PM Modi speaks with Mauritius counterpart; leaders affirm commitment to deepen strategic partnership
New Delhi [India], June 24 (ANI): Prime Minister Narendra Modi had a telephone conversation with his Mauritius counterpart Dr. Navinchandra Ramgoolam and the two leaders discussed cooperation across a broad range of areas, including, defence and maritime security.
Emphasising the special and unique ties between India and Mauritius, the two leaders reaffirmed their shared commitment to further deepen the Enhanced Strategic Partnership between the two countries.
'They discussed the ongoing cooperation across a broad range of areas, including development partnership, capacity building, defence, maritime security, digital infrastructure, and people-to-people ties,' a PMO release said.
PM Modi appreciated the whole-hearted participation of PM Ramgoolam in the 11th International Day of Yoga.
He reiterated India's steadfast commitment to the development priorities of Mauritius in line with Vision MAHASAGAR and India's Neighbourhood First policy.
PM Modi extended invitation to PM Ramgoolan for an early visit to India. Both leaders agreed to remain in touch.
In a post on X, PM Modi said Mauritius remains a key partner in India's Vision MAHASAGAR and Neighbourhood First policy
'Pleased to speak with my friend, Prime Minister Dr. Navinchandra Ramgoolam. We exchanged views on further strengthening India-Mauritius Enhanced Strategic Partnership and regional developments. Mauritius remains a key partner in India's Vision MAHASAGAR and our Neighbourhood First policy,' he said.
India has close and longstanding relations with Mauritius, an island nation in the WesternIndianOcean, anchored in shared history, demography and culture. A key reason for the special ties is thefactthat Indian origin people comprise nearly 70% of the island's population of 1.2 million (28%Creole,3% Sino-Mauritian, 1% Franco-Mauritian).
Since 2005, India has been among the largest trading partners of Mauritius. For the FY2023-24Indian exports to Mauritius was USD 778.03 mn, Mauritian exports to India was USD73.10mnandtotal trade was USD 851.13 mn. Trade has grown in the last 18 years, fromUSD206.76millionin2005-06 to USD 851.13 million in 2023-24. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
18 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Daily Briefing: This day, 1975
Good morning, The game wasn't decided until the last session on Day 5. It started with great possibilities. England needed 350 to win, a daunting but not impossible target. But first, they had to reckon with Jasprit Bumrah, the world's premier fast bowler. Neither Bumrah nor his all-rounder teammate Ravindra Jadeja managed to shake the English batsmen. And soon, the suspense was over. England recorded a five-wicket win, leading the series 1-0 against India. National sports editor Sandeep Dwivedi brings alive the drama of the day, the home team's steep chase and India's missed chances, in his brilliant report from Leeds. We have more on the Test series, but first, let's turn to the rest of the day's headlines. The Emergency was imposed exactly 50 years ago on June 25, 1975. The 21-month period that followed was marked by the suspension of civil liberties, curtailment of press freedom, mass arrests, cancellation of elections, and rule by decree. In today's edition, veterans and reporters recall the darkest chapter of Indian history. 🔴 When Coomi Kapoor recollects the Emergency, it begins with a 4 am phone call informing her of the arrest of Opposition leaders. In the following months, The Indian Express became a battleground of truth, defiance, and sheer grit. Power cuts silenced the presses, censorship muzzled the newsroom, and reporters were jailed and threatened. The paper ran a blank editorial in protest, and Ramnath Goenka, the paper's fiery owner, refused to bow, fighting back with lawsuits, court orders, and iron resolve. Read Kapoor's gripping first-hand account about a newspaper that fought back. 🔴 Contributing editor Neerja Chowdhury offers a sharp and compelling portrait of Indira Gandhi, how she went from Durga, dictator to democrat, all within 5-6 years. She was once hailed by the Opposition after she helped liberate Bangladesh. That changed when she imposed the Emergency to protect her kursi. Ultimately, in a show of the tiny streak of democracy still alive in her, she puzzled her critics, calling for elections, which led to her stunning defeat. 🔴 Faced with an oppressive regime, some revolutionaries stood tall. Vikas Pathak profiles Justice H R Khanna, the sole dissenter in a Supreme Court order that upheld the suspension of rights under the Emergency. 🔴 Santosh Singh recalls the Jayaprakash Narayan movement, which shook the Indira Gandhi government, birthed an alternative to Congress and created a star line-up of future leaders like Lalu Prasad and Nitish Kumar. 🔴 And finally, we have Raj Narain, the unlikely hero who brought down Indira Gandhi with a petition in the Allahabad High Court. It was this ruling that led to her declaring the Emergency. But Narain's machinations in the Janata government would eventually bring her back to power. Also read: Commemorating the dark period should go beyond criticism of past to introspection about present, writes Suhas Palshikar Truce: A fragile ceasefire appeared to hold between Iran and Israel, days after the US attacked the former's nuclear sites. The truce is crucial in stabilising the volatile region, which puts crucial trade and flight routes at risk for the rest of the world. Roll call: Starting from Bihar, which goes to the polls later this year, the Election Commission has directed a special intensive revision of electoral rolls, preparing them afresh. This would require voters who were not on the rolls in 2003 to provide documentation proving their eligibility. Launch ready: After considerable delay, the Axiom-4 mission is slated for launch today. The spacecraft, which would carry India's Shubhanshu Shukla to the International Space Station, in a historic step, is expected to take off around noon IST. It will dock at the ISS at around 4.30 pm on Thursday. Many wrong turns: Rs 18 crore, two years and several memes later, the newly constructed rail overbridge in Bhopal has come under fresh scrutiny. The bridge became a subject of jokes, and then a serious investigation, after images appeared of its peculiar construction. The bridge appears to have an almost 90-degree turn. Whose fault is it? Officials from the Madhya Pradesh Public Works Department (PWD) and the Indian Railways appear to be shifting blame. On the docket: Much of the credit for England's win on Tuesday goes to opener Ben Duckett. It was Duckett's three reverse-sweep boundaries off Jadeja that helped him jump from 86 to 102. Duckett's 149, only the second ton on the English side in the opening game, sealed the deal for the home team. Read Dwivedi's meticulous analysis of England's Bazball hero. Everything we see in the universe, from the stars and planets to the dust, makes up just about 5 per cent of it. Another 27 per cent is made up of dark matter, which neither emits nor absorbs light, but exerts gravity. Without it, galaxies would not hold together. What is the dark matter made of? The answer has long eluded the best of our scientists. Could it be that we have failed to understand gravity altogether? Read Shravan Hanasoge's column on this cosmic mystery. That's all for today, folks! Until tomorrow, Sonal Gupta Sonal Gupta is a senior sub-editor on the news desk. She writes feature stories and explainers on a wide range of topics from art and culture to international affairs. She also curates the Morning Expresso, a daily briefing of top stories of the day, which won gold in the 'best newsletter' category at the WAN-IFRA South Asian Digital Media Awards 2023. She also edits our newly-launched pop culture section, Fresh Take. ... Read More
Scroll.in
18 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
US: Zohran Mamdani poised to win New York Democratic mayoral primary polls
Zohran Mamdani was on Wednesday poised to win the Democratic Party's primary election for the New York mayoral polls in the United States, CNN reported. His main opponent, former New York state Governor Andrew Cuomo, conceded the contest even as the counting of votes was underway. Mamdani's votes in the primary were below the 50% mark, CNN projected. This would mean that the contest will be decided by ranked-choice votes that will be announced beginning July 1. Mamdani, who is of Indian origin, campaigned for a rent freeze, making New York's buses free, energy reforms and increasing taxes on the city's wealthiest persons. The 33-year-old has been a supporter of the Palestinian cause and has called for Israel to be held to account over its war on Gaza. Since 2021, he has served as a member of the New York State Assembly for the 36th district in Queens. He is also a member of the Democratic Socialists of America. If elected in the election scheduled for November 4, Mamdani will become the first Muslim and the first person of South Asian origin to become the mayor of New York. He is the son of Indian-American filmmaker Mira Nair and Mahmood Mamdani, a Ugandan academic and professor of African, colonialism and post‐colonialism studies. Mamdani's opponent Cuomo was attempting a political comeback. In 2021, he had resigned amid allegations of sexual harassment and New York state's mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic. He had denied the allegations. 'Tonight was not our night; tonight was Assemblyman Mamdani's night,' CNN quoted Cuomo as having told his supporters on Tuesday as the votes were being counted. However, his Spokesperson Rich Azzopardi was quoted as saying that Cuomo may consider the mayoral polls in November on another party's ticket. Mamdani will face the city's current Mayor Eric Adams, who is contesting as an Independent. The Republican Party has nominated Curtis Sliwa.
The Print
20 minutes ago
- The Print
Emergency showed extent of executive power. 50 years on, it's still embedded in Constitution
The Constitution itself was designed at a time of immense political, social, and economic upheaval. There were a multitude of challenges around secession, religious integration and communalism because of Partition, the integration of 550 princely states, which made up two-fifths of India, and widespread poverty. The resulting constitutional setup gave the Union government sweeping powers to convert the country into a unitary state. The State, consequently, while giving fundamental rights and freedoms to citizens, could also revoke these through emergency provisions, the office of the governor, money bills, ordinances and in some cases, just ordinary legislation. However, it may not be an aberration, but a logical conclusion of executive power, given the structure and setup of the Indian state itself. The declaration, which was accorded through vague wording within the Constitution in Article 352, was compounded by a flurry of legislation to support the implementation of a dictatorial state. It underscores the ease with which the Union could legally override the separation of powers and curb fundamental rights with limited judicial, legal or citizen oversight. Fifty years on, the broader legacy of the Emergency is the fragility of rights, and checks and balances. If anything, India's democratic successes may be viewed as a miracle, stemming from well-meaning actors, rather than legislation and policy action itself. About 50 years ago, on 28 June 1975, a small, 22-word obituary in The Times of India read, 'O'Casey, D.E.M., beloved husband of T. Ruth, loving father of L.I. Bertie, brother of Faith, Hope and Justicia, expired on June 26,' highlighting a fundamental shift in India's fledgling experiment with democracy. The Emergency was indeed a watershed moment in India's history, and viewed by many as a blot on India's largely democratic traditions. When the Constitution was controversially amended for the first time in 1951, impositions were placed on fundamental rights and free speech. It also enshrined a mechanism, the 9th Schedule. Laws placed in this schedule are not subject to judicial review, a feature used to override unfavourable judicial decisions and to shield the executive from scrutiny. Indira Gandhi used this schedule to overturn her suspension as a member of parliament. Also read: West read Emergency wrong. India's democracy mattered little to US, UK, Russia Existing provisions Throughout India's early years, wars with Pakistan and China allowed the government to declare states of 'external emergency,' which worked to suspend fundamental rights. They were backed by laws that expanded state power, from the Defence of India Act to the Preventive Detention Act. Christoffe Jaffrelot and Pratinav Anil in India's First Dictatorship: The Emergency, 1975-1977, and Srinath Raghavan in Indira Gandhi and the Years that Transformed India, highlight the emphasis Indira Gandhi put on making sure all emergency provisions and actions had a veneer of legality attached to them to reiterate the legitimacy of her actions. She did not need to introduce new laws to give the Emergency teeth; such provisions already existed. The Sedition provision (Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code), the Defence of India Act 1962 (DIA), and the Maintenance of Internal Security Act 1971 (MISA) all expanded the government's ability to suspend fundamental rights or harass dissidents. The DIA and MISA conferred on the government a wide range of powers to detain and arrest individuals, and limit their ability to challenge their detention in the courts. These also allowed warrantless searches and wiretapping to occur. The government could determine 'protected areas' and 'prohibited places,' limiting the movement of people, and violating the right to free movement and protest. These laws notwithstanding, the executive made the process the punishment, a feature that has dominated the Indian state since. Coomi Kapoor, in The Emergency: A Personal History, noted, 'an ugly feature of arrests and detentions under DIA [and MISA] was the immediate rearrest of persons released on bail.' Once the Emergency was lifted in 1977, Indira Gandhi lost power, and a motley coalition under the Janata Party introduced the 43rd and 44th amendments to raise the threshold to declare an emergency, and repealed some of the other controversial legislation enabling Indira Gandhi's hold on power. However, other features still remained in force, allowing the executive to expand its power. In times of crisis, emergency powers may be helpful to respond quickly, but the Constitution does not always provide clear opportunities for oversight from other branches of government that are critical to ensure accountability. During Covid-19, the Union was able to bypass the federal structure by unilaterally imposing a lockdown through ordinary legislation, rather than declaring an emergency (which would have required parliamentary oversight). This was partly because India lacks a dedicated framework to regulate public health emergencies. Containment measures became convenient tools of control and an excuse to suspend civil liberties, as seen with dwindling protests and arrests. The right to privacy was surrendered in the name of containment and contact tracing. This is not to say that such measures were unnecessary, but their legal basis matters. By using laws like the Disaster Management Act 2005, which was not designed for pandemics and is not subject to prior parliamentary review, the Union was able to suspend the freedom of movement and derive secondary powers to amend other laws like the Essential Commodities Act without any legislative or judicial oversight. Also read: Modi govt's assault on democracy is more sinister than the Emergency. Look at the differences Legacy of Emergency Another key feature of the Indian Constitution is its quasi-federal nature, according power to states over certain issues, while allowing the Union to take control if needed. Under Article 356, the Union government can override state rights by dismissing a state government and imposing President's Rule. Since 1947, it has been invoked more than 130 times, with the greatest number of instances being when Indira Gandhi was in power (50 times between 1966-1977 and 1980-1984), followed by the Janata Party (20 times between 1977-1980). It finally took a 1994 Supreme Court judgment to curtail the scope of President's rule. Nonetheless, the Union has been able to exert power over states through fiscal centralisation and the governor's office. Over the past decade, fiscal centralisation via delays in GST compensation, non-shared cesses, and discretionary transfers has undermined state capacity and made states more dependent on the Union, as seen in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Punjab. Though fully legal, such measures do undermine state rights. Fiscal centralisation has been accompanied by political standoffs. Governors have, of late, withheld assent on key bills passed by state legislatures, or blocked state appointments using powers accorded in the Constitution itself. Ongoing issues between non-NDA ruled states and the Union stem from the fact that governors, who are appointed by the Union, could employ a pocket veto on legislation by not assenting to it or forwarding it to the President for a decision. It took a Supreme Court judgment earlier this year to build timelines and processes into how long a governor or the President can block legislation passed by a state government. There are other areas where state control undermines the democratic ethos of the Constitution, especially when weaponised. Anti-terror and preventive detention laws—a hallmark of India's history since Independence—have had their powers expanded with the UAPA, PMLA, and earlier with TADA. This is not to say every government has unjustly used these laws, but to highlight the ease with which civil rights can be taken away if desired. Executive power has ebbed and flowed since the Emergency. During the coalition era from 1989–2014, a weaker Union allowed for cooperative federalism to emerge. States had a stronger say, and key initiatives to decentralise power away from the Union were introduced, from the 73rd and 74th constitutional amendments, to the Right to Information Act. Even as the Union yielded some of its power, anti-terror laws and financial regulation shifted power away from the citizen back to the state, and fiscal centralisation has become a weapon to use against non-NDA-ruled states. If the Emergency showed the extent of executive power, it is clear that the source of such power is embedded in India's constitutional setup; this is the legacy that India must contend with, 50 years on. Vibhav Mariwala writes about political economy, history, and the institutions that shape our world. He works on public policy and global macro between London and Mumbai and tweets @ are personal. (Edited by Theres Sudeep)
