BJP organises event to observe 50 years of Emergency
Belagavi: BJP organised a special programme on Monday to observe 50 years since the imposition of Emergency.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
MP Jagadish Shettar, MLC CT Ravi, and MLA Abhay Patil spoke at the programme.
Ravi said that 50 years ago, there were attempts to move away from democratic values by imposing a state of Emergency, which was declared for selfish reasons, to weaken the rights of the people, to control the judiciary, to take away the freedom of the Press, and for the suppression of human rights. "The Constitution reached a comatose state under the Congress dictatorship," he said, adding: "Those who massacred the Constitution shouldn't speak about it.
Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge did not raise his voice then. It was Jan Sangh, RSS, and BJP who did it."
Shettar said the imposition of Emergency in India was an act of insulting the Constitution.
More than 10 dignitaries who were imprisoned during the Emergency were honoured on the occasion. The programme was conducted to create awareness among the people by reviving the 'dark history' of Congress.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
5 minutes ago
- Business Standard
DC residents protest as WH says federal agents will be on patrol 24/7
Residents in one Washington DC neighborhood lined up Wednesday to protest the increased police presence after the White House said the number of National Guard troops in the nation's capital would ramp up and federal officers would be the streets around the clock. After law enforcement set up a vehicle checkpoint along the busy 14th Street Northwest corridor, hecklers shouted, Go home, fascists and Get off our streets. Some protesters stood at the intersection before the checkpoint and urged drivers to turn away from it. The action intensified a few days after President Donald Trump's unprecedented announcement that his administration would take over the city's police department for at least a month. The city's Democratic mayor walked a political tightrope, referring to the takeover as an authoritarian push at one point and later framing the infusion of officers as boost to public safety, though one with few specific barometers for success. The Republican president has said crime in the city was at emergency levels that only such federal intervention could fix even as District of Columbia leaders pointed to statistics showing violent crime at a 30-year low after a sharp rise two years ago. For two days, small groups of federal officers had been visible in scattered areas of the city. But more were present in high-profile locations Wednesday and troops were expected to start doing more missions in Washington on Thursday, according to a National Guard spokesman who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe the planning process. On Wednesday, agents from Homeland Security Investigations patrolled the popular U Street corridor. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) officers were seen on the National Mall, while National Guard members were parked nearby. DEA agents also joined Metropolitan Police Department officers on patrol in the Navy Yard neighbourhood, while FBI agents stood along the heavily trafficked Massachusetts Avenue. Hundreds of federal law enforcement and city police officers who patrolled the streets Tuesday night made 43 arrests, compared with about two dozen the night before. DC Councilmember Christina Henderson downplayed the arrest reports as a bunch of traffic stops and said the administration was seeking to disguise how unnecessary this federal intervention is. I'm looking at this list of arrests and they sound like a normal Saturday night in any big city, said Henderson. Unlike in other US states and cities, the law gives Trump the power to take over Washington's police for up to 30 days. Extending his power over the city for longer would require approval from Congress, and that could be tough in the face of Democratic resistance. Trump suggested he could seek a longer period of control or decide to call on Congress to exercise authority over city laws his administration sees as lax on crime. We're gonna do this very quickly. But we're gonna want extensions. I don't want to call a national emergency. If I have to, I will, he said. Later, on his Truth Social site, Trump reiterated his claims about the capital, writing, DC has been under siege from thugs and killers, but now, DC is back under Federal Control where it belongs. Henderson, who worked for Sen Chuck Schumer of New York before running for the DC Council, said she was already in touch with friends on the Hill to rally opposition for any Trump extension request. She added, It's Day Three and he's already saying he's going to need more time? Targeting a variety of infractions The arrests made by 1,450 federal and local officers across the city included those for suspicion of driving under the influence and unlawful entry, as well as a warrant for assault with a deadly weapon, according to the White House. Seven illegal firearms were seized. There have now been more than 100 arrests since Trump began beefing up the federal law enforcement presence in Washington last week, White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said. President Trump is delivering on his campaign promise to clean up this city and restore American Greatness to our cherished capital, she said. The president has full command of the National Guard and has activated up to 800 troops to support law enforcement, though exactly what form remains to be determined. Neither Army nor District of Columbia National Guard officials have been able to describe the training backgrounds of the troops who have so far reported for duty. While some members are military police, others likely hold jobs that would have offered them little training in dealing with civilians or law enforcement. The federalisation push also includes clearing out encampments for people who are homeless, Trump has said. US Park Police have removed dozens of tents since March, and plan to take out two more this week, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt has said. People are offered the chance to go to shelters and get addiction treatment, if needed, but those who refuse could be fined or jailed, she said. City officials said they are making more shelter space available and increasing their outreach. Violent crime has dropped in the district The federal effort comes even after a drop in violent crime in the nation's capital, a trend that experts have seen in cities across the US since an increase during the coronavirus pandemic. On average, the level of violence Washington remains mostly higher than averages in three dozen cities analyzed by the nonprofit Council on Criminal Justice, said the group's president and CEO, Adam Gelb. Police Chief Pamela Smith said during an interview with the local Fox affiliate that the city's Metro Police Department has been down nearly 800 officers. She said the increased number of federal agents on the streets would help fill that gap, at least for now. Mayor Muriel Bowser said city officials did not get any specific goals for the surge during a meeting with Trump's attorney general, Pam Bondi, and other top federal law enforcement officials Tuesday. But, she said, I think they regard it as a success to have more presence and take more guns off the street, and we do too. She had previously called Trump's moves unsettling and unprecedented while pointing out he was within a president's legal rights regarding the district, which is the seat of American government but is not a state. For some residents, the increased presence of law enforcement and National Guard troops is nerve-racking. I've seen them right here at the subway... they had my street where I live at blocked off yesterday, actually, Washington native Sheina Taylor said. It's more fearful now because even though you're a law-abiding citizen, here in DC, you don't know, especially because I'm African American.
Hans India
5 minutes ago
- Hans India
Saffron party raises issue in Assembly
Raising the matter during the Zero Hour, BJP state President B Y Vijayendra said Nayak from the Valmiki community was murdered heinously for being in love with a woman from another community. Noting that the accused had made reels using the machete a day ahead of the murder and had posted the video on Instagram, he alleged that police not taking caution had led to the murder. Claiming that only after the protests, police took action and made arrests, Vijayendra pointing out that Nayak's family is poor, demanded compensation for them, as Rs 25 lakh was given to the family of Mohammed Fazil, who was killed in Mangaluru. 'As Gavisiddappa Nayak family is poor, a minimum of Rs 50 lakh compensation should be given, along with 2 acre land and a government job to one of his family members,' he said, adding that the case should be handed over to NIA, as there is no faith on the police department. Later, when Speaker U T Khader said that the government will give its reply on Thursday, as the home minister was not present, the BJP members demanded an answer today itself, as it was a serious case. This led to a heated exchange between BJP and the ruling Congress. The BJP members, including C N Ashwath Narayan, accused the government of showing negligence in the case, and questioned whether the 'government is alive?' Minister Shivaraj Tangadagi hit back, alleging that the opposition party was playing politics over death, and asserted that the administration had taken prompt action in the case. The Speaker denied any further discussion on the issue as it was raised under the Zero Hour. He said the government will give its reply when the home minister is present in the House.
Hans India
5 minutes ago
- Hans India
Supreme Court to hear pleas seeking restoration of J&K's statehood today
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will on Thursday take up a set of applications seeking the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir within a fixed timeframe. According to the causelist published on the apex court's website, a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran will hear the matter on Thursday, a day ahead of Independence Day. Last week, CJI Gavai agreed to retain the petitions on the hearing board after they were mentioned by senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan. One of the applications, filed by Zahoor Ahmed Bhat and activist Khurshaid Ahmad Malik, argued that the prolonged delay in restoring statehood is "gravely affecting the rights of the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir and also violating the idea of federalism." The applicants contended that the absence of a time-bound framework for restoration amounts to a breach of federalism, which is part of the Constitution's Basic Structure. In its landmark verdict on Article 370, a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud had left open the question of whether Parliament has the authority to extinguish statehood by converting a state into one or more Union Territories. The Bench relied on a statement by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assuring that statehood would be restored to Jammu and Kashmir. During the oral hearings, SG Mehta, the second-highest law officer of the Centre, had told the court that the Union Home Ministry could not provide an exact timeline, saying it would take "some time" to restore statehood. Nevertheless, the Constitution Bench -- which also included Justices S.K. Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, and Surya Kant -- directed the Election Commission of India to hold Legislative Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir under Section 14 of the Reorganisation Act by September 30, 2024, and stated that "restoration of statehood shall take place at the earliest and as soon as possible." The verdict also upheld Ladakh's status as a Union Territory under Article 3(a) read with Explanation I of the Constitution, which allows the creation of a Union Territory by separating a territory from a state. In May 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed review petitions challenging this ruling, finding "no error apparent on the face of the record" and declining to list the matter for an open court hearing.
