K.S. Aiyar Memorial Lecture at IIPA on Aug 2
Karnataka Chief Secretary Shalini Rajneesh will be the chief guest. The event will be held at 4 p.m. at the Multipurpose Hall, Infantry Road.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
4 hours ago
- India Today
Poll body issues notice for Vice President's election after Jagdeep Dhankar quits
The Election Commission of India has issued a notice regarding the elections that will take place to appoint the new Vice President of India on September 9. The latest notice details the specific dates for filing the nomination papers and candidature to the notice, the nomination papers are to be filed on the first floor of Parliament no later than August 21, 2025. Additionally, a deposit of rupees 15,000 will also need to be submitted to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) or to a Government notice also mentions additional documents needed, along with the nomination papers like the receipt of making the said deposit. Furthermore, the date and time assigned for the scrutiny of the nomination papers is at 11 a.m. on August 22. The notice also confirmed the timing of the vice-presidential polls: between 10 a.m. to 5 comes after the abrupt resignation of the former Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar on July 22."To prioritise health care and abide by medical advice, I hereby resign as the Vice President of India, effective immediately, in accordance with Article 67(a) of the Constitution," Dhankhar wrote in a letter addressed to President Droupadi his resignation, the Ministry of Home Affairs confirmed the vacancy through a notification issued on July 22, planned election to fill the vacancy is in accordance with what the Constitution of India dictates in the case of a sudden vacancy of the vice-presidential Article 66 of the Indian Constitution will be implemented, allowing a secret ballot exclusively participated in by members of Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Parliament
Hindustan Times
8 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Process now on to elect next Vice President of India, EC notification is in
The Election Commission of India(EC) on Thursday issued a notification for the September 9 election to the office of the Vice President of India with crucial dates in the procedure, hence kickstarting the nomination process. Vacancy was created when Jagdeep Dhankhar resigned from his post on July 21, citing health concerns.(HT File) The decision comes after a vacancy was created after Jagdeep Dhankhar resigned from his post on July 21, citing health concerns. The official notification from the EC on Thursday read that under clause (2) of Article 68 of the Constitution of India, an election to fill the said vacancy is required to be held as soon as possible after the occurrence of the vacancy. 'The Election Commission of India hereby calls upon the Electoral College to elect a person to fill the said vacancy in the office of the Vice-President of India, in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act, 1952 (31 of 1952), and the Rules and Orders made thereunder,' the official notification read. According to constitutional provisions, in case of a mid-term poll too, the incumbent gets a full five-year term. Dhankhar had two years remaining in his term. What are key dates for VP poll? August 21, 2025, Thursday: The last date for making nominations. Place of delivering nomination papers is at the office of the RO at Parliament House, New Delhi, between 11 am and 3 pm. A security deposit of ₹15,000 has to be deposited either in cash with the RO or in the Reserve Bank of India or in a Government Treasury, said an official press note. August 22, 2025, Friday: The date for scrutiny of the nominations. Place of scrutiny of nomination papers is also an assigned room at Parliament House, at 11 am. August 25, 2025, Monday: The last date for the withdrawal of candidatures. September 9, 2025, Tuesday: The date on which a poll shall, if necessary, be taken at Parliament between between 10 am and 5 pm, as per the commission's notification. Who participates in the poll? The VP is elected by all members of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. The 543-member Lok Sabha, currently has one vacant seat, Basirhat in West Bengal. Currently, in the 245-member Rajya Sabha, there are five vacancies, four from Jammu and Kashmir, and one from Punjab. The seat from Punjab was vacated after AAP leader Sanjeev Arora resigned following his election to the state assembly in a bypoll last month. VP poll procedure Article 66 (1) of the Constitution of India provides that the vice-presidential election shall be held in accordance with the system of Proportional Representation, by means of single transferable vote, and the voting at such election shall be by secret ballot. Parties cannot issue whips or directions on this. What bars a candidate for contesting for the Vice President's post? A candidate can only contest for the vice president's post if he is a citizen of India, has completed 35 years of age and is qualified for election as a member of the Rajya Sabha. A person is also not eligible if he holds any office of profit under the government of India or a state government or any subordinate local authority.
Indian Express
15 hours ago
- Indian Express
In censuring Rahul Gandhi and laying down a singular definition of Indianness, Supreme Court goes against its own record
While granting him a reprieve on Monday in a defamation case over his alleged remarks on the armed forces in the wake of the 2020 Galwan clash with China, the Supreme Court censured Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi for speaking out on the issue. It also doled out a prescription for being a 'true Indian' — 'If you are a true Indian, you would not say all these things', it said. Only days earlier, the Bombay High Court questioned the Left parties' patriotism while upholding Mumbai Police's denial of permission to the CPM and CPI to hold a protest rally at Azad Maidan in solidarity with Gaza. The court criticised the prioritising of foreign affairs over national concerns — 'You are looking at issues in Gaza and Palestine. Look at your own country', it said. The observations by the apex court and the high court are disquieting. For one, they mark an institutional overstepping. It is not the court's remit to define, and to circumscribe Indianness, or to hand out certificates of patriotism, or to decide the LoP's responsibilities and the political party's priorities. In a climate of political polarisation, in which the right to freedom of speech is often in need of constitutional protection, and when 'anti-national' is a label frequently used to demonise the dissenter and delegitimise dissent, the restrictive strictures of the Supreme Court in particular — on which questions can be asked of the government in times of conflict, and which can't, and on who is and who is not a 'true Indian' — are especially dispiriting. The SC, after all, is the custodian of the constitutional letter and spirit. As such, it is the bulwark against any encroachment of fundamental rights, including and especially free expression. In fact, the Court only has to look back on its own record to see why its current stance touches off concerns. It has established a rich tradition of checking executive overreach and protecting and upholding civil liberties. In earlier judgments, it has underlined, for instance, that 'national security' cannot be invoked as a ground to curb fundamental rights. In the 2021 case involving the alleged use of Pegasus malware against citizens, the SC held that while there are limits to judicial review when it comes to national security, 'this does not mean that the state gets a free pass every time the spectre of 'national security' is raised'. And that 'National security cannot be the bugbear that the judiciary shies away from, by virtue of its mere mentioning'. The Constitution of India is distinctive for its capaciousness, for enlarging spaces for expressions of diversity and difference. It accommodates and enables plurality, while enforcing rights and accountability. By laying down a singular definition of Indianness, by turning a restrictive eye on questions asked of the dominant narrative and the government, the Court goes against its own past record and does a disservice to the Constitution. That the oral observations of the Court are not legally binding, that they are only part of the deliberative process, is not a mitigating factor. The Court must recognise that it is a measure of the enormous respect for the institution of the judiciary that what it says is taken seriously — and that, by the same token, in an argumentative democracy, it can have an undesirable chilling effect.
