News NSO Group hasn’t kept its promises on human rights, RSF and other NGOs say Saudi ArabiaMiddle East – North Africa News RSF joins Middle East and North Africa coalition to combat digital surveillance Receive email alerts Reporters Without Borders (Reporters sans frontières – RSF) expressed its concern today at the imposing of pre-distribution censorship on the respected pan-Arab daily paper Al-Hayat and accused the government of wanting to “punish any media criticism” of the authorities. “Things are now moving backwards after a small degree of press liberalisation over the past few months,” RSF secretary-general Robert Ménard noted in a letter to information minister Fuad al-Farsi. “This is the second time in a week that the authorities have exerted pressure on major newspapers.”. Saudi Arabia’s King Ibn al-Saud, was added to RSF’s worldwide list of “predators of press freedom” last November. The minister ordered censorship of Al-Hayat from 22 March following an editorial the previous day by its Riyadh bureau chief, Daud Shurayan, criticising what the minister had said about censorship at a meeting with local newspaper editors. The minister had forbidden the press to publish his remarks. Shurayan wrote that he did not consider what had been said to be “state secrets.”A royal decree last year authorised Al-Hayat (owned by the son of defence minister Prince Khaled bin Sultan), along with Saudi newspapers and another respected pan-Arab daily, Ash Sharq al-Awsat, to be distributed without being censored. On 18 March, the interior minister, Prince Nayef, ordered the dismissal of Mohammed al-Mukhtar al-Fal, editor-in-chief of the daily paper Al-Madina, eight days after he published a poem by Abdul Mohsen Musalam, called “The Corrupt on Earth,” which accused judges of corruption and abuses. The poet, one of the country’s best known, wrote that it was “sad that in the Muslim world, justice is suffering from a few judges who care for nothing but their bank accounts.” Musalam was arrested on 16 March and imprisoned in Jeddah. Saudi ArabiaMiddle East – North Africa RSF_en June 8, 2021 Find out more Saudi media silent on RSF complaint against MBS Follow the news on Saudi Arabia News March 25, 2002 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Well-known pan-Arab daily censored Organisation News to go further April 28, 2021 Find out more RSF has protested against the interior minister’s decision to censor the pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat and says it shows once again the Saudi government wants to punish any media criticism. Help by sharing this information March 9, 2021 Find out more
Tag Archiv: 上海kb名店
ColumnsInterventionist Judiciary Is A Necessary Shining Sword Of Modern Constitutionalism Mohan Katarki, Senior Advocate3 Jun 2020 9:59 PMShare This – xThe millions of migrants breathed a sigh of relief when the Supreme Court of India (SC) passed its interim directions on May 28 in a suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to redress their miseries caused by the unplanned lockdown to beat the coronavirus. However, the extraordinary intervention sparked a debate whether, SC should have refrained itself to the majoritarian art…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe millions of migrants breathed a sigh of relief when the Supreme Court of India (SC) passed its interim directions on May 28 in a suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to redress their miseries caused by the unplanned lockdown to beat the coronavirus. However, the extraordinary intervention sparked a debate whether, SC should have refrained itself to the majoritarian art of governance. Needless to say that the Supreme Court is the seat of justice for arbitrating between the individuals in respect of property matter, contractual rights or issues touching their personal matters, deciding on criminality of accused, adjudicating on federal disputes and finally, exercising extraordinary power of judicial review to enforce the fundamental rights of millions against the mighty State power. Undoubtedly, its role in the enforcement of the fundamental rights goes to the root of constitutional governance. However, this enforcement of fundamental rights itself has two dimensions. The traditional role in upholding fundamental freedoms touch civil liberties including free speech and activist approach in implementing the socio economic rights which are claims or positive rights to food, shelter, health, etc. The framers of the Constitution of India (COI) in 1950 unhesitatingly chose to enact a limited form of Government. The idea of holding the State as accountable before ordinary court of law was uppermost in their design of things for constitution. Going beyond to English doctrine of judicial review over administrative actions, the framers vested powers in the High Courts and Supreme Court to take a dig at the legislations passed by the Parliament or State legislatures. Even the constitutional amendments were not given immunity from amenability to judicial review. The suggestion coming from legal luminaries that SC should have deference towards the majoritarian decisions has no foundation in modern constitutionalism. Indeed, idea is a ghost of authoritarianism. Those who think of fitting such idea in to the democratic constitution must know that they are trying to fit square peg in a round hole. Moreover, the present representative system is imperfect. The first past the post system of election depend on securing more votes than rivals which may not constitute a majority of the votes polled in the election. At the national level, even though the present ruling party in India won 303 seats out of 542 seats in the Lok Sabha election held in 2019, it secured only about 38% of votes. In fact, these 38% voters formed less than 20% of the total population. Even in 1952, 1957, 1962, 1967, 1971 or 1984, when Indian National Congress won hands down, the support of total population to the ruling party was less than 20%. Therefore, this theory of judicial deference in favour of majoritarian Government is fundamentally fallacious, if not a ridiculous proposition. Undoubtedly, judiciary is a legitimate arbiter between the Government and its critics in a democratic set up. The only instance when judiciary may have deference to executive or slowdown its intervention, could be in the situation when the decisions sought to be challenged are bipartisan. However, absent such bipartisan decisions, the SC is expected to act fearlessly against the majoritarian regime.In last seven decades, the Supreme Court has played a stellar role except during emergency. However, non-interventionist role in the recent past is equated with the unfortunate role it played in emergency. But, the last word is yet to be written on this. Hope, SC asserts its constitutionally legitimate interventionist role and protects the migrants and decides quickly on the validity political detentions and restores 4G Internet (if Committee doesn’t restore) in Kashmir valley. The veiled arguments of Union in Kashmir matters which is really founded on demised Korematsu case decided by US Supreme Court during World War II will be hopefully shown it’s way out by the SC.The first three decades after enactment of the Constitution of India (COI) in 1950 saw the judiciary in asserting its traditional role of upholding freedoms and equality by undoing even the most popular measures relating to abolition of vestiges of feudalism by land reforms. The SC upheld fundamental rights even at the cost of being seen institutionally as a relic of rural capitalism or a friend of kulaks. This was the period in Indian judicial history when legalism was at its best.However, when emergency was imposed decreeing the suspension of fundamental rights in Part III of the COI by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, SC ended with disastrous decision in ADM Jabalpur case. The judges (except Justice H R Khanna) surprisingly placed life and liberty at the mercy of the majoritarian by declining to exercise jurisdiction and rule on the legal validity of detention of political opponents. The SC read COI as an artificial construct on a dry piece of clay. The mandate of common law or natural law that no body shall be deprived of liberty except in accordance with law and as tested by an independent judiciary was shockingly sent down the Yamuna to Ganges and finally flushed into Bay of Bengal.Rising from the ignominy, the SC begun its next phase and focuses on the interests of masses. During emergency, the COI was amended by 42nd Amendment Act of 1977 to incorporate the words ‘socialist’ and ‘secular’ in the preamble. Taking a leaf from the ideals of socialism, the judiciary turned into activist institution. The requirement of locas standi, which acted, as gatekeeper in Anglo Saxon jurisprudence was relaxed. The decision in Maneka Gandhi in 1978 mandated a test of reasonableness in the procedure established by law. The meaning of life was creatively interpreted as life with dignity. The socio economic rights were read into Art 21. Sometimes, but not always, assistance was drawn from the directive principles of State policy parked in the COI. On first reading of Art 21, it doesn’t seem to encapsulate the rights as claims against State. It appears as a negative right or freedom. However, SC animated by the incorporation of word socialism in the preamble of COI, read Art 21 as incorporating positive rights or as claims against the State. A concept of affirmative action or the State responsibility towards its citizens was introduced. Even otherwise, doctrine of positive rights is consistent with international obligations assumed by India under United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966.The refashioned juridical artefacts paved the way for judicial activism in implementing said socio economic rights. The Art 21 weaponised as positive right armed the judiciary to wake up the inactive State or its official. The SC has issued hundreds of directions to the Governments at Centre and States to provide education food, water, shelter, transportation, etc. on the premise that inaction by the State is equally illegal. SC also knocked out archaic prison laws.The observance of strict legalism in enforcing freedom and equality ignoring korematsu style arguments by Union and implementation of socio economic rights based on humanitarian jurisprudence built for decades from case to case cannot and shouldn’t be given up on the specious argument of majoritarian doctrine. Interventionist Judiciary is a necessary shining sword of modern constitutionalism.Views are personal only Author is a Senior Advocate at Supreme Court of India Next Story
To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week. Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters
RelatedPosts Ighalo: My best moment as ‘Red Devil’ Arsenal, Wolves want Michael Olise EPL: Crystal Palace stun sloppy Man U Manchester United and Wolverhampton Wanderers will have to do it all again in the FA Cup after the Premier League pair played out a goalless draw at Molineux. There were changes aplenty following a hectic festive period for both clubs and neither could get a foothold in a fairly drab first-half. Sergio Romero produced one fine save to deny Matt Doherty but that was the only event of note. The second period saw chances for both sides, with Juan Mata first seeing a free-kick fly just inches wide before second-half substitute Marcus Rashford hitting the bar with a deflected effort. Doherty had a goal disallowed for handball, while Raúl Jiménez hit the post as the game drew to a conclusion. The replay will suit neither manager, as both are already having to juggle their squads due to Europa League commitments and United are in League Cup action on Tuesday, but neither side can feel unlucky not to win following what wasn’t a great advertisement for the competition.Tags: FA CupJuan MataManchester UnitedMatt DohertyRaul JimenezWolverhampton Wanderers
Published on March 8, 2019 at 6:40 pm Contact Arabdho: [email protected] | @aromajumder Facebook Twitter Google+ BUFFALO — Kristen Siermachesky rounded the net and pointed to the Syracuse area of the stands with a wide smile on her face. After her teammates mobbed her in the corner, Siermachesky was the first to slip out and head toward more high-fives on the bench. She had just scored to give Syracuse a 2-1 lead. A lead it would never relinquish. For the first time in program history, Syracuse (13-21-3, 10-8-2 College Hockey America) clinched an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament and earned its first CHA title against Robert Morris (16-14-6, 13-4-3). The teams remained even after one period, but the Orange pulled away in the second period at the HarborCenter, cruising to a 6-2 victory on Friday. Here are three takeaways from the historic victory. Jaycee Gebhard locked downThroughout the game, whenever CHA’s leading scorer Jaycee Gebhard was on the ice at even strength, she was matched against Syracuse’s line of Lauren Bellefontaine, Emma Polaski and Abby Moloughney. The first shift of the game, the RMU forward spent extended time in the offensive zone and on the forecheck. As the game progressed, the lines drew even. Then, with the SU underclassmen line on the ice without Gebhard, Allie Olnowich fired a wrister from the blue line to put the Orange up 1-0.AdvertisementThis is placeholder textGebhard had an empty net to shoot at on the power play in the first period but bobbled the puck. She eventually scored in the third period, but RMU was trailing 5-1 at that point. As the Orange’s lead grew, Gebhard grew more and more frustrated. Nearly every time Gebhard touched the puck in the offensive zone, especially in the first two periods, she was hounded by SU players and pinned to the boards. Syracuse’s young line didn’t generate a lot of offense, but they repaid head coach Paul Flanagan’s trust with a shutdown performance.At the right timeBefore Syracuse boarded the bus for Buffalo on Tuesday, Allie Munroe said the Orange were “peaking at the right time.” That held true throughout three games at the Harborcenter. Syracuse came into the tournament having beaten every team in the CHA except RIT, but had only taken one out of four games against Robert Morris. It didn’t matter. At the back, goalie Ady Cohen has trended upwards since the start of February. Before, she was 1-4 with a 3.20 goals against average. In the last month, she’s 3-3-1, but her GAA is down to 2.70. Cohen started against Mercyhurst and made big stops to earn Syracuse’s first win against the Lakers in tournament history. On Friday, she continued her strong play, making numerous key stops including going into the splits to stop a point shot near the end of the second period.Second period team The Orange scored four unanswered goals in the middle period to take control of the contest. It started with Siermachesky. She was moved to forward after coming back from an upper-body injury, and she converted a rebound chance to give Syracuse a 2-1 lead. Just under three minutes later, Jessica DiGirolamo fed Brooke Avery, who slid it five-hole. Savannah Rennie and Lauren Bellefontaine added two more goals later in the period to go into the intermission up 5-1. Robert Morris never recovered, and by the time Gebhard scored her consolation marker, it was just that.In the three CHA tournament games this week, Syracuse scored 10 goals in the second period while allowing just one. Against Lindenwood, SU was down 1-0 after the first period, but four straight second period goals tilted the matchup in its favor. The middle frames of each contest proved vital in the Orange earning their first CHA crown in program history. Comments
OTTAWA – There is money in the bank. Voters in the hopper. And from many angles, a spring in the step of many Conservatives these days.One year of Andrew Scheer, observers say, has not exactly been flashy but he has done the Conservative Party some good.“He’s been steady,” says Tim Powers, a conservative strategist and vice-chairman of Ottawa-based firm Summa Strategies. “You’d probably give him a solid B or B plus.”Carl Vallee, a former press secretary for the government of Stephen Harper, and now a partner in Montreal strategy firm Hatley, calls Scheer “very, very constant.”Scheer, the 39-year-old, dimple-cheeked father of five, has spent a year fashioning himself as the everyman to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s jet-setting millionaire ways. His advertising plays up the fact that while Trudeau grew up with a silver spoon or two, Scheer was raised in suburban Ottawa by middle-class parents who didn’t even own a car.Since Scheer took over as leader the Conservative fundraising machine is back in full tilt. The last two quarters were the best the party has had since the 2015 election, and the Conservatives are clearly outpacing the Liberals on the money front — by almost two dollars to one in the first three months of 2018.The polls, while volatile and often hard to parse this far away from an actual vote, have still been favourable of late for the Conservatives, showing them tied with or in spitting distance of the Liberals. If nothing else, the polls serve as a shot of morale in the arm of the Tory caucus and help in the recruitment of candidates.“There’s certainly no mass panic at the moment,” said Powers.As a former speaker, Scheer is one of the most recognizable faces within the Ottawa bubble but outside of it, he’s probably not the first name many people think of when asked to name a Tory politician. Vallee says in Quebec, Maxime Bernier is likely still the most well known. In Ontario and Alberta, provincial Tory leaders Doug Ford and Jason Kenney are eating up more air time.Powers said it’s not horrible if Ford or Kenney are getting more attention currently because they have elections to win before Scheer does. He says the big question mark for Scheer will come in August, when the Conservatives host their first policy convention since he took over as leader. It will also be about the one-year mark from the next election and Scheer has to use it to start to define himself and his version of conservatism.Duane Bratt, a politics professor at Mount Royal University in Calgary, said Scheer’s biggest problem may be that “he is still not well known.”He says any polls favouring the Conservatives have more to do with people being annoyed with Trudeau than with Scheer. And while Scheer has criticized many Liberal policies there have been few alternatives put forward, including how he’d handle the Trans Mountain pipeline or address climate change without a carbon price.Powers notes that Scheer has easily had a better year than either Trudeau or new NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, but it hasn’t been a year devoid of fires entirely.The appearance or reality of ongoing discord between Scheer Conservatives and those who supported Bernier — Scheer barely beat him on the final ballot of the leadership — continues to float beneath the surface like the lava of a Hawaiian volcano, threatening to burst through at any moment.Bernier himself caused an eruption when he published a teaser chapter from a coming book that said Scheer had won the leadership only thanks to the support of “fake Conservatives” in Quebec. They were people from the powerful dairy lobby, said Bernier, who joined the party only to vote against Bernier and his policy opposing supply management, which regulates production and pricing of milk, eggs and chicken.After a raucous caucus meeting, Bernier suddenly announced he would put off publication of the entire book — initially scheduled for this fall — in order to fully back Scheer as party leader.“They both have found a way to work together,” said Vallee.Brad Trost, the Saskatchewan social conservative MP whose surprise fourth-place finish in the leadership gave him some initial clout to push the party’s position, has mostly been sidelined after losing the nomination to run again in his riding. However, his ongoing lawsuit against the party over accusations he gave out the party’s membership list inappropriately is a simmering issue, and the social Conservatives who backed Trost and then shifted to Scheer may be a little restless in Trost’s absence.The biggest push Scheer has made of late is in Quebec. The second most populous province has not been an easy road for the Tories since Brian Mulroney was prime minister but Vallee says the collapse of support in Quebec for the NDP and the disintegrating Bloc Quebecois are opening the door to a two-horse federal race in 2019: Trudeau or Scheer.Scheer has launched what he calls a “listening tour” in Quebec this spring, complete with a website listeningtoquebecers.ca, and he travelled to the province multiple times in May.Vallee said there is a natural home for nationalist Quebecers in the Conservative Party of Canada, because many of their values are similar, particularly when it comes to fears about preserving language, heritage and history.