Culling of mad dogs of Kashmir inevitable!

The habitual offenders and avowed traitors are at it again. Soon after coming out from the over a year-long incarceration, the mad dogs of Kashmir have in an orchestrated manner begun to bark at India and made their intentions loud and clear that their trimmed tails can never be strengthened.

Their history speaks volumes for such a conclusion.

The progeny of ace traitor of yester years, Farooq Abdullah and his son Omer Abdullah have been following the suicidal path at their own cost. Similarly, Mehbuba Mufti, daughter of the well-known separatist late Mufti Mohammad Sayeed who, while occupying the august post of the Home Minister at the Centre had stage- managed the kidnap drama of his another daughter and others, too has been following the footprints of her father.

Just a day before the abrogation of Article 370 and Article 35A of the Constitution was announced, this criminal anti-national gang had made its resolve clear that it would foment insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir and will not allow its integration into the Union of India.

This resolve touted as Gupkar Declaration by seven parties including the Congress has now been renewed. Now, it is the Constitutional duty of the government to ensure that this gang does not get any chance for its implementation.

It is beyond any doubt that these die-hard criminals with the open support of Pakistan, China and other fanatic Islamic countries have begun hobnobbing with and conspiring against the lawfully elected government of India. Frooq Abdullah in his recent utterances has gone to the extent of seeking help not only from Pakistan but also from China to 'liberate' J&K from India.

His secessionist statement comes at a time when Indo-China relations are at the lowest ebb and militaries of both the countries are at logger heads. In such a situation, no government worth its salt should tolerate any anti-national utterances that would have demoralising effect on its forces.

Clearly, Abdullah-Mufti gang with the active support of the crest-fallen other opposition parties has been trying to fish in the troubled waters. Such elements undoubtedly deserve no sympathy and must be taught a fitting lesson by the executive of the country. The mad dogs deserve to be culled in the interest of the nation.

A governor is not a dancing doll

The storm in a tea cup over a letter addressed by the onstitutional head of the Maharashtra has left the concerned citizens baffled. The Governor of Maharashtra in his letter addressed to the State government had expressed the opinion that the places of worship should be opened just as bars, theatres, restaurants and other public places are opened.

Incidentally, the said letter was addressed at a time when the priests of Shirdi Sai Baba Temple were staging dharna for getting the temple opened since it has remained closed for the last 6 months.

This situation has brought the gubernatorial post into the firing range of the opposition parties and other critics to the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) at the Centre. While some feel that the Governor has to keep mum at all the times and act only when there is any constitutional crisis such as the government losing the majority support etc.

However, the Constitution of India does not envisage such a position of the Governor. Article 163(2) reads as under "If any question arises whether is or is not a matter as respect to which the governor is by or under this constitution required to act in his discretion, the decision of the Governor in his discretion shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion." In other words, the constitution forbids any questioning about the discretionary acts of the Governor.

There are a number of judicial pronouncements made by the High Courts and the apex court on this subject. Still driven by the political considerations, the Governors are made the scapegoats by the politicians. Be it the case of the Governor of Maharashtra, West Bengal or the Lieutenant Governor of Pudicherry, they are abused and insulted by the ruling parties of the States if they refused to dance to their tunes.

Obviously, such a situation goes against the spirit of the constitution and anybody taking the Governor to the task under one pretext or the other should be sent home lock, stock and barrel.

Method must, even in madness

The ongoing tussle between the government of Andhra Pradesh and the State High court has now spread its tentacles to the Supreme Court of India. And what is more, it has also taken within its grip perhaps the next to be the Chief Justice of India, Justice NV Ramana.

The complaint signed by none other than the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh Y S Jaganmohan Reddy, who himself is a prime accused in several cases filed by the CBI and ED, contains serious allegations of corruption, nepotism, incompetence and sexual harassment against some judges of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh/Telangana.

The complaint also targets the senior judge of the apex court Justice NV .Ramana making serious allegations on the judicial matters of the State. Whether the said complaint has any merit or as alleged contains any truth is a separate matter. But what is more disturbing is the way in which it has been conveyed. The said complaint and annexure thereto have been released to the media by the advisor to the Chief Minister.

Indeed this is highly objectionable. It is, indeed, strange that bandwagon of the so-called 'protectors of the majesty of courts and the rule of law' including so-called intellectuals and the so-called associations of lawyers claiming representative status of 'all India' lawyers, who within a blink of the eye rose in unison to save the condemned prisoners, known terrorists, anti-nationals and avowed contemnors of the courts, have maintained stoic silence over this issue. In fact, by their baffling behaviour they stand exposed.

Considering the scheme of the constitution, the conduct of judges cannot be a subject matter of discussion or debate even in the legislatures. However, there have been some instances in the past when some Chief Ministers ventured to complaint against the judges of the High Court including the Chief Justice.

A case in sight is of the former Chief Minister of united Andhra Pradesh, D Sanjivayya, who had complained against the then Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh, P Chandra Reddy and some other judges of the High Court. In that case, the Chief Minister had addressed a letter dt. 04-11-1961 marked as 'secret' to Lal Bahadur Shastri, who was the Home Minister of India.

Earlier, the Chief Minister had also met the Home Minister personally in Delhi and registered his protest against the then Chief Justice of the State High Court and his coterie. Nothing was made public then.

We think this is the proper way of voicing the grievances against the people in high positions by the people in high positions. Washing dirty linen in public by any body, including the chief ministers , judges of the courts and other dignitaries is not permissible under the Constitution of India and any body violating the law of the land must be given stringent punishment irrespective of his status or position.