DMK hails SC's stay on ED probe in TASMAC case
Chennai: The DMK on Thursday celebrated the Supreme Court's decision to stay the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) probe into the alleged TASMAC scam, calling it a major vindication of the party's position.
Speaking to reporters at the DMK headquarters, Anna Arivalayam, party organising secretary R. S. Bharathi said, "The Supreme Court's ruling exposed the Centre's attempt to weaponise the ED to malign the Tamil Nadu government."
"The BJP cannot digest the DMK's consistent electoral victories in Tamil Nadu. That is why they are using the ED to defame our regime," Bharathi said.
Bharathi pointed out that around 44 First Information Reports (FIRs) had been filed in connection with TASMAC, the state-run liquor distribution body.
"Yet, only a few selectively chosen FIRs were used by the ED to conduct raids. This shows that the intention was not to investigate but to create a negative perception about the DMK," he said.
Referring to the Supreme Court's observations, Bharathi claimed the Apex Court had criticised the ED for functioning like a "blackmailing institution" in several parts of the country.
"The court's order is not just a relief for Tamil Nadu, but also a strong message against the arbitrary actions of the ED," he added.
He further asserted that the verdict is a legal endorsement of the DMK government's stand and legal efforts against the ED's overreach.
"The court has dealt a hammer blow to the ED's politically motivated actions. This is a significant win for federalism and democracy," Bharathi said.
The Supreme Court, earlier in the day, had stayed the ED's probe into alleged money laundering involving TASMAC, questioning the agency's jurisdiction and motives.
The judgment has sparked sharp political reactions, with the DMK framing it as a triumph against "authoritarian interference" by the Centre.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Shah's speech on Tamil Nadu ‘blatant lies': A Raja
Amit Shah is trying to disturb the peace in a harmonious state like Tamil Nadu, said DMK's A Raja on Monday while emphasising that the Union home minister's speech attacking them a day ago were'blatant lies'. 'His speech was three things — disgusting, blatant lies without evidence and divisive,' Raja said in a press conference. Shah in Madurai on Sunday launched a scathing attack on the MK Stalin-led DMK government for 'rising corruption, crimes against women and drug mafia' over the last four years and said that the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) would form the government in Tamil Nadu in the 2026 assembly elections. 'Their communal politics does not work here. People of Tamil Nadu have repeatedly shown the BJP that their politics will not be accepted here,' Raja said. He added that they are not afraid of Shah and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. ' We are not afraid of Shah and Modi. Afterall, they are ordinary people. Why are they not able to win here? Because we have an ideology that is an alternative to theirs. As long as Dravidian ideology exists, they cannot gain a foothold here. We are not Delhi, Maharashtra and Haryana. We are Tamil Nadu, we are Dravidam, they (BJP) cannot come here.' Raja rebutted Shah's speech point by point and listed chief minister MK Stalin's achievement while adding that the BJP-led Union government is creating confusion over the delimitation process. On Shah urging people to participate in large numbers on June 22 for BJP's conference on Lord Murugan in Madurai, Raja said that the people know that it is to whip up communal sentiments. 'You are not conducting this for the unity of Hindus but to bring in religious divide by going against Islam, Christianity and marginalised people,' the Lok Sabha MP said. Naam Tamilar Katchi (NTK) chief S Seeman too said that the BJP should not politicise Tamil deity Lord Murugan. 'There is a value for Murugan in the state. Why didn't BJP speak of his glory all these days,' Seeman told reporters. 'You take up Rama in Uttar Pradesh, Puri Jagannath in Odisha, Aiyyappa in Kerala, and then Murugan here. Do you think people here will be deceived?' In response, the BJP said Shah ensured that the BJP forms the government in Haryana, Maharashtra and Delhi. 'He has come to Tamil Nadu to pack off the DMK in the 2026 assembly elections,' BJP's Tamil Nadu chief Nainar Nagendran said.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
AI must be subordinate to fairness, equity, human dignity: Justice Surya Kant
Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant has said justice cannot be reduced to a digital product, warning that artificial intelligence (AI) must always remain subordinate to fairness, equity, and human dignity. 'Justice, unlike software, is not a product to be optimised, but a principle to be honoured. Technology must remain subordinate to our higher commitments to fairness, equity, and human dignity,' said Justice Kant, who is set to become the Chief Justice of India in November. Speaking at Microsoft's Fireside Chat on 'AI and Law' on June 6, Justice Kant cautioned that while AI promises to enhance access, efficiency, and transparency in the legal system, unchecked deployment could mirror and even magnify existing societal inequities. 'Technology, if left unchecked, can reflect and reinforce societal inequities. AI is not a perfect technology, and it can perhaps never replace the human element that the entire Rawlsian theory of justice hinges on,' he said. Rawlsian theory refers to the philosophy of justice developed by John Rawls, an American political philosopher. The core of the theory is the concept of 'justice as fairness', which aims to reconcile the seemingly competing values of freedom and equality. Justice Kant acknowledged the global nature of the challenges AI presents, particularly issues like algorithmic bias, hallucinated legal citations, and data protection. 'Take, for instance, the fictitious legal precedents that chatbots routinely come up with when faced with complex legal propositions,' said Justice Kant, warning of the risks of relying blindly on AI in sensitive domains like law. He spoke about growing cyber threats to courts and the judiciary, including ransomware attacks and doxing of judges, and said such digital risks were now 'a matter of constitutional resilience.' He said India has responded proactively, with secure e-filing platforms, the National Judicial Data Grid, and virtual hearings backed by multi-layered authentication. 'Cybersecurity is not a matter of IT hygiene, but of constitutional resilience…courts must invest not just in secure infrastructure, but in public confidence,' Justice Kant said. Justice Kant said the adoption of AI must not be driven by novelty or efficiency alone. 'We do so not as passive observers, but as stewards of a future we must shape with wisdom and purpose… Shaping the future demands more than innovation—it calls for an unwavering adherence to foundational values.' Justice Kant said India's judicial digital transformation, while ambitious, is being shaped through collaboration between technologists, judges, civil society, and academics via a dedicated Centre for Research and Planning within the Supreme Court. He referred to India's evolving legal-tech landscape and initiatives reshaping the courts including SUVAS, the Supreme Court's translation software that has enabled over 100,000 judgments in 18 regional languages, Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) systems in Constitution Bench hearings for real-time transparency, and LegRAA, a legal research tool that aids without replacing judicial reasoning. 'These technologies are designed explicitly to support, not supplant, human judgment. It preserves the essential human element of jurisprudence, ensuring that final legal Page 6 of 13 interpretations remain firmly rooted in wisdom, compassion, and ethical discernment,' he said. Justice Kant called for building AI systems that reflect functional competence and moral clarity. 'I remain firmly convinced that any contemplation of AI must be guided by a deep moral compass. Shaping the future demands more than for an unwavering adherence to foundational values. Transparency, equity, responsibility, and respect for human dignity must not be afterthoughts, but the pillars upon which all technological advancement rests…Let this dialogue between technologists and jurists be not the end, but the beginning of a sustained collaboration, one where justice and technology walk hand in hand, with the citizen always at the centre.'
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Apex court rejects plea filed by Tamil Nadu on education funds
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a plea by the Tamil Nadu government seeking an urgent hearing in its suit against the Union government for allegedly withholding over ₹2,000 crore in funds under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme (SSS), citing what the state described as 'coercive tactics' by the Centre to force the state to implement the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. 'For how long has this fund not been given? What is the urgency now?' a bench of justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan asked senior advocate P Wilson, who mentioned the matter on behalf of the Tamil Nadu government, seeking an expedited listing. As Wilson flagged the constitutional right to free and compulsory education of nearly 4.8 million students in the state being adversely impacted, the bench remained unconvinced and declined the request: 'The plea is rejected.' The brief exchange took place during the Supreme Court's ongoing summer recess, now designated as a period of 'partial court working days' where only two to three benches sit and only matters of pressing urgency are usually considered, in addition to some old cases where both sides have given their consent to argue during the break. The regular functioning of the top court will resume on July 14. Filed under Article 131 of the Constitution, Tamil Nadu's suit accuses the Centre of linking its annual share under the SSS to the implementation of the NEP 2020 and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme -- a condition the state calls 'unconstitutional, arbitrary and coercive.' According to the suit, the Project Approval Board had approved a total outlay of ₹3,585.99 crore for Tamil Nadu under the SSS for the financial year 2024–25, of which ₹2,151.59 crore was to be the Centre's 60% share. The state claims this amount was not released solely because of its principled opposition to NEP 2020. Tamil Nadu, ruled by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), has been a vocal critic of the NEP, particularly its three-language formula, which the state believes undermines its two-language policy rooted in Tamil linguistic pride and regional identity. 'The Union Government seeks to coerce the State to implement the NEP-2020 throughout the State in its entirety and to deviate from the education regime followed in the State,' the suit submitted, while asserting that the SSS is a standalone scheme that should not be tied to compliance with any other olicy. The suit further alleged that the withholding of funds 'cripples the implementation of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009,' directly impacting 4.39 million students, 2.2 lakh teachers, and over 32,000 school staff in the state. The state's legal team has argued that the Centre's move violates the spirit of cooperative federalism and amounts to an 'usurpation' of the state's constitutional powers to legislate on education, which falls under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List. Tamil Nadu has also urged the Supreme Court to declare that the implementation of the NEP and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme, which mandates full compliance with NEP, is not binding on the state. It has sought a direction to the Centre to immediately release ₹2,291 crore (including interest), claiming the delay is 'not only illegal but also violative of constitutional morality.' While the plea for an urgent hearing has now been declined, the main suit continues to be listed for regular hearing. The standoff comes amid a broader constitutional tussle between the Tamil Nadu government and the Union government. On April 8, the Supreme Court struck down Tamil Nadu governor RN Ravi's controversial move to reserve 10 re-enacted state bills for presidential assent, and the matter is now part of a presidential reference pending before the top court.
