Disgraceful Khurshid’s comment on SC, EC denigrating India abroad

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by Ray, Mar 13, 2014.

  1. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    London

    (PTI)

    External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid has questioned the role of the Supreme Court and the Election Commission, making mocking comments about them.

    Apparently referring to the Supreme Court judgement disqualifying convicted lawmakers, he called it "a judge-made law", while the "broad philosophical approach" of the Election Commission guidelines appear to be that "you should do or say nothing that wins you an election".

    Speaking on the 'Challenges of Democracy in India' at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) here last night, Khurshid said the Election Commission's Model Code of Conduct made it difficult for parties to win elections.

    "The recent instructions that we received from them (EC) interestingly are that our manifesto must be certain that it does not offer the building of roads, because promise of building roads distorts democratic decision-making.

    "You should also not offer drinking water because that distorts decision-making," the senior Congress leader said.

    Khurshid said the broad philosophical approach, as he understood was that "you should do or say nothing that wins you an election. You should try your best to lose elections. I cheekily said to them we try to lose our elections for five years; give us 15 days in which we can try and win them please".

    He described the Commission as "very vigorous and highly respected", which has "cleaned up a lot of the ugly warts of our election process".

    "But they are only three of them, with no appeal from them. And three of them can decide what word you can use in an election campaign... That is an interesting area of study on how much Election Commissions can interfere in public discourse," Khurshid said.

    Referring to the role of the Supreme Court, he said that "important democratic decisions are being transferred to an unaccountable body of people".

    "In India, courts are taking a view on issues that are in democractic theory really an area of Parliament or government to decide. Their explanation is that if you will not be able to act and if you will not address these issues, we will have no choice but take them over," Khurshid said.

    "They are also deciding who can now go to Parliament and who can't go to Parliament. This is not law, but judge-made law.

    "At least in theory if democracy throws up a wrong kind of person, you can say this is what the people want. But to have an unelected, unaccountable body taking these decisions then becomes a major challenge to Indian democracy," he said.

    Khurshid further elaborated on the nature of the decision-making process by the top court.

    "Supreme Court judges never sit in benches which have more than two or three judges... generally only two of them sit together and two of the total 31 can decide what should happen... the?trouble is when they make mistakes, what do we do," asked the Minister, who is in London for the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) meeting tomorrow.

    "Judges sit and they say, this is not to happen, that is not to happen and of course, go to the extent of threatening contempt proceedings against officials. Two judges can say anything about Parliamentarians being tried or not being tried, that they'll be allowed to contest or not, what kind of affidavit they have to file, what they can do and so on," Khurshid said.

    Khurshid critical of SC, EC

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    If this is what the oaf, who pretends to be English educated perfect, has said then he has no regards for Indian democracy and institutions.

    If that be the case he is a rare Indian specimen who has seen his parents wedding or so I surmise since none other can be so treacherous to criticise one own Mother (Motherland) on foreign soil.

    Rasool Khan of Congress was defending such rot!

    The Congress, it appears, has overstayed its shelf life!

    I am ashamed such oaf can be Cabinet Ministers.

    Is the Cabinet and the weak PM so anti national as to permit such outrageous comments denigrating India on foreign soil?

    is this Khurshed an Indian? Or does he have loyalties elsewhere? Like the UK?

    If he feels that the Supreme Court prevents crooks in Parliament to sabotage democracy, as they do, then who will guard the guardians?

    God?
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2014
    VIP, parijataka, jackprince and 4 others like this.
  2.  
  3. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    I am horrified that such chaps can be Cabinet Ministers.

    Such a daft person heads our Foreign Policy.

    No wonder we are kicked around the deck.

    It is time that this idiot gets kicked around and out of India!

    What an Indian this oaf is!
     
    parijataka, nirranj and ghost like this.
  4. Compersion

    Compersion Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    454
    Location:
    India
    Re: Disgraceful Khurshid’s comment on SC, EC denigrating India abroa

    I am not sure but the above ought to be seen from what he "trying" to say. The overall themes that he is trying to say is about "transparency" and "accountability" and "parliament supremacy" in vast areas from ec to sc to parliament but he avoids talking about sg and mms. how he switches in his head being a external affairs minister to a memeber of parliament to a jolly chap - he switches this suddenly and for many it's amusing, and importantly since he is a minister of external affairs his primary focus has to be on such matters and he has to be careful how and what and when he says such things.

    There have been many that have concur that he can be truly described to the following "affable, but not so able". that was unfortunately said to him on his face and not sure he understood it. We really need a able external affairs minister!!
     

Share This Page