Anna Hazare's anti-corruption movement regains life after 2G scam verdict

The Supreme Court's decision to quash 2G licences has boosted the flagging anti-corruption movement led by Anna Hazare, after his ill health hit his movement.

It was the uproar over the government's inaction and delayed action in the 2G spectrum allocation scam that created the space for Hazare's anti-corruption movement. The apex court's decision to cancel all the 122 licences issued without auction in 2008 would be seen as a clear endorsement of the claims made by leaders of the anti-corruption movement. This will strengthen the credibility of the movement. The fact that Prashant Bhushan, a key member of Team Anna, was among those who filed petitions in the 2G case will give credence to this.

Hazare's movement had been in downswing in the aftermath of the late December fast in Mumbai, which failed to take off like the August effort in Delhi. With Hazare out of the picture on account of ill-health, the team's campaigning efforts in the assembly elections also made little progress.

The Supreme Court's order restores to a great extent the patina of the anti-corruption movement, whose members had come under attack for their less than stellar record on corruption.

"It is a salutary judgment and establishes a huge precedenta¦ It will go down the history and will change the way cases of corruption will be investigated in this country," Bhushan said. He said that it "will send a strong signal to the entire country and in particular the corporate world that this country is no longer willing to allow these corrupt corporates and the corrupt public officials to retain the benefits of illegal and corrupt acts."

Source~ The Economics Times

Well said sir n mr chidambram vl be in tihaadh vry soon
JAI HIND

Kudos to Dr Swamy for his legal fight against Corrupt UPA Government

JAY HIND!!!!

Dear Depinder,

And judge Saini's judgment proves the point that we need legal reforms, one of which is Jan Lokpal Bill.

What is the kind of amendment we need in our legal systems?

For example, "prima facie" must be defined taking into account the relative positions of the persons involved. When case against people in higher positions are involved, the bar for "prima facie" case must be lowered.

Balance of convenience must be considered too. Let's say: (i): judgment is in favour of a Minister when his continuance in office could jeopardize the society. (ii): judgment is in against a Minister when an enquiry against him could affect his individual rights. With a less rigorous (but an existent) case with bar for "prima facie" requirement lowered, an enquiry should be ordered, since balance of convenience is against the minister. Perhaps, he should be allowed to continue in office, but keeping checks on his ability to tamper with it. Jan Lokpal Bill does it to a large extent.

I'm not a lawyer, but these are my thoughts.

Ganesan. :~)

Sir,you are not a lawyer it is fine otherwise your statement could be the same as of Laloo Parsad who said about the Jan Lokpal that if it come in force even a constable will put him in the jail.Laloo the joker...............