![]() Wednesday, Aug 07, 2002 |
| Opinion | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Opinion
-
Letters to the Editor
Sir, A slap in the face of the public. That is what it is: the draft bill on disclosure of assets and criminal antecedents, if any, by the politicians who seek our votes. We are not so much concerned with the criminal convictions as the information is already in the public domain. It is the personal assets of the candidates and their kith and kin that we have a right to know. A sworn affidavit is what we want. Not from the successful candidate alone but from all those who aspire for public office. This affidavit shall be submitted to the public through the Election Commission. Not to the Speaker. How can one of their own tribe, the Speaker, sit in judgment on the facts? The EC need only to verify if the affidavit has been filed and reject the nominations of those who have failed to do so. It is the court that shall sit in judgment. There shall be only one appeal to the High Court and no more than two postponements of the hearing. The decision shall be taken within 180 days of the filing of writs by any member of the public. The Bill shall provide for severe punishment for perjury. The punishment: three years' rigorous imprisonment with prison facilities applicable to the lowest class of prisoners, a fine of Rs.one lakh and disqualification for 10 years. Ram Raj Raman, Chennai
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|