Jerusalem: Israel marked its 75th Independence Day amid protests and political divisions between supporters and opponents of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “contentious plan to overhaul the judiciary”.
The celebration on Tuesday began at sundown, with an official torch-lighting ceremony held at the Mount Herzl in Jerusalem. As Netanyahu spoke at the state ceremony for the fallen soldiers at Mount Herzl, protesters rallied outside the site, Xinhua news agency reported.
Tens of thousands of Israelis rallied in the city of Tel Aviv for what the organisers called an “Independence Party” to protest the overhaul plan. The Tel Aviv police blocked parts of the Ayalon Highway and several main streets.
Over the past few days, Netanyahu and opposition leaders called for putting their differences aside. However, the day was still marked by clashes as bereaved families laid wreaths and lit candles at cemeteries across Israel.
In Beersheba, where hardline National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir spoke, clashes erupted between some bereaved families and the supporters of the judicial reforms.
“Ben-Gvir came here despite repeated calls by bereaved families over the past days, asking him not to do so. It a disgraceful provocation that shows no respect for our fallen sons,” Shaula Levi, a bereaved mother, told Channel 12 TV news.
In the Druze town of Isfiya in northern Israel, protesters prevented Intelligence Minister Gila Gamliel from entering the military cemetery. Gamliel had to leave without delivering her scheduled speech.
The far-right government’s plan to “overhaul” the judicial system has torn apart the Israeli society, sparking mass weekly demonstrations over the past four months.
Israel declared independence on May 14, 1948, but it marks the Independence Day on different dates every year based on the Hebrew calendar.
PARIS — French President Emmanuel Macron drew a connection between his country’s pension reform and Europe’s independence from other countries, during a televised address Monday evening.
“We are a people who intend to control and choose our destiny, who do not want to depend on anyone, neither on the forces of speculation, nor on foreign powers, nor on wills other than our own, and we are right,” Macron said during the 15-minute speech.
The French head of state’s TV appearance was the first time he has addressed the nation since he signed his contentious pension reform — which raises the retirement age from 62 to 64 — into law amid a prolonged political and social crisis.
The president’s reference to independence from “foreign powers” echoed controversial comments he made earlier this month in an interview with POLITICO and French daily Les Echos. On his way back from China, the French president created a stir by saying Europe should avoid being the United States’ follower — including on the matter of Taiwan’s security.
“One cannot declare its independence: It is built through ambitions, efforts at the national and European level, in terms of knowledge, research, attractiveness, technology, industry, defense. And it is also financed collectively through work,” Macron said Monday.
European and French independence, he added, is what will “allow us to obtain more justice” and decrease inequalities.
The bill was greenlit by the country’s top constitutional court on Friday, crushing hopes of opposition parties and unions that the reform could still be stopped.
The French president, who faces the prospect of a gridlocked parliament, said his government would focus on labor, law and justice, and “progress” in the coming months, with Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne expected to present a more detailed roadmap next week.
[ad_2]
#Macron #doubles #French #independence #pension #reform #crisis
( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )
Hyderabad: Responding to criticism by the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) who charged the Telangana government for not celebrating September 17 as Liberation Day, state IT minister KT Rama Rao countered the Union government by questioning why 15th August is celebrated as Independence Day and not as Liberation Day.
Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Sunday alleged that the ruling Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) in Telangana hesitates to celebrate Hyderabad Liberation Day.
Speaking at a program in Bidar, Amit Shah further remarked that Telangana has failed in remembering the sacrifices of people, who fought against Nizam’s rule.
Slamming Shah for his false statements, KTR said, “Stop being a prisoner of the past. Become the Architect of your Future.”
The minister on his Twitter account stated as a reminder that the Telangana government officially celebrates September 17 as National Integration Day.
To those who ask why can’t we call it Liberation Day;
Why do we celebrate 15th August as Independence Day and not as Liberation Day?
What should matter is respectful commemoration of the sacrifices & struggles against oppressors; be it the British or Nizam
“Your blatant misrepresentation is indeed unbecoming of the stature of a Union Home Minister,” tweeted KTR.
The minister asserted that respectful commemoration of the sacrifices and struggles against oppressors, be it the British or Nizam is what matters the most.
Guwahati: The Bangladeshi Independence Day celebrated in Assam and Tripura on Sunday with numerous functions and events in the two Indian states that share border with the neighbouring country.
Bangladesh’s Assistant High Commissions in Guwahati and Agartala organised a series of programmes to observe the day.
Artistes, including renowned singers from both Bangladesh and India, performed in the functions.
Discussions were held highlighting the significance of Bangladesh Independence Day and National Day.
Bangladesh celebrates its Independence Day on March 26 — which is also a national holiday.
The day commemorates Bangladesh’s declaration of Independence from Pakistan in the early hours of March 25, 1971.
On the occasion, troops of the Border Security Force exchanged sweets and greetings with Border Guards Bangladesh in the border outposts along the border between the two neighbouring countries.
Days after the Pakistani forces unleashed attacks across Bangladesh, East Pakistan’s leaders vowed to win their Independence on March 26, 1971.
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman then launched a guerilla war against the then Pakistani rulers.
The Liberation War later turned into a full-scale India-Pakistan War, leading to the surrender of 93,000 Pakistani soldiers in Dhaka on December 16, 1971.
India was the first country to recognise Bangladesh as a sovereign nation.
According to Bangladeshi freedom fighters and experts, Pakistani forces, during the 9 months of the Liberation War (March 26 to December 16, 1971), massacred over 3 million Bengali-speaking people, including children, and raped over 6 lakh women.
Over 1 crore families were displaced from their ancestral homes and lands during that period.
New Delhi: Information and Broadcasting Minister Anurag Thakur on Saturday questioned the journalistic independence of the BBC after the media house suspended a former footballer and star anchor for his remarks on social media and reportedly took a documentary off air.
Thakur took a swipe at the UK-based public broadcaster while sharing two news reports on the BBC suspending former England captain and star sports anchor Gary Lineker after he criticised the UK government’s immigration policy and taking off air a documentary by David Attenborough “over fearing of right-wing backlash”.
“Interesting to see how the BBC which makes lofty claims about journalistic objectivity and independence suspends their star anchor over his social media activity,” the Union minister said on Twitter.
“In yet another interesting exhibit, BBC suspends airing of a documentary it shot over fears that it would anger a section of society,” he said.
“Fake narrative setting and ethical journalism are inherently contradictory. Those indulging in malicious propaganda forged in concocted facts can obviously never be expected to have the moral fibre or the courage to stand up for journalistic independence,”Thakur said.
The government had, in January, banned the BBC documentary ‘The Modi Question’ on the 2002 Gujarat riots and termed it as a propaganda piece.
The BBC has stood by the documentary, calling it “rigorously researched according to highest editorial standards”.
Last month, the income tax Department conducted a survey at the BBC offices in Delhi and Mumbai to investigate a charge of “deliberate non-compliance with Indian laws including transfer pricing rules and diversion of profits illegally”.
The BJP had launched a scathing attack on the BBC, calling it the “most corrupt” and accusing it of unleashing “venomous” propaganda against India.
On Saturday, the BBC denied the report that it decided not to broadcast an episode narrated by world-famous conservationist Sir David Attenborough for a new wildlife series over fears of a right-wing backlash.
“This is totally inaccurate, there is no sixth episode’. Wild Isles’ is and always was a five-part series and does not shy away from environmental content,” a BBC statement said.
The broadcaster is also reeling under a controversy over football legend Gary Lineker.
Several of the BBC’s regular sports presenters have stepped back in solidarity with Lineker after he was suspended over a controversial tweet related to the government’s immigration policy.
Kolkata: Former chief justice of India U U Lalit said the judiciary has faced instances of challenge and attempts at interference but dealt with these appropriately to ensure its independence.
He said in order to have a thriving democracy, one must have an independent judiciary because it is through dispute resolution that society is assured of governance by the rule of law.
“There are various challenges that the judiciary has to face today,” he said, asserting, “therefore, we have to be strong as a judicial fraternity We must bear every kind of pressure, onslaught or any kind of interference.”
Speaking at a symposium on ‘Independent judiciary: Critical for a vibrant democracy’ held by the Bharat Chamber of Commerce here on Saturday evening, he said there have been instances of court decisions subjected to executive interference, but these have been appropriately dealt with ensuring the independence of the judiciary.
The former CJI said attributes of independence of the judiciary are impartiality, fairness in action, reasonableness and complete integrity for the purpose of dispute resolution.
Noting that the “citadel never falls except from within”, the former CJI said this is the expression with which the district judiciary is to be protected.
Lalit said the district judiciary is not under the control of anybody except the high court in the state.
“All their postings, promotions, appointments and even transfers are supposed to be only at the recommendation of the high courts,” he said.
Holding there should be no outside interference with the functioning of the judiciary, he said a number of articles in the Constitution ensure there is no interference in the functioning of every individual judge or the judiciary in general.
“One way to ensure the independence of the judiciary is to have an atmosphere where the people responsible for discharging judicial functions must have a sense of complete freedom and lack of interference from any agency,” he said.
The ex-CJI said the shoulders of the judiciary are quite strong to deal with any kind of external onslaught from any force.
Supreme Court judge Justice Hima Kohli said the independence of the judiciary is not just a principle but a moral imperative.
“The relevance of an independent judiciary cannot be overstated, especially in a country like ours which is not just a democratic republic; it has been described in the Constitution as a sovereign, socialist, secular and democratic republic,” she said.
Justice Kohli said to discharge constitutional duties, the judiciary must be independent and impartial.
“It must be free from any external and internal influence,” she said, maintaining that judicial independence is not just a facet of the fundamental rights of citizens but also an essential condition for maintaining a vibrant and democratic social order.
She said the independence of the judiciary has been upheld by the Supreme Court in a host of landmark cases.
Senior figures in the Scottish National party believe Nicola Sturgeon’s shock resignation could delay their effort to stage another independence referendum by at least five years.
The party’s national executive committee confirmed on Thursday evening that Sturgeon’s plan – to stage a special conference on her proposals to use the next election as a single-issue “de facto referendum” on independence – had been scrapped.
The committee, which met online, also said that nominations for the leadership contest, which it revealed had opened at midnight on Wednesday, would close at noon on 24 February.
The vote among the SNP’s 100,000-plus membership will open at noon on Monday 13 March and close at noon 14 days later, on 27 March.
The committee said the special conference had been “postponed” but it remains far from clear whether the next SNP leader and first minister will adopt Sturgeon’s risky argument that a general or Holyrood election could serve as a proxy referendum.
Angus Robertson, the party’s former Westminster leader and current bookmakers’ favourite, is widely expected to be among the first to declare his candidacy on Friday, with Humza Yousaf, the health secretary, Kate Forbes, the finance secretary – currently on maternity leave – and Ash Regan, a former minister, all tipped to join the race.
John Swinney, Sturgeon’s experienced and widely respected deputy, who was SNP leader 20 years ago, confirmed on Thursday night that he will not contest the election.
The party’s executive meeting was hurriedly convened after Sturgeon stunned the political world and many voters by unexpectedly revealing on Wednesday morning she had decided to quit as party leader – a step many had expected in 2025 or 2026 at the earliest.
Nicola Sturgeon: the moments that marked her leadership – video
In a long reflective statement at her official residence in Edinburgh, Sturgeon said the relentless pressures of being first minister had taken an emotional and psychological toll. Aged 52, and after 25 years in frontline politics, she wanted a different career and privacy.
“The nature and form of modern political discourse means there is a much greater intensity – dare I say it, brutality – to life as a politician than in years gone by,” she said. “All in all, it takes its toll on you and on those around you.”
MPs and MSPs from across the party, including potential leadership candidates, said on Thursday the conference should be dropped or postponed to allow the next leader to decide their own independence strategy.
While many SNP members support Sturgeon’s proposal – introduced as her plan B after the UK supreme court ruled out allowing Holyrood to stage a referendum without Westminster’s approval – it is widely disliked by non-SNP voters and by SNP MPs.
With support for independence hovering at about 45% and rarely rising above 50%, SNP parliamentarians fear a single-issue election campaign will alienate voters much more worried about the cost of living or the NHS, and could cost SNP MPs their seats.
Speaking privately, senior sources acknowledged that with the next general election due in 2024 and a Holyrood election in 2026, it would be unrealistic to propose staging a second referendum until after those elections were fought or without a substantial, consistent majority in favour of independence.
One source said delaying a fresh referendum would leave the next leader with the challenge of how they could offer independence to voters without promising a referendum. But the first task was to focus on securing and improving the SNP’s shaky domestic policy record, they said.
Another said: “The special conference has to be paused until a new leader is elected, and the focus needs to move away from the process around a referendum to sustaining popular support for independence.”
skip past newsletter promotion
after newsletter promotion
One cautioned, however, that SNP members could rebel against suggestions of a long delay to a second referendum, and could force leadership candidates to embrace a quicker timetable.
A supporter of Sturgeon’s call for a single-issue election campaign rejected suggestions the referendum could be delayed until later in the decade. He said Westminster’s repeated refusal to allow a referendum meant the SNP had to force the issue at an election.
“If you face a democratic roadblock you have to overcome it,” he said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Talking about process for five years will be utterly pointless. We want a leader who will communicate their vision for independence and excite people.”
Stewart McDonald, until recently the SNP’s defence spokesperson at Westminster, said postponing the de facto referendum debate was essential.
The key challenge for the next leader, McDonald said, was “how do we get ourselves into a position where we get sustained majority support for independence and get ourselves to the promised land of a referendum we can win”.
Earlier on Thursday, Stephen Flynn, the SNP’s Westminster leader, said the special conference should be pushed back to give the new leader time to set out their intentions. “It’s sensible that we do hit the pause button on that conference and allow the new leader the opportunity to set out their vision,” he told Sky News.
That proposal was supported by Michael Russell, the party’s president, who told BBC Scotland on Thursday morning: “There is a question to be asked as to whether that should be postponed whilst the leader comes into place.”
Russell, one of the SNP’s most senior figures, said Sturgeon had touched on that prospect in her speech on Wednesday. Although he supported Sturgeon’s stance on how to fight the next general election, he said: “I think it’s a matter that needs to be discussed.”
Richard Thomson, an MP from the north-east of Scotland, once the SNP’s heartland, said he had no fears about using an election as a proxy referendum but said that was much less satisfactory than a legally constituted referendum.
“I think a referendum is still the best way, the democratic way, the way that people in Scotland have expressed a preference to go,” he said.
“Whatever route you take, you want to be in a position where you’re not just going to squeak it, but you’re actually going to win it and win it convincingly, such that everybody can accept the result.”
[ad_2]
#Sturgeon #exit #delay #Scotland #independence #vote #years
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
An independent Scotland has not been hindered by Nicola Sturgeon’s departure; it could well be advanced by it. Her eight years as first minister have been remarkable, but failed to bring statehood closer to reality. The question is whether her intransigence postponed it.
Sturgeon made a strategic error after her predecessor Alex Salmond lost the 2014 independence referendum. She assumed her charisma could swiftly erode the 55% turnout for continued union with England and secure a victorious rerun of the poll. Despite her electoral successes, she never seriously dented that majority. All Sturgeon could do was plunge an ever more visceral anti-Englishness into courtroom battles with London that she was never likely to win.
Salmond had in 2014 foolishly rejected David Cameron’s offer of a second referendum option for so-called “devo max”, a radically enhanced Scottish autonomy. This would certainly have passed, with polls indicating 66% support among Scottish voters. While devo max was a constitutional can of worms, it could not have been wished away. It should have begun a drastic restructuring of the Scottish economy away from dependence on – and therefore control from – London. At very least it would have put serious autonomy within the realm of plausibility.
The question now is how far could a new SNP leader take such a move towards greater autonomy forward, possibly aided by sensible and open-minded leaders of the Labour and Tory parties. To Sturgeon, the issue bordered on the theological. As with Salmond, it was freedom or bust, independence or serfdom. They wanted their own currency, their own debt, a hard border with England, membership of the EU and no UK weapons on Scottish soil. This was fantasy enough but at no point did it engage in the elephant in the independence room – economics.
Alex Salmond in 2014 foolishly rejected David Cameron’s offer of a second referendum option for so-called “devo max”. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian
Gazing across the Irish Sea, we can all study Ireland’s experience since independence a century ago, when under British rule it was among the poorest nations in Europe. Depending on definition, it is today one of the most prosperous. But it took Dublin 50 years of austerity and pain – including a meagre welfare state – to get there. Not until the 1980s did it achieve such key indicators of growth as a net inflow of investment, population and talent, and “Celtic tiger” status.
There is no tartan tiger. Sturgeon’s leadership enabled the Scots to have their cake and eat it. Her fierce nationalism gave voters emotional satisfaction. She ran hospitals, schools, trains, law and order, while Covid gave Scotland a degree of administrative discretion. Limited scope to raise top income taxes allowed a generous family support package and free student tuition. But this did not deliver the Scottish people conspicuously better services, and it depended heavily on an annual subsidy from London.
Scotland’s budget deficit in 2020-21 of 22% of GDP was among the largest of any nation in the western world, though surging oil and gas revenues have recently cut it back. Similarly sized Denmark runs a surplus of 4%. The annual UK government grant to Scotland announced last October was a record £41bn. This is money a Scottish treasury would have to find on its own, which is why Scotland’s standard of living needs union into the foreseeable future. As Ireland shows, there is a path out of dependency, but it is neither easy nor swift.
‘Federalism covers a spectrum of options but its purpose is to offer Scotland a freer hand to raise and spend public money’: the Scottish parliament building at Holyrood in Edinburgh. Photograph: Jane Barlow/PA
Federal constitutions in Spain, Switzerland and Germany indicate that the key to autonomy lies in fiscal freedom, in the capacity to grow, earn and spend, independent of policies ordained by a central government. The Basques and the Swiss cantons enjoy fiscal discretions unthinkable to the British Treasury – but the key lies in fiscal self-sufficiency. Advocates of independence persistently fail to confront this.
There is no reason why Scotland cannot approach the prosperity of Ireland or Scandinavia. Decades of reliance on the most centralist political economy in Europe – that of the UK – have crippled Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Devo max might aim to embrace some of Ireland’s libertarian taxes along with Norway’s links to the EU’s single market. It might conceivably join with Northern Ireland in its revitalised Brexit protocol, ingeniously returning to the EU’s trading regime and yet free to trade with England. A digital border would be complicated, as Ireland is showing, but it would honour the clear vote of a majority of Scots against Brexit.
The concept of devo max – so-called “full fiscal autonomy” or “radical federalism” – is now debated by many on the fringes of the independence debate, in Wales as well as Scotland. The effort is to move forward from political confrontation. Federalism covers a spectrum of options but its purpose is to offer Scotland a freer hand to raise and spend public money, while offering London relief from a heavy burden in Scotland. It would be what Ireland was denied by England in the 19th century, true home rule under the crown. Had it been granted, the old United Kingdom might still be one.
As for Sturgeon’s successor, such an outcome could deliver a new Scotland mercifully at peace with London. Or it could prepare a path to full independence if that were, in my view sadly, to be Scotland’s eventual choice.
[ad_2]
#path #Scottish #independence #Sturgeon #brilliant #couldnt #Simon #Jenkins
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Nicola Sturgeon’s resignation could prompt a major rethink around her plans to fight the next UK general election as a de facto referendum on independence, the Scottish National party’s leader in Westminster has suggested.
After the shock announcement of the first minister’s departure on Wednesday, Stephen Flynn said the special conference due to be held next month on Sturgeon’s plan should be pushed back to give the new leader time to set out their intentions.
“I think it’s sensible that we do hit the pause button on that conference and allow the new leader the opportunity to set out their vision,” he told Sky News.
That proposal was supported by Mike Russell, the party’s president, who told BBC Scotland on Thursday: “There is a question to be asked as to whether that should be postponed whilst the leader comes into place.”
Russell, one of the SNP’s most senior figures, said Sturgeon had touched on that prospect in her speech on Wednesday. Although he supported Sturgeon’s stance on how to fight the next general election, he said: “I think it’s a matter that needs to be discussed.”
The conference was organised to approve Sturgeon’s highly controversial proposal but it is one Flynn and others inside the SNP have widely criticised, and is deeply unpopular with voters. There is speculation at Holyrood it may now be repurposed as a leadership hustings event for SNP members in the Edinburgh area.
Jostling will begin in earnest among potential replacements for Sturgeon, who served as the first female first minister and spent decades in frontline politics – outlasting all the leaders both in Holyrood and Westminster she worked alongside.
The SNP’s national executive committee is scheduled to meet online at 6.30pm on Thursday to discuss the timing for a leadership contest. Russell has said he expects that process to be “shortened” and for there to be a “contested election”.
Nicola Sturgeon: the moments that marked her leadership – video
Sturgeon’s push to use the next general election, expected to be held in 2024, as the main battleground for another independence push caused controversy within the SNP. Some believe she was anticipating heavy opposition to the plan, and the outgoing first minister acknowledged in her resignation statement it would have been dishonest to chair the conference, knowing she was minded to quit soon after.
Flynn, who became Westminster leader of the SNP in December, said party figures were “going to be discussing and debating the merits” of the treatment of the next general election as a de facto referendum.
But he added: “I personally think that party conference should be paused, for obvious reasons. I think the new leader should have the opportunity and indeed the space to set out their position, their values and their intentions going forward.”
Asked if the position of treating the next general election as a de facto referendum was “dead” on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Thursday, he said the party should give the next leader space to set out their “agenda”.
As speculation mounted about who could replace Sturgeon, Flynn said he had “not seen anyone throw their name in the ring yet” and declined to say who he would most like to see lead the SNP.
skip past newsletter promotion
after newsletter promotion
Flynn ruled out taking up “the big task” himself, and said he had “no doubt there’ll be a number who will consider themselves as being capable of taking on the challenge”.
While Sturgeon has said she will remain as first minister until her successor is chosen, the SNP’s national executive committee has not yet published a timetable for the election of its next party leader.
Early possible contenders to succeed Sturgeon include Keith Brown, the SNP’s deputy leader; the finance and economy secretary, Kate Forbes; the constitution secretary and former Westminster leader of the party, Angus Robertson; the deputy first minister, John Swinney; and the health secretary, Humza Yousaf.
A protracted leadership election, given pressures on the NHS and the cost of living crisis, is likely to be capitalised on by opposition parties. Douglas Ross, the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, said the Scottish government should focus on issues that “really matter to people”.
Kenny MacAskill, the deputy leader of the pro-Scottish independence Alba party, argued on Thursday that Sturgeon’s departure should lead to a recognition that the cause was about more than “one individual or one party”.
He told the Today programme the SNP was “one part of the independence movement” and should use Sturgeon’s departure “to recalibrate, to recognise that there have been strategic flaws, to look for a new direction”.
[ad_2]
#SNP #top #leaders #urge #overhaul #Sturgeon #independence #plan
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Colombo: Sri Lanka celebrated 75 years of independence on Saturday by holding a military and cultural parade with the participation of a number of foreign special invitees.
Sri Lankan President Ranil Wickremesinghe and Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena participated in the events held at Galle Face in Colombo, Xinhua News Agency reported.
The parade included armored vehicles of the military, and parades with the participation of troops, including retired officers and disabled officers.
A two-minute silence was observed to commemorate all Sri Lankans who sacrificed their lives for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka.
The President’s Media Division said that the event was organiSed with great pride and dignity ensuring minimal cost to showcase the pride and past glory of Sri Lanka to the world.
