- 5 weeks ago
The bulletin outlines the fallout from the NEET paper leak protests and allegations of Delhi Police actions. The Supreme Court refused an urgent listing for a plea concerning police conduct, declining to examine protest videos at the mentioning stage.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:01All right, our top story comes in from the top court of this country, the Chief Justice of India at
00:07the back of, if you remember, what he had said in terms of cockroaches and then an entire agitation started
00:14at the back of that word with the Cockroach Amta party.
00:17Well, the top court, the Supreme Court of this country has rejected a petition or a plea to hear which
00:26alleged the brutalities of the police, alleged brutalities of the police on protesters.
00:32The CGI Chief Justice of India says don't waste our and your time.
00:38We don't have the time to watch videos on social media of police brutalities in this case.
00:46There are youngsters like cockroaches, they don't get any employment, they don't have any place in profession.
00:52A word spoken in a courtroom, a movement born on the internet.
00:59And now, a fresh confrontation with the Supreme Court.
01:05The cockroach controversy has come full circle.
01:09The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused urgent listing of a plea, alleging police brutality against Cockroach Janata Party protesters.
01:18The petitioner wanted the court to look at videos of the crackdown.
01:23But the Chief Justice had a blunt response.
01:35And the CGI's remarks have now triggered fresh political backlash.
01:41Our army party leader Somnath Bharti questioned whether courts could refuse to hear allegations of police brutality against protesters.
01:51Shiv Sena UBT MP Priyanka Chaturvedi responded with a sarcastic, amazing.
01:58And the Cockroach Janata Party's founder and spokesperson hit out at the CGI.
02:04The party, which has been protesting over India's education system and demanding Dharmendra Pradhan's resignation,
02:12takes its name from remarks made by Chief Justice Surya Khan earlier this year.
02:17In May, during a hearing, the CGI spoke of parasites attacking the system and compared unemployed youngsters to cockroaches,
02:26saying some join the media, some become activists and target every institution.
02:32The backlash was emitted.
02:34The remarks were seen as an attack on unemployed youngsters and then came the clarification.
02:41Days later, the Chief Justice said his remarks had been misquoted and that he was referring to fake degree holders
02:48and bogus lawyers, not unemployed youth.
02:53But by then, the word had escaped the courtroom and the internet had given it a new life.
03:00The Cockroach Janata Party was born.
03:03What began as a parody page became a digital movement and soon the movement spilled onto the streets.
03:10Thousands gathered at Jantar Mantar, a protest led largely by young people.
03:15And now, the movement born from a courtroom remark is back before the courtroom.
03:21This time, asking the Supreme Court to look at what happened to those who carried that word onto the streets.
03:29Bureau Report, India Today.
03:36All right, joining me right now is Ms. Indira Jaising, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court, former ASG, ma'am.
03:42Thank you for taking the time out and joining us this evening.
03:44I just want to connect with you.
03:46My first question, Ms. Jaising, is concerning the latest that has come in from the top court of the country
03:55where they haven't, they've rejected a plea regarding the alleged brutalities on protesters by the Delhi police,
04:04stating that they don't have time to watch videos of these brutalities and that people should stop wasting their time
04:14and also their own time.
04:19Yes.
04:21Look, I don't think any of us should for a moment believe that the judiciary doesn't watch videos.
04:31I know for a fact that there is a full-fledged publicity department existing within the Supreme Court of India,
04:37and we all know that from time to time they issue press releases.
04:41And for some time now, we have known that there are several judges who have their own press publicity outreach
04:51in many different ways.
04:54This just indicates that everything that is ever said about the Supreme Court of India is well monitored, not only
05:04by the institution, but also by individual judges.
05:06And I have reason to believe there have been former judges in the past, now retired, who have personally told
05:12me that, yes, we monitor everything in real time.
05:16There have been judges who have told me that even while sitting in court, if they're sitting in court once,
05:24especially the Chief Justice of India, they know what's going on in court 10, court 12, court 16, et cetera,
05:29et cetera.
05:29How does this happen?
05:31Communication now is so instantaneous.
05:35So it is not possible for me to believe that videos are not watched.
05:39That's as far as watching of videos goes.
05:43As far as the question of waste of time is concerned, I would like to say two things.
05:50Number one, I think ill-thought-of, knee-jerk reaction type of petitions ought not to be filed in the
05:59Supreme Court of India.
06:01Well-documented, well-thought-out, well-argued petitions are most welcome.
06:08And then I would like to see any court say we will not hear it.
06:12That would be abdication of judicial functions.
06:16And that is why you have noticed that today there has been a petition filed in the Delhi High Court
06:23by two very…
06:25Ma'am, if you will allow me to interject, are you saying that this is abdication of judicial duty here?
06:32Correct me if I'm wrong.
06:35I am saying for any judge to say we will not hear a well-thought-out petition dealing with police
06:46brutality is an abdication of functions.
06:49For the simple reason that Article 32 provides direct access to the Supreme Court of India.
06:55Of course, you can also go to the High Court, okay?
06:57The question is not which court you go to.
07:00The question is there is a mass violation of fundamental rights.
07:05And that does require judicial notice, okay?
07:08But I'm also saying that we as lawyers ought not to be filing ill-thought-out petitions which are not
07:20substantiated with proper documentation.
07:23And it is in this context that I want to point out that the Supreme Court Bar Association and the
07:29Delhi High Court Bar Association have filed well-drafted, well-thought-out, good petitions in the Delhi High Court.
07:38And therefore, the Delhi High Court has been compelled to hear that case.
07:42I use a strong word, compulsion.
07:44There is a compulsion on the judiciary to hear these issues.
07:48Now, see, Preeti, there's one thing I also would like to say to you.
07:52This is more about the protests.
07:54You know, there are laws in this country which tell us how to deal with so-called law and order
08:01situations, with so-called riots.
08:03Police are trained in, quote-unquote, riot control.
08:08And one of the primary issues of law is what is the nature of the force that you use in
08:18order to quell a riot, okay?
08:20I'm not talking about excess force.
08:23I'm just talking about force itself.
08:26And there are clear police manuals which say you cannot hit anyone above the waist.
08:31Now, what is the reason for this?
08:33What I have seen from the videos that have been circulating, and I make bold to say that it is
08:38my duty to watch every video that is circulating, not only to watch it, but to preserve it.
08:44What I have seen is people being hit on the head.
08:48Now, I would like to tell you, even a nodding acquaintance with a bit of medical jurisprudence and forensic science
08:56will tell you that a hit on the head is incapacitating sometimes for life, okay?
09:02It is a centre of cognition.
09:04It is a centre of what makes you speak.
09:06It is a centre of what makes you see.
09:09It is what your life is all about.
09:13And this is the logic behind the direction to the police of law that you will not hit a person
09:22above the waist, because you're going to destroy their vital organs and for life, okay?
09:28So, this is a question that the Supreme Court should have seized upon and should have said, this we will
09:36not allow, this kind of mass violation of fundamental rights.
09:40Right.
09:42But, Ms. Jaising, you know, Ms. Jaising, it's not an attempt for headline hunting.
09:47I'm not doing that, but I'll take you back where you say, well-drafted petitions, especially where it comes down
09:53to protest, is the judicial compulsion of the courts to entertain.
09:58You have been the ASG of this country.
10:02You are a reputed Supreme Court senior advocate.
10:06I would like to ask you, in this particular case, because our timelines are flooded with these videos, would you
10:13think this would have warranted an urgent hearing?
10:17You know, not only would it have warranted an urgent and extraordinary hearing, I would say, 24 hours of the
10:24day, night or day, is not even important in a case of this kind.
10:27Yes, my answer is yes.
10:29But even more importantly, there is the surmoto jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India, okay?
10:35And we have seen repeatedly the Supreme Court taking surmoto cognizance of issues which concern the judiciary.
10:43It's time for the Supreme Court to take surmoto cognizance of issues which concern you and me, not just you
10:50and me, but people of the age group of 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.
10:55These are the people that are being attacked today in the country.
10:59And yes, I do think the Supreme Court is under a duty to take surmoto cognizance of what's going on.
11:04That's my view.
11:05That's my opinion.
11:07I want you, Ms. Jaising, I want you to maybe elucidate for us because, of course, this was a petition
11:14that was turned down by the top court, a leave-alone taking surmoto cognizance.
11:19Has there been past precedent in cases such as this, a protest march, which there has been, you know, alleged
11:26brutalities of the crackdown by the security forces?
11:30Is there past precedent of the court stepping in, taking surmoto cognizance?
11:34And the question is not whether there is precedent for taking surmoto cognizance of protest.
11:40The question is, is there past precedence for taking surmoto cognizance, even though the petitions are not well-drafted, and
11:49there is.
11:50The courts have taken cognizance of letters, OK, which don't necessarily contain all the data that should be there on
11:59record.
11:59They have then gone on to appoint their own commissions, their own committees of social scientists to gather the evidence
12:07and place it before the Supreme Court of India, OK?
12:10This is the essence of what we call public interest litigation.
12:13So what has happened to that jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, I am unable to understand.
12:21And you can't have a surmoto jurisdiction which is so totally arbitrary.
12:26You take cognizance when it concerns, let's say, something like an attack on the judiciary, a perceived attack on the
12:35judiciary,
12:35and not take cognizance of an attack on people of the country.
12:40Right.
12:44Ma'am, it's a big thing that, with what you've just said, that it's the jurisprudence of the top court
12:50to take cognizance of a protest like this.
12:53It is rather big.
12:55I want to, you know, I want to ask you, like you pointed out, and you've, you know, said a
13:01lot with saying, with, you know, how you've elucidated it.
13:04I want to ask you one question.
13:06You've studied the Constitution very closely.
13:08There is a raging debate right now in the country on where does the right of protest end as per
13:14validated in the Constitution and threats to national security begin.
13:20Because the march was illegal.
13:22Many people are saying, yes, you have a right to protest, but the march to parliament was illegal.
13:26The cops had to crack down.
13:29Yeah.
13:32See, illegal in what sense?
13:34Illegal in the sense that it did not have, quote, unquote, permission, right?
13:42Unlawful assembly.
13:43I presume that's what they mean by illegality.
13:45There is a difference between illegality and unconstitutionality.
13:48Let's be very, very clear.
13:49I would go to the extent of saying sometimes you have a duty to protest.
13:54Forget a right to protest.
13:57That's at one level.
13:58We all have a right to protest.
14:00But at another level, we have a right.
14:04We have a duty to protest when we see our law enforcement agencies violating the law.
14:10In fact, if I were to go and join the protest, it would be at the point of time when
14:16the law enforcement agencies break the law.
14:20OK, it is then your duty.
14:24Self-defense is your duty.
14:26It is your duty to stop law enforcement agencies from breaking the law.
14:32And this is what they have done.
14:34So, apart from the question of legality, we need to also discuss the question of morality.
14:41OK, we can't leave this debate at the level of, oh, it's illegal.
14:46OK, if it's illegal, if I have violated Section 144 order, now, of course, that section will change.
14:53But if I have violated that order, what can you do?
14:56OK, you can pick me up.
14:57You can detain me.
14:58You can do what you want to do and then release me once the threat to your perceived threat is
15:05over.
15:06Can you then pick up a latte and break it on my head?
15:10No, you can't.
15:11So, you know, just using expressions like, oh, don't use excessive force.
15:16That's not good enough.
15:19It is the Supreme Court must understand why.
15:23What is the logic behind saying, don't hit above the waist?
15:28OK, it's my vital organs that we are talking about.
15:33Cognition.
15:34And this, I think.
15:35Ma'am, I'm going to ask you one quick question before we let you go.
15:39Yes.
15:40I'm going to ask you, Ms. Jaising, one quick question before we let you go.
15:44The bar has always been very robust in the past.
15:47We're championing various forms of protest.
15:50Do you think the bar is also failing in its duty?
15:53I have consistently said that the legal profession has not stood up to the attacks on the Constitution that we
16:04have seen in the past few years.
16:07But I have to say that I'm very pleased that the Supreme Court Bar Association and the Delhi High Court
16:13Bar Association has taken up the issue collectively and gone to the high court.
16:18We are awaiting the results.
16:19I, for one, will vote.
16:23You know, the elections are coming.
16:24The Supreme Court Bar Association elections are coming.
16:26And my vote will go to the candidate who says, I stand by the Constitution of India.
16:33I stand with students.
16:40All right, ma'am, thank you for taking the time out and joining us this evening.
16:44I highly appreciate it.
16:45Thank you there.
16:46I am joined right now by Mr. Rajesh Devedi, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court.
16:51He's with us, clearly, to bring to you a contrarian point of view that Mr. Devedi has.
16:56Mr. Devedi, you just heard the conversation with Ms. Indira Rajai Singh, where she's practically said this was, there is
17:03constitutional legality, there is constitutional morality, there is jurisprudence, and there is a compulsion, a judicial compulsion, on the part
17:12of the top court of the country to listen in.
17:15To please, which come in, where protest is concerned.
17:19Leave alone, take Suomoto cognizance.
17:22See, first of all, if I say something about the issue which is involved, that is, neat paper leak, I
17:31would, certainly, I am in favor of drastic reforms, so far as the selection processes are concerned.
17:40Because what I find is that it is not only neat, but at several other state-level examination also, papers
17:49are being leaked, there is so much of corruption.
17:52Recently, Supreme Court had set aside a selection process of involving teachers' selection in the state of West Bengal when
18:01the TMCE government, Mamata Banerjee, was in power.
18:07And therefore, we have, as you are also aware about this, all over the state, different states, this is happening.
18:15So, something very serious has to be done, some serious reforms have to be undertaken to ensure that this corruption
18:24ends.
18:25It is nothing but corruption.
18:27So far, so good.
18:29But the question is…
18:30Mr. Diveti, this has nothing to do with neat.
18:31This is, where, yeah, this has everything to do with protest and what the top court said today, where it
18:39rejected a petition, where it came down to alleged brutalities on protesters.
18:44By saying we don't have time to watch videos, don't waste my time or yours.
18:50See, having said that, I must say that the Supreme Court does have power to take cognizance of matters involving
18:59liberty.
18:59It can take also suomoto cognizance when it feels that the matter is of such a great national importance.
19:06And it doesn't involve disputed questions of fact.
19:11But if the matter involves investigations, disputed questions of facts, there are allegations, counter-allegations.
19:20One side says that there is lati charge.
19:22Other side says 170 policemen have been injured, stone pelting, etc.
19:28Evidently, there is breach of the process of law because no permission had been granted.
19:36Yet, if you want to march towards parliament on a time when the parliament is meeting to discuss issues of
19:43national importance, then to march there is to disrupt.
19:50Therefore, the Supreme Court rightly refused to take cognizance of this matter because there is a lot of investigation to
20:00be done.
20:02And the Supreme Court is already overloaded with cases.
20:06And if it keeps on taking such kind of cases, then in every state there will be protests.
20:12In every state there will be some kind of lati charge or sometimes breaking of the rule of law, stone
20:19pelting, etc.
20:20It is happening all over the country.
20:22How many matters can be taken up just because it is happening in Delhi?
20:25Why rush to the Supreme Court?
20:28Go to the High Court.
20:29High Court is also there in Delhi.
20:31So, Article 32 doesn't mean that the Supreme Court must take cognizance of all such disputed matters which involve serious
20:38questions of fact.
20:40Videos are not one-sided.
20:41Petitions may be filed with one kind of videos.
20:44There are other kind of videos floating in the market.
20:49So, how will the Supreme Court evaluate?
20:52Affidavits will be there on both sides.
20:54Videos will be on both sides.
20:56Sir, if you are speaking, but I would, sir, the argument could in all of this would also be because
21:02if you are talking about videos floating in the market,
21:05there are multiple videos, and if one looks at this particular plea, one can entertain and look into what happened
21:13on the other side as well,
21:15which is protesters turning against the police.
21:18How does that take away from videos, which clearly seem to suggest, documented visually, with the police and the rapid
21:29action force,
21:30hitting protesters above the waist with lattes, with, you know, tear gas shelves, hitting them.
21:37Some of them very serious, critical.
21:39One of them was on a ventilator.
21:41Nowhere is one taking away from the fact that police personnel were also attacked by certain groups of protesters.
21:49But how does it stop the top court of the country to take cognizance?
21:54Because the top court of the country does look at videos to take cognizance of this petition,
21:59which speaks of alleged brutalities, which clearly seem to suggest that the code of, that the police has violated,
22:07at least by the visual documentary, has violated that code by hitting protesters for, you know, number one above the
22:17waist.
22:17And there are multiple videos of that.
22:20I'm sorry, there are multiple videos on both sides, and this is not a matter which can be rushed to
22:24the Supreme Court straight away.
22:26True, I agree with you.
22:27They should go to high court.
22:29I agree with you.
22:30But how does that take away from this petition that there are videos of the other side?
22:33What is the problem in going to the high court for this?
22:37High court is also a constitutional court, and high court can take cognizance of writ petitions and violations of liberty
22:43on this side or that side,
22:45and do what it wants to do.
22:47It may constitute a SIT, it may constitute a committee.
22:51But if everybody starts going to the Supreme Court, which means the apex court, which must come and end,
22:57not every matter can be taken up under Article 32 straight away.
23:02So we are finding today that in every sort of matter...
23:05But, sir, some people might feel that this matter...
23:09But, sir, some people are saying this is not in every kind of matter.
23:13This involves a lot...
23:15And you are right, there are a lot of people who were in the protests that were politically motivated.
23:20There were pockets where these protesters turned against the cops, started to stone-pelt.
23:25But you can't deny the fact that a huge chunk of these protesters were organically who came out in solidarity,
23:34in protest,
23:35hapless young boys and girls, students who were attacked brutally, allegedly attacked brutally by the police.
23:41And therefore, the urgency of the matter was such that the top court had to be approached.
23:48And there comes constitutional morality, there comes jurisprudence.
23:53Some people know, sorry, some people may think this is nothing to do with jurisprudence.
23:57Jurisprudence says it is the discretion of the Supreme Court of India to decide.
24:03There is no jurisprudence which compels that every matter which comes before the Supreme Court under Article 32,
24:08the Supreme Court or the Chief Justice of India must take it on board and get into it and decide.
24:14So, there are many people who may think that this is very important, the students have been hit above the
24:19waist and so on.
24:20This is one part of it.
24:21Other judges may feel that, well, go to the high court also.
24:25Why trouble us with the videos, how the Supreme Court judges will get into all this?
24:30There are so many other matters pending since ages which need to be decided.
24:35So, it's ultimately Supreme Court's discretion.
24:38Not one section of the people today may feel that, yes, they should have taken Congress as well.
24:44They are entitled to things like that.
24:47Another section may say that the Supreme Court…
24:50Sir, I'll ask you one quick question, Ms.
24:51Yes.
24:52Fair point.
24:53You have your legal argument.
24:56I want to ask you one question.
24:57So, a lot of people, sir, I'm not comparing the two at all, but a lot of people are looking
25:04at in 2012 where the Supreme Court took Suomoto cognizance of the protest where Nirbhaya was concerned and that saw
25:12a groundswell of sorts of the youth which came out in protest.
25:16So, not comparing, but people are suggesting that if the courts could, you know, take Suomoto cognizance and there has
25:24been precedent there, what stops the top court of doing it now?
25:28So, well, I myself said that the Supreme Court has authority even Suomoto to take.
25:33Now, Nirbhaya has no comparison with this.
25:36What is happening?
25:37Nirbhaya was just symbolic of something which is happening against women all over the country.
25:42How do you compare it with this kind of an event where an examination is involved?
25:47No, I'm talking about the protest.
25:48Sir, I'm not comparing at all.
25:50Sir, ma'am, every protest…
25:51I'm talking about the nature of protest.
25:53I understand.
25:53That's all, a groundswell of students.
25:56This has also seen a groundswell of students.
25:58No, it's not a question of groundswell of students.
26:01It's a question of issue.
26:03It is the issue which decides not that 5,000, 10,000 people can be collected on an issue in
26:10India anywhere.
26:11It's not a big deal today with a population of 1.40 crores.
26:18It's not a big deal.
26:20So, therefore, there's only…
26:22We can't compare with that.
26:23The issue of Nirbhaya and the issue involved here, something, action has been taken.
26:28F.I.R. has been filed.
26:2913 people have been arrested.
26:31Sir, at that time, to remind you, the top court of the country had taken Suomoto cognizance
26:35at the back of police crackdown on protesters, not to do with what the issue was.
26:42It was purely on the crackdown on protesters then.
26:46No, I'm sorry.
26:47Always the crackdown is one aspect of the episode.
26:51It is the issue which sparks the episode.
26:55So, everything has to be taken note of.
26:58And ultimately, what I'm saying, I don't…
26:59I'm not saying that the Supreme Court could not have taken cognizance.
27:03But if the Supreme Court feels that this is not one of it, go to the High Court.
27:08I don't know why people are in a constitutional court available in Delhi itself.
27:14Why don't you go to the High Court?
27:15Why everybody should rush to the Supreme Court only for propaganda and politics?
27:20So, politics should be kept out.
27:23What I'm finding is that in this whole protest, now there are less students and more political
27:31people getting involved into it.
27:32And the whole thing is being turned into an anti-BJP kind of a thing.
27:36Now, that is destroying the whole objective of reforms, which should be put in the forefront.
27:43Rather than politicizing it, it should be reforms.
27:49All right, sir.
27:50Thank you for taking the time out and joining us this evening.
27:54Appreciate it, sir.
27:55Thank you so much.
27:56All right, viewers.
27:56Let's quickly dip into the latest news break that is coming in.
27:59And that comes in from the Vedanta Hospital in Durgaon.
28:05Because let's hark back, Sonam Wangchuk, who has been moved to the Medanta Hospital from
28:11Sapdarjan, had met J.P. Nadda and Jitendra Singh of the BJP and today have said that he is
28:17willing to break his past until and unless though one condition is fulfilled.
28:22And that condition was that all cases against the protesting students be dropped.
28:28For now, there is a delegation of opposition MPs and leaders that have sat on a dharna outside the Medanta
28:37Hospital
28:38because the opposition party members are not being allowed to meet Sonam Wangchuk.
28:44Now, there is the Amadmi party there, there is the Amadmi party there and all of the MPs
28:50from these parties have gone to meet Sonam Wangchuk who has said that he will give up his past
28:56if this one precondition is fulfilled that all cases be dropped.
29:01Taking our viewers to the latest news break, Sonam Wangchuk's wife, Gitanjali Angmo, has met
29:08opposition delegation outside the hospital Sanjay Singh from the Amadmi party spoke to the press.
29:16Our name is罪.
29:17We read our maids to the French press.
29:20We read our maids to the people who wish to destroy your haps.
29:23We are the army to destroy your haps that we need to destroy your haps.
29:27We put it down to the mosque and the harps.
29:37Now, we should continue our maids to destroy your haps.
29:40Also, we received our maids, to destroy your haps and Bolers,
29:58I want to quickly cut across to my colleague Aishwarya, who's joining us.
30:02Aishwarya, Sonam Vangchuk, after meeting J.P. Narda and Jitain Singh, has given one prerequisite
30:10request and a condition to break his past, and that is all charges be dropped against
30:16the protesting students who were detained and there were police cases against them.
30:20It's a climb down by Sonam Vangchuk.
30:23Is the government also going to climb down?
30:26Yes, you know, Piti, from what I'm understanding at the moment, there were detailed, there was
30:31a lot of talks that in fact happened between Sonam Vangchuk, J.P. Narda and Jitain Singh.
30:35And in that talk, one of the things that the Bharti Janta Party very clearly told Sonam
30:39Vangchuk is that they want him to move out and they want him to be healthy.
30:43They want him to live.
30:44And they also said that you just need to tell us what exactly you want.
30:48And now we are seeing this letter, which has come out, Piti, from what I'm understanding.
30:51We will see most of those cases being taken back by the police.
30:55This is the kind of assurance that the Bharti Janta Party will be giving Sonam Vangchuk.
31:00And in the next 24 hours, you would see the Bharti Janta Party also trying to meet him once
31:05again, giving him and tell him what exactly the Bharti Janta Party has done.
31:09From what I'm understanding, in the next 24 hours, we will see a climb down of sorts happening
31:14from the Bharti Janta Party side as well, Piti.
31:19All right.
31:20So the climb down, viewers, to elucidate, for your better understanding, Sonam Vangchuk earlier
31:26had stuck to one big condition and that was the resignation of the Education Minister,
31:30Dharmir Uthgadai.
31:31Since then, he has given out multiple messages, some of them suggesting that he's willing to
31:38end his past if parliamentarians meet, discuss the state of education in the country.
31:44Now, his latest precondition is not the resignation of the Education Minister, but all cases be
31:50dropped against the protesting students.
31:52And like my colleague Ashwarya is telling us, that the government could very well, in fact,
31:57incorporate and agree to this condition of Sonam Vangchuk.
32:02I want to bring in Moshmi, who's going to throw some light on the politics behind it.
32:06Moshmi, no Congress MPs in this delegation going to meet Sonam Vangchuk.
32:10Samajwadi Party MPs, Aam Admi Party there, there is a sense from the opposition now to
32:16also own the fact, politically own the fact that they too tried to assuage Sonam Vangchuk
32:24and convince him to end his past.
32:31That's right.
32:32And you know, perhaps we've seen a different sort of groupism as far as within the opposition
32:39is concerned, Preeti.
32:40If you look at the, from a bird's eye point of view, we saw this entire signature campaign
32:46happen in the parliament and perhaps Sanjay Singh of the Aam Admi Party towing a different
32:52line as the Aam Admi Party's loggerheads with the Congress, even, you know, slamming the
32:58Congress yesterday for, you know, diluting the entire protest of the students and trying
33:03to hijack it.
33:04So that's the politics that is folding within the opposition.
33:08But at large, I, I must reiterate that largely the opposition has been on the same lines as
33:16far as the demands are concerned, which are the demands that the students are wanting.
33:21Now, this is a big climb down as far as the resignation of Dharmendra Pradhan is concerned.
33:28And not many hours from now, Rahul Gandhi has said that is a non-negotiable demand.
33:34Now, would the Congress go by what Sonam Vangchuk has said or would the Congress do a different
33:41line from the other opposition parties over the demand of Dharmendra Pradhan will be the
33:47bone of contention tomorrow?
33:49We'll see those differences also, you know, pan out tomorrow, whether a discussion in the
33:55parliament is just enough or whether, whether and compensation and taking back the cases
34:01or is it 0.0 focus on Dharmendra Pradhan's sacking?
34:10Right.
34:11But, you know, Moshmi, also, and I'm going to come right back to you in just about a minute.
34:14It's no longer really about Sonam Vangchuk in the opposition.
34:17There's a protest raging on.
34:19And these protesters, bareheaded by the Kokhrun Janata party, say that nothing doing.
34:24It has to be the resignation of the education minister.
34:28At least for now, they seem to be sticking to that demand.
34:31Stay with me, Moshmi.
34:32Let's listen in to Sonam Vangchuk's wife.
34:54This letter is brought to you and you can see how many signs there are.
34:59These are all MPs of signs that are complaining to Sonam Vangchuk's wife that you have to throw up your
35:05own face.
35:06So, if the government doesn't give you a chance to Sonam Vangchuk's wife that you don't throw up your face.
35:23The protesters who were the protesters, there will be no wrong thing, legally, physically, or F.I.R. or anything.
35:35There are many atrocities on them, and they have so much resilience that they have not reacted to the result.
35:54All right, so is the government looking to offer an olive branch?
35:59Has the government climbed down from its stand of no negotiations?
36:03Because Sonam Vangchuk has climbed down.
36:07Here's more.
36:24As protests against Education Minister Dharmedra Pradhan over need paper leaks rocked the national capital,
36:33the Narendra Modi government is reaching out to all the stakeholders.
36:38The government aims to hold a second round of talks with the Cockroach Janta Party,
36:43but the protest leaders are demanding a neutral venue this time.
36:47Union Health Minister J.P. Nadda had met a CJP delegation on Monday.
36:52That round did not yield any outcome.
37:13Sources say senior ministers J.P. Nadda and Jitendra Singh also met educationist Sonam Vangchuk
37:20at the Medanta Hospital in Gurugram last night.
37:23The activist remains on a hunger strike, though the CJP leaders have urged him to end it.
37:29And now, Vangchuk has written to Nadda and Jitendra Singh,
37:33seeking an unequivocal assurance that none of the young protesters will face punitive
37:38or retaliatory legal action for participating in the movement.
37:42He has also sought an assurance against any further use of excessive police force.
37:48Vangchuk says he will end his fast if the government gives that assurance.
37:52Without it, he says he will continue his hunger strike indefinitely.
37:57The government also offered debate in parliament, but not under the rule demanded by the opposition,
38:03which is also insisting on the education minister's ouster.
38:06The government is prepared for the need paper leak.
38:18The government is prepared for the need paper leak.
38:37foreign
38:41foreign
38:43foreign
39:07On Tuesday, the government approached Rahul Gandhi too
39:10for a parliament debate before the leader of opposition was dragged away by Delhi police
39:15from outside the PM's residence.
39:18Rahul was detained briefly at the Chhatrasal Stadium before he was released.
39:45Three engagements, one message.
39:48The government wants to contain the protests before it spreads further.
39:52The question being asked in political corridors tonight,
39:55is this a genuine olive branch or just crisis management?
40:00Bureau Report, India Today.
40:05All right, we have the third day running, complete washout where parliament is concerned.
40:09Even the opposition has different demands of the government
40:13while a protest rages on in Jantar Mantar with one unconditional demand
40:18and that's the resignation of the education minister.
40:22The same demand now echoed by the Communist Party.
40:24I want to bring in Moshmi.
40:26Moshmi, take us through on what's really going on in parliament
40:29because there is no other issue echoing on the streets and in the sunset
40:34if cliches can be quoted.
40:40Oh, absolutely, Preeti.
40:42You know, we've seen several disruptions in the upper house and the lower house.
40:46We also saw a meeting of ministers and ministers meeting the speaker.
40:53Akhle Shadav had a long discussion with the Lok Sabha speaker
40:58and lots of protests erupting at the Makar Dwar and in the floor of the house
41:05with opposition sloganeering.
41:07And we saw opposition leaders marching in black attires as a sign of protest
41:14and alleging the dictatorship of the Modi government.
41:19So, one will have to wait and see whether there is any ice breaking
41:24as far as the parliament is concerned
41:27because no business has been transacted for the past three days
41:31ever since the parliament really convened.
41:33And importantly, now the focus has come to the NEET paper leak
41:39and also the atrocity, alleged atrocities on students that happened
41:44and the beton charging with Rahul Gandhi saying that there should be action
41:50against the police personals who indulged in such kind of acts.
41:54So, whether there is a meltdown in terms of,
41:57there is a demand for discussion under 267,
42:01that is an adjournment notice that you in fact cancel all business of the house
42:08or whether they stress on with the demand of resignation of Dharmendra Pradhan
42:14is a matter that will be sorted in the morning by the opposition leaders
42:18in the morning meeting.
42:23All right, Moshmi, thank you for joining us.
42:25We are going to continue to come back to you with the latest updates.
42:28We are now coming in.
42:30Union Minister J.P. Narda will be briefing the media at 8.30 p.m.
42:35So, is the government also going to now suggest
42:39that all the cases against students will be dropped
42:43so Sonam Wangchuk can end his fast?
42:45So, all eyes right now on J.P. Narda speaking at 8.30 p.m.
42:51He will be speaking with the media
42:53and in all probability will be concerning his meeting with Sonam Wangchuk.
42:59With that viewers, I am going to get into a quick break
43:01but we are going to leave you with all that did not happen once again
43:05in Parliament on Day 3.
43:07Thank you for joining us.
43:13Day 3 of monsoon session.
43:16Parliament remained paralysed as the battle over the neat paper leak refused to die down.
43:21Black was the colour of protests in Parliament on Wednesday.
43:25Congress MPs turned up dressed in black
43:27accusing the government of silencing students
43:30and cracking down on demonstrations.
43:33In large numbers, the opposition leaders are standing
43:36right at the Makar Dwarar protesting
43:38and saying that they want the Education Minister Darbendu Pradhan
43:41to step down, to resign.
43:44The top leaders of the opposition party,
43:46all of them wearing black, Priyanka Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Akhle Shahdav,
43:49all of them wearing black clothes
43:51and all of them standing now in solidarity.
43:55This is opposition unity that we can see they are saying
43:58what they want at this moment is for their demands to be heard.
44:18Inside the Lok Sabha, the confrontation escalated within minutes.
44:23The opposition demanded an immediate discussion on NEET and paper leaks.
44:27The Congress demanded Education Minister Darbendu Pradhan's resignation first for any debate.
44:33Sir, our demand is very clear.
44:37Education Minister should be resigned.
44:39Then one more.
44:41If you accept, if you accept adjournment motion, adjournment motion, adjournment motion.
44:50Mr. Minister Ardhiv, Mr. Shifatjh is, Mr. Hikshahd, Mr. Shifatj is, Mr. Shifatjahd.
44:56Mr. Shifatj is, Mr. Shifatjahd, the Month is the Second Board of interiors of the state, and Mr. Shifatjahd, Mr.
45:16Shifatjahd.
45:27The government hit back saying that it was ready for a full debate
45:31and accused the opposition of choosing disruption over discussion.
45:52The government hit the wall and the government hit the wall and the government hit the wall.
46:20Samajwadi Party Chief Akhilesh Yadav insisted the issue was bigger than politics
46:25and demanded that Prime Minister Narendra Modi must address the Parliament.
46:29He even questioned that why was Congress allowed to speak but not Samajwadi Party,
46:34accusing BJP and Congress of having an understanding.
47:00But neither side blinked.
47:06With slogans drowning out proceedings yet again, the Speaker adjourned the House
47:10as the neat showdown continued to hold Parliament hostage.
Comments