Ex-Cong leader launches new party, to focus on farmer issues
Kottayam: A group of former senior Congress leaders came together on Saturday and announced the formation of National Farmer's Party, a party focused on working towards the interests of farmers.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Former MP and three-time Kanjirappally MLA George J Mathew, who severed ties with Congress a few years back, is the chairman of the new party. The general secretary of the outfit is PM Mathew, who is also the former Kerala Congress chairman and MLA. Ex-MLA MV Mani and KD Lewis are the vice presidents, while Johny Chakkala and Jomon K Chacko are the secretaries. Joseph Michael Kallivayalil is the treasurer.
John Thomas Kottukappally, son of ex-MP late George Thomas Kottukappally, and KT Scaria, son of ex-MP late Scaria Thomas, are also in the leadership of the party.
Speaking on the occasion, George J Mathew said that it is not right to label them as a Christian party. He also said that the new outfit does not have untouchability towards any front. The party will work together with any political fronts that protect the interests of the farmers in the upcoming local body and assembly polls, he said. Meanwhile, the party has approached Election Commission to allot either drone, sprinkler or rocket as its party symbol.
Among the demands put forth by the new party include, presenting an agricultural budget along with the annual budget by both state and central govts, forest rules to be made favourable for the farmers, legal permission for killing wild animals that encroach into human-inhabited areas and destroy agriculture, taming of wild animals and auctioning them by the govt.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
7 minutes ago
- Time of India
NEET-PG 2025: Shashi Tharoor urges JP Nadda to allot extra exam centres in Kerala; says available seats 'exhausted within minutes'
Shashi Tharoor & JP Nadda (File photos) NEW DELHI: Congress leader Shashi Tharoor , who is also the Lok Sabha MP from Kerala's Thiruvananthapuram, wrote to Union heath minister JP Nadda on Saturday, urging his immediate intervention in authorising additional centres for NEET-PG aspirants in the coastal state. Tharoor said the medical exam students were unable to choose any city within Kerala as the available seats were "exhausted within minutes of the website reopening". Highlighting that National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) already has data on number of applicants in Kerala, Tharoor said it would be "unfair to restrict the number of centres in the state and put the candidates through distress, inconvenience, and financial burden by forcing them to travel to other states for the exam". "Dear @JPNadda Candidates from Kerala appearing for the NEET-PG 2025 exam are unable to choose any city within the state as their test city, as the available seats were exhausted within minutes of the website reopening. As NBEMS already has data on the number of applicants from Kerala, it is unfair to restrict the number of centres in the state and put the candidates through distress, inconvenience, and financial burden by forcing them to travel to other states for the exam. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo I hope you will intervene immediately to help these candidates by authorising additional centres without delay. Thank you!" posted MP Shashi Tharoor on X. The NBEMS on Friday published the revised list of exam cities for the NEET PG 2025 examination on its official website. The updated list confirms that the number of test cities has been expanded to 233, ahead of the entrance test scheduled for August 3, 2025. Candidates will now be required to resubmit their preferred exam cities from June 13, 2025 (3 PM) to June 17, 2025 (11:55 PM) via the official portal. NBEMS has clarified that the city allotment process will operate on a first-come-first-serve basis, depending on candidate priority and availability.
New Indian Express
28 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Congress in damage control mode over Satheesan's Jamaat remarks
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: As leader of opposition V D Satheesan's attempt to 'whitewash' Jamaat-e-Islami, backfired politically in Nilambur, the Congress has started damage control efforts. KPCC president Sunny Joseph has met powerful Muslim and Christian leaders in this regard. The move comes days before the visit of Congress general secretary and Wayanad MP Priyanka Gandhi to Nilambur which is part of her LS constituency. Sunny Joseph, who is close to Thamarassery Bishop Remigiose Inchananiyil, met the latter on Friday. The meeting came after the Catholic Congress under the powerful Thamarassery Diocese issued a strong statement against Congress - Welfare Party tie-up. The KPCC chief reportedly clarified the party's stand to the bishop. He also sought the Church's support. According to sources close to the Church, Sunny Joseph held talks with Catholic Congress leaders. The KPCC president also met Jifri Muthukoya Thangal, the president of Samastha Kerala Jem-Iyyathul Ulama, on Thursday. There is criticism among UDF partners that the opposition leader's 'certificate' to the Jamaat-e-Islami was an unwanted one. They are of the view that it gave both the CPM and BJP a political weapon which could have a far-reaching effect even in national politics. 'There is still suspicion over the controversial stand of Jamaat on Indian democracy, religious state and Constitution,' a Congress PAC member told TNIE. 'It is no surprise that almost all prominent Muslim community organisations including Samastha Kerala Jem-Iyyathul Ulma, and Kerala Nadvathul Mujahideen, and the Catholic Congress, a lay organisation of Syro-Malabar Catholics of Thamarassery Diocese, had come out strongly against the Jamaat-e-Islami- Congress alleged tie-up,' he added. The Congress-UDF leadership has decided not to entertain questions about Jamaat-e-Islami, Welfare Party and Congress 'tie-up'. AICC general secretary K C Venugopal's attempt to evade questions about the controversy, and senior leader K Muraleedharan playing down the issue are seen as part of this strategy. The party has decided to focus on the governance of the LDF government. There is also apprehension that though Venugopal's attack against CM's alleged anti- Malappuram remark was a success, the Jamaat controversy spoiled the edge. 'There are chances that the RSS -BJP may use the Jamaat controversy against the Gandhi family and the Congress in north India,' a senior Congress leader told TNIE. 'As state assembly elections are approaching, we do not want any kind of political debate on that,' he said.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Ram Madhav writes: What the current discourse on religious freedom gets wrong
In an interesting report, 'Changing the conversation about religious freedom: An integral human development approach', published in June last year, the Atlantic Council, a US-based think tank, claimed that it was seeking 'a new approach to religious freedom that integrates it with integral human development (IHD)'. In a welcome departure from the earlier practice of demonising countries in the name of religious freedom, the report argued that religious freedom should not only be treated as a human right but also as 'a crucial component of overall human flourishing and sustainable development'. Religious freedom became a bogey to defame countries after the US Congress passed the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) in 1998 and created the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) to 'monitor, analyse and report on violations of religious freedom worldwide'. The commission's annual reports have acquired notoriety for misrepresenting facts, often with an alleged political bias, in branding several countries as 'Countries of Particular Concern' (CPCs). Several countries have questioned its locus standi in interfering in their sovereign affairs. India took an aggressive stand by refusing to recognise the commission and denying visas to its officials. Earlier this year, the Ministry of External Affairs not only rejected the commission's 2025 report, which included India as one of the CPCs, but went further to brand the commission an 'entity of concern'. The USCIRF's reports have no sanctity outside the four walls of the US Congress. Yet, they have helped create a 'religious freedom industry'. A breed of 'religious freedom ambassadors' has emerged in over 30 countries. Religious freedom, per se, is not contentious. Several democracies, including India, hold it as sacrosanct. Articles 25 to 30 of the Indian Constitution offer various freedoms to religions including the freedom of conscience, the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate, and the freedom to manage their affairs without state intervention. Minority religions enjoy positive discrimination by way of special rights to run educational and cultural institutions. The same rights are not available to the majority Hindu religion. India is the only country where people of all religions, including several Christian denominations and Muslim sects, coexist in harmony. It's not that there are no religious tensions, but they must be seen in the context of India's population of a billion-plus Hindus, almost 200 million Muslims and 40 million Christians. In its long history, Hindu society has endured enormous religious persecution by invading Mughal armies as well as violent religious inquisitions by Christian rulers like the Portuguese in Goa. The country was partitioned in 1947 on religious grounds after a brutal and violent campaign led by the Muslim League. That history has made the leaders of modern India recognise the need for strengthening the bond of national unity based not only on political and constitutional foundations but also on cultural and civilisational ethos. Religious bigotry and fundamentalism — majority or minority — were rejected and emphasis was laid on creating a national mainstream. For a vast and diverse country with a long history of religious strife, that's not an easy task. Yet, occasional outbursts notwithstanding, India has achieved commendable success in demonstrating unity and harmony. Still, India remained in the USCIRF's crosshairs. There are two important reasons for that bias. One is that the commission places its religious freedom discourse in a Eurocentric framework. It refuses to take into account country-specific sensitivities. Two, it relies on scholars who are reportedly biased. I was at a conference in Rome recently where the Atlantic Council's initiative to view religious freedom from the prism of integral human development was the central theme. Propounded first by Jacques Maritain, a French Catholic philosopher, in 1936, and followed three decades later by Deendayal Upadhyaya, the ideological father figure of the BJP, Integral humanism emphasises the need to rise above religions to secure not only the material but ethical, moral and spiritual well-being of individuals. It advocates a pluralistic approach for achieving such an integral development. It is imperative that the religious freedom discourse be situated in the national context to achieve a proper understanding of the role of religions in the integral growth of people. The Indian Constitution imposes reasonable restrictions on public order, morality and health on all fundamental rights, including the freedom of religion. That calls for religions that came from outside to internalise the cultural experience of India, in which pluralism and respect for all religions is an important basic principle. No religion can claim universality or superiority. Hence, in the Indian context, the religious narrative should shift from 'one god' to 'only god' — everything is divine — and 'one truth' to 'only truth'. Religious conversions are an important challenge in this context. In a landmark judgment in Rev. Stainislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh (1977), the Supreme Court held that the right to 'propagate' does not include the right to proselytise and hence there is no fundamental right to convert another person. The Court clarified that it does not impinge on the freedom of conscience guaranteed by the Constitution, but rather, protects it. It may be worthwhile to recall that Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis had criticised proselytism, albeit in the limited context of Catholics being won over by other denominations. A proper understanding of the cultural and civilisational experiences of various nations helps in reframing the religious freedom discourse in the right perspective. Otherwise, the Atlantic Council's efforts will also be seen as 'a form of 'cultural imperialism' or a 'Western' endeavour with a hidden agenda', to borrow from its own report. The writer, president, India Foundation, is with the BJP. Views are personal
