British scientists have developed a portable microwave scanner to help police identify individuals carrying concealed guns and knives.
It is small enough to be used covertly, at some distance from the subject.
The device is based around microwave radar technology and is designed to pick up the "reflections" of weapons concealed beneath clothing.
Some officials believe technology like this could help increase the effectiveness of stop-and-search.
The existing prototype is suitable for the detection of guns, but researchers say subsequent versions of the technology will be able to identify concealed knives as well.
The new device employs low-power microwaves to identify weapons, using similar wavelengths as the body scanners currently in use at a number of airports.
However, Professor Nick Bowring from Manchester Metropolitan University, who led the development of the new device, said it worked on a different principle.
Unlike airport scanners, the portable machine does not produce an image of the subject, it only analyses signals.
"It is designed to work out on the streets and is not (restricted) to a closed, controlled environment," Professor Bowring told BBC News.
A human operator will transport the device, using it to direct microwave emission at a person of interest.
Return signals - microwaves reflected back towards the device - are picked up, sensed and analysed.
Weapon signature
"[The scanner] does a lot of computing and processing of the signals it acquires. It puts them all together, analyses them over a short period and makes a decision," said Professor Bowring.
"It works on the principle that the radar returns from people, when they are carrying a gun or a knife, look different. And we pick up on those small differences."
So-called neural network technology is employed to identify signals from concealed weapons and to ignore those from everyday items. Similar technology is used in the automatic recognition of car number plates.
Professor Bowring said he and his team had found ways to reduce the numbers of "false positive" readings to a "very low level".
Because of sensitivities surrounding its use, he could not say what distance the device worked over, but explained it was a "useful stand-off range". Researchers are reluctant to release pictures of the experimental set-up for similar reasons.
Tests are currently being carried out by the Metropolitan Police's operational technology department to see how the scanner could work in practice.
If those trials are successful, a device could become available to police forces within two years.
Catherine Coates, head of innovation at the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), said: "This device could save lives and free up valuable policing time currently taken up with gun and knife detection."
'Public scrutiny'
Anita Coles, policy officer for Liberty, told BBC News: "We welcome scientific innovation in the fight against crime but this kind of technology needs public scrutiny and foundation in law.
"The causes of violence also need attention. You will never eliminate all the guns, knives, bottles and glasses so it's important to consider other conditions that foster conflict."
In a statement, Stuart Ibbotson, head of engineering for the Metropolitan Police, said: "We are still at early stages and a way off deploying operational capability yet, but so far, results are very encouraging.
"This kind of device would be of great service to officers, helping them to catch people carrying guns and knives without putting themselves in increased danger. It could also help to target stop and search to further increase its effectiveness."
The number of firearms operations rose by almost a fifth last year in police forces in England and Wales.
Officers fired weapons seven times - up from three incidents the year before, but still fewer times than in 2001.
The Home Office figures showed a drop in firearms operations in some police areas commonly believed to have significant gun crime problems.
Professor Bowring said the scanner had been developed relatively cheaply, at a cost of only a few hundred thousand pounds.
The project involved researchers from MMU, Manchester University, Newcastle University and Queen Mary University of London.
It was funded by the EPSRC, supported by the Metropolitan Police and the Home Office Scientific Development Branch.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Shell settles Nigeria deaths case
Royal Dutch Shell has agreed to pay $15.5m to settle a lawsuit which accused the oil firm of complicity in rights abuses in Nigeria.
The case, due for trial in the US next week, was brought by relatives of a group of anti-Shell activists executed in 1995 by Nigeria's military rulers.
The families say Shell helped the government to punish the campaigners.
But the company insists it did nothing wrong and said the payment was part of a "process of reconciliation".
Shell official Malcolm Brinded said: "This gesture also acknowledges that, even though Shell had no part in the violence that took place, the plaintiffs and others have suffered."
'Victory' for campaigners
Among those executed was Ken Saro-Wiwa, a prominent writer.
He and other activists had formed a group in 1990 aimed at showing the world the environmental damage they said Shell's drilling was causing in the Niger Delta.
But the campaigners were jailed on charges of ordering the 1994 murder of four local leaders.
After a trial, Mr Saro-Wiwa and eight others were hanged.
Their relatives have pursued Shell through the courts ever since.
Ken Saro-Wiwa's 40-year-old son, Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr, said his father would have been happy with the result.
He told the Associated Press that Shell's settlement represented a "victory for us".
Paul Hoffman, one of the lawyers for the Nigerian families, also expressed his satisfaction with the outcome.
"We litigated with Shell for 13 years and, at the end of the day, the plaintiffs are going to be compensated for the human-rights violations they suffered," he said.
"Had we tried the case and won, the plaintiffs were still looking at years of appeals," he said.
The lawyers said a large chunk of the money would be put into a trust to benefit the people of Ogoniland - the area Mr Saro-Wiwa was seeking to protect.
Weapons allegations
The case was first filed in the US in 1996 under a 200-year-old statute allowing people to bring rights abuse cases in US courts even when the alleged crimes took place outside the US.
The lawsuit alleged that Shell officials helped to supply Nigerian police with weapons during the 1990s.
It claimed that Shell participated in security sweeps in parts of Ogoniland and hired government troops that shot at villagers who protested against a pipeline.
And the papers also alleged that Shell helped the government capture and hang Mr Saro-Wiwa and several of his colleagues.
"Shell has always maintained the allegations were false," said Mr Brinded.
"While we were prepared to go to court to clear our name, we believe the right way forward is to focus on the future for Ogoni people, which is important for peace and stability in the region."
The case, due for trial in the US next week, was brought by relatives of a group of anti-Shell activists executed in 1995 by Nigeria's military rulers.
The families say Shell helped the government to punish the campaigners.
But the company insists it did nothing wrong and said the payment was part of a "process of reconciliation".
Shell official Malcolm Brinded said: "This gesture also acknowledges that, even though Shell had no part in the violence that took place, the plaintiffs and others have suffered."
'Victory' for campaigners
Among those executed was Ken Saro-Wiwa, a prominent writer.
He and other activists had formed a group in 1990 aimed at showing the world the environmental damage they said Shell's drilling was causing in the Niger Delta.
But the campaigners were jailed on charges of ordering the 1994 murder of four local leaders.
After a trial, Mr Saro-Wiwa and eight others were hanged.
Their relatives have pursued Shell through the courts ever since.
Ken Saro-Wiwa's 40-year-old son, Ken Saro-Wiwa Jr, said his father would have been happy with the result.
He told the Associated Press that Shell's settlement represented a "victory for us".
Paul Hoffman, one of the lawyers for the Nigerian families, also expressed his satisfaction with the outcome.
"We litigated with Shell for 13 years and, at the end of the day, the plaintiffs are going to be compensated for the human-rights violations they suffered," he said.
"Had we tried the case and won, the plaintiffs were still looking at years of appeals," he said.
The lawyers said a large chunk of the money would be put into a trust to benefit the people of Ogoniland - the area Mr Saro-Wiwa was seeking to protect.
Weapons allegations
The case was first filed in the US in 1996 under a 200-year-old statute allowing people to bring rights abuse cases in US courts even when the alleged crimes took place outside the US.
The lawsuit alleged that Shell officials helped to supply Nigerian police with weapons during the 1990s.
It claimed that Shell participated in security sweeps in parts of Ogoniland and hired government troops that shot at villagers who protested against a pipeline.
And the papers also alleged that Shell helped the government capture and hang Mr Saro-Wiwa and several of his colleagues.
"Shell has always maintained the allegations were false," said Mr Brinded.
"While we were prepared to go to court to clear our name, we believe the right way forward is to focus on the future for Ogoni people, which is important for peace and stability in the region."
Lebanon confirms Hariri election win
Interior Minister Ziad Baroud confirmed the 14 March coalition of Saad Hariri had won 71 seats in the 128-member body, one more than four years ago.
Hassan Nasrallah, head of militant movement Hezbollah, which won 57 seats, said he accepted the outcome.
US President Barack Obama praised the election and welcomed the result.
Mr Baroud said voting passed off satisfactorily, despite some organisational problems.
Security has been tightened and political leaders appealed for calm throughout Lebanon, which last year witnessed pitched battles between rival factions.
A possible victory for Hezbollah, which is supported by Syria and Iran, had caused jitters among Western governments, and the US was threatening to withdraw its aid package to Lebanon.
But Hassan Nasrallah said he accepted the outcome.
"I would like to congratulate all those who won, those in the majority and those in the opposition," he said.
Mr Obama said in a statement: "It is our sincere hope that the next government will continue along the path towards building a sovereign, independent and stable Lebanon
He went on the warn: "Government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion."
The turnout was 54%, Mr Baroud said, the highest percentage among Lebanon's three million voters since the 1975-91 civil war.
The campaign was marred by mud-slinging and accusations that large numbers of expatriate Lebanese were flown home for free to cast votes.
But former US President Jimmy Carter, who lead a team of international observers, said he was encouraged by the way the election was conducted and the response of politicians from all sides.
"The most important thing is to commend the people of Lebanon and the election authorities for a successful demonstration of the right of the people to express their will. They did it legally and properly, and one of the tests of a successful election is a rapid acceptance of the results," Mr Carter said.
Lebanon is a country of deeply-fragmented religious sects, and this election broadly pitted Shia Muslim supporters of Hezbollah against Sunni Muslims and Druze supporting the 14 March coalition.
The crucial electoral showdown had been between Christian rivals, who although they make up only one-third of the population are constitutionally guaranteed an equal half share of parliamentary seats.
The influential Christian Maronite community was split between established Western-orientated factions and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) of former army chief Michel Aoun, which joined the pro-Syria faction in 2006.
As predicted, Hezbollah and its smaller Shia ally Amal swept the vote in Lebanon's mainly Shia areas, but the FPM lost in the key districts of Zahleh and Beirut First.
Deadlock
After years of Syrian domination of its small neighbour, underpinned by a large military presence, the pro-Western bloc was swept to power in 2005, following the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in a car bombing in Beirut.
Popular discontent after that attack had forced Syria to withdraw its troops amid accusations of its involvement in the killing. The government in Damascus has strongly denied the claims.
A post-2005 unity coalition collapsed in November 2006, with the resignation of all six of its pro-Syrian ministers, stripping it of representation by Lebanon's largest confessional group, the Shia Muslims.
The following year parliament became deadlocked over filling the vacant presidency - and a unity government was only re-formed after the country teetered on the brink of full-scale civil war in May 2008.
Analysts say another fragile unity government is likely from this result.
A major division looks set to remain over Hezbollah's powerful guerrilla army, which pro-Western elements accuse of disrupting Lebanese stability but which Hezbollah supporters say is vital to resist the threat from Israel.
Hezbollah will demand that it retain a veto-wielding share of cabinet seats which it secured in last year's unity talks.
Hassan Nasrallah, head of militant movement Hezbollah, which won 57 seats, said he accepted the outcome.
US President Barack Obama praised the election and welcomed the result.
Mr Baroud said voting passed off satisfactorily, despite some organisational problems.
Security has been tightened and political leaders appealed for calm throughout Lebanon, which last year witnessed pitched battles between rival factions.
A possible victory for Hezbollah, which is supported by Syria and Iran, had caused jitters among Western governments, and the US was threatening to withdraw its aid package to Lebanon.
But Hassan Nasrallah said he accepted the outcome.
"I would like to congratulate all those who won, those in the majority and those in the opposition," he said.
Mr Obama said in a statement: "It is our sincere hope that the next government will continue along the path towards building a sovereign, independent and stable Lebanon
He went on the warn: "Government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion."
The turnout was 54%, Mr Baroud said, the highest percentage among Lebanon's three million voters since the 1975-91 civil war.
The campaign was marred by mud-slinging and accusations that large numbers of expatriate Lebanese were flown home for free to cast votes.
But former US President Jimmy Carter, who lead a team of international observers, said he was encouraged by the way the election was conducted and the response of politicians from all sides.
"The most important thing is to commend the people of Lebanon and the election authorities for a successful demonstration of the right of the people to express their will. They did it legally and properly, and one of the tests of a successful election is a rapid acceptance of the results," Mr Carter said.
Lebanon is a country of deeply-fragmented religious sects, and this election broadly pitted Shia Muslim supporters of Hezbollah against Sunni Muslims and Druze supporting the 14 March coalition.
The crucial electoral showdown had been between Christian rivals, who although they make up only one-third of the population are constitutionally guaranteed an equal half share of parliamentary seats.
The influential Christian Maronite community was split between established Western-orientated factions and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) of former army chief Michel Aoun, which joined the pro-Syria faction in 2006.
As predicted, Hezbollah and its smaller Shia ally Amal swept the vote in Lebanon's mainly Shia areas, but the FPM lost in the key districts of Zahleh and Beirut First.
Deadlock
After years of Syrian domination of its small neighbour, underpinned by a large military presence, the pro-Western bloc was swept to power in 2005, following the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in a car bombing in Beirut.
Popular discontent after that attack had forced Syria to withdraw its troops amid accusations of its involvement in the killing. The government in Damascus has strongly denied the claims.
A post-2005 unity coalition collapsed in November 2006, with the resignation of all six of its pro-Syrian ministers, stripping it of representation by Lebanon's largest confessional group, the Shia Muslims.
The following year parliament became deadlocked over filling the vacant presidency - and a unity government was only re-formed after the country teetered on the brink of full-scale civil war in May 2008.
Analysts say another fragile unity government is likely from this result.
A major division looks set to remain over Hezbollah's powerful guerrilla army, which pro-Western elements accuse of disrupting Lebanese stability but which Hezbollah supporters say is vital to resist the threat from Israel.
Hezbollah will demand that it retain a veto-wielding share of cabinet seats which it secured in last year's unity talks.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Telcos dial Africa for new pastures
After tasting success in domestic markets, it’s ‘Dial Africa’ for Indian telecommunication companies. And it’s not the high-profile, twice-rejected MTN alone that’s attracting Indian firms.
While the government-owned Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd (MTNL) is in advanced discussions for telecom licences in four countries, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL) is formulating its strategy to enter the continent.
Adding their bit are the Essar group, Tata Communications and Reliance Communications, all of which have licences for telecom services in African countries and are looking to expand their operations.
Bharti Airtel is negotiating with South Africa-based MTN for a “two way deal” that would allow it to own 49 per cent equity in South African giant MTN.
“We are evaluating a proposal to acquire a company that has licences in four to five countries,” said R.S.P. Sinha, chairman and managing director (CMD), MTNL. “Africa is a lucrative market and we would like to acquire a licence through auction if there is an opportunity.” However, in most countries, licences have been auctioned.
“Funding is not an issue for our Africa expansions,” Sinha said. “We have done all the ground work.” MTNL is presently a service provider in partnership with Tata Communications (formerly VSNL) and Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd (TCIL). “We will enter into Africa on our own,” said Sinha.
MTNL not the only government-owned company eyeing the African market. “We are looking at an expansion in Africa,” said Kuldeep Goyal, CMD, BSNL. “Whenever we find right opportunity we will grab it.”
Essar group has acquired a telecom licence in Uganda. “Africa is an important market for Essar’s telecom business and we are working towards building a strong brand in this market,” said Srinivas iyengar, CEO, Essar Telecom Kenya. “We would be looking at opportunities to establish a pan Africa footprint in future.”
The company plans to offer services in a joint venture with a local company, Kenya Telecom Uganda Ltd. It already has a licence in Kenya and plans to expand in other countries.
“We find African markets promising and have recently hiked our stake in Neotel (of South Africa) to 56 per cent from 26 per cent,” a senior Tata Communications official said. “We view this as a beach head to the rest of the African markets as and when right opportunities arise.”
Why Africa?
“African countries have just started moving on the development path,” said RK Upadhyay, CMD, TCIL. The company has been executing telecom infrastructure projects in Africa for past 20 years and is present in 30 countries. “There is expected to be enormous growth in telecommunications in next five years. Whenever, development takes place in a developing economy, the need for telecom services increases,” Upadhyay said.
“Africa has a low teledensity and high average revenue per user,” said Goyal. This explains why Indian providers want to go to. India has a teledensity (number of telephones for a population of 100) of about 40 per cent. In many African countries the teledensity is below 20 per cent (See table).
Besides, the continent’s average revenue per user is high. Against Rs 250 per month in India, the number in some African countries including is about three times as much.
Reliance has a licence in Uganda for offering mobile, fixed line, Internet, national and international long distance services, in addition to WiMax and Wifi services. It plans to acquire licences in other countries, a senior official said.
While the government-owned Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd (MTNL) is in advanced discussions for telecom licences in four countries, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL) is formulating its strategy to enter the continent.
Adding their bit are the Essar group, Tata Communications and Reliance Communications, all of which have licences for telecom services in African countries and are looking to expand their operations.
Bharti Airtel is negotiating with South Africa-based MTN for a “two way deal” that would allow it to own 49 per cent equity in South African giant MTN.
“We are evaluating a proposal to acquire a company that has licences in four to five countries,” said R.S.P. Sinha, chairman and managing director (CMD), MTNL. “Africa is a lucrative market and we would like to acquire a licence through auction if there is an opportunity.” However, in most countries, licences have been auctioned.
“Funding is not an issue for our Africa expansions,” Sinha said. “We have done all the ground work.” MTNL is presently a service provider in partnership with Tata Communications (formerly VSNL) and Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd (TCIL). “We will enter into Africa on our own,” said Sinha.
MTNL not the only government-owned company eyeing the African market. “We are looking at an expansion in Africa,” said Kuldeep Goyal, CMD, BSNL. “Whenever we find right opportunity we will grab it.”
Essar group has acquired a telecom licence in Uganda. “Africa is an important market for Essar’s telecom business and we are working towards building a strong brand in this market,” said Srinivas iyengar, CEO, Essar Telecom Kenya. “We would be looking at opportunities to establish a pan Africa footprint in future.”
The company plans to offer services in a joint venture with a local company, Kenya Telecom Uganda Ltd. It already has a licence in Kenya and plans to expand in other countries.
“We find African markets promising and have recently hiked our stake in Neotel (of South Africa) to 56 per cent from 26 per cent,” a senior Tata Communications official said. “We view this as a beach head to the rest of the African markets as and when right opportunities arise.”
Why Africa?
“African countries have just started moving on the development path,” said RK Upadhyay, CMD, TCIL. The company has been executing telecom infrastructure projects in Africa for past 20 years and is present in 30 countries. “There is expected to be enormous growth in telecommunications in next five years. Whenever, development takes place in a developing economy, the need for telecom services increases,” Upadhyay said.
“Africa has a low teledensity and high average revenue per user,” said Goyal. This explains why Indian providers want to go to. India has a teledensity (number of telephones for a population of 100) of about 40 per cent. In many African countries the teledensity is below 20 per cent (See table).
Besides, the continent’s average revenue per user is high. Against Rs 250 per month in India, the number in some African countries including is about three times as much.
Reliance has a licence in Uganda for offering mobile, fixed line, Internet, national and international long distance services, in addition to WiMax and Wifi services. It plans to acquire licences in other countries, a senior official said.
Justices’ panel wanted Punjab judge sacked
The Union government is not allowing the prosecution of a High Court judge suspected of receiving bribes — including whiskey bottles and a mobile phone — and fixing illegal land deals.
But it now emerges that an in-house inquiry committee constituted by the Chief Justice of India has recommended the removal of Justice Nirmal Yadav of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
A rare, in-house probe by Allahabad High Court Chief Justice HL Gokhale, Gujarat High Court Chief Justice KS Radhakrishnan and Justice Madan B Lokur of the Delhi High Court has “established beyond doubt” that Justice Yadav received Rs 15 lakh in unexplained money, sent by Delhi hotelier Ravinder Singh, according to a thus-far secret 92-page report which is in possession of the Hindustan Times.
The committee gave its report on December 6, 2008. Hindustan Times reported two days ago how in March the Union government refused permission to prosecute Justice Yadav, citing insufficient evidence — and at a time when questions are being raised about the government’s reluctance to intervene and the judiciary’s reluctance to act against its own.
Contacted on Friday, Law Minister Veerappa Moily refused comment, disconnecting the phone. The SC inquiry and CBI inquiries were both initiated by Chief Justice of India (CJI) KG Balakrishnan. Both relied on the same evidence: interrogation of suspects and witnesses, documents and cellphone call details.
Last week this paper also reported how Punjab’s Vigilance Bureau had asked for — but not received permission — to further investigate into the revelations of an officially-sanctioned phone tapping of two private persons in which the names of two other judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court had figured in connection with a slew of malpractices, including payment of bribes for favourable judgements.
“The misconducts (sic) disclosed against you are serious enough for initiation of proceedings for your removal as Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court,” said a confidential note issued by CJI and served on Justice Yadav on December 25, 2008.
In response, Justice Yadav started a flurry of communications with the CJI, picking holes in the Committee findings. She raised a number of objections and argued that a SC judge and a Punjab and Haryana High Court judge were at the residence of another High Court judge, who shared a similar-sounding name, Nirmaljit Kaur, where the Rs 15 lakh was wrongly delivered on August 13, 2008.
Justice Yadav based her allegation on a reference in the inquiry committee report which inter-alia says, "...even if there were some judges present at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur on the evening of August 13, 2008, it has no bearing or relevance to the inquiry.”
Justice Yadav’s implication: the money was meant for these judges, not for her. Her arguments were not supported by the evidence, which point to payoffs from touts.
There has been no further action by the Chief Justice over six months. Justice Yadav was taken off the high court Bench last year, continues to be without judicial work and receives full salary and benefits. Justice Nirmal Yadav initially refused comment. Later, she said: “The matter is with the Chief Justice of India whom I have already submitted my replies.”
The three-judges committee had two tasks:
To determine if the Rs 15 lakh, delivered to the residence of Justice Kaur, was meant for Justice Nirmal Yadav and that it was sent by Delhi hotelier Ravinder Singh through Sanjiv Bansal, then Additional Advocate General of Haryana.
To determine if the Rs 15 lakh was paid by Singh to Justice Yadav on August 14 through Rajeev Gupta, Bansal’s friend.
"Both these allegations have been established beyond any reasonable doubt. These allegations themselves amount to acts unbecoming on the part of Justice Nirmal Yadav,” said the report.
Justice Yadav, the report said, “did not practice the degree of aloofness which was expected of her consistent with the dignity of her office”.
But it now emerges that an in-house inquiry committee constituted by the Chief Justice of India has recommended the removal of Justice Nirmal Yadav of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
A rare, in-house probe by Allahabad High Court Chief Justice HL Gokhale, Gujarat High Court Chief Justice KS Radhakrishnan and Justice Madan B Lokur of the Delhi High Court has “established beyond doubt” that Justice Yadav received Rs 15 lakh in unexplained money, sent by Delhi hotelier Ravinder Singh, according to a thus-far secret 92-page report which is in possession of the Hindustan Times.
The committee gave its report on December 6, 2008. Hindustan Times reported two days ago how in March the Union government refused permission to prosecute Justice Yadav, citing insufficient evidence — and at a time when questions are being raised about the government’s reluctance to intervene and the judiciary’s reluctance to act against its own.
Contacted on Friday, Law Minister Veerappa Moily refused comment, disconnecting the phone. The SC inquiry and CBI inquiries were both initiated by Chief Justice of India (CJI) KG Balakrishnan. Both relied on the same evidence: interrogation of suspects and witnesses, documents and cellphone call details.
Last week this paper also reported how Punjab’s Vigilance Bureau had asked for — but not received permission — to further investigate into the revelations of an officially-sanctioned phone tapping of two private persons in which the names of two other judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court had figured in connection with a slew of malpractices, including payment of bribes for favourable judgements.
“The misconducts (sic) disclosed against you are serious enough for initiation of proceedings for your removal as Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court,” said a confidential note issued by CJI and served on Justice Yadav on December 25, 2008.
In response, Justice Yadav started a flurry of communications with the CJI, picking holes in the Committee findings. She raised a number of objections and argued that a SC judge and a Punjab and Haryana High Court judge were at the residence of another High Court judge, who shared a similar-sounding name, Nirmaljit Kaur, where the Rs 15 lakh was wrongly delivered on August 13, 2008.
Justice Yadav based her allegation on a reference in the inquiry committee report which inter-alia says, "...even if there were some judges present at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur on the evening of August 13, 2008, it has no bearing or relevance to the inquiry.”
Justice Yadav’s implication: the money was meant for these judges, not for her. Her arguments were not supported by the evidence, which point to payoffs from touts.
There has been no further action by the Chief Justice over six months. Justice Yadav was taken off the high court Bench last year, continues to be without judicial work and receives full salary and benefits. Justice Nirmal Yadav initially refused comment. Later, she said: “The matter is with the Chief Justice of India whom I have already submitted my replies.”
The three-judges committee had two tasks:
To determine if the Rs 15 lakh, delivered to the residence of Justice Kaur, was meant for Justice Nirmal Yadav and that it was sent by Delhi hotelier Ravinder Singh through Sanjiv Bansal, then Additional Advocate General of Haryana.
To determine if the Rs 15 lakh was paid by Singh to Justice Yadav on August 14 through Rajeev Gupta, Bansal’s friend.
"Both these allegations have been established beyond any reasonable doubt. These allegations themselves amount to acts unbecoming on the part of Justice Nirmal Yadav,” said the report.
Justice Yadav, the report said, “did not practice the degree of aloofness which was expected of her consistent with the dignity of her office”.
Health and climate change vie for boost in Congress
Barack Obama may be pressuring Congress as no U.S. president has for decades as he aims to get two big domestic goals passed this year -- reforming health care and fighting global warming.
"It's not impossible to do both, but that would be more than a Congress has ever given a president, maybe since the first First 100 Days," said Brookings Institution senior fellow Stephen Hess, referring to the start of Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" presidency in 1933.
A further time constraint may be the pressures imposed by the campaign next year for congressional elections in November when the seats of all 435 U.S. representatives and a third of the 100 senators are up for grabs.
Congress in the past often has shown itself to be unable to handle more than one big issue a year, but Obama and his fellow Democrats, who control the Senate and House of Representatives, see a window of opportunity this year to pass two long-standing Democratic goals.
Expanding health care to the uninsured and reducing pollution associated with climate change would have an economic impact on nearly every consumer and most U.S. companies -- from health insurers and utilities, to oil refineries, ailing automakers, steel manufacturers and small businesses.
Nonetheless, Democratic leaders are giving it a run, placing both initiatives on a fast track -- with or without much Republican support.
"The one that has the highest probability of making it is health care," said Bruce Josten, an executive vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He noted a full legislative agenda later this year, including annual spending bills, a Supreme Court confirmation and tax legislation, could crowd out a climate bill debate in the Senate.
Nevertheless, several congressional committees are pushing ahead with their review of the bill that aims to cut industry's carbon dioxide emissions 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050 with alternative energy sources and energy efficiencies.
The bill's prospects are strengthened by an unusual coalition of environmentalists, corporations and labor unions that have joined the effort. Obama is trying to sell climate change legislation as much more than doing something good for the environment. "Green" job creation and weaning the country off of foreign oil are his major talking points.
According to several Democratic lawmakers, the White House is already working hard to woo Senate Democratic and Republican moderates who will hold the keys to obtaining the needed 60-vote majority in the 100-member Senate.
In the meantime, environmentalists are heartened that four months into Obama's presidency such wide-ranging legislation is advancing, even with its concessions to some industries.
"If it became law today it would be the most important piece of energy and environmental legislation Congress ever produced," said one activist.
HEALTH CARE IN THE LEAD
Of the two, health care might be the bill that is more likely to reach Obama's desk for enactment by year's end. Both houses of Congress hope to blend their respective bills into a compromise measure by October -- Obama's deadline.
Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy has a major role in drafting the new health care bill as head of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. The bill would require individuals and businesses to purchase insurance and prohibit insurance companies from refusing to cover anyone because of health history.
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said for the next five weeks, the Senate's normal three-day work week will be extended to five so a health care reform bill can be passed.
"I want to emphasize what the president said, that health care is an absolute priority," said Representative Chris Van Hollen, a member of the House Democratic leadership, when asked by Reuters about the two bills' prospects. "But we believe we're going to do both" in the House, he added.
In the midst of a deep economic recession and with medical bills contributing to an estimated 60 percent of U.S. personal bankruptcies, providing health care for those without insurance is paramount to Obama.
Fifteen years ago, then-President Bill Clinton tried to keep a campaign pledge to enact universal health care, only to fail miserably. That contributed to significant Democratic losses in the 1994 congressional elections.
Since then, the health care problem has worsened with medical costs escalating and 46 million uninsured. Democrats claim they've learned their lesson about unfulfilled promises.
They still have to find a sound way to pay for expanding health care, a tough job amid staggering U.S. budget deficits.
Republicans keep hammering away at any proposed government-run health insurance. "A government plan could undercut private health plans, forcing people off the health plans they like," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell warned.
Behind the scenes, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pressuring her lieutenants to speed up work on the climate change legislation, which won strong backing last month from the politically diverse House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Pelosi hopes to pass this bill in June or July. Even if the legislation were to go no further this year, Obama would have a major accomplishment to tout in December, when world leaders are set to meet in Copenhagen to discuss global warming.
But the legislation likely would result in higher energy bills for American consumers, an especially difficult sell during a recession.
"It's not impossible to do both, but that would be more than a Congress has ever given a president, maybe since the first First 100 Days," said Brookings Institution senior fellow Stephen Hess, referring to the start of Franklin Roosevelt's "New Deal" presidency in 1933.
A further time constraint may be the pressures imposed by the campaign next year for congressional elections in November when the seats of all 435 U.S. representatives and a third of the 100 senators are up for grabs.
Congress in the past often has shown itself to be unable to handle more than one big issue a year, but Obama and his fellow Democrats, who control the Senate and House of Representatives, see a window of opportunity this year to pass two long-standing Democratic goals.
Expanding health care to the uninsured and reducing pollution associated with climate change would have an economic impact on nearly every consumer and most U.S. companies -- from health insurers and utilities, to oil refineries, ailing automakers, steel manufacturers and small businesses.
Nonetheless, Democratic leaders are giving it a run, placing both initiatives on a fast track -- with or without much Republican support.
"The one that has the highest probability of making it is health care," said Bruce Josten, an executive vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He noted a full legislative agenda later this year, including annual spending bills, a Supreme Court confirmation and tax legislation, could crowd out a climate bill debate in the Senate.
Nevertheless, several congressional committees are pushing ahead with their review of the bill that aims to cut industry's carbon dioxide emissions 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050 with alternative energy sources and energy efficiencies.
The bill's prospects are strengthened by an unusual coalition of environmentalists, corporations and labor unions that have joined the effort. Obama is trying to sell climate change legislation as much more than doing something good for the environment. "Green" job creation and weaning the country off of foreign oil are his major talking points.
According to several Democratic lawmakers, the White House is already working hard to woo Senate Democratic and Republican moderates who will hold the keys to obtaining the needed 60-vote majority in the 100-member Senate.
In the meantime, environmentalists are heartened that four months into Obama's presidency such wide-ranging legislation is advancing, even with its concessions to some industries.
"If it became law today it would be the most important piece of energy and environmental legislation Congress ever produced," said one activist.
HEALTH CARE IN THE LEAD
Of the two, health care might be the bill that is more likely to reach Obama's desk for enactment by year's end. Both houses of Congress hope to blend their respective bills into a compromise measure by October -- Obama's deadline.
Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy has a major role in drafting the new health care bill as head of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. The bill would require individuals and businesses to purchase insurance and prohibit insurance companies from refusing to cover anyone because of health history.
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said for the next five weeks, the Senate's normal three-day work week will be extended to five so a health care reform bill can be passed.
"I want to emphasize what the president said, that health care is an absolute priority," said Representative Chris Van Hollen, a member of the House Democratic leadership, when asked by Reuters about the two bills' prospects. "But we believe we're going to do both" in the House, he added.
In the midst of a deep economic recession and with medical bills contributing to an estimated 60 percent of U.S. personal bankruptcies, providing health care for those without insurance is paramount to Obama.
Fifteen years ago, then-President Bill Clinton tried to keep a campaign pledge to enact universal health care, only to fail miserably. That contributed to significant Democratic losses in the 1994 congressional elections.
Since then, the health care problem has worsened with medical costs escalating and 46 million uninsured. Democrats claim they've learned their lesson about unfulfilled promises.
They still have to find a sound way to pay for expanding health care, a tough job amid staggering U.S. budget deficits.
Republicans keep hammering away at any proposed government-run health insurance. "A government plan could undercut private health plans, forcing people off the health plans they like," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell warned.
Behind the scenes, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pressuring her lieutenants to speed up work on the climate change legislation, which won strong backing last month from the politically diverse House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Pelosi hopes to pass this bill in June or July. Even if the legislation were to go no further this year, Obama would have a major accomplishment to tout in December, when world leaders are set to meet in Copenhagen to discuss global warming.
But the legislation likely would result in higher energy bills for American consumers, an especially difficult sell during a recession.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)