The Evening Wrap: Centre changing goalposts on ‘minority’ tag leaves Supreme Court fuming

The Centre’s shifting stands on who can grant minority status left the Supreme Court displeased on Tuesday even as the political push for giving Hindus the ‘minority’ tag in as many as 10 States where the religious community is numerically low turns increasingly strident. On March 25, the Ministry of Minority Affairs, in an affidavit, told the court that both the Centre and States had “concurrent power” to notify minorities. It had even said that States could also recognise a community as a minority at the individual State level. “States can also declare a religious or linguistic community as a minority community within the said State,” the Ministry had said. Hardly two months later, a “superseding” affidavit filed by the same Ministry on May 9, reversed its own position. This time, the Ministry claimed that the Centre alone was vested with the power to notify a minority community. The three-page affidavit said Section 2(f) and Section 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Educational Institutions Act, 2004, and the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, respectively, passed by the Parliament, empowered the Centre to notify a minority community. “The power is vested with the Central government to notify minorities,” the Ministry submitted. The Centre, in the same second affidavit, however turned around to say it would still have to engage in a “wide consultation with the State governments and other stakeholders” before notifying any community as a minority. The “wide consultations” would avoid “any unintended complications in future with regard to such a vital issue”, it reasoned with the court. The Centre said there were “several sociological and other aspects” at play here. “You seem to have taken a U-turn from your earlier stand... You people have not been able to decide what you have to do... There is a lot of uncertainty. If you had wanted to consult, who was stopping the government of India... Taking different stands does not help. Consultations should have taken place before you filed your affidavits... We do not appreciate this,” Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, leading a Bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh, lashed out at the government. Referring to the two affidavits, Justice Kaul said “first you say Parliament and State legislatures have concurrent powers, then you back out and say only Centre has the power. You also say that you need to consult as there are far-reaching ramifications which may have unintended complications”. The court, however, for the time being acquiesced with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s request to give the Centre three months to hold the consultations. It posted the case on August 30 and directed it to file a status report three days before the court hearing. Mehta said the second affidavit was filed after meetings among three Ministers, in which he was also present, to discuss the “potential fall-outs”. The Bench said it was important for the Centre to take a stand as the country was religiously and linguistically diverse. “In different States different communities are minorities. A community which is a majority in large parts of the country can be a minority in certain States. The interests of these communities must be protected,” the court noted. Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, the petitioner-in-person, said his petition was not focussed on Hindus. He said the petition was a challenge to the provisions of the 1992 and 2004 statutes which gave the Centre the exclusive power to notify a minority community. Upadhyay has argued that the followers of Judaism, Baha’ism and Hinduism — who are the real minorities in Ladakh, Mizoram, Lakshadweep, Kashmir, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Punjab and Manipur — cannot even establish and administer educational institutions of their choice in these States. He argued that religious and linguistic minorities were spread all over the country and not restricted to any single State or Union Territory. He has sought a clear answer from the government as to whether it was the Parliament or the State legislatures which had the power to notify a minority community and protect its interests in accordance with the constitutional guarantees. Reply in 24 hours on pending sedition cases, Supreme Court tells Centre The Supreme Court on Tuesday indicated a willingness to wait, but not for too long, for the government to “re-examine” the colonial law of sedition. However, the court wants the government to respond within the next 24 hours on how it intends to protect the interests of people already arrested and facing prosecution under Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code. The court further sought the government’s response on whether the use of the British-era law could be suspended in view of the reconsideration process. “We will definitely take into consideration that you are doing a serious exercise of reconsideration of the law. We should not appear unreasonable… But there are concerns. One is about cases which are already pending. The other is the future misuse of Section 124A during the reconsideration. The Attorney-General has himself said there is abuse… How are you going to protect the interests of the people from this abuse while the reconsideration exercise is on,” Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana asked Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre. At one point, the court said the reconsideration process could not be an open-ended one. “How long will you take for the ‘reconsideration’ of the law,” Chief Justice Ramana asked. But Mr. Mehta was non-committal. “I may not be able to say. The process has started,” the law officer said. He urged the court to trust the earnest tone and spirit of the government’s affidavit which promised the re-examination of the law. “There is a serious application of mind,” the Solicitor-General assured the court. “We will decide the question of how much time should be given,” Chief Justice Ramana said. On the issue of protecting people from the misuse of sedition law, Mr. Mehta said those affected could always move the constitutional courts of the land. “These cases are booked by the State governments. The Centre does not do it. The aim of Section 124A is to protect the sovereignty and integrity of the nation… Whenever there is misuse, there are the constitutional courts and remedies,” Mr. Mehta submitted. “Meanwhile, they will be in jail for months,” Chief Justice Ramana retorted, “we cannot ask each and every individual booked for sedition to go to court… That cannot be the case now when the government has itself shown concern about the misuse of civil liberties… Tell us whether people can be protected from abuse while reconsideration is on”. Sri Lanka orders armed forces to shoot at any persons ‘damaging property or threatening lives’ Sri Lanka gave shoot-at-sight orders to its armed forces on Tuesday to curb riots in the country, the Defence Ministry said in a statement. The armed forces were ordered to shoot at any persons damaging public property or threatening lives, Defence Ministry spokesman Nalin Herath said. The country had earlier given emergency powers on May 10 to its military and police to detain people without warrants, after a day of clashes that killed eight people and injured more than 200, in violence that prompted Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa to resign. As the Indian Ocean nation battles its worst economic crisis in history, thousands of protesters had defied curfew to attack government figures, setting ablaze homes, shops and businesses belonging to ruling party lawmakers and provincial politicians. Despite sporadic reports of unrest, the situation calmed by Tuesday, said police spokesman Nihal Thalduwa, adding that about 200 people had also been injured in violence that led to an island-wide curfew until 7 a.m., the following day. The government of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the younger brother of the Prime Minister, outlined broad powers for the military and police to detain and question people without arrest warrants. The military can detain people for up to 24 hours before handing them to police, while private property can be searched by force, including private vehicles, the government said in a gazette notification on May 10. Rahul Gandhi slams Modi for creating ‘two Indias’, says Congress will come to power in Gujarat Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on May 10 accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of creating two Indias, one for the rich and another for the poor, and claimed that the resources of the country are being given to a few wealthy people. Launching his party’s campaign for this year’s Gujarat Assembly elections at an “Adivasi Satyagrah rally’ in tribal Dahod district, Gandhi said he is confident that Congress will come to power in the State. “In 2014, Narendra Modi ji became the Prime Minister of India. Before that, he was the Chief Minister of Gujarat. The work he started in Gujarat, he is doing in the country. It is called the Gujarat Model,” Gandhi said. “Today, two Indias are being created, one India of the rich, a few select people, billionaires, and bureaucrats who have power and money. The second India is of the common people,” he said. The Congress party does not favor two Indias, he added. “In the BJP model, resources of people like water, forest, and land which belong to tribals and other poor people, are being given to a few,” he said. The Congress leader also said that the BJP-led government in the State had deprived tribals of their rights. “The BJP Government will not give you anything, but take away everything from you. You (tribals) have to snatch your rights and then only you will get what is yours,” he said. “Tribal people through their hard work built roads, bridges, buildings, and infrastructure in Gujarat. But what did you get in return? You got nothing. Neither good education nor health service,” he said. The Congress leader also slammed Modi over the handling of the coronavirus pandemic. “During the pandemic, the Prime Minister told you to bang pots and pans (from balconies) and flash your mobile lights, when three lakh people died in Gujarat. Ganga river was filled up with dead bodies. Between 50 to 60 lakh people died in the country due to coronavirus,” he said. In Brief In a nationwide crackdown, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on May 10 searched about 40 locations to nab representatives of non-government organisations (NGOs), middlemen and some public servants of the Union Home Ministry’s Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) division on the charge of violating the Act, according to an agency source. It is alleged that the FCRA division officials, who are under scrutiny, were facilitating illegal FCRA clearances in lieu of bribes. In this operation, the CBI has apprehended some accused persons, including public servants, while bribes were being exchanged. Around half a dozen officials and others are being questioned by the agency to determine their role. During the searches so far, “hawala” transaction details of about ₹2 crore have also been found. Based on the inputs shared by the Home Ministry, the agency conducted searches on the premises of the suspects in Delhi, Rajasthan, Chennai, Hyderabad, Coimbatore and Mysore among other places. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow [logo] The Evening Wrap 10 MAY 2022 [The Hindu logo] Welcome to the Evening Wrap newsletter, your guide to the day’s biggest stories with concise analysis from The Hindu. [[Arrow]Open in browser]( [[Mail icon]More newsletters]( Centre changing goalposts on ‘minority’ tag leaves Supreme Court fuming    The [Centre’s shifting stands on who can grant minority status left the Supreme Court displeased]( on Tuesday even as the political push for giving Hindus the ‘minority’ tag in as many as 10 States where the religious community is numerically low turns increasingly strident. On March 25, the Ministry of Minority Affairs, in an affidavit, told the court that both the Centre and States had “concurrent power” to notify minorities. It had even said that States could also recognise a community as a minority at the individual State level. “States can also declare a religious or linguistic community as a minority community within the said State,” the Ministry had said. Hardly two months later, a “superseding” affidavit filed by the same Ministry on May 9, reversed its own position. This time, the Ministry claimed that the Centre alone was vested with the power to notify a minority community. The three-page affidavit said Section 2(f) and Section 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Educational Institutions Act, 2004, and the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, respectively, passed by the Parliament, empowered the Centre to notify a minority community. “The power is vested with the Central government to notify minorities,” the Ministry submitted. The Centre, in the same second affidavit, however turned around to say it would still have to engage in a “wide consultation with the State governments and other stakeholders” before notifying any community as a minority. The “wide consultations” would avoid “any unintended complications in future with regard to such a vital issue”, it reasoned with the court. The Centre said there were “several sociological and other aspects” at play here. “You seem to have taken a U-turn from your earlier stand... You people have not been able to decide what you have to do... There is a lot of uncertainty. If you had wanted to consult, who was stopping the government of India... Taking different stands does not help. Consultations should have taken place before you filed your affidavits... We do not appreciate this,” Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, leading a Bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh, lashed out at the government. Referring to the two affidavits, Justice Kaul said “first you say Parliament and State legislatures have concurrent powers, then you back out and say only Centre has the power. You also say that you need to consult as there are far-reaching ramifications which may have unintended complications”. The court, however, for the time being acquiesced with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s request to give the Centre three months to hold the consultations. It posted the case on August 30 and directed it to file a status report three days before the court hearing. Mehta said the second affidavit was filed after meetings among three Ministers, in which he was also present, to discuss the “potential fall-outs”. The Bench said it was important for the Centre to take a stand as the country was religiously and linguistically diverse. “In different States different communities are minorities. A community which is a majority in large parts of the country can be a minority in certain States. The interests of these communities must be protected,” the court noted. Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, the petitioner-in-person, said his petition was not focussed on Hindus. He said the petition was a challenge to the provisions of the 1992 and 2004 statutes which gave the Centre the exclusive power to notify a minority community. Upadhyay has argued that the followers of Judaism, Baha’ism and Hinduism — who are the real minorities in Ladakh, Mizoram, Lakshadweep, Kashmir, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Punjab and Manipur — cannot even establish and administer educational institutions of their choice in these States. He argued that religious and linguistic minorities were spread all over the country and not restricted to any single State or Union Territory. He has sought a clear answer from the government as to whether it was the Parliament or the State legislatures which had the power to notify a minority community and protect its interests in accordance with the constitutional guarantees. Reply in 24 hours on pending sedition cases, Supreme Court tells Centre The Supreme Court on Tuesday indicated a willingness to wait, but not for too long, for the government to “re-examine” the colonial law of sedition. However, the [court wants the government to respond within the next 24 hours]( on how it intends to protect the interests of people already arrested and facing prosecution under Section 124A (sedition) of the Indian Penal Code. The court further sought the government’s response on whether the use of the British-era law could be suspended in view of the reconsideration process. “We will definitely take into consideration that you are doing a serious exercise of reconsideration of the law. We should not appear unreasonable… But there are concerns. One is about cases which are already pending. The other is the future misuse of Section 124A during the reconsideration. The Attorney-General has himself said there is abuse… How are you going to protect the interests of the people from this abuse while the reconsideration exercise is on,” Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana asked Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre. At one point, the court said the reconsideration process could not be an open-ended one. “How long will you take for the ‘reconsideration’ of the law,” Chief Justice Ramana asked. But Mr. Mehta was non-committal. “I may not be able to say. The process has started,” the law officer said. He urged the court to trust the earnest tone and spirit of the government’s affidavit which promised the re-examination of the law. “There is a serious application of mind,” the Solicitor-General assured the court. “We will decide the question of how much time should be given,” Chief Justice Ramana said. On the issue of protecting people from the misuse of sedition law, Mr. Mehta said those affected could always move the constitutional courts of the land. “These cases are booked by the State governments. The Centre does not do it. The aim of Section 124A is to protect the sovereignty and integrity of the nation… Whenever there is misuse, there are the constitutional courts and remedies,” Mr. Mehta submitted. “Meanwhile, they will be in jail for months,” Chief Justice Ramana retorted, “we cannot ask each and every individual booked for sedition to go to court… That cannot be the case now when the government has itself shown concern about the misuse of civil liberties… Tell us whether people can be protected from abuse while reconsideration is on”. Sri Lanka orders armed forces to shoot at any persons ‘damaging property or threatening lives’ Sri Lanka [gave shoot-at-sight orders to its armed forces]( on Tuesday to curb riots in the country, the Defence Ministry said in a statement. The armed forces were ordered to shoot at any persons damaging public property or threatening lives, Defence Ministry spokesman Nalin Herath said. The country had earlier given emergency powers on May 10 to its military and police to detain people without warrants, after a day of clashes that killed eight people and injured more than 200, in violence that prompted Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa to resign. As the Indian Ocean nation battles its worst economic crisis in history, thousands of protesters had defied curfew to attack government figures, setting ablaze homes, shops and businesses belonging to ruling party lawmakers and provincial politicians. Despite sporadic reports of unrest, the situation calmed by Tuesday, said police spokesman Nihal Thalduwa, adding that about 200 people had also been injured in violence that led to an island-wide curfew until 7 a.m., the following day. The government of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the younger brother of the Prime Minister, outlined broad powers for the military and police to detain and question people without arrest warrants. The military can detain people for up to 24 hours before handing them to police, while private property can be searched by force, including private vehicles, the government said in a gazette notification on May 10. Rahul Gandhi slams Modi for creating ‘two Indias’, says Congress will come to power in Gujarat Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on May 10 [accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of creating two Indias]( one for the rich and another for the poor, and claimed that the resources of the country are being given to a few wealthy people. Launching his party’s campaign for this year’s Gujarat Assembly elections at an “Adivasi Satyagrah rally’ in tribal Dahod district, Gandhi said he is confident that Congress will come to power in the State. “In 2014, Narendra Modi ji became the Prime Minister of India. Before that, he was the Chief Minister of Gujarat. The work he started in Gujarat, he is doing in the country. It is called the Gujarat Model,” Gandhi said. “Today, two Indias are being created, one India of the rich, a few select people, billionaires, and bureaucrats who have power and money. The second India is of the common people,” he said. The Congress party does not favor two Indias, he added. “In the BJP model, resources of people like water, forest, and land which belong to tribals and other poor people, are being given to a few,” he said. The Congress leader also said that the BJP-led government in the State had deprived tribals of their rights. “The BJP Government will not give you anything, but take away everything from you. You (tribals) have to snatch your rights and then only you will get what is yours,” he said. “Tribal people through their hard work built roads, bridges, buildings, and infrastructure in Gujarat. But what did you get in return? You got nothing. Neither good education nor health service,” he said. The Congress leader also slammed Modi over the handling of the coronavirus pandemic. “During the pandemic, the Prime Minister told you to bang pots and pans (from balconies) and flash your mobile lights, when three lakh people died in Gujarat. Ganga river was filled up with dead bodies. Between 50 to 60 lakh people died in the country due to coronavirus,” he said. In Brief In a nationwide crackdown, the [Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on May 10 searched about 40 locations]( to nab representatives of non-government organisations (NGOs), middlemen and some public servants of the Union Home Ministry’s Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) division on the charge of violating the Act, according to an agency source. It is alleged that the FCRA division officials, who are under scrutiny, were facilitating illegal FCRA clearances in lieu of bribes. In this operation, the CBI has apprehended some accused persons, including public servants, while bribes were being exchanged. Around half a dozen officials and others are being questioned by the agency to determine their role. During the searches so far, “hawala” transaction details of about ₹2 crore have also been found. Based on the inputs shared by the Home Ministry, the agency conducted searches on the premises of the suspects in Delhi, Rajasthan, Chennai, Hyderabad, Coimbatore and Mysore among other places. Evening Wrap will return tomorrow  Today’s Top Picks [[Shivkumar Sharma’s melodious contribution to Bollywood] Shivkumar Sharma’s melodious contribution to Bollywood]( [[Slain photojournalist Danish Siddiqui among 4 Indians honoured with Pulitzer Prize for ‘images of COVID’s toll in India’] Slain photojournalist Danish Siddiqui among 4 Indians honoured with Pulitzer Prize for ‘images of COVID’s toll in India’]( [[A new book throws fresh light on Parukutty Neithyaramma, the queen consort of Cochin State] A new book throws fresh light on Parukutty Neithyaramma, the queen consort of Cochin State]( [[Marcos Jr. wins Philippines presidency, initial count shows] Marcos Jr. wins Philippines presidency, initial count shows]( Copyright @ 2021, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. If you are facing any trouble in viewing this newsletter, please [try here]( If you do not wish to receive such emails [go here](