US Congress opens impeachment proceedings against President Trump

Agencies
September 25, 2019

Washington, Sept 25: US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the initiation of a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump over the latter's controversial phone call with the Ukrainian president.

"Today, I'm announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry," said the Democratic congresswoman from California in a speech on Tuesday, after she concluded a closed-door meeting with the House Democratic Caucus, Xinhua news agency reported.

Citing Trump's admission this week that he talked about Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden during the July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Pelosi said "the actions of the Trump presidency revealed the dishonourable fact of the president's betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security, and betrayal of the integrity of our elections."

Pelosi said she will direct six House committees to proceed with their investigations into Trump "under that umbrella of impeachment inquiry."

"The president must be held accountable. No one is above the law," she said.

Trump responded immediately to Pelosi's announcement, taking to Twitter and calling the inquiry "a presidential harassment."

The president said the Democrats "never even saw the transcript of the call," adding their decision to impeach him is "a total Witch Hunt!"

Earlier on Tuesday, Trump said he authorized the release of the full transcript of the phone call between him and his Ukrainian counterpart.

The president Trump tweeted from New York, where he was attending the United Nations General Assembly session, that he has "authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript" of the phone call. "You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call," he added.

The presidential conversation between Washington and Kiev is at the centre of a whistleblower complaint filed in mid-August by an unidentified intelligence official, alleging that Trump interacted inappropriately with a foreign leader and made an unspecified "promise."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrat from New York, said Tuesday his chamber voted unanimously in support of the content of the whistleblower complaint being provided to Congress.

"The Senate by unanimous consent passed my resolution calling for the whistleblower complaint to be provided to Congress as required by law," Schumer tweeted.

"That means every GOP Senator supports the whistleblower report being immediately provided to the Senate and House Intel Committees," he added. Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire has been withholding the material from congressional committees investigating the scandal.

The Hill, in a Monday report, cited a congressional official as saying Maguire and Michael Atkinson -- inspector general of the intelligence community with which the complaint was filed -- are both expected to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee later this week.

Maguire is scheduled to appear before the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday, the report added.

On the other side of the aisle, Republicans in both chambers denounced Pelosi's announcement. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy called on the Democrats to "put the public before politics."

"Speaker Pelosi happens to be the speaker of this House but she does not speak for America when it comes to this issue. She cannot decide unilaterally what happens here," McCarthy told reporters Tuesday. "They have been investigating this President before he even got elected," he added, referring to the Democrats.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, for his part, called the impeachment inquiry a "rush to judgment" by "Washington Democrats."

"This rush to judgment comes just a few hours after President Trump offered to release the details of his phone conversation with President Zelensky," the Republican from Kentucky said in a statement. "It comes despite the fact that committee-level proceedings are already underway to address the whistleblower allegation through a fair, bipartisan, and regular process."

In an attempt to contain the fallout of the scandal, McConnell said Monday that lawmakers should handle the issue through bipartisan cooperation.

"I believe it's extremely important that their work be handled in a secure setting with adequate protections in a bipartisan fashion, and based on facts rather than leaks to the press," he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
September 12,2024

New Delhi, Sep 12: Madrasas are "unsuitable" places for children to receive "proper education" and the education imparted there is "not comprehensive" and is against the provisions of the Right to Education Act, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has told the Supreme Court.

The child rights body told the top court that children, who are not in formal schooling system, are deprived of their fundamental right to elementary education, including entitlements such as midday meal, uniform etc.

The NCPCR said madrassas merely teaching from a few NCERT books in the curriculum is a "mere guise" in the name of imparting education and does not ensure that the children are receiving formal and quality education.

"A madrassa is not only a unsuitable/unfit place to receive 'proper' education but also in absence of entitlements as provided under Sections 19, 21,22, 23, 24, 25, and 29 of the RTE Act," it said.

"Further, madrasas do not only render an unsatisfactory and insufficient model for education but also have an arbitrary mode of working which is wholly in absence of a standardised curriculum and functioning," the NCPCR said in its written submissions filed before the top court.

The child rights body stated that due to the absence of provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, the madrassas are also deprived of entitlement as in Section 21 of the Act of 2009.

"A madrassa works in an arbitrary manner and runs in an overall violation of the Constitutional mandate, RTE Act and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. It cannot be overlooked that a child getting education in such an Institution will be devoid of basic knowledge of school curriculum which is provided in a school.

"A school is defined under Section 2(n) of the RTE Act, 2009, which means any recognised school imparting elementary education. A madrassa being out of this definition has no right to compel children or their families to receive madrassa education," the NCPCR said.

It said most of the madrassas fail to provide a holistic environment to students, including planning social events, or extracurricular activities for 'experiential learning.

In a breather to about 17 lakh madrassa students, the apex court on April 5 had stayed an order of the Allahabad High Court that scrapped the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 calling it "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism.

Observing that the issues raised in the petitions merit closer reflection, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud had issued notices to the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh government and others on the pleas against the high court order.

The top court said had the high court "prima facie" misconstrued the provisions of the Act, which does not provide for any religious instruction.

The high court had on March 22 declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism, and asked the state government to accommodate students in the formal schooling system.

The high court had declared the law ultra vires on a writ petition filed by advocate Anshuman Singh Rathore.

It had said the state has "no power to create a board for religious education or to establish a board for school education only for a particular religion and philosophy associated with it."

"We hold that the Madarsa Act, 2004, is violative of the principle of secularism, which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution," the high court had said.

The petitioner had challenged the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa Board as well as objected to the management of madrassas by the Minority Welfare Department instead of the education department.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.