US court issues summons against Modi

[dastan]

No need to worry about what answer he'll give to the press, am confident that he's more than capable of defending himself after all he's a clever politician

 

[Zebra]

No need to worry about what answer he'll give to the press, am confident that he's more than capable of defending himself after all he's a clever politician

As you say sir.

 

[happy]

Nah, I disagree with you.

PM Modi must say....being a PM of India, I have nothing to do with US court, even when I am in US.

I think he will stick to the version that @ladder says. Diplomatically it is a safe line. In other words, if PM wants some crucial agreements with the USA, he would be jeopardizing those deals by making a rash statement.

 

[ladder]

This name "Gurpatwant Singh Pannun" suggests he is a Sikh but his heart is bleeding for Muslims.This is ironic!

As per latest news the ISI is frustrated and has funded many NGO's in US which mostly includes Muslims and some traitor ass burn Khalistani's .The aim is to speak against MODI and do stupid demonstrations.

Poor Pakis are feeling so insecure,frustrated,hopeless and demotivated by MODI being a PM and going to Japan,Aus and now US for big deals.

#ModiInUS: ISI has funded web of NGOs to sabotage Modi visit

#ModiInUS: ISI has funded web of NGOs to sabotage Modi visit - India(English) News 2014-09-23 - Video - NRIAPNews.com

This name "Gurpatwant Singh Pannun" suggests he is a Sikh but his heart is bleeding for Muslims.This is ironic!

Nothing Ironic. He is same guy who filed a case against Ex. PM ManMohan Singh in 2013.

Justifying the filing of lawsuit, SFJ's legal advisor Gurpatwant Singh Pannun said the human rights violation law suit against Singh has been filed under Alien Tort Claims Act and Torture Victim Protection Act for funding several counter insurgency operations in Punjab

US court issues summons against Prime Minister Manmohan Singh | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

==================
Therefore I had posted.

This has no value more than a well timed PR exercise by 'you know who'.

 

[Zebra]

I think he will stick to the version that @ladder says. Diplomatically it is a safe line. In other words, if PM wants some crucial agreements with the USA, he would be jeopardizing those deals by making a rash statement.

All these has nothing to do with those agreements or discussions about those agreements.

Only thing is some poor guy can't help himself, without keeping one leg in doodh and another one in dahi at the same time.

 

[Hari Sud]

A court case is overdue on behalf of the dead people of that train compartment in Gujarat where 89 people died, all set on fire by overjealous Muslim miscreants which started the now notorious Gajarat riots. Everybody including the US courts wish to talk about dead Muslim in the riots but nobody talks about those 89 dead Hindus in the train. Relatives and families of these people should file a court case in the same court and make the same people respondent who have been chasing Government of India for the last ten years. There is enough evidence to support the case. All these are funded by Pakistani ISI.

Second court case is overdue against Sikh over jealous militants now residing under assumed names in US who wish to talk about 1984 riots but are silent over rein of terror which their financed terrorists killed hundreds of innocent people on the streets of Punjab invluding highest leaders and common people walking on the streets or riding a bus. This court case include all those who contibuted money to buy guns and explosives in US and Canada. Their campaign did not succeed but bad taste in the mouth remains in the families of dead people. They should be summoned to an American court and asked why were they contributing money to kill people.

Let us see what these people behave when court summons arrive.

 

[anupamsurey]

I actually pity on the knowledge of US court, i mean dont they have any idea that Head of any state (on a diplomatic mission) can not be served any summons.?

 

[pmaitra]

Tell me which nation says that's it's judiciary is not independent?

The principle on which the laws are derived from the same principle of 'protection' and minimum sub-state of customary international law.

So, independence of judiciary argument is best flushed down the toilet.

When Indian court consults Indian Govt.'s view on matters that can have international ramifications. Why can't in USA? IS Indian judiciary not independent?

Though I agree to rest of your post.

The Judiciary gives verdict based on laws, which are passed by the Legislature. There goes one limb of independence. The Legislature, in many countries, can impeach a judge. There goes the second limb of independence.

Yes, every country has to engage in bureaucratic wrangling to demonstrate "independence" of the Judiciary, but I think we know who works for whom.

 

[thethinker]

PM Narendra Modi 'ring fenced' against summons | Zee News

New York: India on Friday made it very clear that Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who arrived here on a five-day visit, was "ring fenced" and there was no question of anyone serving any summons on him and that an action in the matter was underway.

India's strong reaction came a day after a federal US court issued summons against Modi on his alleged role in 2002 communal violence in Gujarat when he was the state chief minister.

Even the White House downplayed the issue, with its Press Secretary Josh Earnest saying that it (lawsuit) was not going to have any impact on Prime Minister Modi's very important visit and added that sitting heads of government also enjoy personal inviolability while in the US, which means they cannot be personally handed or delivered papers to begin the process of a lawsuit.

Asked about the summons, External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Syed Akbaruddin said, "Indian representative is ring fenced. There is no question of anyone serving any summons on India's sovereign representative. Lets make it very clear, there will be no such issues. State Department has also clarified today."

 

[Zebra]

PM Narendra Modi 'Ring Fenced' Against Summons: Ministry of External Affairs

September 27, 2014 10:45 IST

Realising the sensitivity of the matter, the White House moved swiftly and downplayed the issue. The White House Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, clarified that the lawsuit was not going to have any impact on Prime Minister Narendra Modi's very important visit. The White House echoed the line chosen by the Indian foreign ministry by saying that the sitting heads of the government enjoy personal inviolability while in the US. This means they cannot be personally handed or delivered summons to begin the process of a lawsuit.

 

[ladder]

The Judiciary gives verdict based on laws, which are passed by the Legislature. There goes one limb of independence. The Legislature, in many countries, can impeach a judge. There goes the second limb of independence.

Yes, every country has to engage in bureaucratic wrangling to demonstrate "independence" of the Judiciary, but I think we know who works for whom.

Yes, but let's not get into this.

NY is notorious for,

In contrast, the U.S. state of New York is known for its permissive filing system, which was modified in 1992 but still largely operates in its traditional form in certain lower courts.[2]

Filing (legal) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and

Other jurisdictions may only require that the summons be filed after it is served on the defendants. New York is notorious for its permissive filing system, in which the summons or complaint need not be filed at all.

Summons - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
@JMM99, @Achauhan or Saya sir can clarify on this.

So, if any anomaly exist, it is procedural and doesn't come under the realm of independence of judiciary.

So, you will find most of the cases against Manmohan, Sonia, Kamal Nath too originated from NY Fed. court. and by probably by one only group as posted in earlier by me.

And, it will our educated guess who are fueling this.

===================

And it the summon issued is for 'civil action', ( I haven't gone through exact text of summon and it's provisions) which is only for compensation. No arrest is required in this, as deliberately misinterpreted by Pakistani journalists.

If judiciary/ judicial provision is being misused for PR exercise in US, which probably is hurting the interest of USA, then it is pertinent for USA to look into it and take remedial action.

 

[Ray]

Modi has immunity as a Chief of a Country and so he cannot be issued a summon.

 

[ladder]

Modi has immunity as a Chief of a Country and so he cannot be issued a summon.

Summon can be issued but not served. The detail is posted in my previous post.

MMS was also immune in 2013 when the same lawyer of SFJ filed a case against him ( and current status of that case is a matter of another discussion). This is for PR exercise. But, not every one is conversant in law. And Pakistani Journalists are leaving no stone unturned to paint the picture that Modi will be arrested on route to Washington from NY.

 

[ladder]

Meet the man trying to take Narendra Modi to US court

Meet the man trying to take Narendra Modi to US court – Quartz

==========================

Text of summon.

[PDF] http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/archive/02126/Class_lawsuit_agai_2126838a.pdf?_ga=1.33127998.1475807245.1411802915 [/PDF]

 

[dastan]

http://timesofindia.com/world/us/Ri...ving-summons-to-Modi/articleshow/43601243.cms

$10000 to anyone who will serve the Summons on modi during his various public engagements in the city over a period of next two days

Ps : How about we declare $20000 for someone who chops this guy's head off, just saying

 

[Punya Pratap]

2 glaring things......

1st America and its institutions habit of meddling in others affairs
2nd some peoples' desperation to get into lime light no matter what it takes

My personal opinion is to ignore such morons who clearly do such things for publicity stunts!

 

[Meriv90]

2 glaring things......

1st America and its institutions habit of meddling in others affairs
2nd some peoples' desperation to get into lime light no matter what it takes

My personal opinion is to ignore such morons who clearly do such things for publicity stunts!

I'm not saying that is correct or not nor this is my opinion.

Since it is about a "pogrom" and in consequence a human right violation by international laws all countries are able to prosecute the crime. And in some countries the judge is "forced" to prosecute or he will be trialed.

I'm curius, has ever Modi traveled to Europe before becoming PM? I'm not used to common law systems like US one so yours is far more similar, could the process go further and the sentence take action when the mandate ends?

 

[ladder]

I'm not saying that is correct or not nor this is my opinion.

Since it is about a "pogrom" and in consequence a human right violation by international laws all countries are able to prosecute the crime. And in some countries the judge is "forced" to prosecute or he will be trialed.

I'm curius, has ever Modi traveled to Europe before becoming PM? I'm not used to common law systems like US one so yours is far more similar, could the process go further and the sentence take action when the mandate ends?

The answer is no international law has jurisdiction. Show me which law are you talking about.

Don't try to shoot from your hip by branding it as 'my opinion' and how did you conclude it is a human rights issue?

 

[Meriv90]

The answer is no international law has jurisdiction. Show me which law are you talking about.

Don't try to shoot from your hip by branding it as 'my opinion' and how did you conclude it is a human rights issue?

I can't have an opinion about something I'm not completely informed, human right issue because the ban to US visa for Modi originated by violation of religion freedoms (human right). So I wasn't stating my opinion, just of what he has already been accused.

Human rights are Ius cogens so universal jurisdiction is applied.

For this reason I was asking if you knew if Modi in the past traveled to europe before becoming PM(to prove me wrong, because I'm always willing to learn ;-)).

 

[ladder]

I can't have an opinion about something I'm not completely informed, human right issue because the ban to US visa for Modi originated by violation of religion freedoms (human right). So I wasn't stating my opinion, just of what he has already been accused.

Human rights are Ius cogens so universal jurisdiction is applied.

For this reason I was asking if you knew if Modi in the past traveled to europe before becoming PM(to prove me wrong, because I'm always willing to learn ;-)).

Yes, Modi's visa to USA was revoked in 2005 which was issued in 2003, while the incident took place in 2002. How come the visa was issued in the first place?

The reason was his name was placed in a list of Human rights violators, which had no other names then and till now.

So, for USA there is only one human rights violators in the entire world in a decade and it is (was) Modi.

Now, if you think refusal of visa is a absolute truth to make any one a violator of Human rights, you very well can continue to live in your la la land.

And I will take about law only when you post the exact provisions of it. Don't talk in generic strength.

Police action against protestors in Rome too infringes on human rights, can India pass judgement against mayor of Rome?

So, if you want to debate better get down to details, generic statements don't hold water here.