"Never doubt that even a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the World." — Margaret Mead

Sunday, July 21, 2013

3,000-pound cash bond for UK visa row

Were you consulted on visa bonds, British MP panel asks Manmohan
London, July 21
A high-powered British parliamentary committee has written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh asking if he was consulted over a controversial plan to introduce a hefty 3,000-pound cash bond for “high-risk” visitors from India.
Under the pilot scheme announced by British Home Secretary Theresa May last month, citizens of India, along with those of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Ghana and Sri Lanka, could be asked to pay a 3,000-pound cash bond in a bid to prevent them overstaying their visa.
The House of Commons' Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC) -- a group of cross-party MPs chaired by British-Indian Labour MP Keith Vaz -- has been looking into the proposed visa and immigration system that will be enforced from November this year.
"I would be most grateful if you could clarify if your government has been consulted by the UK Government on the bonds pilot. As part of the committee's remit, we have an ongoing inquiry into the work of UK visas and immigration," wrote Vaz, who has previously categorised the scheme as "unfair and discriminatory".
Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma had raised India's concerns over the issue with his British counterparts while on a visit to the UK soon after the policy was announced.
Since then, the UK Government has stressed that the scheme will affect only a handful of high-risk individuals and will be fully re-assessed at the end of the pilot in 2014.
Responding to a similar letter form HSAC, Nigeria accused the UK of racial discrimination. The Nigerian Ambassador to Britain said his country is "not favourably disposed to the proposal as it will affect a good number of Nigerians visiting the UK, even in spite of assurances to the contrary”. "We view it as discriminatory and targeted at only non-white members of the Commonwealth," ambassador Dalhatu Sarki Tafida said. Meanwhile, the HASC is conducting its own inquiries into the workings of Britain's visa and immigration system. — PTI 
Controversial scheme
* From November, citizens of India, along with those of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Ghana and Sri Lanka, could be asked to pay a 3,000-pound cash bond to prevent them overstaying their UK visa
* The House of Commons' Home Affairs Select Committee, a group of cross-party MPs chaired by British-Indian Labour MP Keith Vaz, has been looking into the proposed visa system
* Though affected nations have accused the UK Government of racial bias, it has stressed that the scheme will affect only a handful of high-risk individuals.

Monday, June 17, 2013

NRI Law Group Canada: ਧੋਖੇਬਾਜ਼ ਐਨ. ਆਰ. ਆਈ. ਲਾੜਿਆਂ 'ਤੇ ਸਖਤ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ

NRI Law Group Canada: ਧੋਖੇਬਾਜ਼ ਐਨ. ਆਰ. ਆਈ. ਲਾੜਿਆਂ 'ਤੇ ਸਖਤ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ: ਚੰਡੀਗੜ੍ਹ- ਪੰਜਾਬ ਵਿਚ ਵਿਆਹ ਦੇ ਨਾਂ 'ਤੇ ਹੋਣ ਵਾਲੀ ਧੋਖਾਧੜੀ 'ਤੇ ਨੱਥ ਪਾਉਣ ਲਈ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਨੇ ਵਿਆਹ ਦੀ ਰਜਿਸਟ੍ਰੇਸ਼ਨ ਜ਼ਰੂਰੀ ਕਰ ਦਿੱਤੀ ਹੈ। ਪੰਜਾਬ ਕੈਬਨਿਟ ...

Thursday, January 17, 2013

17 Indians in Sharjah murder case can finally return home

Chandigarh/Dubai, January 17
A long-drawn legal battle finally come to an end today as 17 Indian boys, who have been languishing in Sharjah jail for more than three years, got the final approval from the Sharjah court and were cleared for deportation.

All of them had got death sentence, which the court had waived in 2011 after Dubai businessman SP Singh Oberoi paid blood money of one million US dollars to the parents of the victim Mishri Khan.

But, permission to leave the United Arab Emirates was held up as a civil petition seeking compensation for those injured in the Mishri Khan murder case was filed.

The case pertains to 2009 when a group of Indian workers clashed with a group of workers from Pakistan in which Mishri Khan of Sargodha was killed and two of his cousins — Mushtaq Ahmed and Shahid Iqbal — were grievously injured.

Subsequently 17 Indian boys were charged for a drunken brawl leading to murder and arson. They were subsequently convicted and sentenced to death. It was under pressure from the media that the Indian mission in UAE hired a team of lawyers to defend the Indian boys who pleaded innocent. An appeal was filed in the Sharjah Appeal Court against the orders of the Sharjah Court in April 2010.

It was during hearing of the appeal that the Sharjah Court asked the defence team if it was prepared for settlement under Diya - blood money - to which it reluctantly agreed holding that it had a fool proof case.

Oberoi paid up the blood money and the court also endorsed the settlement deal and waived the death sentence in 2011. But then the civil petition was filed and it took more than a year for adjudication and forced the 17 Indian boys to have an extended stay in the Sharjah jail even after their death sentence had been waived.

SP Singh Oberoi says that with the pronouncement of a joint compensation of AED 1,00,000 for Mushtaq Ahmed and Shahid Iqbal for grievous injuries they received in the clash will now get Indian boys released.

case file
Mishri Khan of Pakistan was killed and two were injured in a clash in Sharjah in 2009
The Sharjah police prosecuted 17 Indian boys. They were sentenced to death. All convicts are from Punjab and Haryana
On September 12, 2011, the court waived the death sentence of all the convicts after they paid the “blood money”
On September 23 when they were about to return to India, a civil petition seeking relief for the two injured was filed

Way to freedom for 17 youths

Sukhjinder Singh of Patti, Sukhjot Singh of Sanghera in Barnala, Ram Singh of Kanvi in Amritsar, Aarvinder Singh of Gurdaspur, Baljeet Singh of Sangwal in Jalandhar, Daljeet Singh of Aitiana in Ludhiana, Dharampal Singh of Jhoke Tehal Singh Wala in Ferozepur, Satgur Singh of Ghanaur Jattan in Sangrur, Satnam Singh of Roohli Kalan in Ludhiana, Kashmir Singh of Rattu Ke in Tarn Taran, Suban Singh of Lohian Khaas in Kapurthala, Kulvinder Singh of Ludhiana, Kuldeep Singh of Moga, Sukhjinder Singh of Kapurthala, Namjyot Singh of Ludhiana, Harjinder Singh of Phagwara and Taranjit Singh of Kaithal

Obama’s New Gun Violence Prevention Proposals


In a press conference on Wednesday, President Obama outlined a sweeping effort to prevent gun violence in the United States. Surrounded by children who had written him letters voicing their desire to see gun laws passed, Obama announced that he will sign 23 executive orders and bring a set of proposals to Congress.

The President referenced one child’s letter that read, “I know that laws have to be passed by Congress, but I beg you to try very hard.”

“I promise that I will try very hard,” he said.

Obama also condemned lawmakers who vocally resist any new gun measures, pointing out that the gun policies of Ronald Reagan were more reasonable.

The initiatives cover everything from mental heath, to gun safety, to blocking the most deadly firearms from making it to market. Here are some of the most important efforts the President introduced today:

1. Making background checks universal. Obama wants every single gun owner to go through a proper background check, so it can be determined whether they have a criminal history or diagnosed mental illness. He wants Congress to close the gun show loophole that allows people at gun shows, and private buyers of used weapons, to avoid getting checked. He will also, through executive action, urge private sellers to conduct background checks, even if they aren’t mandatory.

2. Improving state reporting of criminals and the mentally ill. While all states are required to report to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) people who should not have access to guns, some states are sluggish about putting the data into the system. Obama will put more money into the hands of the states so that they can improve their reporting systems, and issue stronger guidelines to let states know when they should report people. Obama will also, through Presidential Memorandum, work to make sure agencies are regularly entering data into NICS.

3. Banning assault weapons. This is likely the most difficult battle Obama will undertake. He wants to reinstate the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, which outlaws military-grade weapons, like the AR-15 used by Newtown gunman Adam Lanza and by Aurora Theater gunman James Holmes. Obama wants Congress to pass the ban, and close some of the loopholes identified in its 1994 iteration.

4. Capping magazine clip capacity at 10 bullets. A military-grade weapon is dangerous, but so are its accessories: Obama proposes banning all extended magazine clips that hold over 10 bullets. Huge magazine clips allow a gunman to fire off hundreds of rounds without having to stop, even once, to reload. The high-capacity magazine ban was also part of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.

5. Purging armor-piercing bullets. The sale of armor piercing ammunition has been banned for quite some time, but is still legal to posess such bullets. Obama is calling on Congress to outlaw ownership and transfer of these bullets, instead of just the sale. Those who oppose any gun laws try to spin a ban on armor piercing bullets as a ban on deer hunting ammunition, but such ammo has the ability to penetrate bullet-proof vests, and is more colloquially known as “cop killer bullets.”

6. Funding police officers. Obama wants Congress to reverse its course of austerity for public employees by approving $4 billion to fund police enforcement around the country.

7. Strengthening gun tracking. In order to track weapons that are used for crimes, Obama will issue a memorandum mandating that all agencies trace back firearms. This means that any agency in the country must trace guns used in crimes back to their original owners, as a way to help collect data on where criminal weapons are coming from. Obama will also ask Congress to allow law enforcement to do background checks on guns seized during investigations.

8. Supporting research on gun violence. Obama hopes to be able to gather more information on gun violence and misuse of firearms, and use that data to inform the work of law enforcement. He also wants to restart research, which has been long blocked by the National Rifle Association, on how video games, the media, and violence affect violent gun crimes. The Centers for Disease Control will immediately begin these efforts, but Obama also is calling on Congress to add $10 million to the pot of funding for such research.

9. Encouraging mental health providers to get involved. In order to make sure that those with homicidal thoughts are unable to access the weapons with which to kill, Obama seeks to encourage mental health professionals to alert authorities to such people. He will clarify that doing so is not in violation of patient privacy laws. He also wants to dispel the idea that Obamacare prevents doctors from talking to patients about guns.

10. Promoting safe gun ownership. The administration will start a “responsible gun ownership” campaign to encourage gun owners to lock up their firearms. He will also work with the Consumer Product Safety Commission to make sure safes and gun locks on the market are effective. He’s also calling on the justice department to help him come up with new gun safety technology.

11. Funding school counseling. Obama is calling on Congress to fund the positions of 1,000 news school counselors. The funding will come both through the already-existent COPS Hiring Grant, and through a new Comprehensive School Safety program that Congress will need to sign off on. The latter would put #150 million into funding for new counselors and social workers in schools.

12. Encouraging safe, anti-bullying school environments. Over 8,000 schools could receive new funding — $50 million — under Obama’s plan to encourage safer school environments. Obama wants to help at-risk students by creating a “school climate survey” that will collect data on what services students need, and to remedy any problems by putting professionals into schools. The administration will also issue guidelines on school discipline policies.

13. Recognizing the mental health needs of low-income Americans. Medicaid recipients already qualify for some mental health services, but Obama would like to expand that service so that low-income Americans have the same access to professional help as those who have money to pay for it on their own. Obama will issue a directive to heads of state health programs, enforcing “mental health parity” — the idea that mental health should be treated as a priority as important as physical health.

Kuka Martyrs' Day observed

Malerkotla, January 17
The state-level Kuka Martyrs' Day function was a low key affair this year even though a large number of followers of the Namdhari sect participated in the function here today.

The function was organised at the Namdhari Shaheedi Samarak here to pay tributes to 66 Kuka martyrs, who were blown off with cannons by the British on January 17 and January 18, 1872 here. A large number of Namdharis paid obeisance at the Kuka martyrs' memorial that is a 'Khanda', with 66 holes, signifying the 66 martyrs. Mata Chand Kaur, widow of Satguru Jagjit Singh, and new chief of the Namdhari sect Satguru Uday Singh were also present.

Sunday, November 18, 2012

Fearing defeat, Sheila delaying DSGMC poll: Badal

Parkash Singh BadalJalandhar/Chandigarh, November 18
Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal today hit back at his Delhi counterpart Sheila Dixit saying that she was deliberately delaying elections to the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC). Talking to newsmen at Khiala village near Jalandhar, Badal accused the Delhi Chief Minister of helping DSGMC president Paramjit Singh Sarna whose defeat in the next DSGMC poll was inevitable. He said that as it would have an impact on the Delhi Assembly elections, Sheila wanted to delay elections to the Sikh institution. In a separate statement, the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) took a strong note of the remarks of the Delhi Chief Minister asking her Punjab counterpart Parkash Singh Badal to “keep off Delhi gurdwara affairs”. The SAD described her reaction as irrational and indicative of the fact that Dixit was not aware of the history of the DSGMC. The SAD said that it was strange that the Congress leader was asking the founding fathers of the DSGMC to become mute spectators to the denigration of the management committee responsible for the maintenance of historic Sikh shrines in the national capital. SAD president Sukhbir Singh Badal said, “Will someone please go and tell her that Sikh affairs are very much a business of the Sikhs, and of the Sikhs alone, and that she or her government should stay away from the internal religious matters of the Sikh community. “Let her instead use her position to ensure better law and order in Delhi. By openly talking about an issue which concerns our shrines, Dixit has only confirmed Parkash Singh Badal’s observation that the Congress government in Delhi is indeed interfering in the religious affairs of the Sikhs,” he said.
Party spokesman Dr Daljit Singh Cheema reminded the Congress leader that it was in 1970 that the then SAD president Sant Fateh Singh led a ‘morcha’ in Delhi demanding a similar democratic body on the pattern of the SGPC for the management of Sikh shrines in Delhi.
“Parkash Singh Badal, all his senior colleagues and 16,000 other SAD leaders and workers went to jail in this morcha,” added Cheema.
“So the present DSGMC came into being in 1971 as a result of the sacrifices made by the Sant Fateh Singh, Parkash Singh Badal and other SAD workers,” he said.

Sunday, October 21, 2012

Immigration: Canada should follow U.S. lead in locking up its borders


It is a truism that we all (except for a statistically insignificant Native American segment) are immigrants. Whether our families came here centuries ago or just deplaned at Pearson International Airport, we are "immigrants." Somehow that sociological irrelevancy is supposed to make citizens more understanding of those seeking to live in our country, regardless of how they got here. We are the fortunate — just lucky to have beaten the rush and consequently should be humble over our sanguine circumstances and more respectful of the "rights" of those arriving without benefit of hidebound visa bureaucracies.
Sorry about that.
What is it that dewy-eyed human comfort stations don't understand about illegal?  That is I-L-L-E-G-A-L, as in having no right to be here — Having broken the law by their presence and having no respect for the designated procedures and regulations of the country whose bounties they seek to receive.  They are trespassers, queue jumpers, and by definition criminals.
The very first requirement for a nation state is to secure its borders.  This is not the 18th century when unfettered wanderers could blithely cross the North American continent.  Effective border control is the essence for addressing the immigrant issue.  Hence, efforts — that could be much stronger — across the U.S. southern border are imperative not just to thwart economic migrants but more importantly to combat massive drug smuggling. There should be comparable concern in Canada. Having a border sufficiently porous to permit terrorists to enter Canada and then slip/side into the United States benefits neither country. The U.S.-Canada border is no longer a wink-and-a-nod transit zone, but it is still far from secure with illegal drugs and weapons moving south and north respectively.

Nor should Canadians be dismissive about the 12 million (but who's counting?)  illegals in the United States. Were there to be a comparable number, say 1.2 million, in Canada, one expects that Ottawa would not be amused. It is an immense problem in every dimension that has virtually paralyzed California's finances by attempting to provide social services for these illegals.
We need to set aside the anguished cases of illegal immigrant parents facing separation from legal citizens. We need to ignore these "oh so sad" stories of small child-with-life-threatening-illness used as anchors to rationalize permitting parents to stay. Just who asked these individuals to enter our country illegally? And then to have children?
The only "right" those arriving illegally should have is to be taken to the border humanely and returned to their countries of origin.
Indeed, it is very hard to find diplomats that have issued visas who sympathize with "illegals." They have seen the patient efforts of foreign citizens working through the regulations, adhering to mandated requirements, taking medical exams and language tests, and waiting/waiting/waiting for their opportunity to arrive. Every illegal immigrant has done the equivalent of giving a "Trudeau salute" while sneering "Sucker!" to those that have played by the rules. If for no other reason than keeping the faith with legal immigrants, we must be punctilious about finding and expelling illegal immigrants.
It is absurd that the United State should have a "wet foot; dry foot" rule permitting any illegal boater-rafter that reaches dry land to stay. It is absurd that any individual reaching a Canadian customs post can claim refugee status — and accorded government subsidies while the claim is processed — an effort often taking years.
But we need to be honest.  The immigration dilemma didn't explode overnight.  For a generation there has been a silent conspiracy between Republicans that wanted cheap labor for farms and industry and Democrats that wanted these individuals unionized so eventually they would become voters.  But it is a canard that if there were no illegals, economies would grind to a stop.  With over 8 percent official unemployment, there are individuals that can do the "jobs that citizens won't take."  You either pay to get these jobs done; if they are important enough to do, money will be found to do them.  Or if they are not done, so what?  Every California lawn doesn't need its own manicurist.  Every middle-class working woman doesn't need a nanny/housekeeper.  And real labor shortages will prompt greater efficiencies and technological innovation.
Such an approach hardly implies "shutting the door."  But immigrants are a distinct societal expense, and should be accepted only to the degree that they benefit our economies.  It is a rare privilege to gain access to a first world, human rights respecting democracy.  We should not hesitate to limit access strictly.

Read also: New citizens improve Canada and benefit the economy