Monsoon session: Answers MPs must seek in parliament
Hopefully, the MPs will not only raise the questions, but also question the answers! Here are a few issues that deserve attention and answers.
Operation Sindoor: The issue of national security and terrorism is expected to hold centre stage. The monsoon session is the first since the terror attack in Pahalgam in April. The government is expected to provide answers on intelligence failure, security lapse, if the terrorists were apprehended and, of course, the four day face-off. There is much attention on the ceasefire and whether it was imposed, as claimed repeatedly, by US President Donald J Trump, despite denials by India. The timing of the ceasefire is important but beyond when, how and who brokered it, there is the question of why the US pivoted to intervene. Was it the BrahMos hit on Nur Khan airbase? Is the Pakistani nuclear site and systems at Nur Khan airbase under US control, as claimed by Pakistan experts and, if so, what does this mean for India's security?
Air India 171 crash: The crash of the Air India flight from Ahmedabad to London that claimed 260 lives is the worst in recent aviation history. The how and why of the crash is critical both for Air India and beleaguered Boeing. The Air Accident Investigation Bureau of India, which investigated the cause, released a preliminary report that seemed to park the blame on the pilots by excerpting a cockpit conversation. Why not release the whole conversation, as was done in the case of Captain 'Sully' Sullenberger's US Airways flight 1549 report? Is it normal to release a preliminary report with an inference about fault—particularly when tradition requires explicit avoidance of blame—and then issue clarifications? Was the report leaked to US media, and by who? What explains the Directorate General of Civil Aviation's directive to airlines to check fuel switches? Over 350 million Indians fly every year and they deserve clarity and accountability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
21 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Lok Sabha adjourned again, opposition writes to Speaker for discussion on SIR
The Lok Sabha faced disruptions due to Opposition protests. The protests were against the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar. Opposition leaders demanded an urgent discussion with the Speaker. They expressed concerns about transparency and timing. The House was adjourned twice amidst the uproar. A bill regarding Scheduled Tribes in Goa was also listed. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Opposition 's relentless protest against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar paralysed the functioning of the Lok Sabha yet again on Friday, with two forced adjournments, even as the floor leaders of Opposition parties wrote a letter to Speaker Om Birla demanding an urgent discussion on the protest forced the first adjournment till 2pm. When the House reassembled, the Opposition members resumed their sloganeering. They carried placards and walked into the well of the House. Krishna Prasad Tenneti, who was presiding over the proceedings, warned the members against carrying placards and asked them to return to their seats. Papers were laid on the table and matters of public importance under Rule 377 were submitted amid the din. Tenneti repeatedly appealed to the Opposition to allow the House to function. The Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Assembly Constituencies of the State of Goa Bill 2024 was listed for consideration and passing. Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal accused the Opposition of being House was adjourned for the day within nine their letter to Birla, the Opposition floor leaders said, "This (SIR in Bihar) is unprecedented. ECI has indicated that similar exercises will soon be undertaken across the country. Given the widespread apprehension about the transparency, timing, and intent of this process, the matter requires the urgent attention of the House." The signatories to the letter included the leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, Gaurav Gogoi (Congress), TR Baalu (DMK), Supriya Sule (NCP-SP), Lalji Verma (SP), Kakoli Ghose Dastidar (AITC), Arvind Savant (SS-UBT), Abhay Kumar (RJD) and N K Premachandran (RSP).
Time of India
29 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bimal Gurung meets Suvendu in Kol
1 2 Darjeeling : In a significant move ahead of the 2026 assembly polls, GJM president Bimal Gurung on Thursday met Bengal opposition leader Suvendu Adhikari in Kolkata. Gurung was accompanied by party general secretary Roshan Giri and son Avinash Gurung. Sources suggest discussions in the closed-door meeting involved BJP 's strategy to rebuild its base in the Hills ahead of the polls. Gurung, on his part, is said to be weighing his options as he attempts to regain his political influence. Interestingly, on July 27 — observed as Martyr's Day in the Hills — Gurung had issued an ultimatum to BJP, demanding that the party fulfil its long-pending promises to the Gorkha community by Dec. "We have supported BJP since 2009, but they've given us nothing in return. With elections approaching, we cannot keep misleading our people. If BJP continues playing politics, we will be forced to explore other options," Gurung had said. GJM's journey with BJP dates back to 2009, when Gurung's support helped the saffron party gain a foothold in Darjeeling. Since then, BJP has consistently won the Darjeeling Lok Sabha seat. In 2020, Gurung dramatically exited NDA. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
‘Political speeches are often exaggerated': Telangana HC quashes criminal defamation against CM Revanth Reddy
The Telangana High Court Friday quashed a criminal defamation case against Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy. The case stems from remarks made by the CM against the BJP during the Lok Sabha election campaign at Kothagudem in May 2024. On Friday, the Bench of Justice Lakshman allowed the petition filed by Reddy to quash the proceedings against him in the case pending trial before a Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (JFCM) for Excise cases (designated MP-MLA court) in Hyderabad. He was booked under Section 499 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 125 (promoting enmity between classes in connection with an election) of the Representation of the People Act. The complainant, Telangana BJP unit represented by its General Secretary Kasam Venkateshwarlu, contended that the statements, such as 'the BJP, if voted to power, would change the Constitution and abolish reservations to SC/ST and BC communities', were part of a 'fake and dubious political narrative' to confuse voters and promote enmity between communities. The BJP alleged that the speech lowered the party's reputation and caused damage during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The Special JFCM for excise cases in August 2024 had issued a summons to Revanth Reddy, asking him to appear personally before it. Subsequently, the chief minister approached the high court challenging the complaint and seeking to stay the proceedings initiated against him. The high court had earlier granted him an exemption from personal appearance before the trial court. The petitioner's counsel, T Niranjan Reddy, informed the court that political speeches should not be the subject of defamation, 'as elections inherently involve parties seeking to lower each other's reputation.' He said the 'alleged speech is a routine activity of a political leader to criticise the opposition and is not defamation,' and that such speeches are protected under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The petitioner, among other allegations, argued that the complaint was filed with a political vendetta to harass the petitioner and constitutes an abuse of the legal process. On his part, the counsel for the respondent, Devineni Vijay Kumar, argued that the statements created mistrust and fear among voters, bringing disrepute to the BJP. After hearing both sides, the court rejected the contention of the petitioner that political parties do not enjoy reputation and cannot maintain a complaint for criminal defamation. The court also found neither the complainant (BJP Telangana) nor its representative, Kasam Venkateshwarlu, was authorised by the national unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party to file the complaint. Refraining from discussing the contents of the alleged speech and the issue of its defamatory nature, the court noted, 'Political speeches are often exaggerated. To allege that such speeches are defamatory is another exaggeration.' 'It is trite law that, power of quashing should be exercised very sparingly and circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases. However, where the initiation of criminal proceedings suffers from material defects or where such criminal proceedings constitute abuse of process, the inherent powers can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings,' the court stated in the order.
