BATMAN
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 29,895
- Reaction score
- -28
- Country
- Location
And cheif justice too, are we even now.
Donât alienate Muslims
- Thread starter KashifAsrar
- Start date
Adux
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 3,856
- Reaction score
- 0
Not even close, Look at the number of minorities we have at various high-power positions, so your Temp Cheif Justice doesnt cut it. Though I do agree it is a start even though late.
If it is the question of finger counting and numbers
i will add two more president of India
Dr. Zakir Hussain, Dr Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed.
And yeah the CJ comparision
Muhammad Hidayat Ullah
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Hidayat_Ullah
and one more an Indian Hero. Highest Gallantry award winner,who gave his life for the nation he was born. The man who blunt the Pakistani armour attack at Khem Kher. A muslim
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_Quarter_Master_Havildar_Abdul_Hamid
Adux
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 3,856
- Reaction score
- 0
we got back to acceptance and submissions....lol. Is this in your trait.
Accept what,
Go read on
Our Prime Minister is also from a Minority, doesnt he have any powers also.
[edit] Powers and functions
President's Bodyguard (India)The President of India enjoys the following powers:
[edit] Executive powers
The Constitution vests in the President of India all the executive powers of the Central Government. He appoints the Prime Minister who enjoys the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha. He also appoints the other members of the Council of Ministers and distributes portfolios to them on the advice of the Prime Minister.
The Council of Ministers remains in power during the 'pleasure' of the President. In practice, however, the Council of Ministers must retain the support of the Lok Sabha. As long as the majority in the Lok Sabha supports the government, the Council of Ministers cannot be dismissed.
The President is responsible for making a wide variety of appointments. These include:
Governors of States
The Chief Justice
Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts
The Attorney General
The Comptroller and Auditor General
The Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners
The Chairman and other Members of the Union Public Service Commission
Ambassadors and High Commissioners to other countries.
The President also receives the credentials of Ambassadors and High Commissioners from other countries.
The President is the Commander in Chief of the Indian Armed Forces.
The President of India can grant pardon or reduce the sentence of a convicted person, particularly in all the cases involving punishment of death.
The President of India can remove the Prime Minister or other Union ministers from office, although this is never done in practice unless the Prime Minister loses majority support in the Lok Sabha. The decisions involving pardoning and other rights are taken by the president himself. He doesnt need to consult anyone.
[edit] Judicial powers
The president appoints the Chief Justice of the Union Judiciary and other judges on the advice of the Chief Justice. Theses judges are actually selected by the Union cabinet. The President dismisses the judges if and only if the two Houses of the Parliament pass resolutions to that effect by two-thirds majority of the members present.
If he considers that a question of law or a matter of public importance has arisen, he can ask for the advisory opinion of the Supreme Court. He may or may not accept that opinion.
[edit] Legislative powers
The President summons both houses of the Parliament and prorogues them. He can even dissolve the Lok Sabha. These powers are formal and the President while using these powers must act according to the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister.
He inaugurates the Parliament by addressing it after the general elections and also at the beginning of the first session each year. His address on these occasions is generally meant to outline the new policies of the government.
A bill that the Parliament has passed, can become a law only after the President gives his assent to it. He can return a bill to the Parliament, if it is not a money bill, for reconsideration. However, if the Parliament sends it back to him for the second time, he is obliged to assent to it.
When the Parliament is not in session and the government considers it necessary to have a law, then the President can promulgate ordinances. These ordinances are submitted to the Parliament at its next session. They remain valid for no more than six weeks from the date the Parliament is convened unless approved by it earlier.
[edit] Emergency powers
The President can declare three types of emergencies:
National emergency
State emergency
Financial emergency
[edit] National emergency
National emergency is caused by war, external aggression or armed rebellion in the whole of India or a part of its territory. Such an emergency was declared in India in 1962 (Indo-China war), 1965 (Indo - Pakistan war), 1971 and 1975 (declared by Indira Gandhi to let her government remain in power).
The President can declare such an emergency only on the basis of a written request by the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. Such a proclamation must be approved by the Parliament within one month. Such an emergency can be imposed for six months. It can be extended by six months by repeated parliamentary approval.
In such an emergency, Fundamental Rights of Indian citizens can be suspended. The six freedoms under Right to Freedom are automatically suspended. However, the Right to Life and Personal Liberty cannot be suspended.
The Parliament can make laws on the 66 subjects of the State List (which contains subjects on which the state governments can make laws). Also, all money bills are referred to the Parliament for its approval. The term of the Lok Sabha can be extended by a period of up to one year, but not so as to extend the term of Parliament beyond six months after the end of the declared emergency.
[edit] State emergency
State emergency is declared due to failure of constitutional machinery in a state. Almost all states have undergone this type of an emergency. This emergency is also known as President's rule.
If the President is satisfied, on the basis of the report of the Governor of the concerned state or from other sources that the governance in a state cannot be carried out according to the provisions in the Constitution, he can declare emergency in the state. Such an emergency must be approved by the Parliament within a period of six months.
It is imposed for six months and can last for a maximum period of three years with repeated parliamentary approval every six months. If the emergency needs to be extended for more than three years, this can be achieved by a constitutional amendment, as has happened in Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir.
During such an emergency, the President can take over the entire work of the executive, and the Governor administers the state in the name of the President. The Legislative Assembly can be dissolved or may remain in suspended animation. The Parliament makes laws on the 66 subjects of the state list (see National emergency for explanation). All money bills have to be referred to the Parliament for approval.
National Emergency comes under Article 352 of the India Constitution.
[edit] Financial emergency
If the President is satisfied that there is an economic situation in which the financial stability or credit of India is threatened, he can proclaim financial emergency as per the Constitutional Article 360. Such an emergency must be approved by the Parliament within two months. It has never been declared. On a previous occasion, the financial stability or credit of India has indeed been threatened, but a financial emergency was avoided through the selling off of India's gold reserves.
A state of financial emergency remains in force indefinitely until revoked by the President.
In case of a financial emergency, the President can reduce the salaries of all government officials, including judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. All money bills passed by the State legislatures are submitted to the President for his approval. He can direct the state to observe certain principles (economy measures) relating to financial matters.
[edit] Important presidential interventions
The President's role as defender of the Constitution, and his powers as Head of State, especially in relation to those exercised by the Prime Minister as leader of the government, have changed over time. In particular, Presidents have made a number of interventions into government and lawmaking, which have established and challenged some conventions concerning Presidential intervention. Some of the more noteworthy are documented here.
In 1979, the then Prime Minister, Charan Singh, did not enjoy a Parliamentary majority. He responded to this by simply not advising the President to summon Parliament. Since then, Presidents have been more diligent in directing incoming Prime Ministers to convene Parliament and prove their majority within reasonable deadlines (2-3 weeks). In the interim period, the Prime Ministers are generally restrained from making policy decisions.
The constitution gives the President the power to return a bill unsigned but it circumscribes the power to send it back only once for reconsideration. If the parliament sends back the bill with or without changes, the President is duty-bound to sign it. However, deliberately or inadvertently, the constitution does not set a time-limit in which the President is obliged to approve the bill, so he may withhold assent indefinitely. This has come to be known in legal and constitutional circles as the "Pocket Veto", and has been used on a number of occasions against controversial Bills.
In the mid-1980s, President Zail Singh withheld assent to a Bill passed by Parliament that gave sweeping powers to the State to intercept mail. This was considered by the President to be an encroachment on citizens' freedom of speech and liberty as guaranteed by the Constitution.
In early 1990, President Venkataraman withheld assent to a Bill passed by the outgoing Parliament that gave pension benefits to themselves. This was interpreted by the President to be self-aggrandisement.
Since the nineties, Parliamentary elections have generally not resulted in a single party or group of parties having a distinct majority. In such cases, Presidents have used their discretion and directed Prime Ministerial aspirants to establish their credentials before being invited to form the government. Typically, the aspirants have been asked to produce letters from various party leaders, with the signatures of all the MPs who are pledging support to their candidature. This is in addition to the requirement that a Prime Minister prove he has the support of the Lok Sabha (by a vote on the floor of the House) within weeks of being sworn in.
In the late nineties, President Narayanan introduced the important practice of explaining to the nation (by means of Rashtrapati Bhavan communiqués) the thinking that led to the various decisions he took while exercising his discretionary powers; this has led to openness and transparency in the functioning of the President.
In mid-2006, President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam sent back a controversial bill regarding enlarging the scope of the offices of profit, which disqualify a person from being a member of parliament. The opposition combine, the NDA, hailed the move. The UPA chose not to send the bill back. The bill was eventually passed by Parliament without any change, and after 30 days A. P. J. Abdul Kalam gave the assent.
Accept what,
Go read on
Our Prime Minister is also from a Minority, doesnt he have any powers also.
[edit] Powers and functions
President's Bodyguard (India)The President of India enjoys the following powers:
[edit] Executive powers
The Constitution vests in the President of India all the executive powers of the Central Government. He appoints the Prime Minister who enjoys the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha. He also appoints the other members of the Council of Ministers and distributes portfolios to them on the advice of the Prime Minister.
The Council of Ministers remains in power during the 'pleasure' of the President. In practice, however, the Council of Ministers must retain the support of the Lok Sabha. As long as the majority in the Lok Sabha supports the government, the Council of Ministers cannot be dismissed.
The President is responsible for making a wide variety of appointments. These include:
Governors of States
The Chief Justice
Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts
The Attorney General
The Comptroller and Auditor General
The Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners
The Chairman and other Members of the Union Public Service Commission
Ambassadors and High Commissioners to other countries.
The President also receives the credentials of Ambassadors and High Commissioners from other countries.
The President is the Commander in Chief of the Indian Armed Forces.
The President of India can grant pardon or reduce the sentence of a convicted person, particularly in all the cases involving punishment of death.
The President of India can remove the Prime Minister or other Union ministers from office, although this is never done in practice unless the Prime Minister loses majority support in the Lok Sabha. The decisions involving pardoning and other rights are taken by the president himself. He doesnt need to consult anyone.
[edit] Judicial powers
The president appoints the Chief Justice of the Union Judiciary and other judges on the advice of the Chief Justice. Theses judges are actually selected by the Union cabinet. The President dismisses the judges if and only if the two Houses of the Parliament pass resolutions to that effect by two-thirds majority of the members present.
If he considers that a question of law or a matter of public importance has arisen, he can ask for the advisory opinion of the Supreme Court. He may or may not accept that opinion.
[edit] Legislative powers
The President summons both houses of the Parliament and prorogues them. He can even dissolve the Lok Sabha. These powers are formal and the President while using these powers must act according to the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister.
He inaugurates the Parliament by addressing it after the general elections and also at the beginning of the first session each year. His address on these occasions is generally meant to outline the new policies of the government.
A bill that the Parliament has passed, can become a law only after the President gives his assent to it. He can return a bill to the Parliament, if it is not a money bill, for reconsideration. However, if the Parliament sends it back to him for the second time, he is obliged to assent to it.
When the Parliament is not in session and the government considers it necessary to have a law, then the President can promulgate ordinances. These ordinances are submitted to the Parliament at its next session. They remain valid for no more than six weeks from the date the Parliament is convened unless approved by it earlier.
[edit] Emergency powers
The President can declare three types of emergencies:
National emergency
State emergency
Financial emergency
[edit] National emergency
National emergency is caused by war, external aggression or armed rebellion in the whole of India or a part of its territory. Such an emergency was declared in India in 1962 (Indo-China war), 1965 (Indo - Pakistan war), 1971 and 1975 (declared by Indira Gandhi to let her government remain in power).
The President can declare such an emergency only on the basis of a written request by the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. Such a proclamation must be approved by the Parliament within one month. Such an emergency can be imposed for six months. It can be extended by six months by repeated parliamentary approval.
In such an emergency, Fundamental Rights of Indian citizens can be suspended. The six freedoms under Right to Freedom are automatically suspended. However, the Right to Life and Personal Liberty cannot be suspended.
The Parliament can make laws on the 66 subjects of the State List (which contains subjects on which the state governments can make laws). Also, all money bills are referred to the Parliament for its approval. The term of the Lok Sabha can be extended by a period of up to one year, but not so as to extend the term of Parliament beyond six months after the end of the declared emergency.
[edit] State emergency
State emergency is declared due to failure of constitutional machinery in a state. Almost all states have undergone this type of an emergency. This emergency is also known as President's rule.
If the President is satisfied, on the basis of the report of the Governor of the concerned state or from other sources that the governance in a state cannot be carried out according to the provisions in the Constitution, he can declare emergency in the state. Such an emergency must be approved by the Parliament within a period of six months.
It is imposed for six months and can last for a maximum period of three years with repeated parliamentary approval every six months. If the emergency needs to be extended for more than three years, this can be achieved by a constitutional amendment, as has happened in Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir.
During such an emergency, the President can take over the entire work of the executive, and the Governor administers the state in the name of the President. The Legislative Assembly can be dissolved or may remain in suspended animation. The Parliament makes laws on the 66 subjects of the state list (see National emergency for explanation). All money bills have to be referred to the Parliament for approval.
National Emergency comes under Article 352 of the India Constitution.
[edit] Financial emergency
If the President is satisfied that there is an economic situation in which the financial stability or credit of India is threatened, he can proclaim financial emergency as per the Constitutional Article 360. Such an emergency must be approved by the Parliament within two months. It has never been declared. On a previous occasion, the financial stability or credit of India has indeed been threatened, but a financial emergency was avoided through the selling off of India's gold reserves.
A state of financial emergency remains in force indefinitely until revoked by the President.
In case of a financial emergency, the President can reduce the salaries of all government officials, including judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. All money bills passed by the State legislatures are submitted to the President for his approval. He can direct the state to observe certain principles (economy measures) relating to financial matters.
[edit] Important presidential interventions
The President's role as defender of the Constitution, and his powers as Head of State, especially in relation to those exercised by the Prime Minister as leader of the government, have changed over time. In particular, Presidents have made a number of interventions into government and lawmaking, which have established and challenged some conventions concerning Presidential intervention. Some of the more noteworthy are documented here.
In 1979, the then Prime Minister, Charan Singh, did not enjoy a Parliamentary majority. He responded to this by simply not advising the President to summon Parliament. Since then, Presidents have been more diligent in directing incoming Prime Ministers to convene Parliament and prove their majority within reasonable deadlines (2-3 weeks). In the interim period, the Prime Ministers are generally restrained from making policy decisions.
The constitution gives the President the power to return a bill unsigned but it circumscribes the power to send it back only once for reconsideration. If the parliament sends back the bill with or without changes, the President is duty-bound to sign it. However, deliberately or inadvertently, the constitution does not set a time-limit in which the President is obliged to approve the bill, so he may withhold assent indefinitely. This has come to be known in legal and constitutional circles as the "Pocket Veto", and has been used on a number of occasions against controversial Bills.
In the mid-1980s, President Zail Singh withheld assent to a Bill passed by Parliament that gave sweeping powers to the State to intercept mail. This was considered by the President to be an encroachment on citizens' freedom of speech and liberty as guaranteed by the Constitution.
In early 1990, President Venkataraman withheld assent to a Bill passed by the outgoing Parliament that gave pension benefits to themselves. This was interpreted by the President to be self-aggrandisement.
Since the nineties, Parliamentary elections have generally not resulted in a single party or group of parties having a distinct majority. In such cases, Presidents have used their discretion and directed Prime Ministerial aspirants to establish their credentials before being invited to form the government. Typically, the aspirants have been asked to produce letters from various party leaders, with the signatures of all the MPs who are pledging support to their candidature. This is in addition to the requirement that a Prime Minister prove he has the support of the Lok Sabha (by a vote on the floor of the House) within weeks of being sworn in.
In the late nineties, President Narayanan introduced the important practice of explaining to the nation (by means of Rashtrapati Bhavan communiqués) the thinking that led to the various decisions he took while exercising his discretionary powers; this has led to openness and transparency in the functioning of the President.
In mid-2006, President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam sent back a controversial bill regarding enlarging the scope of the offices of profit, which disqualify a person from being a member of parliament. The opposition combine, the NDA, hailed the move. The UPA chose not to send the bill back. The bill was eventually passed by Parliament without any change, and after 30 days A. P. J. Abdul Kalam gave the assent.
so basically he appoints the Prime Minister who enjoys the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha, this makes my point clear that he doesnt have choice but to appoint that person who have majority of Lok Sabha in his pocket
wat adice will your current PM give to the president please appoint someone from BJP hell no, he will basically not ask but order the president to appoint people from his own party congress
as long as Lok Sabha is with you your president cant do ****
lolzzzz ok when ever our ambassadors go to india(for any issue about kashmir) they dont even meet your president they always go to your PM or defence minister
wow this guy is so powerful
again Lok Saba is the boss
on the advice of the Chief Justice bascially CJ is ordering the President
WTF now you dont even have to go to the President Union cabinet will do his work
President will have to take the permission of House of the Parliament and if the House of the Parliament no then the president is like "****"
again PM and Council of Minsters are behind his decision , President is only there to say yes sir and yes sir, cause no sir is not an option
WTF just send the bill for the second time and it will automatically passes
i thought she was the PM at that time not the President
so basically PM can extend his time at the office, President is only there to sign a bunch of paper this means he is puppet
state emergency must be approved by the Parliament, President cant do anything about it
in state emergency almost all bill are money bills
without paliment approval your president cant do anything about this matter
this document clearly says that the President of India is nothing but a piece of crap
so basically he appoints the Prime Minister who enjoys the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha, this makes my point clear that he doesnt have choice but to appoint that person who have majority of Lok Sabha in his pocket
wat adice will your current PM give to the president please appoint someone from BJP hell no, he will basically not ask but order the president to appoint people from his own party congress
as long as Lok Sabha is with you your president cant do ****
lolzzzz ok when ever our ambassadors go to india(for any issue about kashmir) they dont even meet your president they always go to your PM or defence minister
wow this guy is so powerful
again Lok Saba is the boss
on the advice of the Chief Justice bascially CJ is ordering the President
WTF now you dont even have to go to the President Union cabinet will do his work
President will have to take the permission of House of the Parliament and if the House of the Parliament no then the president is like "****"
again PM and Council of Minsters are behind his decision , President is only there to say yes sir and yes sir, cause no sir is not an option
WTF just send the bill for the second time and it will automatically passes
i thought she was the PM at that time not the President
so basically PM can extend his time at the office, President is only there to sign a bunch of paper this means he is puppet
state emergency must be approved by the Parliament, President cant do anything about it
in state emergency almost all bill are money bills
without paliment approval your president cant do anything about this matter
this document clearly says that the President of India is nothing but a piece of crap
Okay so how much power does Pakistani prime minister have?
You posting indicates that you believe CJ have more power than Presidents.
A hindu CJs in a Pakistan is out of the world,where as a Muslim President in India is a lame duck?
A hindu president in India will have the same powers as a muslim president. Hence it does not mean that muslim president in India is only a showpiece and a hindu president will more powers.
The reason for asking how much power Pakistani PM has to indicate to you is both cannot take "strategic decisions",becoz as like the president in india,they are not directly elected by the people.You think a country should have two power centers?
Nevertheless a president position is India is elected by representative of the people,where as a CJ is appointed.
And yeah lets not talk about powers CJs have in Pakistan. We have been seeing what happens to CJ's who go against Mushraff , Muslim or Hindu notwithstanding.
And you compare that to power of President of India?
Similar threads
- Article
