SRINAGAR: Police on Saturday said that two persons, projecting themselves as political activists, were arrested for allegedly duping people on the pretext of providing government jobs in Pattan area of north Kashmir’s Baramulla district.
“On January 11, Police received information that two self-styled political activists from Pattan area are demanding money on the assurances that they will arrange government jobs and are providing fake appointment orders and are also threatening the general public,” news agency GNS quoted police statement as having said.
Police swung into action and promptly registered a case under relevant sections in police station Pattan, the statement said.
“During course of investigation, Police after utilizing all technical and human intelligence and strenuous efforts arrested two accused namely Ubaid Nazir Sofi and Mohammad Iqbal.”
Police said that it was learnt during interrogation that these “scamsters were cheating common people on the pretext of giving jobs in police department and taking huge amount of money from them.”
“Once the victim started asking money back, they used to issue threats to them. Further investigation into the matter is on,” it added.
Santos told CNN on Wednesday that he had no involvement with the amended filings, saying he “[did] not touch any of [his] FEC stuff.” It was still not clear on Friday who actually filed the Wednesday amendments that bore Datwyler’s electronic signature, although the number of people who would typically have access to a congressional campaign’s system for submitting filings to the FEC is small.
Neither Santos’ attorney nor Marks responded to multiple inquiries this week about who is currently serving as the campaign’s treasurer.
Campaigns are required to have a treasurer in order to carry out most functions, including accepting contributions. Santos’ campaign was still listed as accepting contributions via WinRed, the widely used Republican fundraising platform, as of Friday. WinRed processed more than $1 million in transactions for his campaign during the 2022 cycle, according to a POLITICO analysis of FEC data.
The company did not respond to inquiries about Santos’ use of its platform this week. But NBC News reported on Friday that the company had reached out to the Santos campaign over its reports, which show the committee paying more than $200,000 in fees to WinRed. That’s a greater total than would be expected based on the campaign’s total fundraising on the platform.
Santos, who was sworn into Congress earlier this month just weeks after The New York Times reported he had fabricated much of his biography, is also facing several campaign finance complaints before the FEC.
Complaints filed by nonprofits including the Campaign Legal Center and End Citizens United allege Santos may not have had the personal funds to loan his campaign the $700,000 it reported receiving from him last year, and the complaints also allege that his campaign may have misreported components of its spending. The Santos campaign reported dozens of transactions charged at exactly $199.99, just 1 cent below the threshold that required the campaign to keep receipts detailing the expenditures. Federal and local prosecutors are also investigating Santos’ finances, but he has not been charged with a crime.
The FEC has sent more than two dozen letters to Santos’ campaign and affiliated groups in the past two years. While the agency frequently sends such letters to campaigns to correct mistakes in filings, Santos’ political groups have received more of the notices than is typical.
[ad_2]
#Campaign #finance #regulator #asks #Santos #clarify #whos #charge #political #accounts
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
BBC on Wednesday released the second episode of the two-part documentary – ‘India: The Modi Question‘ – which directly blames Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s role in the 2002 Gujarat riots when he helmed the state as its chief minister.
The first part was released on January 19 and was shared by many on all social media platforms which encouraged debates around the 2002 Gujarat riots and the role of then chief minister Narendra Modi during the riots that killed more than millions and displaced many, especially Muslims.
The one-hour documentary reveals ‘never-seen-before’ or ‘restricted’ documents in detail. It looks at the escalating tension between the Muslim community and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as well as Hindu right-wing organisations – Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
The documentary holds Modi directly responsible for the riots and states that such large-scale mass murder or in other words, a pogrom, was not possible without steady help from the state.
Modi government was quick to respond calling the documentary propaganda material ‘designed to push a particular discredited narrative.’
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said, “The documentary is a reflection on the agency that has made it. We think it is a propaganda piece designed to push a particular discredited narrative. The bias, lack of objectivity, and continuing colonial mindset are blatantly visible. Can’t dignify such a film.”
As the documentary created interest and buzz on the internet, the Central Government banned its airing in the country as well as directed all social media platforms to remove any posts and links pertaining to the documentary, creating a protest call from netizens and Opposition parties.
With the help of Rule 16 of the IT Rules, 2021 — formally known as the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 — notified on February 25, 2021, describes the government’s power with regard to “Blocking of information in case of emergency”.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting used emergency powers stating the documentary is based on a ‘colonial mindset’.
Following the ban, several student unions and political parties across India screened or tried to screen the documentary leading to tensions or conflict. Here are a few cities and states where the documentary was screened.
Hyderabad
In Hyderabad, the BBC documentary was screened at the University of Hyderabad (UoH) campus by a student group called the Fraternity Movement. Around 200 students turned up.
However, members of the ABVP complained to the university registrar who then released a statement saying no prior permission was taken by the students to screen the film.
Kerala
The documentary was screened in various places, including colleges, in Kerala on Tuesday with the BJP youth wing going up in arms in protest against the screenings.
In Thiruvananthapuram, the Youth Congress organised a screening at Manaveeyam Veedhi, a cultural space on Tuesday. The Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) held one at Poojappura Maidan.
Not just Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala’s financial capital Kochi saw many screenings. The Students’ Federation of India (SFI) conducted screenings for students of the Cochin University of Science and Technology, Kalady Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Maharaja’s College Ernakulam, and Government Law College.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) state secretary V Govindan came out in support of the screening saying, “Banning the documentary is an undemocratic stand. Ideals should not be banned in a democratic society.”
Delhi
In New Delhi, the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) saw the screening turned into a protest on Tuesday when student unions ignored the administration’s statement to cancel the screening which was supposed to take place on the same night at 9 pm.
The administration went ahead and snapped current and internet supply thus halting the screening. However, determined students started watching it on their laptops and phones. Protests between the college authorities and students broke out and incidents of stone pelting were also reported.
On Wednesday, a day after the ruckus in JNU, students at Delhi’s Jamia Milia Islamia university announced it would screen the banned BBC documentary at 6 pm.
While there are reports that several SFI students have been detained, the university has categorically said that no permission was given for the screening.
“The University reiterates that no meeting of students or screening of any film will be allowed in the campus without permission. University is taking all measures to prevent people/orgs having vested interest to destroy peaceful academic atmosphere here”, the university said in a circular.
By the time of publishing this report, Delhi Police has detained over 70 students who were gathered at Jamia Millia Islamia to protest against the detention of four activists over the proposed screening of a BBC documentary on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Students’ Federation of India said.
Member of Parliament A A Rahim from CPM party has strongly condemned the detention which includes female students also. In a tweet, he described the ban as a cowardly act by the Modi government. He demanded the immediate release of the students.
The students from #Jamia should be released immediately. The authorities including university admin and police are responsible for upholding security. Right to assemble must not be curtailed. Attack on students in #JNU should be investigated and perpetrators brought to justice.
SFI of Presidency University in Kolkata has asked for permission from the university’s administration to show the banned BBC documentary on January 27 at 4 pm.
The student union sent an email to the university administration seeking permission to book the badminton court on the campus where the screening will take place. The university is yet to respond.
Nadhim Zahawi was battling to save his political career on Saturday night after he finally admitted reaching a tax settlement with HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) following an “error” over a controversial multimillion-pound shareholding in the polling company YouGov.
In a carefully worded statement, Zahawi appeared to confirm that HMRC had carried out an investigation into his financial affairs while he was serving as chancellor last summer. Zahawi, now the Tory party chairman, said that the tax authority had concluded that he had made a “careless but not deliberate” error.
“So that I could focus on my life as a public servant, I chose to settle the matter and pay what they said was due, which was the right thing to do,” he stated. Tax experts said the statement was a tacit acknowledgment that Zahawi had paid a penalty.
The admission raises questions for Rishi Sunak over what he knew about the settlement and when. It comes with the prime minister already under pressure after being fined for not wearing a seatbelt, with MPs also unhappy over his rejection of tax cuts and the government’s allocation of levelling up funds. In an attempt to protect Sunak, Zahawi added: “When I was appointed by the prime minister, all my tax affairs were up to date.”
Zahawi’s tax affairs were thrown into the spotlight last summer when he was appointed chancellor by Boris Johnson, the day before Johnson was forced to resign. The Observer reported that civil servants in the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team had alerted Johnson to an HMRC “flag” over Zahawi before his appointment, but it had been ignored.
Zahawi faced scrutiny on a tranche of shares in YouGov, the polling company he co-founded, which were held by a Gibraltar company, Balshore Investments, and sold for about £27m between 2006 and 2018. It was estimated by the thinktank Tax Policy Associates he may have avoided £3.7m capital gains tax on the sale of these shares.
Saturday’s statement immediately set off new demands for Britain’s most senior civil servant and parliament’s standards commissioner to launch separate investigations into the affair, after questions over whether Zahawi has made the correct declarations to officials and parliament concerning his financial interests.
Zahawi has still not disclosed the size of the HMRC settlement or confirmed he paid a penalty. It follows a Guardian report that he paid about £5m in relation to the sale of shares in YouGov.
Unlike his YouGov co-founder, Stephan Shakespeare, Zahawi took no shares in YouGov. However, a 42.5% shareholding was held by Balshore Investments, an offshore trust controlled by Zahawi’s parents. As YouGov grew in value, Balshore sold all the shares by 2018.
Zahawi said his father took shares “in exchange for some capital and his invaluable guidance”. He added that while HMRC agreed that his father was entitled to shares, it “disagreed about the exact allocation. They concluded that this was a ‘careless and not deliberate’ error.”
Zahawi said HMRC had agreed he had never set up an offshore structure, including Balshore Investments, and that “I am not the beneficiary of Balshore Investments”. When asked on Saturday night, his team would not comment on whether he had ever benefited from Balshore Investments in the past.
Dan Neidle, a tax lawyer and founder of Tax Policy Associates, said: “When I first reported this, he denied it, threatened to sue me and said throughout his tax affairs were in order. It is a disgrace.”
Opposition parties are now demanding the publication of all of Zahawi’s correspondence with HMRC. They are also calling for independent investigations into whether Zahawi made the necessary declarations to officials and parliament.
Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, is facing calls to oversee an investigation into whether Zahawi should have declared any links relating to YouGov or Balshore under the ministerial code. The Liberal Democrats’ deputy leader, Daisy Cooper, has written to Case, calling for his intervention.
Cooper said: “Zahawi and his Conservative cabinet colleagues are arrogantly trying to brush this under the carpet. There are facts that still need to be established so there must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of this. The British public has lost all faith in Conservative ministers to tell the truth after years of scandal.”
Meanwhile, Labour has also written to Daniel Greenberg, the new parliamentary commissioner for standards, asking whether Zahawi should have declared Balshore Investments in the public register of members’ interests.
Anneliese Dodds, the Labour chair, said Zahawi’s new remarks raised more questions. “This carefully worded statement blows a hole in Nadhim Zahawi’s previous accounts of this murky affair,” she said. “He must now publish all correspondence with HMRC so we can get the full picture. In the middle of the biggest cost of living crisis in a generation, the public will rightly be astonished that anyone could claim that failing to pay millions of pounds worth of tax is a simple matter of ‘carelessness’.”
She added: “Nadhim Zahawi still needs to explain when he became aware of the investigation, and if he was chancellor and in charge of our tax system at the time.”
Several senior ministers have defended Zahawi, including the prime minister. At prime minister’s questions on Wednesday, Sunak said Zahawi had “already addressed this matter in full and there’s nothing more that I can add”.
[ad_2]
#Nadhim #Zahawi #fights #political #life #admitting #tax #error
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Kolkata: As the country is all set to celebrate the 126th birth anniversary of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, politics over the issue is heating up in West Bengal where the great Indian freedom fighter has his roots. The ruling Trinamool Congress and the principal opposition BJP have their own political cards to play in the matter.
The Trinamool Congress-led state government has recently announced the decision to set up a ‘Jai Hind Vahini’ on the lines of the National Cadet Corps (NCC).
This announcement has led to a political slugfest in the state where the opposition parties have denounced it as a blatant attempt to politicize the Netaji issue. This is especially so in the backdrop of the recent development in which the office of the additional director general, West Bengal & Sikkim Directorate, NCC, had pointed out how the careers of over one lakh NCC cadets have been affected because of the non-payment of its share of expenditure by the state government.
According to CPI(M) central committee member Sujan Chakraborty, the Trinamool Congress reportedly has a branch organization whose name is also Jai Hind Vahini.
“So, is this yet another attempt to politicize the school education sphere through this move under the garb of paying homage to Netaji? What is the justification of this move, when the NCC is there?” he questioned.
Somewhat on the same lines, the BJP’s state spokesman Samik Bhattacharya too has criticized the move.
He said: “The entire school education system in West Bengal is going through a deep crisis because of the massive teachers’ recruitment irregularity scam. In such a situation this move on Jai Hind Vahini is nothing but a joke in the name of Netaji. First, the state government should try to revive the education system by cleaning it up.”
Trinamool Congress senior legislator Tapas Roy rubbished the opposition criticism by describing it as an unnecessary attempt to politicize each and every issue.
Roy said: “No one is saying that the Jai Hind Vahini will be set up, sacrificing the existing NCC scheme. This is just to pay homage to Netaji on the occasion of his birth anniversary. The opposition in reality does not have any respect for the great souls of the nation and hence they unnecessarily politicize the entire issue.”
Meanwhile, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat’s scheduled program to pay homage to Netaji in front of Shahid Minar in Kolkata on January 23 has stirred controversy in West Bengal.
Although the RSS cannot be strictly defined as a political force, major political parties in West Bengal and even some analysts feel that the saffron camp will surely try to gain political mileage by this move of Bhagwat before the West Bengal panchayat polls in 2023 and more importantly the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.
According to Trinamool Congress’s state vice-president Jai Prakash Majumdar, it is intriguing why the RSS chief for the first time chose to pay tribute to Netaji and more especially why he chose Kolkata as the venue.
“It is clear that the move is to give BJP some oxygen in the state before the panchayat polls. The RSS has never shown any respect for Netaji before. Even Netaji refused to meet Vinayak Damodar Savarkar,” Majumdar said.
The CPI(M)’s central committee member Robin Deb feels that the RSS and the Trinamool Congress have always operated on a mutual admiration basis, where Mamata Banerjee describes RSS as the true warriors against the communists and the latter equates her with Goddess Durga.
“This same tradition of mutual admiration is continuing where Netaji’s birth anniversary celebration has just become a medium,” Deb added.
Historian AK Das too cannot recollect the RSS celebrating the birth anniversary of Netaji so elaborately and that too in West Bengal with the Sangh chief himself being present.
“At least history does not speak of any connection or synergy of thoughts between Netaji and RSS. But that cannot stop anyone from paying homage to this great freedom fighter. But considering the timing with two major elections coming up, the coinciding of the event with any political motive cannot be totally ruled out,” Das said.
Netaji’s grandnephew Chandra Kumar Bose, who is himself a face of the BJP in West Bengal, said that this hypocrisy over the great Indian freedom fighter should come to an end now. “Either one should oppose Netaji or accept and practice his ideology of secularism and inclusivity true to its spirit,” he said.
Dianne Feinstein, the 89-year-old who served as California senator for three decades, has yet to announce her retirement. But the contest to succeed her in two years is already shaping into a bitter battle.
After months of shadow campaigning and whispered political leveraging, earlier this month, Katie Porter – the whiteboard-wielding progressive congresswoman – became the first to officially declare her candidacy. Barbara Lee, the old-school leftist with an ardent antiwar record, has reportedly told colleagues she is running. Adam Schiff, icon of the anti-Trump liberal resistance, has reportedly begun prepping for a run. Silicon valley congressman Ro Khanna is expected to jump in as well.
In California’s open primary system, it’s possible, and likely, that two Democrats will face-off in the 2024 Senate race. Until then, voters may need to brace for what is sure to be a protracted, pricey two years of campaigning.
And we’re likely to see an “avalanche” of candidates to come, said Wendy Schiller, a political science professor at Brown University.
Porter’s early announcement drew criticism for coming not only before Feinstein had announced her retirement, but also amid a spate of severe storms in California. Following Porter’s announcement, Schiff pointedly used his campaign fundraising list to raise money for flood victims.
Katie Porter reads a book in the House Chamber during the fourth day of Speaker elections. Photograph: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
But Porter’s declaration also earned praise, for publicly owning up to the political plots that many ambitious California lawmakers have so far been devising in the dark. Concerns about Feinstein’s cognition and fitness to serve have been circulating for years, and quite a few candidates have been eyeing her seat for just as long.
“The sooner you can get out the door and start talking to donors and consolidate support, the stronger you’ll be,” Schiller said. Porter already had $8m in her campaign war chest after beating back a Republican challenger in her competitive Orange county district, south-east of Los Angeles and managed to raise more than a million in the first day after announcing her run for Feinstein’s seat. Schiff has nearly $21m.
Meanwhile Lee, a beloved Bay Area politician who has served in congress since 1998, hasn’t had to do a lot of fundraising so far. She’s got just over $50,000 on reserve. In a state that is dominated by the Democratic party, the ultimate victor could boil down to who has the most funding. And how each candidate manages to differentiate themselves from fellow lawmakers who ultimately agree on most major policy decisions.
Barbara Lee speaks during a press conference with other members on the Inflation Reduction Act. Photograph: Bonnie Cash/UPI/REX/Shutterstock
“They’re not going to run on very slight policy differences,” Schiller said.“They’re going to run on who will be the strongest, most energetic – and they will use that word, energetic – advocate for the state of California.”
Porter, who is a protege of senator Elizabeth Warren (and has already been endorsed by the senator) has built a reputation as a sharp interrogator at congressional hearings, and staunch defender of women’s rights. Her victories in purple Orange county will also have trained her to persevere in politically chequered California.
Meanwhile, Schiff became a household name after serving as lead impeachment manager pursuing Donald Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. While Schiff has earned the ire of criminal justice and immigrant rights advocates in California for his “tough on crime” record as a California legislator prior to being elected to Congress, he will likely be received as a more centrist and moderate alternative to the more leftist contenders.
Adam Schiff speaks to members of the media after final hearing of the January 6 panel. Photograph: Carolyn Kaster/AP
Lee, the only member of both chambers of Congress to vote against the Authorization for Use of Military Force after 9/11, can rely on her unwavering progressive record. “I can personally attest to her courageous, bold, principled stances,” said Aimee Allison, president and founder of She the People, an organisation aimed at boosting the political power of women of colour.
In the Bay Area, which has historically been the state’s political powerhouse and produced a spate of governors and senators including House speaker Nancy Pelosi, Feinstein, governor Gavin Newsom and vice-president Kamala Harris, Lee has strong support and has earned her bonafides working with the Black Panthers, then as a lawmaker pushing to limit defense spending, enacting gun control measures, climate legislation and protections for women’s rights.
When Newsom was considering whom to appoint to the Senate seat vacated by Harris, Lee was a top contender. Now Allison and many other Californians are hoping to see a Black woman ascend to the Senate – at a time when there are none in the chamber. “Black women are the drivers of so many Democratic wins throughout the country at every level,” Allison said. That they aren’t represented at all in the Senate “is a travesty”, she said.
Ro Khanna questions the panel during a House Committee on oversight and reform hearing. Photograph: REX/Shutterstock
It’s still unclear whether Khanna will run against Lee if she declares – having hinted that he might make way for his fellow Bay Area progressive if she runs. Khanna, who has positioned himself to run for either Senate or the presidency in recent years with political tours around the US, has branded himself as someone who can bridge populism and the big tech that dominates his Silicon Valley district.
Other potential contenders will make themselves known soon. Markedly missing from the field so far is a Latino candidate, in a state where 40% of residents are Latinx. Alex Padilla, the state’s junior senator, is the first Latino senator elected from California.
Some politicos think Newsom himself may declare a run – even as others speculate that he is positioning himself for a presidential run.
Feinstein still hasn’t said she’ll retire. But since Porter announced, “we’re all focused on the Senate race of 2024 – you can’t put that back in the box”, Allison said. “So the people who are serious about running for Senate – they’ve got to get started.”
[ad_2]
#Senate #musical #chairs #California #prepares #political #battle #Feinstein #vacancy
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Political systems are the set of formal legal institutions that make up the government. A political system is the type of political organisation that can be accepted, observed, etc., and that is declared by a state. It is the process of making official government decisions. It may include not only security organisations but a variety of groups in society, such as kinship clans and caste or class stratification. When these smaller entities, like clans or tribes, transfer their dedication and loyalty to a bigger, typically central government, that is the defining trait of when a nation or state forms. A state is also a political system that has sovereignty.
Here we discuss the six types of political systems in the world:
Monarchial
It is a political system where the head of state is one person who dominates forever and transmits power to their children or family when they die. The majority of monarchies mostly allow male succession, basically from father to son. The desire of a society to raise an indigenous ruler who will effectively represent its historical accomplishments and further its interests, whether it is a tribe, a city population, or a multi-tribal “people,” is another reason why monarchies develop. A monarchy is not the opposite of a democracy.
Types of monarchies
i. Absolute ii. Constitutional
Absolute
An absolute monarch rules by whim, although he is not a tyrant or dictator. A true monarch may not be the real ruler, as state power might be wielded by ministers, regents, or advisors, with policy determined more by place intrigue than anything else.
Constitutional
There are elected officials who make policy decisions, and a prime minister usually leads the government with the King or Queen as a figurehead. Many countries allow monarchies as their form of government. Some examples include Andorra, Bahrain, Belgium, Bhutan, Cambodia, Denmark, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Monaco, Morocco, the Netherlands, Norway, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom.
Theocratic
The word theocracy comes from the Greek words “theo,” which means “god,” “deity,” and “kratia,” which means “rule” or “governance.” and can therefore be understood as meaning “rule by God.” A theocratic political system is one in which the community’s religious leaders are in charge and make decisions. We can say that where the roles of priest and ruler are combined.
Generally, but not always, these rulers will state that they are acting purely on behalf of a divinity and are following the rules and laws of that divinity. Theocracies can take a number of different forms, depending on the relationship between the religious and political institutions. In some cases, the religious leaders may have direct control over the state, as in Iran under the Ayatollahs. In others, the religious leaders may act as advisers to the state, as in the case of the Mormon Church in Utah. However, some countries that might be considered to have theocratic political systems include Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Vatican City.
Theocracies are often criticised for violating the separation of church and state. Critics argue that theocracies can be used to justify oppression and discrimination and that they can lead to religious extremism.
Military
It is the type of political system in which military strongmen or junta rule. the understanding of the connections between political factors and military organisation development and behaviour, as well as how military organisations affect political decision-making. In certain situations, leadership is maintained with the help of foreign intelligence agencies, and in others, the rule is established by rejecting a public referendum that calls for the leadership to go. Military rule is crucial to clarify ordinary militarism. For example, some common characteristics of military rule include sacking the parliament and controlling the judicial branch.
Countries under military rule include Myanmar, Sudan etc. Pakistan was also under military rule till 2008.
Democracy
It is the type of political system where ultimate power is vested in and exercised directly by the people under its rule. In other words, people have the authority to choose their governing representatives. This system is based on the principle of majority rule. Democracy allows people to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic, and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practise of political self-determination.
Democracies are different from other forms of government, such as monarchies, dictatorships, and oligarchies, in that they allow for citizen participation in government.In a democracy, the government is held accountable to the people. This means that the government must listen to the people and respond to their needs and concerns.There are many countries that allow a democratic political system, including the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and most European countries as well as India.
Single party
A single-party political system is one where there is only one political party that has control over the government. A single-party political system is one in which only one party has significant power or influence. This party may be the ruling party, as in a one-party state, or it may be the only party allowed to contest elections, as in a single-party system. This type of system is often seen in countries that are ruled by dictatorships.
A dictatorship is a form of government in which one person or a small group of people have complete control over the country. The party in power is usually the one that has the most support from the people. There are many benefits to a single-party political system. First, it allows for a clear and consistent message from the party in power. This can be helpful in terms of both domestic and foreign policy. Second, it can lead to more efficient and effective government since there is less infighting between different factions within the ruling party.
Finally, it can create a sense of unity among the people, as they all share a common goal of supporting the party in power. The main function of a single-party political system is to give the ruling party absolute power to pass legislation and make executive decisions without opposition. This can be beneficial if the ruling party is competent and has the best interests of the country at heart. However, it can also be detrimental if the ruling party is corrupt or incompetent, as there would be no one to check their power. Countries with a single-party system include China, North Korea, Cuba etc.
Transitional
A transitional political system is a system of government that is in a state of transition from one form of government to another. This type of system is often seen in countries that are undergoing a process of democratization. Transitional governments are often characterised by a number of features. First, they are often led by a transitional leader. This leader is typically someone who was not previously in power and who is seen as being more legitimate than the previous leader.
Second, transitional governments often have a more limited mandate than traditional governments. This means that they are often only in power for a limited period of time and that their authority is more limited than that of traditional governments.
Third, transitional governments often have a more complex political structure than traditional governments. This complexity can make it difficult for transitional governments to make decisions and implement policies.
Fourth, transitional governments often face significant challenges. These challenges can include a lack of legitimacy, a lack of popular support, and a lack of resources.
Finally, transitional governments often have to deal with a variety of different stakeholders. Countries that allow transitional political systems include Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Libya, and Syria.
In this article we studied the types of political systems which are currently implemented across the world.
(We don’t allow anyone to copy content. For Copyright or Use of Content related questions, visit here.)
Jammu and Kashmir has witnessed many new political parties since the abrogation of Article 370, whether it is the Jammu and Kashmir Apni Party, the Aam Aadmi Party, or the Democratic Azad Party. Many of these parties were in the news for prominent faces and some for controversies. However, there are various other political parties that didn’t grab the headlines but are established and working in Jammu and Kashmir. Similarly, on November 6, 2022, the Vishwa Bandhutva Party (the Global Brotherhood Party in English) launched its J&K unit. This political outfit was registered just a year ago, according to the Election Commission of India.
VDP’s JK-UT president, Virender Kumar Sharma, explained the parties’ agendas to The Chenab Times in a video interview. Vishwa Bandhutva Party, or Global Brotherhood Party, has launched its party unit for the UT of J&K with an agenda for J&K that was written on the letter pad of the UT president, a copy of which lies with The Chenab Times. There were nine points on the agenda, including:
The party is mainly working for the betterment of labour class. The enhanced wages of Labour, better working Place, Special Pension Scheme, Health insurance, Security of their Children education academic as well as professional, Minimum ex gratia Relief of Rs.15,00,000/- if a Labourer happens to die while working and suitable monthly honorarium to the living kith & Kins of deceased Labourer. Better housing & sanitary help from both centre & UT levels.
The party shall fight from Road to Law of Court to protect the dwelling places (houses) of families fatling under BPL, EWS, ST, OBC, SC etc. Who have built their homes on state land with measurement of land below 05 Marlas.The party has personal lawyers who shall plead the cases of above mentioned categories from party funds and if the party comes into power in the (UT) shall regularize is such colonies/homes as one time human sustainable existence settlement.
The youth of this (UT) are repeatedly being crushed and harassed by present Government by adapting repeated cancellation of selection lists. Our party shall fight against this approach of central Govt. and LG Administration to make laws to avoid future any spoilage of youths career. Our party shall approach: Supreme Court” of India with a PIL to seek relief to the youth in future selection process.
In villages of this (UT) 60% of youth are jobless today. Our party if comes into Power shall install community Industrial units at Panchyat level as per the availability of raw materials in that Panchyat to provide employment to those 60% youth to save them from indulging into drugs & criminal activities.
If our party comes into Power a survey of “Actual Poor dwellers” of rural Jammu & Kashmir UT be conducted & the families falling under this category be adapted by our Govt. and all their needs of livelihood be managed under the Scheme named “Mera Aahar Mera Adhikaar” in addition to it, a job to youth (one job atleast) be given to educated youth of poor families as per their qualification under another youth saving Scheme “Mera Rozgaar Mera Adhikaar”.
Jammu and Kashmir (UT) is a Power house of India as it has intensive hydro electricity Potential. Our party shall support local firms/companies of this UT to undertake the construction work of the hydro electric Power Projects by framing laws under which tendering shall not be permitted to Companies/Firms living outside the (UT).The youth of this UT would be trained to operate all types of machinery and shall be provided employment at large scale.The Re-habilitation plans for people who are likely to be affected would be provided with a suitable home, best health facility transportation highest rate of Land/structure compensation, food security and pension as deemed suitable.
Our party shall not participate in those mass media programmes where religious debates take place. The party has termed a voter as human soul and shall use word “Human/Insaan” only instead of Caste of and Individual/voter.
Our party if come into Power shall sign MOU’S with foreign countries to provide Global Employment to our youth. The party shall take all responsibility of the youth going outside the country for Jobs i.e. Passport,Visa, Insurance, safety and special intention would be given to J&K (UT) youth as a measure of healing programme.
It is need for rehabilitation of Jammu and Kashmir (UT) in real sense as last thirty years have killed thousand the soul of this state. All the human have passed through a unrepaired and unforgettable era. The UT needs to get into its original form i.e. statehood,repair of brotherhood trust measures Employment to youth, Revival of trade, setting up modern Industries and rehabilitation of all dislodged humans from their sweet homes.
These nine agendas were explained in the letter by the Vishwa Bandhutva Party’s JK UT president Virender Kumar Sharma.
(We don’t allow anyone to copy content. For Copyright or Use of Content related questions, visit here.)
