Lok Sabha Speaker to lead delegation to BRICS inter-parliamentary forum
Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla will be leading an Indian parliamentary delegation to the 11th BRICS Parliamentary Forum in Brazil this June, where he is scheduled to address the forum on the 'BRICS Parliaments united for the reform of the multilateral peace and security architecture', a statement from the Lok Sabha Secretariat said on Thursday (May 29, 2025).
The BRICS Parliamentary Forum will be held in Brasilia from June 3 to June 5, the statement said, adding that Mr. Birla would also be addressing the forum on inter-parliamentary cooperation for 'responsible and inclusive Artificial Intelligence'.
The theme for the 11th BRICS Parliamentary Forum is 'The Role of BRICS Parliaments in Building a More Inclusive and Sustainable, Global Governance'.
Mr. Birla may also hold bilateral meetings with the Presiding Officers of the participating Parliaments on the sidelines of the forum, the Lok Sabha Secretariat said, adding that a joint statement would be adopted at the end of the summit.
The delegation, led by Mr. Birla, will comprise Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman Harivansh, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MPs Surendra Singh Nagar, Vijay Baghel, and Vivek Thakur; and the Telegu Desam Party's Shabari Byreddy. The delegation will also include Lok Sabha Secretary-General Utpal Kumar Singh, and Rajya Sabha Secretary-General P.C. Mody.
The Lok Sabha Secretariat said that the delegation from India is also scheduled to participate in the proceedings during the plenary sessions on themes related to the 'Search of New Paths for Economic Development', 'Towards Stronger and More Durbale BRICS Inter-Parliamentary Cooperation', 'BRICS Inter-Parliamentary Alliance for Global Health', and the 'BRICS Inter-Parliamentary Dialogue on Climate and Sustainability'.
The statement added that Presiding Officers and Members of Parliament from 10 BRICS countries — Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Iran — would also be participating in the forum with the President of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, Tulia Ackson, who serves as the Speaker of the National Assembly of Tanzania.
Delegates from invited nations, which include Belarus, Bolivia, Kazakhstan, Cuba, Nigeria, Malaysia, Thailand, Uganda, and Uzbekistan, will also be participating, the statement said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
23 minutes ago
- Indian Express
From the Mughals' successors to dancing skills, ruling Shiv Sena and NCP lock horns
The rivalry between the ruling coalition allies in Maharashtra, the Nationalist Congress Party led by Ajit Pawar and Eknath Shinde's Shiv Sena, seems to be intensifying in the Raigad district after Sena MLAs openly warned NCP state president Sunil Tatkare Sunday that his reverse countdown has begun. A day after, the NCP Monday likened them to the successors of the Mughals in Kaliyuga. Referring to Lok Sabha MP Tatkare's mimicry of Sena minister Bharat Gogawale from Raigad's Mahad Assembly seat, who always carries a handkerchief in his hand, Sena's Karjat MLA Mahendra Thorave said, 'The day you mimicked Bharat Gogawale, your reverse countdown had begun. Just wait and watch how we force you to take the handkerchief on your head'. Thorave, who was speaking at the birthday celebration of Gogawale, even warned that Tatkare's file on the irrigation scam has not yet been closed. Alibaug Sena MLA Mahendra Dalvi, too, targeted Tatkare, saying the upcoming Maharashtra civic body polls will be fought as Mahayuti, but Tatkare will not be a part of it. 'He (Tatkare) has a habit of claiming everything for himself. Those who have no sense of ownership should not even think about guardianship (of Raigad district),' Dalvi said. The Sena and NCP are at loggerheads over the guardian ministership of the Raigad district. While Tatkare's daughter and the state's Women and Child Development Department Minister, Aditi Tatkare. has claimed it, Sena's Gogawale wants the post. Apart from the local political rivalry, this issue is one of the bones of contention between the two parties. Dalvi further claimed, 'We worked for Tatkare in Lok Sabha polls, but he showed his level in the Assembly elections'. On Monday, NCP chief spokesperson Anand Paranjpe hit back with a jibe, especially at Thorave 'There is no doubt that Sunil Tatkare will retain his Raigad Lok Sabha constituency, which has the blessing of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, even in 2029. But let me assure these successors of the Mughals in Kaliyuga that they will soon have to hide their faces with a handkerchief, and avoid the people of Maharashtra,' Paranjpe. 'The Sena minister and two MLAs always act aggressively like the Mughals. Before attacking Tatkare, an MLA like Thorave should realise that the entire world has seen his dance bar skills when he was dancing at the top of the table after his trip to Guwahati,' Paranjape added.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
27 minutes ago
- Business Standard
SC rejects plea on deportation drive in Assam, asks petitioner to move HC
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma told the petitioner to approach the Gauhati High Court in the matter The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea which alleged that the Assam government has reportedly launched a "sweeping" drive to detain and deport persons suspected to be foreigners without nationality verification or exhaustion of legal remedies. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma told the petitioner to approach the Gauhati High Court in the matter. "Why are you not going to the Gauhati High Court?" the bench asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, who appeared for petitioner All BTC Minority Students Union. Hegde said the plea was based on an order passed by the apex court earlier. "Please go to the Gauhati High Court," the bench observed. Hegde said the petitioner would withdraw the plea to take appropriate recourse before the high court. The bench allowed him to withdraw the plea. The plea, filed through advocate Adeel Ahmed, referred to a February 4 order of the top court which, while dealing with a separate petition, had directed Assam to initiate the process of deportation of 63 declared foreign nationals, whose nationality was known, within two weeks. "Pursuant to the said order (of February 4)... the state of Assam has reportedly launched a sweeping and indiscriminate drive to detain and deport individuals suspected to be foreigners, even in the absence of foreigners tribunal declarations, nationality verification, or exhaustion of legal remedies," the plea claimed. It referred to news reports, including one about a retired school teacher who was allegedly "pushed back" into Bangladesh. "These instances reflect a growing pattern of deportations conducted by the Assam Police and administrative machinery through informal 'push back' mechanisms, without any judicial oversight or adherence to the safeguards envisaged by the Constitution of India or this court," it claimed. "The 'push back' policy, as implemented, violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by deporting individuals without due process, thereby denying them the opportunity to contest their deportation and infringing upon their right to life and personal liberty," the plea claimed. It alleged that the indiscriminate application of deportation directives, coupled with absence of proper identification, verification and notice mechanisms, has resulted in a situation where Indian citizens were being wrongfully incarcerated and threatened with removal to foreign territories without lawful basis. The plea sought a direction that no person shall be deported pursuant to the February 4 order without a prior reasoned declaration by the foreigners tribunal, without adequate opportunity of appeal or review and verification of nationality by the Ministry of External Affairs. It also sought a declaration that the "push back" policy adopted by Assam was violative of Articles 14 (equality before law) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution and contrary to binding judicial precedents. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Indian Express
33 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Framing the narrative war against Pakistan
Nobody ever really wins the war of narratives. Each side tells its own story — shaped by perceived triumphs, real or imagined — and believes in the glory of its version. No one cares what the other side claims, unless one side was materially and visibly vanquished in a physical fight. That rarely happens. Sample this: As India began striking terror infrastructure across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir on May 7, Pakistan claimed it had shot down six Indian aircraft. India denied it. In fact, New Delhi refused to confirm any losses until last week, when the Chief of Defence Staff tacitly acknowledged that a jet (maybe more, unspecified) had been downed, but that 'the tactical mistake was remedied, and the plan reimplemented' — an implicit way of saying: 'It matters not what we lost, as long as we ultimately won.' The standoff ended in a ceasefire, with each side walking away convinced it had the better of the exchange. India believes it called out Pakistan's nuclear bluff; Pakistan insists it gave as good as it got — claims that remain unverifiable in the fog of war. Meanwhile, Pakistan says little about the pounding its airbases received in the Indian response. So steeped in denial is the country's military establishment that its Army Chief has assumed the rank of Field Marshal — an honorific that reveals more about narrative vanity than battlefield reality. For its part, Delhi is convinced it humbled Pakistan. Islamabad, however, couldn't disagree more. 'We have shattered India's illusion of superiority,' says Pakistan's PM. 'New Delhi has been taught a lesson in respecting the sovereignty of its neighbours.' Even Washington had its version of events. President Trump triumphantly claimed that he convinced both countries to back off. 'I talked trade with them,' he said. India denies it. Pakistan agrees. Who's telling the truth? Hard to say. Perhaps none of them care. Each sticks to its own version. Last week, seven multi-party Indian delegations visited global capitals to explain Delhi's position. Many in the West are sympathetic to India's position — its long-standing concerns about cross-border terrorism and Pakistan's duplicity in dealing with extremist groups. They recognise the provocations India faces and the public pressure on Delhi to respond. Even so, some take India's account with a pinch of salt. Yes, Pakistan was complicit in the Pahalgam terror attack — but why didn't India go after the real perpetrators? Why not share intelligence? Why the secrecy, the social media bans, the coyness in accepting losses, and the reluctance to engage with the international media? Back home, a few seem interested. Most people are content with the version of events presented to them. Perhaps that's the point of a good narrative — to remove the burden of inquiry, so the prevailing storyline is accepted, repeated, and quietly folded into national pride. And therein lies the rub. Narratives are, by their very nature, misleading. They mix fact, half-truth, and convenient fiction to produce a favourable picture. In the end, they mostly convince only the teller. You can believe deterrence has been restored — but it means little if your adversary doesn't agree. The deeper challenge lies in coming to terms with Pakistan's strategic culture. As Christine Fair, Professor at Georgetown University and a keen Pakistan watcher, has long argued, the Pakistan Army operates with an insurgent mindset. It wins simply by not losing. It thrives on confrontation and political relevance. That makes it almost immune to traditional deterrence logic. This is what India must keep in mind. The next time there's a provocation from Pakistan — and there might well be another — New Delhi would do well to resist the urge for political signalling. It's this compulsive need to cater to public opinion and control the narrative that often gets us into trouble. Showing resolve is tricky because it casts restraint as weakness and risks turning action into theatre. The smarter course is to hold fire, stay alert, and choose response over optics. For that, it's important to retain the element of surprise. In the days following the start of the operation, Pakistan's military claimed it had anticipated an Indian strike and was lying in wait. While the details remain unclear, Islamabad suggested it had adopted a restrained posture until Indian aircraft reportedly struck what it described as civilian targets, after which Pakistani forces retaliated by targeting Indian jets. Whether this sequence played out exactly as claimed is open to question. It's also unclear if not targeting the Pakistan military in the opening salvo was a strategic misstep. Yet the broader point stands: Military action, meant more as political messaging, is a risky undertaking. Combat aimed mainly at signalling, not effect, is almost always a mistake. It's worth bearing in mind that in conflicts like the four-day engagement in May, narrative dominance is an illusion. The real contest is not about who speaks loudest, but who adapts, who endures, and who denies the adversary what it wants most: Relevance. The writer is a retired naval officer and strategic affairs commentator based in New Delhi
