40:34Will they not
40:35suffer?
40:36Can a
40:36minister function
40:38as minister
40:38from jail?
40:39Because this
40:40law is
40:40specific to
40:42Chief Minister,
40:43whether in
40:44state or in
40:44the centre, or
40:45Prime Minister.
40:46Can they
40:47function from
40:47jail?
40:48And if they
40:48cannot be on
40:4930 days,
40:50isn't it
40:50better somebody
40:51steps into
40:52that place,
40:52somebody else,
40:53and the
40:54moment they
40:54get bail,
40:54they can
40:54come back.
40:55That's the
40:55point that
40:56they're raising.
40:57So, they
40:58don't get bail,
40:59correct?
41:00One thing.
41:00And the
41:01joke of the
41:01century, not
41:02the decade,
41:03the Prime
41:04Minister is
41:04involved in
41:05this.
41:05The Prime
41:05Minister of
41:06this country,
41:07as we know,
41:08the ED or
41:08the CBI is
41:09in his
41:10pocket.
41:10They're his
41:11puppets, as
41:11if they're
41:12going to go
41:12after him.
41:13Now, the
41:13issue here is
41:14what happened
41:16in Vima
41:16Koregaon.
41:17We know
41:18the NIA
41:18put into
41:19the computers
41:20of Sudha
41:21Bharatwaj,
41:22of Varvara
41:23Rao, as
41:24well as
41:24Stan Swamy
41:25material, which
41:25was not there
41:26in their
41:26computers, and
41:27it has been
41:28proven by
41:28outside agencies.
41:30Outside
41:31agencies, not
41:31in courts of
41:32law in our
41:33country.
41:33So, you
41:34have faith in
41:34outside agencies
41:36alleging something
41:37about what's
41:38happening in
41:38our country.
41:39So, I don't
41:40have faith in
41:40my CBI, I
41:42don't have faith
41:42in my NIA, I
41:44don't have faith
41:44in my ED, I'm
41:45being very honest.
41:45You have faith in
41:46courts of law.
41:48They don't have
41:48faith in judiciary
41:49also.
41:50I didn't say
41:50court of law, I
41:51said an agency
41:52investigator, I
41:52never said
41:53court of law.
41:54No, but let's
41:54wait for a
41:55verdict of the
41:55court of the
41:56law, because
41:56which is this
41:57agency outside, what
41:58is its background,
41:59what are their
42:00credentials, we do
42:01not know.
42:01We know for
42:03sure how the
42:04BJP government,
42:06what they did in
42:07the Bhima Koregaon
42:08case.
42:09Let's all
42:09understand that.
42:10So, these were
42:11falsified information
42:12put into their
42:13computers.
42:14Now, what we
42:14worry, I worry.
42:15who?
42:17It is, it is.
42:18Anyway, but that's
42:19not the main debate
42:20today.
42:20That's not the main
42:21debate.
42:21Let's leave that for
42:22another time.
42:22The debate is about
42:23this government, this
42:25government, which, as
42:27you know, not a
42:28single leader.
42:29Very important case
42:30is of Ajit
42:31Pavar.
42:32Ajit Pavar is
42:32somebody who the
42:33Prime Minister said
42:34in a speech in
42:35Madhya Pradesh, he's
42:36corrupt.
42:37Devendra Fardas has
42:38been saying for
42:39five years he's
42:40corrupt.
42:40Kirith Somaya was
42:41doing all the
42:42investigation.
42:43What happened to
42:43that particular case?
42:44Can I revert
42:46this, please?
42:47No, you must
42:47respond because
42:48Dr. Shama
42:49Mohamed raises a
42:50very valid point.
42:52The entire
42:52opposition is
42:53including the
42:54Tribunal Congress
42:54is a long, long
42:56real list.
42:57Anybody who
42:57joins the BJP
42:58cases against them
42:59are dropped,
42:59sir.
43:02No, no, you
43:03know, they are
43:04just obfuscating
43:05the entire issue.
43:05See, we make
43:06political allegations,
43:07but was there
43:08any charge sheet,
43:09was there any
43:10FIR against
43:11Ajit Pavar?
43:12In fact, you
43:13know, the
43:13anti-corruption
43:14bureau of
43:15Maharashtra
43:16had exonerated
43:17him, had
43:18exonerated him
43:19of all the
43:20charges that
43:21he was facing.
43:22Please understand,
43:23Gaurav, political
43:24allegations are
43:25different, political
43:27allegations are
43:28different from a
43:29charge sheet or
43:30even an FIR, and
43:31the Congress is
43:32obfuscating on the
43:33issue because the
43:34Congress' sympathies
43:35lie with the
43:36corrupt, the
43:37Congress' sympathies
43:38lie with the
43:38Nuxals, and that is
43:39why they are
43:40obfuscating on this
43:41issue.
43:41I have a very
43:42simple point.
43:43There is a very
43:43clear demarcation
43:44between political
43:45allegation and, you
43:47know, the process
43:48of law.
43:49A political
43:50allegation in the
43:51absence of a
43:52process of law
43:53does not qualify a
43:54person to be, you
43:56know, to be arrested
43:57or for that
43:57I want to bring in
43:59Dilji Taluwalia for
44:00a legal point.
44:02A quick legal
44:02point.
44:02A quick legal
44:03point.
44:04A quick legal
44:05point with Dilji
44:06Taluwalia.
44:07An FIR, let's
44:08say, is registered
44:09and it's
44:09incorrect.
44:11Okay, Dr.
44:11Mohamad, you
44:12want to quickly
44:12complete your
44:12point?
44:13Let, let, Dr.
44:14Mohamad get
44:15quickly.
44:15They are corrupt.
44:16We don't, you
44:17know, we cannot do
44:18any cases against
44:18them.
44:19There should be an
44:19investigation.
44:20Why did the
44:21Prime Minister of
44:22India on a, on a
44:24speech in Madhya
44:25Pradesh say, Ajit
44:26Pavard is
44:27going up.
44:27You're saying
44:28there has to be
44:29investigation.
44:30Point made.
44:31Tuhinsena, quickly
44:32before I bring in
44:33Mr. Aluwalia.
44:35Tuhinsena, only
44:35Tuhinsena now.
44:36No, no, this is
44:37precisely what I'm
44:38trying to explain.
44:39This is precisely
44:40what I'm trying to
44:41explain to the
44:43Congress party.
44:43There is a
44:44difference between
44:45political allegation
44:46and the process of
44:47law.
44:48We may make a
44:49political allegation
44:49but if there is no
44:51movement in the
44:52process of law, if
44:52there is no FIR,
44:53if the, you
44:54know, guilt has
44:55not been
44:56established, then
44:56that person is
44:57not guilty.
44:59It's as simple as
45:00that.
45:00Why is the
45:00Congress party
45:01obfuscating on the
45:02entire issue?
45:02Sir, because that's
45:03the point the
45:04opposition makes.
45:05Anybody who joins
45:06the BJP, there is
45:07no investigation
45:08against them.
45:09It's never taken to
45:10its logical
45:11conclusion.
45:12That's the point the
45:13opposition is making
45:13but I want to
45:14quickly come to
45:15Dilji Talualia on
45:17the legal aspect
45:17here.
45:18A person is
45:19arrested and a
45:20person has to be
45:21a minister, whether
45:22at the state or
45:23the centre, chief
45:24minister slash
45:25prime minister.
45:26If he or she is
45:27arrested, there are
45:29courts of law, they
45:30will decide on bail.
45:31Let's say he does
45:32not get bail from
45:33lower court, high
45:35court, division
45:35bench, supreme
45:36court and right
45:37now there's a
45:39JPC.
45:40Can our political
45:41leaders not work
45:43on bringing in
45:44systems of checks
45:45and balances and
45:46safeguards so that
45:48nobody is wrongly
45:49confined and not
45:50politically hounded
45:51through this law and
45:53yet you have clean
45:54people and not
45:55people running
45:56governments from
45:57jail, sir.
45:59There are two
46:00points.
46:00First preliminary
46:01point is that
46:02earlier the
46:04consequences used
46:05to accrue as a
46:06result of the
46:07representation of
46:08people act wherein
46:09a person once he
46:10was convicted, these
46:11consequences used
46:12to follow.
46:13Today these
46:14consequences are
46:15following just after
46:16the arrest, 30
46:17days after the arrest,
46:18he loses the
46:18ministership.
46:20Sir, does he not
46:20get bail from
46:21courts is the
46:22point I was asking.
46:23There are so many
46:24levels of courts.
46:25Yeah, so when we
46:27talk about the ED
46:27and you invoke the
46:29Prevention of Money
46:30Laundering Act,
46:31there is a reverse
46:32burden.
46:33It is for the
46:33accused to show
46:34that he has not
46:35committed the
46:36offense.
46:36So there is a
46:36reverse burden.
46:37Now, you know
46:39very well that the
46:40district judiciary,
46:41the norm even
46:42today is bail is an
46:44exception and jail
46:45is a rule.
46:46Even then, when a
46:47bail application is
46:48filed, opportunity is
46:50given to the ED or
46:51the CBI to file their
46:52reply or their
46:53counter to that.
46:55So this entire
46:56process takes at
46:57least two to three
46:58weeks for the bail
46:59petition to be heard
47:00and for the order to
47:01come, at times it even
47:02takes 30 days.
47:04Even if, let's say, it
47:05is fast-tracked and it
47:06comes within 15 days, it
47:08goes to the High
47:08Court, High Court will
47:09again issue notice and
47:11there will be an
47:11opportunity to the
47:12other side to file a
47:13reply.
47:14So you don't even
47:15get the second
47:16opportunity of testing
47:18your case for bail and
47:20you lose your seat, lose
47:21your ministership.
47:22So this is like turning
47:24presumption of
47:25innocence on his head and
47:26I really feel that this
47:28is violated by the
47:28basic structure.
47:29This particular bill will
47:31be tested in the courts
47:32and this will be
47:33quashed.
47:34So, though, perhaps let
47:36JPC work out systems of
47:38safeguards before it goes
47:40to a court of law
47:41ultimately.
47:42But should that
47:42happen, I'm sorry I've
47:44run out of time on this
47:44part of the show because
47:45I have breaking news and
47:46a very important story
47:47that's coming up to all
47:48my guests.
47:48Many thanks for joining
47:49me.
47:50News just coming in with
47:52more details.
47:53India has alerted
47:55Pakistan and
47:56communicated details
47:57about possible flooding
47:58downstream in the Tavi
48:00River and the
48:01Satluj River.
48:02This is information
48:03that's coming in through
48:04media in Pakistan.
48:06Though the Indus Waters
48:07Treaty remains held
48:09in abeyance after that
48:11Pahalgaam terror attack,
48:13New Delhi on humanitarian
48:14grounds is reported to
48:15have alerted Islamabad
48:16through the Indian High
48:17Commission in Islamabad
48:19and not the Indus Waters
48:20Treaty Commission about
48:22possible flooding
48:24downstream.
48:25Pakistani media has
48:26acknowledged India's
48:27message alerting
48:28Pakistan to secure its
48:29people living downstream
48:31about possible heavy
48:32flooding.
48:33The second message of
48:35caution according to
48:35media reports in
48:36Pakistan was on rising
48:38water levels in the
48:38Satluj River.
48:40First it was the Tavi
48:40River, then it's the
48:42Satluj River and
48:43potential release of
48:45water from dams in
48:46India.
48:46The Indus Waters
48:47Commission route was
48:49completely bypassed
48:50according to these
48:50reports from Islamabad.
48:52Pakistan has now
48:53issued a warning to its
48:54people to evacuate to
48:56safer areas on the
48:57basis of information
48:58provided by India on
49:00humanitarian grounds.
49:01The communication has
49:02been made entirely on
49:04humanitarian grounds is
49:05the information that's
49:05coming in and the
49:07communication was made
49:07by the Indian High
49:08Commission in Islamabad to
49:09the Pakistani foreign
49:11ministry on this story.
49:13I want to quickly bring in
49:14India today's Pranay Upadhyay
49:16for more on this.
49:17Pranay, any word from the
49:19Ministry of External Affairs
49:20on this or all information
49:21only through the Pakistani
49:22media?
49:23Our sources in government
49:25has confirmed, Gaurav, that
49:27the communication has been
49:28made, it has been conveyed to
49:29the Pakistani relevant
49:30authorities in the
49:31Pakistani foreign office
49:32that we have our
49:34assessment as far as the
49:35incoming flood situation is
49:37coming, as far as the
49:38surge of the water in
49:39Satluj River and Tavi
49:40River as you have rightly
49:41pointed it out.
49:42And that's why on the
49:43humanitarian ground,
49:44Indian High Commission in
49:45Islamabad has conveyed it
49:47to the Pakistani foreign
49:47office and accordingly the
49:49Pakistani disaster management
49:50authority has issued a
49:51warning for 30th till 30th
49:53of August.
49:53We know that in Pakistan,
49:55in the recent flood in
49:56Khyber Pakhtunkhwa region,
49:57in Punjab region and
49:58various other parts of
49:59Pakistan, around 780,
50:01more than 780 people have
50:03been died and more than
50:04thousand people got
50:05injured.
50:05Many people have been
50:06displaced in Pakistan and
50:09you know, we know that
50:10India, Pakistan after May or
50:13after Operation Sindhur,
50:15this industrial water
50:16treaty mechanism has been
50:18put in abeance but on the
50:19humanitarian ground, we
50:20know that India is the
50:22leading, you know,
50:23technological powerhouse in
50:24South Asia.
50:25We have our own
50:26satellites, we have our
50:27own assessment and you
50:28would recall, Gaurav, that
50:29India was the first country
50:30to initiate the SARK
50:31satellite concept.
50:32Prime Minister Narendra
50:33Modi initiated that
50:34though Pakistan, you know,
50:35rejected that idea but
50:36India has been helping all
50:38its neighbour in
50:39humanitarian crisis, be it
50:40Nepal earthquake or be it,
50:42you know, Sri Lanka
50:42crisis, be it Bangladesh
50:43flood, India has always
50:45extended a helping hand to
50:46its neighbour and despite...
50:48Yes, despite the
50:50acrimonious relationship or
50:51that despite the tensions,
50:53India extended this, you
50:55know, information on the
50:56basis of humanitarian
50:57grounds.
50:58Pranay Upadhyay for joining
50:59me here on India Today,
51:01many thanks.
51:01India will never compromise
51:03on the interests of our
51:04farmers, those in the
51:06dairy business and those
51:07in animal husbandry.
51:09Strong words from Prime
51:10Minister Narendra Modi ahead
51:12of what he called was
51:13economic selfishness of
51:15some countries.
51:16Remember, the additional
51:1725% tariffs on India,
51:1927th, they come into
51:21effect.
51:21The Prime Minister has sent
51:23out a strong message from
51:24the land of Mahatma Gandhi.
51:27He said for him, the interests
51:28of India's farmers, India's
51:31shopkeepers, India's dairy
51:33farmers, those in animal
51:35husbandry, our small
51:37entrepreneurs, their
51:38interests come first.
51:40No matter the pressure,
51:41India will find a way out.
51:43India stands firm, whether
51:45it's the Reserve Bank of
51:46India, the readiness to
51:48provide exporters some
51:49relief, the nation is
51:51pushing back, will not
51:53buckle under American
51:54pressure.
51:55We get you more in this
51:56report.
51:58Hours to go for punitive
52:0050% U.S. tariff on
52:02India.
52:03But New Delhi remains
52:04unfazed and Modi
52:06government's big plan to
52:07protect the most
52:08vulnerable ready.
52:10The centre is set to
52:11roll out shops for
52:12farmers, small and medium
52:14industries and exporters.
52:15My government, Lagoon
52:20Demyo, Kishanoka, Parashupaloka,
52:27never will be
52:28a need for
52:31As per sources, the PMO is holding a high-level meet on Tuesday to finalize targeted relief
52:50packages for industries most exposed to the tariff height.
52:55Exporters are seeking an emergency credit line guarantee while cluster-based working
52:59capital funds are under review.
53:02At the core of government support strategy, small and medium enterprises and export-driven
53:07units.
53:08We will not be afraid of this country.
53:14We will not be afraid of this country.
53:16The RBI meanwhile has acted swiftly after the April US tariff, India's GDP forecast
53:44was cut by just 20 basis points.
53:46With 45% of sectors outside the tariff regime, RBI hopes negotiations will ease the impact.
53:53It has already cut the repo rate by 100 basis points and continues to provide ample liquidity
53:59to banks.
54:01US Vice President J.D. Vance said President Donald Trump has applied aggressive economic
54:07leverage such as secondary tariffs on India to force Russia to stop bombing Ukraine.
54:13India is in no mood to listen to Trump's tariff black maize on Russian oil imports.
54:19India has also pushed back hard on allegations of funding Russia's war.
54:24If you have a problem buying oil from India, oil or refined products, don't buy it.
54:31Nobody forced you to buy it.
54:34I mean, but Europe buys, America buys.
54:38So you don't like it, don't buy it.
54:40But back home politics continues with Congress questioning why the Russian imports help.
54:46As politics continues, Modi Sarkar is making it clear.
54:50This is new India where national interest isn't negotiable.
54:55Relief for exporters, confidence in the rupee and firm steps on energy security.
55:01New Delhi has shown that it won't bend under pressure.
55:05Bureau Report, India Today.
55:06So the government's mantra is very clear.
55:12Rashtrahith Sarvopari, national interest first, India first.
55:18That is all I have for you on this special broadcast.
55:21Many thanks for watching.
55:22News and updates continue on India Today.
55:24Stay with us.
Recommended
27:40
|
Up next
25:00
Be the first to comment