War can't solve Kashmir issue; 2 nuclear-armed countries won’t fight: Imran Khan

Agencies
December 4, 2018

Islamabad, Dec 4: Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Monday said war is not a solution to the Kashmir issue, which can be resolved through talks.

In an interview to a group of television journalists here, Khan said unless there was a dialogue, various options on resolution of Kashmir cannot be discussed.

When asked about the formula to resolve the Kashmir issue, Khan said there were two or three solutions, which have been in discussions. He, however, refused to share more details, saying it was "too early to talk about them".

Khan claimed he was informed by late prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and former foreign minister Natwar Singh during a conference that Kashmir would have been resolved if the BJP had not lost the 2004 Lok Sabha elections.

"It shows that there is a solution of Kashmir and both countries were close to resolving it," the Pakistani prime minister insisted.

Ruling out the possibility of any war with India, he said two nuclear-armed countries would not fight because "there are always unintended consequences".

Asserting that Pakistan was serious to develop peaceful ties with all its neighbours, Khan claimed India was not ready to hold talks with the country due to the upcoming general elections.

Replying to a query on his views on the military's role in shaping of foreign policy in every country, including the US, he said, "Advice from the establishment is taken in those issues where security situation is involved."

Khan said the Pakistan Army and his government "are on the same page" and his decisions are "backed" by the military.

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
November 14,2024

srirang.jpg

Bengaluru: The Prime Minister Narendra Modi led union government has requested the Karnataka High Court to direct the Mandya district administration and the state government to clear a madrasa operating within the premises of the historic Jama Masjid in Srirangapatna.

The Waqf Board, opposing this move, has claimed the mosque as its property and defended the right to conduct madrasa activities there.

The matter was brought before a division bench headed by Chief Justice N V Anjaria following a public interest litigation filed by a person named Abhishek Gowda from Kabbalu village in Kanakapura taluk. The petition alleged “unauthorised madrasa activities” within the mosque.

Representing the Central government, Additional Solicitor General of India for High Court of Karnataka, K Arvind Kamath argued that the Jama Masjid was designated as a protected monument in 1951, yet unauthorised madrasa operations continue there.

He noted that concerns over potential law and order issues have so far prevented any intervention. Kamath urged the court to direct the Mandya district administration to take action and vacate the madrasa from the mosque.

In defence, lawyers for the state government and the Waqf Board contested this request, stating that the Waqf Board had been recognised as the owner of the property since 1963 and, thus, conducting madrasa activities there is lawful.

After hearing both sides, the bench adjourned the case for further arguments, scheduling the next hearing for November 20.

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
November 7,2024

trump.jpg

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.

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
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

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.

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.