Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

[Sarbajit Roy]

A few reasons why Justice Santosh Hegde must quit the drafting committee NOW !!!

A man is known by the company he keeps,

1) He is in the company of politicians whom the citizenry perceive to
be extremely corrupt.
2) He is in the company of lawyers who regularly defend corrupt people
for extraordinary fees
and amass extraordinary assets.
3) He is in the company of some of the most incompetent people to
draft an ombudsman bill.

A man is known by his deeds.

1) He should quit before people start examining his old judgments in
the SC - for example
his completely corrupt Akshardham decision
2) He should quit before people start questioning his conduct as
Chairman TDSAT and why
he did nothing to prevent the telecom scams .

A man is known by his beliefs.

1) He should quit before people start asking about his belief (and
belief of those close to him)
in godmen and babas,.

A man is known by his utterances.

1) He should quit because he knows that the committee he is appointed
to is a fraud on the
Constitution of India, and had he been an honest judge he would have
been the first to strike
down its constitution / composition as arbitrary. Why has he not
spoken so far ? Is it because.
he is so dependent on post retirement sinecures that he must stifle
his conscience and good
sense ?

[Satish Kumar Kapoor]

Dear Sarbajit

Why u want to kill drafting committee?

S.K.Kapoor

---

From: Sarbajit Roy <sro...@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge <humja...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

[sarbajit roy]

Dear Satishji

For the same reason that a mongoose wants to kill a snake.

Sarbajit

On Apr 22, 8:27 am, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsat...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Dear Sarbajit
>
> Why u want to kill drafting committee?
>
> S.K.Kapoor
>
> ________________________________

> sense ?

[Sankar Pani]

If we start finding faults with each and every person, then only god if any will be eligible in your scale to the Drafting committee.At the present juncture we can choose relatively less corrupt or less controversial people but never possible to find a person who do not have any such allegation. to me it seems that we have to accept the best in the existing committee and and should judge the objective of the committee.

--
Sankar Prasad Pani
A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
India
PIN-751007
Cell- 9437279278
http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/

[sarbajit roy]

Your statements are grossly objectionable.

1) It is EASY to find competent people who are absolutely
incorruptible and without any credible allegations against them.

2) The issue is not about the LokPak Bill's contents or the fashion
it is brought about, BUT about the NEED for it in the first place.

3) Why should we the people of India settle for "RELATIVELY
LESS CORRUPT or CONTROVERSIAL PEOPLE" ??
You should reconsider the wisdom of statements you make in a
public forum.,

Sarbajit

[Joshi NM]

Hi,

When you see writing on the wall, you only negotiate for the best terms. e.g. GATT agreement signed by FM MM singh is the example, when only best negotiation was the available option to India.

similarly, JanLokpal Bill is written on wall. Now how best tp get the law enacted is the focus area.

Digvijay Singh, Kapil Sibbal & Manu Singhvi are out there to speak for derailment.

Kalmadi & Dixit are not called for inquiry. Supreme court is shouting at Govt. for names of money launderers.

So, better is to get Lokpals working ASAP.

loop-holes may be plugged as and when need arises.

numerous laws are enacted without active discussions in legislature houses. Numerous Bills are killed for extraneous reasons.

Even RTI Act & its implementation is not free from controversies.

Consumer Forums blatantly violate section 13 (3A) of Consumer protection act & give judgment after 5-7 years, without recording reasons for delay.

let the lokpal act come in force with sharp teeth. Let no excuse stand in the way for its coming into force.

regards.

-Joshi NM

[Sankar Pani]

could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in the interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill else will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption free nation.

[Satish Kumar Kapoor]

I don't think who is corrupt or less corrupt on panel of drafting committee is important issue.

Even if most corrupt while drafting, does not favour corrupt and incorporates the needs of common citizens  to curb corruption is enough.

People who do not want "lokpal bill" as it will hurt their interests are crying foul.

S.K.Kapoor

---

From: Sankar Pani <sankarpr...@gmail.com>
To: humja...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

[Abhimanyu]

kapoor sir is absolutely correct

[Sarbajit Roy]

Dear Sankar

As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why say
Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally demanding
to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
people will be selected.

Tomorrow if DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep ?

Sarbajit

[Abhimanyu]

sarbajit

plz dont make hypocratical asumptions

anna will never be CVC.

[Sarbajit Roy]

Hypocritcal or hypothetical ?

As per me, Anna Hazare is not eligible for the post of CVC (. But neither was Annapurna Dixit to be appointed as an IC. Eternal vigilance is the watchword --. If we dont defend our rights they will be taken from us.

Unfortunately we have a surplus of lazy, useless, hypocrites of the armchair variety (("a corrupt Lokpal Bill is better than no Lokpal Bill at all") in this group. I think it is high time we get rid of all the deadwood from our groups.

Sarbajit

[Sarbajit Roy]

Dear Mr Anoop Kumar

1) I dispute that Anna Hazare and his nominees constitute or represent civil society.
If we examine the 5, we find that each and every one of them is a former public servant or the progeny. Wouls any reasonable person classify this as an unbiased panel.

2) I dispute that we need a LokPal to tackle corruption in the country. What we need is a Constitutional amendment making military service compulsory for every citizen below the age of 30 for "x" number of years. What we need is a movement to throw out / exterminate the foreign parasites and their progeny who drain our national resources like leeches. What we need is a constitutional amendment bestowing the right on each citizen to bear arms / alternatively the repeal of the Arms Act. What we need is honest and autonomous police forces. What we need is for corrupt advocates and judges to be strung up from the nearest lamppost. What we need is a complete repeal of the Representation of the Peoples Act so that a citizen can only be an MP / MLA for 1 term. The wishlist can go on and on. So stop dreaming and start living.

Sarbajit

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 11:47 AM, S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoo...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,

I have been reading your messages which are mostly Anna bashing or
bashing of the other draft committee members of the  proposed Lok Pall
Bill representing the civil society, that is us.   Mr. Anna Hazare,
Mr. Santosh Hegde, Mr. Arvind Kejriwal, Mr. Shashi Bhushan and Mr.
Prashant Bhushan are only members of the committee drafting the
proposed Lok Pal bill.   They are neither offered any constitution
post nor they are aspiring for one.   Mr. Santosh Hegde served as
Judge of Supreme Court of India and is now Lok Ayuktha of Karnataka
and due to retire soon.

It is a foregone conclusion that India, now considered as one of the
most corrupt nations, needs a strong anti corruption law,  the law
which can be enforceable, swift, fast and result oriented.   For which
we need to have a strong bill.   A deterrent in the first place.  The
bill which is devoid of any short comings and loop holes which would
be conveniently exploited to their advantage by the mighty and
powerful.   In short, we do not need just another bill which is just
seen or read on papers but remains absolutely unenforceable or
powerless.   The toothless tiger.

Mr. Shashi Bhushan has been advocating a strong Lok Pal Bill for the
past 40 years.   He understand the dynamics of both politics and also
law.   Mr. Prashant Bhushan and also Santosh Hegde are other legal
luminaries.   Added with social activists like Mr. Anna Hazare and Mr.
Arvind Kejriwal in the committee, we can atleast hope for a strong and
enforceable bill that would protect the interests of the citizens of
our nation.

Instead of criticizing the draft committee members, and every other
who is supporting the Lok Pal Bill, I wish you concentrate on the
draft bill with constructive suggestions to make it effective and free
from errors or legal loop holes, get it tabled before the parliament
houses and also get it passed.   This would be a great contribution
from your side.  To us as a nation and to our coming generations.

Regards,
S. Anoop Kumar.

On Apr 23, 6:22 pm, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sankar
>
> As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why say
> Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
> conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
> when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally demanding
> to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
> that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
> people will be selected.
>
> Tomorrow if  DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
> Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep ?
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Sankar Pani
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are
> > absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in the
> > interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill else
> > will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption free
> > nation.
>

[Dr. Jagnarain Sharma]

Dear Anoop & all
Every member has a right to agree on an proposal or decline
it. You may like to debate on it, if you have your point in favour or
against it.
As such Roy Dada is also having the right to speak against
any member of the committee.

However you have expressed your opinion, that is good.

You are very much correct that these five members of Civil
Society are not holding any constitutional post nor they are aspiring
for one.
Justice Mr. Santosh Hegde served as Judge of Supreme Court

of India and is now Lok Ayuktha of Karnataka and due to retire soon.

Our only one point programme is CORRUPTION FREE INDIA.
SO LET THE COMMITTEE SUBMIT ITS DRAFT FOR JAN LOKPAL BILL
AND IT IS THE PARLIAMENT WHICH HAS TO PASS IT.
So till that time kindly keep restrain and pray that
effective Bill is ready to be put up before Parliament

I also agree with you that Mr. Shanti Bhushan has been

advocating a strong Lok Pal Bill for the past 40 years. He
understand the dynamics of both politics and also
law. Mr. Prashant Bhushan and also Santosh Hegde are other legal
luminaries. Added with social activists like Mr. Anna Hazare and Mr.
Arvind Kejriwal in the committee, we can atleast hope for a strong and
enforceable bill that would protect the interests of the citizens of
our nation.

So even if all the 10 members of committee are
dishonest or corrupt, it will have no impact on the draft Bill, for
which they have been assigned the job, because ultimately the
Parliament has to pass it.

So criticizing the draft committee members, who are only
preparing a draft Bill, will have no impact on the skill of Bhushan
duo or of other members of committee.

If they have done some crime in the past, they are liable to
be prosecuted by different agency/Police/CBI, at the appropriate time,
as law of the land provide., as no one is above the law.

So it is a different issue altogether and should not be
mingled with their job for drafting the Bill

Pranab Dada has also given green signal to the role of
committee drafting the Bill..
Dr JN Sharma
ADVOCATE/ HUMANRIGHTS ACTIVIST

>> Dear Sankar
>>
>> As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why say
>> Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
>> conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
>> when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally demanding
>> to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
>> that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
>> people will be selected.
>>
>> Tomorrow if DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
>> Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep ?
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Sankar Pani
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are
>> > absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in
>> > the
>> > interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill
>> > else
>> > will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption
>> > free
>> > nation.
>>

>> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:43 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com>

[Sarbajit Roy]

Dear Anoop

You have not understood my arguments in totality.

1)  If the purpose of the Lokpal bill/Act is to curb corruption, then what about all the existing legislation ? Will these be dumped ?

2) Santosh Hegde (and I have appeared before him in the SC -- his orders refer to me as "Ld. counsel" [which BTW is a disparaging term]) is not an entirely clean judge either. If he was a great legal luminary he would be on the Law Commission instead of scrabbling about for demeaning post retirement sinecures like Lok Ayukta.

3) It is completely incorrect for you to say that the majority of Indians want a LokPal Bill or that my ideas are impractical. At best these can be the opinion of a vocal minority. In my own community (which runs into the millions) we stand for all the issues I listed and hence I speak for about 10 million secular Indians (which is not a small number).

4) Why is there not a single Muslim, Christian, Adi Dharmi, Parsi etc amongst the 5 persons Anna Hazare nominated ? Which political and religious forces are behind this army deserter and coward ? Even the so-called land given to Anna Hazare by the Army is no great evidence of his heroism, it is under a scheme given to every Army sepoy at the time

Sarbajit.

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 5:33 PM, S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoo...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,

If the civil society members in the draft committee are unbiased in
your opinion, then perhaps you have an answer as to which side they
are inclined towards and what are their selfish considerations that
would benefit them.

You are disputing the very essence of Lok Pal Bill when majority of
Indians are thinking that Lok Pal is what is required and we are
already late in having such a law in place.   And majority Indians
think, wish, hope and pray that such a bill would bring in some change
in governance, responsibility and accountability in governance and
delivery mechanism.

And regarding the other alternatives to the Lok Pal Bill quoted by
you, you know for sure they are not practical and implementable and
still you suggest them.  I see a day dreamer in you.   It clearly
appears you are personally against a set of people and you fail to see
the good intentions of these people.   And you will oppose anything
and everything these people would attempt to do.  Just for the sake of
opposing.  Even if they can bring in some good to the society.

Regards,
S. Anoop Kumar.

On Apr 24, 11:43 am, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr Anoop Kumar
>
> 1) I dispute that Anna Hazare and his nominees constitute or represent civil
> society.
> If we examine the 5, we find that each and every one of them is a former
> public servant or the progeny. Wouls any reasonable person classify this as
> an unbiased panel.
>
> 2) I dispute that we need a LokPal to tackle corruption in the country. What
> we need is a Constitutional amendment making military service compulsory for
> every citizen below the age of 30 for "x" number of years. What we need is a
> movement to throw out / exterminate the foreign parasites and their progeny
> who drain our national resources like leeches. What we need is a
> constitutional amendment bestowing the right on each citizen to bear arms /
> alternatively the repeal of the Arms Act. What we need is honest and
> autonomous police forces. What we need is for corrupt advocates and judges
> to be strung up from the nearest lamppost. What we need is a complete repeal
> of the Representation of the Peoples Act so that a citizen can only be an MP
> / MLA for 1 term. The wishlist can go on and on. So stop dreaming and start
> living.
>
> Sarbajit
>

[chandra jain]

I think it is a case of severe heartburn & nothing else.

 

This drafting committee has  gathered a lot of national prestige & these five 'civil society' leaders have suddenly come under limelight. Other activists feel they should also be on some such committee.

 

I can only remind all that these five eminent 'civil society' leaders did their homework well, they presented a specific plan of action to the society & the government, worked for its implementation & garnered huge public support. It is only a beginning - the drafting committee has to come up with an acceptable draft with all its intricacies & that bill has to go through the complete legislative process before it can become a law. Other activists can start working on their possible roles in all these subsequent activities, if they want to be associated with this particular anti-graft law only. If they have better ideas/suggestions for the Lokpal Bill, these can be sent to the drafting committee & there is a mechanism to take notice of these suggestions from the 'civil society'. 

 

I am sure that if another group works diligently on another idea, say electoral reforms or picks up something else & comes up with a clear cut plan of action & is able to gather public support, they will be able to corner equal or more
publicity & get appointed to more powerful committees.

 

Instead of denigrating the work of these five or finding faults in their characters, let us work on other badly needed reforms. 

 

Chandra K Jain
93124 39464
INDIA

---

From: S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoo...@gmail.com>
To: humja...@googlegroups.com
Cc: parivar...@gmail.com; kiranb...@yahoo.co.in; debasish...@gmail.com; tripa...@yahoo.com; msis...@gmail.com; fatte...@yahoo.com; sshanbh...@yahoo.com; sankarpr...@gmail.com; s.anoo...@gmail.com
Sent: Sun, April 24, 2011 6:13:26 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

Sorry.  There is an error.   The first sentence of the message should be corrected to read as - "If the civil society members in the draft committee are "biased" in

your opinion, then perhaps you have an answer as to which side they are inclined towards and what are their selfish considerations that would benefit them."

S. Anoop Kumar.

[chandra jain]

I feel that this drafting panel is being given too much 'importance' - much more than they deserve.

 

This panel only prepares a draft for the Lokpal Bill - nothing more. The bill has to still go through the regular legislative process & if it crosses all these hurdles in the parliament (both houses, one  by one), gets president's signatures & gets notified, only then it becomes a law. In this process, there are plenty of chances for those opposed to it, to make it trip somewhere along the way.

 

We can only rejoice that it has cracked open a doorway for the 'civil society' to demand some kind of accountability & good governance from the corrupt political system. Something good is bound to come of it & this kind of movement has the potential to gather force & build itself into a revolution to change the destiny of the nation. 
 

Chandra K Jain
93124 39464
INDIA

---

From: Devendra Tripathi <tripa...@yahoo.com>
To: chandra jain <ckjain...@yahoo.com>; "humja...@googlegroups.com" <humja...@googlegroups.com>
Cc: "parivar...@gmail.com" <parivar...@gmail.com>; "kiranb...@yahoo.co.in" <kiranb...@yahoo.co.in>; "debasish...@gmail.com" <debasish...@gmail.com>; "msis...@gmail.com" <msis...@gmail.com>; "fatte...@yahoo.com" <fatte...@yahoo.com>; "sshanbh...@yahoo.com" <sshanbh...@yahoo.com>; "sankarpr...@gmail.com" <sankarpr...@gmail.com>; "s.anoo...@gmail.com" <s.anoo...@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, April 25, 2011 10:37:46 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

You may be right, Chandra, but I see one more dimension and that I find more worrisome. Some of us have different views and are very sincere and strongly committed to it. Communist party is very good example. They have successfully besieged a leading state of India for almost half a century now. I do not think that communist leaders are evil minded people (actually Jyoti Basu, I read, was most frugal and very honest politician). V. P. Singh, about whom I have a very high respect as a person, is another example. In a single move, he pushed the society back by few decades (now I hear that many people are eager to prove that they are backward!). If corruption creates problem for the economy by disrupting the institutions and processes, such people simply will not accept any process or institution that does not meet a particular standard. I do not know which one is the bigger problem!

 

Regards,
Devendra Tripathi
Cell: +1(408)416-1848

From: chandra jain <ckjain...@yahoo.com>

To: humja...@googlegroups.com
Cc: parivar...@gmail.com; kiranb...@yahoo.co.in; debasish...@gmail.com; tripa...@yahoo.com; msis...@gmail.com; fatte...@yahoo.com; sshanbh...@yahoo.com; sankarpr...@gmail.com; s.anoo...@gmail.com

Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

I think it is a case of severe heartburn & nothing else.

 

This drafting committee has  gathered a lot of national prestige & these five 'civil society' leaders have suddenly come under limelight. Other activists feel they should also be on some such committee.

 

I can only remind all that these five eminent 'civil society' leaders did their homework well, they presented a specific plan of action to the society & the government, worked for its implementation & garnered huge public support. It is only a beginning - the drafting committee has to come up with an acceptable draft with all its intricacies & that bill has to go through the complete legislative process before it can become a law. Other activists can start working on their possible roles in all these subsequent activities, if they want to be associated with this particular anti-graft law only. If they have better ideas/suggestions for the Lokpal Bill, these can be sent to the drafting committee & there is a mechanism to take notice of these suggestions from the 'civil society'. 

 

I am sure that if another group works diligently on another idea, say electoral reforms or picks up something else & comes up with a clear cut plan of action & is able to gather public support, they will be able to corner equal or more
publicity & get appointed to more powerful committees.

 

Instead of denigrating the work of these five or finding faults in their characters, let us work on other badly needed reforms. 

 

Chandra K Jain
93124 39464
INDIA

[sarbajit roy]

Dear Anoop

http://groups.google.com/group/HumJanenge/browse_thread/thread/3df6008700e60a4c

You will see that Chandra Jains message WAS posted to this group about
10 hours before your message
It seems that you have no respect for the moderation abilities of the
management of this group or their honesty and integrity.
It seems that you have more faith in a bunch of communal and corrupt
people who are doing their best to fragment our country.

I note that you have evaded replying to my point on the status of all
the other laws on corruption. At the end of the day even the LokPal
Act will only be just another law to be implemented. Certainly every
order made under it will be subject to appeal in a High Court or the
Supreme Court. Is LokPal Bill going to magically clean up the mess in
these Courts ? Today I have a Contempt matter I filed in SC listed
( in MC Mehta pollution matter). The Court is taking it up as a "New
PIL" along with a similar clutch from 2005-2006 after a delay of 6
years - and that too only after I sent an email last month to the
Registrar General of the Court complaining of the pervasive corruption
in the SC Registry. I m certain the bench will wring its hands in mock
anguish and dispose of the matter as infructuous now that all the
contemnors have retired. If the SC has no respect for contempt against
itself, then should citizens believe in law and justice, or should
they take up arms to defend the state ?

I reiterate that the majority of Indians are simple decent people who
should not concern themselves with high level corruption. Tackling
such high level corruption is not going to be solved with laws, laws
and more laws. They can only be solved with a bloody violent
revolution to safeguard democracy and the values enshrined in our
Constitution. Indians today are soft weak and lazy. We need new
Indians not new laws

Sarbajit

On Apr 25, 7:16 pm, "S. Anoop Kumar" <s.anoopku...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,
>

> Your opinion appears personally & grossly biased towards few persons.   Whether it is Justice Santosh Hegde or Anna Hazare or the others.   You are clearly not looking at the bigger picture.   Or is it a case of 'severe heartburn & nothing else' as mentioned by Mr. Chandra K Jain in his message, the message which did not find place on the group message board or conveniently removed.
>
> The need of the hour is a strong anti corruption bill that works.   The existing legislations have proved to be ineffective and have been misused, exploited or taken for a spin by our hardcore politicians and bureaucrats.  Again and again.  And you are certainly aware of the same.  Our laws have been changed with the changing times.  And that is required to keep pace with the dynamics & laws of motion.  Several of the acts have been amended and several have been repealed and some have been superseded.   If Lok Pal Bill can supersede any other weaker laws what is wrong in it ?
>
> You are questioning the fairness in the constitution of the draft committee from the civil society side just because it does not include a Muslim, a Christian, a Parsi or a Adi Dharmi.  I do not know your community but you state that you represent a ten million strong community.  It is sad this is coming from you, of all the people.  Now you want the committee to be divided and formed on religion lines.   Mayawati already raised that the committee does not contain someone from dalit community.  And she wants the committee to be divided and formed on caste lines.   Some one else will stand out and would demand that each state should have a member in the committee (what prevents ?).   And every political party would seek representation in the committee.  After all this is democracy.     The people who are opposing the committee and dividing the same on caste and communal lines are the people who do not want such a bill taking a shape, leave alone getting it passed in the legislature.  All their efforts are pointing towards derailing the entire process.   And these are the same people who have brought us to this sorry state of affairs today.  
>
> Anna Hazare never claimed he was a war hero.  He was a driver in the army and was a partaker in the 1967 war.   And Anna is reported to be using his piece of land (gifted to him by the govt.) for the welfare of the community.  And Anna has earned his respect for the deeds he has done for the community.  The govt. relented and is in the process of making a Lok Pal draft bill all because of Anna's involvement.  Any other person would not have made such an impact on the government.  
>
> If you cannot make a fruitful contribution atleast do not criticize or belittle or throw stones at others who are working on it and are trying to be open and transparent.  And this would be your most constructive contribution to the nation.  And we would all appreciate it.  
>
> Just for your info, Mr. Salman Kursheed is not only a Muslim, but is also a Union Minister of Minority Affairs.  And he is a member of the draft committee.  
>
> Regards,
> S. Anoop Kumar.  
>
> .  

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
> Date: Apr 25, 10:41 am
> Subject: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!
> To: HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005
>

> <s.anoopku...@gmail.com>wrote:

>
> > Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,
>
> > If the civil society members in the draft committee are unbiased in
> > your opinion, then perhaps you have an answer as to which side they
> > are inclined towards and what are their selfish considerations that
> > would benefit them.
>
> > You are disputing the very essence of Lok Pal Bill when majority of
> > Indians are thinking that Lok Pal is what is required and we are
> > already late in having such a law in place. And majority Indians
> > think, wish, hope and pray that such a bill would bring in some change
> > in governance, responsibility and accountability in governance and
> > delivery mechanism.
>
> > And regarding the other alternatives to the Lok Pal Bill quoted by
> > you, you know for sure they are not practical and implementable and
> > still you suggest them. I see a day dreamer in you. It clearly
> > appears you are personally against a set of people and you fail to see
> > the good intentions of these people. And you will oppose anything
> > and everything these people would attempt to do. Just for the sake of
> > opposing. Even if they can bring in some good to the society.
>
> > Regards,
> > S. Anoop Kumar.
>
> > On Apr 24, 11:43 am, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Regards,
> > > > S. Anoop Kumar.
>

> > > > On Apr 23, 6:22 pm, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Dear Sankar
>
> > > > > As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why
> > say
> > > > > Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
> > > > > conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
> > > > > when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally
> > demanding
> > > > > to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
> > > > > that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
> > > > > people will be selected.
>
> > > > > Tomorrow if DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare
>

> ...
>
> read more »

[M.K. Gupta]

Can some one tell us the fault of Justice Santosh Hegde and why the demand for his resignation is being made?  It is not fact that the nation is proud of him for conducting raids, unearthing blacke money, tacking mining mafia, daring even the Chief Minister for the alleged charges.     --- On Mon, 25/4/11, chandra jain <ckjain...@yahoo.com> wrote:

[M.K. Gupta]

The best way is to ignore the objections on the formation of the drafting committee and let us wait for its meeting which is probably on 2nd May.   This is not a permanent body to raise the point of slot for s'/c, s/t, obc, minority etc.  However, if some legal lumanary from these class want to join, this is for the govt. to decide but it seems that now these question are being raised to delay the entire issue.  After all, the Committee is not going the finalize the law but will only make recomendation and the Parliament is the final authority where there is representatin of all the sections of society.   I apeal the moderators to discourage posting on this issue now.  --- On Tue, 26/4/11, sarbajit roy <sro...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Sarbajit Roy]

Dear Anoop

If an email for this group is cc'ed to others then it goes into a special moderation queue
Please appreciate that this group has been under heavy load since this LokPal agitation began. The moderators are having to carefully balance all emails (much against our wishes/inclinations) to ensure that Freedom of Expression is ensured without disturbing the group. I'm sure you are aware of the concept "your right ends where my nose begins".

Moderators (and members) are tolerating non-RTI discussions till April end. From May there will be a new regimen (some of you may not like it ---- so please utilise the UNSUBSCRIBE option)

Let me address some of your points

1) Salman Khurshid is one of those khaandaani congress muslims - like Mr Habibullah,  who form the courtier class (also known as running dogs). To expect that they will contribute anything to preventing corruption is like expecting the tail will wag the dog.

2)  Are you saying that  vast majority of Indians are NOT simple and decent people ? If so then we definitely need a new breed of Indian !

3) I disagree that Anan Hazare has the people's support. Everything was stage managed by Congress Party and Baba Ramdev and a few of Mr Hazare's Maharashtrian goons.

4) As to new Indians, I will be explaining it to the group from May.

Sarbajit

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:09 PM, S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoo...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Mr. Roy,

Mr. Chandra Jain posted his message at 10.54 a.m. on 25th.  I received
a copy of the message in my mail box for he has marked a copy to me in
addition to few others.   The message was held up in the moderation
loop and the message was not cleared for posting till today morning.
And I posted my message at 07.16 p.m. in which I mentioned that the
message of Mr. Chandra Jain was not cleared from the moderation
loop.   And Mr. Chandra Jain's message and also my message got cleared
and were cleared for posting together on the message board only today
morning.

I have already expressed my views on several bills already in place
and their (in)effective implementation.  And we are fondly looking at
Lok Pal Bill to overcome such maladies.   And people are working
towards it.   Let us give it a try.   We have nothing to lose any
further.

I beg to disagree with you - "that the majority of Indians are simple

decent people who should not concern themselves with high level

corruption".  Who is paying for this loot ?   It is the simple decent
people and tax payers who are overburdened with all sorts of taxes in
various forms from birth to death.  If simple Indians were not be
concerned than Anna Hazare and his team would not have received so
much of support which shook the highest seat of power, that of the
prime minister himself.  The outburst of the simple Indians was
spontaneous and was there for all of us to see.

I am aghast that you feel that bloody violent revolution is required
to safeguard (our) democracy and the values.  I cannot & will not
subscribe to your views.   And I am clearly at loss as to what you
meant by - "We need new Indians not new laws".  Perhaps most of the
group members would like you to solve this interesting riddle to get
the clear, hidden and the intended meaning.

With best regards,
S. Anoop Kumar.

On Apr 26, 7:47 am, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Anoop
>

> http://groups.google.com/group/HumJanenge/browse_thread/thread/3df600...

[Sant Mathur]

Its excellent to note vibrant democracy manifested in cyber space deliberations.

HUMAN CIVILISATION has progressed through small steps(often) and large strides(rarely) ,often on tentaive lines,as at no point of time any FINALITY has been known.Its virtually a statement of truism.

What we all now know is that through framming the questions,and examining the same dispassionately(what is called via Martian Angle),we could ,in the given time frame,and with due diligence,come up with most satisfying solutions.Its also a part of decision making process, namely"harmonious resolution of conflicting interests".

Without going into the generalities let me raise just a few issues. I'll give my humble opinion(also based on foud decades of public service,inclusive of fourteen total years of srevice in VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION area),just a little later as my discussions with some of the stalwarts in this field are,as yet, not conclusive.I'll do that very transparently,and using SWOT analysis and relying on DATT(Direct Attention Thinking Tools),ten most admired principles of the genius in creative thinking(lateral thinking) Mr Edward De Bono.

1.Is a legislation like LOK PAL absolutely essential?As a corollary what happens,or should happen to some other Statuates/Organisations

2.Who should draft it?

3. Is the current exercise the best one,under the circumstances?

4.What provisions need most attention,should it be considered that the Statuate is essentially reqd?

5.How should the decisions finally be taken at DRAFTING STAGE and at PARLIAMENTARY level?

6.How should actual functioning of LOK PAL be there?( effective,efficient,expeditious)?

                           Just a word of suggestion that in our serious deliberations we MUST be cautious about FALLACIES,as it derails the decision making process and also leads to improper inferences.Hope Sh S Roy does favou by circulating a neat document on this subject as the one with me may not be very good for this FORUM.

S P Mathur IPS DGP (retd)

BE MBA PhD(Knowledge Management)

 

                               

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:09 PM, S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoo...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Mr. Roy,

Mr. Chandra Jain posted his message at 10.54 a.m. on 25th.  I received
a copy of the message in my mail box for he has marked a copy to me in
addition to few others.   The message was held up in the moderation
loop and the message was not cleared for posting till today morning.
And I posted my message at 07.16 p.m. in which I mentioned that the
message of Mr. Chandra Jain was not cleared from the moderation
loop.   And Mr. Chandra Jain's message and also my message got cleared
and were cleared for posting together on the message board only today
morning.

I have already expressed my views on several bills already in place
and their (in)effective implementation.  And we are fondly looking at
Lok Pal Bill to overcome such maladies.   And people are working
towards it.   Let us give it a try.   We have nothing to lose any
further.

I beg to disagree with you - "that the majority of Indians are simple

decent people who should not concern themselves with high level

corruption".  Who is paying for this loot ?   It is the simple decent
people and tax payers who are overburdened with all sorts of taxes in
various forms from birth to death.  If simple Indians were not be
concerned than Anna Hazare and his team would not have received so
much of support which shook the highest seat of power, that of the
prime minister himself.  The outburst of the simple Indians was
spontaneous and was there for all of us to see.

I am aghast that you feel that bloody violent revolution is required
to safeguard (our) democracy and the values.  I cannot & will not
subscribe to your views.   And I am clearly at loss as to what you
meant by - "We need new Indians not new laws".  Perhaps most of the
group members would like you to solve this interesting riddle to get
the clear, hidden and the intended meaning.

With best regards,

S. Anoop Kumar.

On Apr 26, 7:47 am, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Anoop
>

> http://groups.google.com/group/HumJanenge/browse_thread/thread/3df600...

>

> ...
>
> read more »

[Sarbajit Roy]

Dear Sant-ji

You have captured some of the issues which I was trying to communicate.

I personally prefer the legal pleadings way of listing out the arguments
in terms of FACTS, followed by POINTS AT ISSUE/GROUNDS followed by what should be done (PRAYERS).
This system  leads to rigorous discussion whuich allows thge matter to be settled one way or the other.

Unfortunately, the jholawalla/activist brigade cannot function in this way. They can only keep shouting and refuse to state/accept facts. They believe that a mob of a thousand howling voices is somehow better than a single empowered citizen. Next month we shall show you how proper debate should take place in cyber space.

Sarbajit

[Sant Mathur]

Dear Sh Sarabjit,

At times personal issues are arising,say on account of clash of egos,which,in turn,could possibly be on account of our not knowing others better.Bonhomie may not exist,but so wouldn't the acrimony also,were we (able) to know each other better.

This I'm voicing on account of my pesonal experience of over sixty summers.Only request is to have deliberations well focussed(objective-oriented) and well-cultured. No reason we can't resolve seemingly intractable problems and impossible looking challenges.Yes,we certainly can !

May be I could share something more on this forum but for want of TIME I really feel constrained in doing so.

Will be also pleased to hear from you telephonically(919841282324 is my mobile number).

Finally thaks for appreciting logical line of thinking( a component of system's approach) that I broached in the last mail.

spm

[Sarbajit Roy]

Dear Santji

The personal issues and egos enter the picture when non-RTI issues are thrust on our membership. If we stick to discussions on RTI within the context of the RTI Act and Rules the personality issues get subsumed.

The point about getting to know each other better is well taken. We should organise annual meetings to coincide with (say) the CIC annual convention where we can meet and party at CIC's expense.

I also concur that a systems approach is a fine way to prove that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Sarbajit

[Dr. Jagnarain Sharma]

DEAR ANOOP KUMAR
This is time to concentrate how one can contribute to the
drafting of JAN LOKPAL BILL for being presented before parliament.
There is no use talking on religion, caste, creed,
community in the drafting.

I FEEL THAT THOSE WHO WANT CORRUPTION TO CONTINUE WANT to punish
Bhushan duo, for the CD matter, which is a different matter altogether
and should
not be mingled with the THEME CORRUPTION FREE INDIA.
The committee appointed for drafting the JAN LOK PAL BILL,
must continue as Pranab Dada has stated.

Even if all the 10 members of the committee are corrupt,
will not make any difference for preparing a draft, because the
parliament has to pass it ultimately.

Government has said controversies involving some civil society members of
the joint comm for drafting the Lokpal Bill would not affect its working and
will work with the members to prepare a "strong and sound" anti-corruption
legislation.

After a meeting of Congress' Core Group headed by Sonia
Gandhi with Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh by her side, Finance Minister Pranab
Mukherjee said controversies "won't affect" the working of Lokpal
Bill drafting panel.
"Goverment members of the committee look forward to working with Anna
Hazare and his colleagues on the committee and to draft a strong and
sound Lokpal
Bill to fight corruption," he said.
Dada Mukherjee's remarks came after a 90-minute meeting of the Core
Group that discussed the issues threadbare.
The Prime Minister's remarks that government hopes
to introduce during the monsoon session of Parliament the Lokpal Bill.

YOUR VERSION IS CORRECT THAT 'people who are opposing

the committee and dividing the same on caste and communal lines are
the people who do not want such a bill taking a shape, leave alone
getting it passed in the legislature. ' All their efforts are pointing
towards derailing the entire process. And these are the same people
who have brought us to this sorry state of affairs today.

I FEEL THERE IS NO NEED TO OPPOSE MR. SARABJIT ROY WHO AS
AN INDIAN CITIZEN HAS EVERY RIGHT TO GIVE OPINION. We may agree or
not is a different matter.
But we must unite on one theme that we want;CORRUPTION FREE INDIA
regards

Dr JN Sharma
ADVOCATE/ HUMANRIGHTS ACTIVIST

>> > > Regards,
>> > > S. Anoop Kumar.
>

>> > > On Apr 23, 6:22 pm, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > Dear Sankar
>
>> > > > As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why
>> say
>> > > > Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
>> > > > conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
>> > > > when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally
>> demanding
>> > > > to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
>> > > > that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
>> > > > people will be selected.
>

>> > > > >> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:14 AM, sarbajit roy <
>> sroy...@gmail.com>