Fraud applications: Indian students face ban / restrictions from 5 Australian universities

The Syrian government fell early Sunday in a stunning end to President Bashar al-Assad’s 24-year rule over the Arab country after the militant group Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) stormed and captured the capital Damascus.

In a statement on Sunday morning, the HTS militants declared that they had captured the capital, confirming reports of the fall of the Assad government.

Earlier in the day, Reuters quoted an unnamed officer as saying that the Syrian army command notified officers that the Assad government had fallen.

Ready to cooperate with power transfer: Syrian PM

Syrian Prime Minister Mohammed Ghazi al-Jalali expressed the government’s readiness to “extend its hand” to the militants and hand over its functions to a transitional government.

“I am in my house and I have not left, and this is because of my belonging to this country,” he said in a video statement.

He also noted that he would go to his office to continue work in the morning, calling on Syrian citizens not to deface public property.

Foreign-backed militants, led by the HTS, waged a surprise two-pronged attack on Syria’s Aleppo and the countryside around Idlib on November 27.

Soon afterward, they captured several Syrian cities, including Hama, Homs, Dara’a, Suwayda, and Damascus.

HTS leader Abu Mohammad al-Jolani called on militants to leave state institutions unharmed.

“To all military forces in the city of Damascus, it is strictly forbidden to approach public institutions, which will remain under the supervision of the former Prime Minister until they are officially handed over, and it is also forbidden to fire bullets into the air,” he said in a statement released on Telegram.

HTS declares fall of Assad government

In their statement, the HTS militant group, which called itself the Syrian National Transitional Council, announced the toppling of the Assad government.

It further vowed to “preserve the unity and sovereignty of Syrian territory, … protect all citizens and their property, regardless of their affiliations,” and “achieve comprehensive national reconciliation.”

Syrian state television aired a video statement by a group of militants saying that President Assad has been overthrown and all prisoners have been released.

“The city of Damascus has been liberated,” said one of the militants who read the statement.

“All the prisoners have been released from the prison of Damascus. We wish all our fighters and citizens preserve and maintain the property of the state of Syria. Long live Syria.”

‘In cooperation with UN'

Head of the Syrian National Coalition, Hadi al-Bahra, said, “The situation is safe, and there is no room for revenge or retaliation.”

“Government institutions will resume operations within two days” and that the “transfer of power will take place in cooperation with the United Nations,” he told Al-Arabiya.

The Supreme Court on Monday while hearing a petition against the stand of Karnataka High Court's view that shouting 'Jai Sriram' inside a mosque was not an offence, sought the stand of the State of Karnataka in the matter.

A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Sandeep Mehta was hearing the matter.

"Alright, they were shouting a particular religious slogan. How is that an offence?" Justice Mehta asked, as bench posted the matter for January 2025.

The bench asked if the accused persons had been identified. Kamat replied that CCT visuals had been collected and the police identified the accused persons, as recorded in the remand report. The bench asked if merely spotting the accused near the mosque would mean that they shouted the slogans.

"Are you able to identify the actual accused? What material you have brought?" the Court asked. Kamat clarified that he was only representing the complainant (caretaker of the mosque) and it is for the police to conduct the investigation and collect the evidence. The FIR need only give information about the offence and need not be an 'encyclopedia' containing all evidence, he added.

This comes after a petition was filed in the Supreme Court questioning the Karnataka High Court's order of September 13, 2024 which quashed an FIR lodged against two men for raising the 'Jai Shri Ram' slogan within mosque premises.

The high court's single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna had said, "It is ununderstandable as to how if someone shouts 'Jai Shri Ram' it would outrage the religious feeling of any class, when the complainant himself states that Hindu - Muslims are living in harmony in the area".

New Delhi: The Ministry of Law and Justice of Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government has made an amendment to the Conduct of Election Rules, restricting public access to certain electoral documents that were previously available.

The original Rule 93(2)(a) of the 1961 Conduct of Election Rules stated, “all other papers relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.” However, following the amendment on Friday, the rule now reads, “all other papers as specified in these rules relating to the election shall be open to public inspection.”

Activists have raised concerns, claiming that the insertion of the phrase “as specified in these rules” limits access to various official documents created during elections to Parliament and Assemblies, which are not explicitly mentioned in the rules.

RTI activist Venkatesh Nayak pointed out that there are numerous documents, though not listed in the rules, that are generated by election officials such as Presiding Officers, Sector Officers (responsible for constituency vulnerability mapping), and those in charge of EVM movement and replacement of defective machines on polling day. These include reports from general, police, and expenditure observers, as well as Returning Officers and Chief Electoral Officers.

Nayak emphasized, “Access to these documents is crucial for ensuring the fairness of elections and the accuracy of results.”

The amendment comes shortly after the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the Election Commission to provide video footage and documents related to votes cast at a polling station in the recent Haryana Assembly elections to lawyer Mehmood Pracha. Pracha has criticized the amendment, asserting that it will withhold essential information. “This is a reconfirmation of the Election Commission’s bias,” he said.

Nayak further stated, “This amendment undermines the principle of full transparency established by the Supreme Court in the Electoral Bonds case. The notification of this amendment on the very day Parliament was adjourned sine die has deprived MPs of the opportunity to challenge its necessity in real time.”