UAE visa restrictions temporary, Sheikh Abdullah tells Pakistan

Bengaluru: Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar on Thursday backed Chief Minister Siddaramaiah over his claim that the BJP had offered Rs 50 crore each to 50 Congress MLAs in an attempt to "topple" the state government.

Addressing reporters here, Shivakumar, also the Congress state president, said, “The BJP indeed lured 50 Congress MLAs with Rs 50 crore each.”

He defended Siddaramaiah’s statement and said the Congress MLAs were briefed about the BJP’s alleged 'Operation Lotus', a term used to describe the BJP's attempts to destabilise ruling governments through horse-trading.

“Some of our MLAs informed the Chief Minister about this matter, and he, in turn, shared it with the media,” Shivakumar said.

At an event in Mysuru, Siddaramaiah reiterated the claim that "none of the Congress MLAs had accepted the offer".

He also accused the BJP of filing false cases against him in a bid to "remove him and overthrow his government".

The BJP has yet to respond to the allegations.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

In a significant gesture towards a smooth transition, President Joe Biden invited President-elect Donald Trump to the White House to discuss the transfer of power, following a pledge from Vice President Kamala Harris to uphold a peaceful handover.

Vice President Harris, in a heartfelt address last night, publicly acknowledged Trump’s victory and assured her full commitment to a respectful and orderly shift in governance. "Our allegiance is not to any individual but to the Constitution itself," Harris emphasized, highlighting the need for national unity and respect for democratic processes.

Reports from The Washington Post reveal that Trump’s team is already hard at work on transition plans, actively considering candidates for key Cabinet positions. For Treasury Secretary, billionaire investor John Paulson and economic strategist Scott Bessent are in the running, while Senator Marco Rubio and former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell are top contenders for Secretary of State.

Additionally, the Trump camp is eyeing influential figures for strategic roles. North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum and former primary rival Vivek Ramaswamy are rumored to be cabinet-bound, with Senator Tom Cotton potentially taking on the role of Defense Secretary. The highest priority, however, is securing a Chief of Staff, with Trump advisor Susie Wiles and Brooke Rollins among the frontrunners for this critical post.

Trump's campaign has reportedly conducted a rigorous vetting process, aimed at bringing loyalists into his administration to ensure alignment with his goals. Campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt confirmed that personnel selections would be announced soon, while Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung confirmed that White House transition talks are imminent.

Adding to the intrigue, there are whispers that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. might take on a prominent role in restructuring health and food safety agencies. Known for his controversial views on vaccines, Kennedy’s potential appointment is already sparking debates across the political spectrum.