Modi has registered criminal cases against 31% ministers in the government
Karachi … News Time
Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s Panama Papers case, in the case of a disqualified by the high court in the case of the past, When in June 1975, a powerful prime minister Indra Gandhi had disqualified the court. On the other hand, any politician in India’s law is just about six years, So, if any politician is punished for more than 2 years or after the sentence of punishment or 6 years after the release of the prison, he can contest the election again. The Indian Election Commission has the option to terminate or reduce the duration of a member’s membership. There are hundreds of MPs in India at which time serious cases are sent to the jails and now they are on bail, Including Lalu Pradash, Amit Shah, Awaisi and several others. For the past 3 years, there are serious cases like murder, corruption, corruption against India’s 1581 MPs. However, they are present in assemblies and positions, even serious cases are registered against Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Narendra Modi government has registered criminal cases against 31 percent ministers. In 78 union ministers of Narendra Modi cabinet, serious cases have been registered against 24 years. Even in the state assemblies of India, there are criminal cases against the heavy number of ministers; overall, cases have been registered against 201 ministers of 620 state ministers. There are cases related to murder against the ministers and violence against the six ministers. The number of members of the Lok Sabha is 542, including cases such as abduction, murder, crimes against women, and crimes against women.
After the disqualification of Nawaz Sharif:
American Online Newspaper International Business Times wrote that the moment of disaster of Nawaz Sharif has brought a major turn in Pakistan’s delicate democratic history. And how is democracy now seen? Pakistani democracy should go towards an adult system where the political class should make a better decision but democracy in Pakistan is going to chaos and end. The past history of Nawaz Sharif’s disadvantaged incident has gone away from the past, when in June 1975, a powerful Prime Minister Indra Gandhi was disqualified by the court. 42 years ago Rahe Bareli in the Alok Sabha election constituency Indra Gandhi defeated Raj Narayan with heavy majority Raj Rajan challenged Allahabad High Court. On June 12, 1975, Allahabad High Court’s Justice Jag Mohan Lal sahna declared the defeat of his victory by disqualifying Indra Gandhi under the use of government resources and corruption allegations; And Indra Gandhi was banned from any position for 6 years. The ruling party Congress was given a 20-day time to find alternative alternative to Indra Gandhi. Indra Gandhi on this decision shook like a lion and applied emergency throughout the country only this week. This decision created a political crisis in India and from 1970 to 1977, the Emergency continued. Indra Gandhi has taken an interim order by referring to the Supreme Court against the Allahabad High Court’s decision. After which he conferred the constitutional amendment of 39th constitution in 1975 when he raised the bill of Congress’s heavy majority in Parliament. Under which 392 articles was introduced in the Indian Constitution. In which the prime minister and Speaker’s choice could not be challenged in any country court. Nor will the challenge be made to any committee made by the Parliament. According to this new article, the person who has been the Speaker of India, Vice President, Prime Minister or Lok Sabha speaker, the nomination papers will not be examined at the time of election and they will be able to contest the election. Under this amendment, it has been decided that the election will not be raised on the election. The Indian Supreme Court dismissed this constitutional amendment in the case of Indra Nehru Gandhi Banam Raj Narayan in the case of conflict with the constitutional structure. The Indian Supreme Court declared that under the 39th constitutional amendment, the option of judicial review of President, Vice President, Prime Minister and speaker election was terminated, which is the main constitutional structure. Apart from this amendment, the Numbers No. 17 included in the list of basic constitutional structure related transparency was also ineffective, However, the court ruled that if a party wants to amend any of the 23-point basic constitutional structures so, he will have to add the relevant matter to his election manifesto, If the people give it mandate in the election, then they can also amend the relevant issue in the constitutional framework. Remember that the Indian Supreme Court declared the 23 cases as a constitution of the Indian Constitution in one case in 1973. The newspaper writes that political wars have been fought against courts in Shazu in India. The court had terminated his sentence in November this year and freedom of Indian judiciary was completely failed in the democratic world, Indra Gandhi had ensured that his power should not be taken out of his hand. There was a political crisis in the Indian Republic.
Emergency situation recently became Indira Gandhi, whether she was an opposition leader or the media, along with her Son, Sanje, kissed all the opponents. After all 23 years after Independence, the Congress 1977 defeated and the first time came out of power. Nawaz Sharif did not have so much credibility to change democracy and live in power as Indra Gandhi had. Nawaz Sharif did not sabotage the judicial verdict like Indra Gandhi and did not think of imposing emergency in the country. Nawaz Sharif’s discomfort is similar to India’s example. Nawaz Sharif is also a strong leader of Pakistan, there was no strong identity of Opposition leaders in India before Indra Gandhi. The other element in the strength of Indra Gandhi was to be the daughter of Jawahar Lal Nehru, while there is no such situation in Pakistan, the democratic institutions in Pakistan are not strong as India, and Nawaz League is not strong like Indian National Congress. Nawaz Sharif is already struggling on several fronts, on one side the establishment is political pressure on the other side and extremists are third. Nawaz Sharif did not have so much confidence in changing democracy and to be in power as Indra Gandhi had. That’s why they rescued and went quietly, as they did twice in the late 20th century. He did not sabotage the judicial verdict like Indra Gandhi, and did not think of imposing emergency in the country. Nawaz Sharif’s departure is certainly disturbed for the stability of the country, Pakistan’s people voted in the 2013 elections, hoping for them. Public Representation Act of section 1, 1951 presents immediate disadvantages of the Parliamentary Parliament. In July 2013, the Indian Supreme Court ordered that such MPs or MLs have serious nature cases, If they have been sentenced by the court for two or more years of imprisonment, they will immediately be unable to get their public positions, The Supreme Court suspended section 8 for public representation Act, 1951in which this clause protects the immediate disaster of the Parliament if he has appealed to the High Court. In September 2013 the Indian Cabinet canceled the order of the immediate disqualification of the convicted members of the Supreme Court and approved an ordinance. The Central Cabinet decides to cancel the Supreme Court’s order under the ordinance, to protect the immediate disposal of the convicted members of Parliament, and that the public representation (Amendment and Verification) Ordinance allows such MPs and MLAs to continue their duties. If their appeal has passed by the High Court in 90 days, however, such members will not be entitled to vote, salary and other privileges during the House’s proceedings unless their final decision is taken.
