Sunday, December 29, 2013

Getting back "Abducted children" according to Hague convention.

Interesting article in DH

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/377480/us-bill-getting-back-039abducted039.html

In short - if children are abducted from the US to India then India should help Washing ton in tracking and getting them back.

India has signed it - because it weakens Indian -American women who have brought their child back to India in case of breakups of marriage, and legal custody battles. ( last paragraph )

US bill on getting back 'abducted' children to arm-twist India, others

Anirban Bhaumik , New Delhi, Dec 29, 2013, DHNS:

New Delhi has resisted pressure to sign The Hague convention

A bill recently passed by the American House of Representatives may prove to be yet another irritant in India-US ties, as it seeks to arm-twist New Delhi to help Washington get back children of estranged Indian-American couples caught in international custody disputes.

The Sean and David Goldman International Child Abduction Prevention and Return Bill was passed by the lower house of American Congress on December 11 – just a day before the humiliating arrest of Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade by US law enforcement officials in New York triggered a diplomatic row between New Delhi and Washington.

The bill seeks to empower the American president to take stern action against any country, which would not help Washington to get back children "abducted" from the US and taken to that country, mostly either by their fathers or mothers following break-ups in marriages.

If the bill is passed by the Senate, the American president will have powers to take measures even against India and other countries, which neither signed the 1980 Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, nor struck any bilateral deal with US for repatriation of children subjected to international parental abductions.

The measures the US president can take include limiting security assistance, withdrawing development assistance and even using diplomatic tools to block loans from World Bank and International Monetary Fund, apart from imposing visa restrictions.

The Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction was concluded in The Hague on October 25, 1980 and has so far been signed by 90 countries. It provides for expeditious return of a child abducted internationally by a parent from one member country to another with the intervention of the two governments.

New Delhi, however, has not yet signed the treaty, as the Ministry of Law and Justice is of the view that India's accession to the treaty would put Indian women married to Non-Resident Indians or foreign nationals to disadvantage in cases of break-ups in marriages and legal battles over custody of children.

This is also the reason why India has not yet struck a bilateral deal with the US for cooperation in such cases. The Law Commission of India, however, in 2009 recommended that India should accede to The Hague convention.

Regards,
Shashi

Thursday, December 26, 2013

US ship crew granted bail

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/376970/us-ship-crew-granted-bail.html

US ship crew granted bail

Last updated: 26 December, 2013

Chennai: Dec 26, 2013 DHNS

Following the delay of filing the charge sheet even after two months, a court in Tuticorin on Thursday released all the 35 members arrested from the American armed ship, Seaman Guard Ohio, on bail.

Except for 22 foreign crew members, who were shifted to Puzhal Central Prison near here will remain in Tuticorin till the charge sheet filed and investigation is thoroughly completed, Police sources said here.

On October 18, Tamil Nadu Police arrested 33 crew members and security personnel of the Seaman Guard Ohio, and a court sent all of them to 14 days' judicial custody.

"The police had to file a charge sheet within 60 days of their arrest. But the police has not done that and hence the court granted the ship crew the bail," Joseph Jawahar, advocate for the ship crew told reporters.

Madras High Court had recently dismissed bail petitions of crew members, who were arrested on charges of illegally carrying weapons on board the vessel and straying into Indian waters.

The ship is owned by a closely held American company AdvanFort. Police have also seized 35 weapons and 5,680 rounds of ammunition from the vessel.

The Coast Guard escorted the ship with 35 people (10 crew and 25 security guards) to Tuticorin port Oct 12.

The ship's owner, AdvanFort, which specialises in providing maritime security against pirates, claimed the ship entered Indian waters to escape the fury of Cyclone Phailin.

Regards,
Shashi

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/375446/bail-pleas-all-crew-us.html

MV Seeman Ohio

You are here: Home » National » Bail pleas of all crew of US ship dismissed

Bail pleas of all crew of US ship dismissed

Madurai, Dec 18, 2013, PTI:

A Madras High Court bench on Wednesday dismissed bail petitions of all the crew members of a US ship, arrested on the charges of illegally carrying weapons on board the vessel and straying into Indian waters, stating the probe was in the initial stage and if they were released on bail, it could affect the investigation.

Justice M Sathyanarayanan said the petitioners did not provide sufficient documents to justify that they could be released on bail.

The 35 crew members of the ship MV Seeman Ohio were arrested on October 18 by Tamil Nadu police after it was intercepted by Coast Guard. They were booked under Arms Act and Essential Commodities Act.The ship crew was also accused of illegal purchase of diesel from local agents.

The Judge, however, granted conditional bail to V Selvam, who was arrested along with five others for illegally providing 1,500 litres of diesel to the ship. The judge directed him to provide two personal sureties for Rs 10,000 each and sign before the Q-branch police daily until further orders. But the anticipatory bail plea of Munithevan, who was also accused in the supply of diesel, was denied by the judge.

The captain of the ship, Dudinik Valentyn, nine other crew members and 25 guards of the ship in their bail plea alleged that the vessel was "asked to come to the port for taking shelter to escape from the cyclonic weather conditions in the Bay of Bengal. On reaching the port, as many 25 officials from eight different agencies barged into the anti-piracy vessel and confined all the 35 crew and falsely claimed as if they intercepted the vessel on October 12."

Regards,
Shashi

Monday, December 16, 2013

http://www.weddingministrybydesign.com/marriage101/forsakingallothers.html

- The failure to shift your loyalty from your parents, friends, etc, to your spouse is a central issue in almost all marital conflict.

-- ( what is important - job, family ?? )
ion with three or four times their current income, but it would require moving to Florida.

Before they can continue, you respond with something like, "We're sure going to miss you around here," making it crystal clear to your spouse that you choose your (parents, friends, job, church, children by a previous marriage, etc.) over them. You have just forsaken your spouse instead of forsaking all others.

Foundations for Marriage

Forsaking All Others

Traditional wedding vows contain the phrase, "forsaking all others". The phrase may be omitted from more contemporary vows, but that does not give us a free pass from adhering to God's design for marriage. Failure to forsake all others has destroyed untold marriages and has crippled countless others.

So what does it mean to forsake all others? The obvious answer revolves around adultery, but it goes far beyond that. Forsaking all others includes leaving your parents (Gen. 2:24), as well as anyone else who might possibly come between you and your spouse.

So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore, what God has joined together, let man not separate. (Matt. 19:6 NIV) No one is intended to ever come between a husband and wife. The failure to shift your loyalty from your parents, friends, etc, to your spouse is a central issue in almost all marital conflict.

Picture this scenario. You are a few years into your marriage. Things have gone fairly well and for all intents and purposes, your marriage is strong. Each year, it seems your debt has increased. It's not overwhelming, but you're certainly not where you would like to be financially. Your spouse calls to tell you they just found that they might be considered for a huge promotion with three or four times their current income, but it would require moving to Florida.

You just told your spouse that they are not, nor have they ever been, nor will they ever be the most important person in your life. Can you imagine the devastation you have just laid on their heart? When you boil it all down, marriage means you and your spouse are the most important people in each other's lives.

Unlike some marital problems, the failure to forsake all others is not gender specific. Husbands are often unable to separate the apron strings from their mothers. They tend to put too much importance on spending time with their buddies. They might even fail to forsake inanimate objects, i.e. preferring spending time working on their automobile rather than with their wife. Wives often fall under similar situations with their families and friends.

A sad fact, but one we must acknowledge, is today over 40% of all marriages are remarriages for at least one spouse. This brings new complexities to forsaking all others as over 65% of these remarriages involve children. The thing to remember here that is very difficult for parents is this; God created marriage as the bond of all human relationships. The most permanent relationship in all of society is not between parent and child, but between husband and wife.

In all marriages, and even more so in blended marriages, children can and often do become masters at driving wedges between a husband and wife. They become expert at playing one against the other. Without the husband and wife working together to provide a united front, children often become rulers of the household. Of those remarriages I mentioned above with children, over 70% of those end in divorce. That is staggering when you think about it and an indication that couples fail to grasp forsaking all others, even when it involves children.

Of course I'm not advocating neglect or abuse. I am advocating marriage as God intended. I am advocating marriage where each spouse puts the other spouse first above all else. I think Dr. Laura Schlessinger summed it up well in her book, 10 Stupid Things Couples Do To Mess Up Their Relationships, when she said, "If your actions hurt your spouse, they are the wrong actions. Period."

The selfishness of our society tells us we somehow have a right to play. It's somehow okay to go out drinking and dancing with your girlfriends, or it's somehow okay for a husband to stand by and allow his mother to berate his wife, or it's somehow okay to side with your children over your spouse (bear in mind, I'm not talking about situations of abuse here). None of these things are acceptable in marriage. Your spouse must come first, always!

Your marriage mantra should be, "No relationship on earth, other than my relationship with Jesus Christ and God, is more important than my relationship with my spouse." Make it so and you will have no problem forsaking all others.

Pastor Monty Rainey

Regards,
Shashi

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Wadiyars properties after the death of the last prince.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/374268/legal-battles-one-too-many.html

Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wadiyar had been fighting many legal battles over the years as properties worth several hundred crores of rupees, including the Bangalore Palace, owned by the erstwhile Mysore rulers, are under litigation in various courts.

The four palaces – the one in Bangalore, Ambavilas Palace in Mysore, Rajendra Vilas atop the Chamundi Hills, and Fernhill Palace in Ooty, are under litigation since decades, either with private persons or with the State government.

According to advocates who handled the cases, these litigations witnessed several legal luminaries right from Supreme Court senior counsel Fali Nariman and Supreme Court judge Justice H L Dattu to the Chidambarams defending the royal family, especially the Bangalore Palace case.

The problem for Bangalore Palace began in 1970 when the erstwhile Maharaja Jayachamaraja Wadiyar transferred a portion of the property to two companies – Chamundi Hotels (P) Ltd (110 acres) and Sree Venkateswara Real Estate Enterprises (P) Limited (344 acres) for a price of Rs four lakh.

"The property was given without any consideration on November 30, 1970. This led to various disputes," said an advocate who defended the royal family. Later on, two civil suites were filed, one by the Maharaja himself. After the death of the Maharaja in 1974, Srikantadatta Wadiyar, continued it. He contended that the deal itself was fraudulent as it had been executed without any consideration.

He said the firms were trying to acquire even the palace, which was at a prime location. Amidst this, Wadiyar gave 28 acres of the palace land each to his five sisters: Gayathri Devi, Meenakshi Devi, Kamakshi Devi, Indrakshi Devi and Vishalakshi Devi, in 1983. They are still in possession of their respective portions.

The legal battle ended in 1992, after both parties agreed to settle it amicably. Another problem cropped up when the then government of H D Deve Gowda began the process to take over the palace and its property.

"Initially, S Bangarappa, when he was the chief minister, tried to take over the property under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. But the then Governor did not approve it. Later, Deve Gowda enacted the Bangalore Palace (Acquisition and Transfer) Act, 1996. Wadiyar demanded a compensation of Rs 800 crore in case the land is acquired," an advocate, who defended the Wadiyars, told Deccan Herald.

When the government struck down the demand and proceeded for acquisition, the Wadiyars moved the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal (KAT), challenging the acquisition. The matter reached the High Court and subsequently the Supreme Court, as the Wadiyars appealed against the lower court verdicts. "Supreme Court advocates Ganguly and Nariman argued for the Wadiyars in KAT. Now, even after 17 years, it is still pending before the Supreme Court and the acquisition process has been stayed," said an advocate.

The dispute, in which the famous Keshavananda Bharati versus the State of Kerala case was cited, on whether the government can acquire private property is pending before the apex court and has now been referred to a larger bench.

Ambavilas and Fernhill

In addition to this, several disputes related to the Ambavilas Palace may have been dragged to the courts. But Jayachamaraja Wadiyar himself gave away the palace to the government in 1974, keeping for himself just the Brahamapuri Gate portion. The Fernhill Palace in Ooty was given away to Tamil Nadu.

However, a Bangalore-based advocate ensured that the palace remained with the royal family.

Other lands

The royals owned 13,000 acres of land and the power of attorney (POA) of the same was given to some people who illegally sold the property for a song and the land is now under litigation. The High Court recently ordered an inquiry into the sale of Doddakere maidan in Mysore.

Another litigation pertaining to sale of fertile land at Chinchagatta in Mandya by another POA holder is also pending. The POA holder has sold the land for Rs 600 per acre

Regards,
Shashi

Monday, December 9, 2013

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-12-09/singapore-clamps-down-on-rioters-after-violence-in-little-india

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong ordered an inquiry into Singapore's first riot in more than four decades as tensions rise over the influx of foreign workers in the city state.

"There is no excuse for such violent and criminal behavior," Lee said in a statement yesterday. Prosecutors will charge 24 Indian nationals in a subordinate court today over the riot, the Singapore police force said in a statement on its Facebook page.

The riot involving about 400 people broke out on the night of Dec. 8 in the Little India district after a traffic accident, the police said in a separate statement yesterday. Little India, about 3 kilometers (2 miles) from the city state's central business district, attracts thousands of foreign workers on their Sunday days off.

Story: Like Its Neighbors, China Struggles With an Aging Population

Discontent in Singapore over foreign workers has risen after years of open immigration spurred complaints on social media about congestion and infrastructure strains at a time of widening income inequality. A four-year government campaign to encourage companies to employ fewer overseas workers has in turn led to a labor shortage, prompting some companies to seek cheaper locations.

The riot was "a new thing, that's definitely a watershed of a kind," Bilveer Singh, an associate professor at National University of Singapore's department of political science, said by phone. "I don't think we have seen this for decades now."

Driver Arrested

The violence began after a bus ran over and killed a 33-year-old Indian national, Deputy Commissioner of Police T. Raja Kumar said in a briefing hours after the incident. The bus driver, a 55-year-old Singaporean, was arrested for causing death by negligent act and is assisting with investigations, the police said on Facebook yesterday.

Story: India Is Courting China's Rivals, Too

Vehicles damaged during the riot, including 16 police cars, were removed. The situation was brought under control within an hour and officers did not fire any weapons during the incident, authorities said.

About 300 officers responded to the riot with 22 police officers and five auxiliary officers hurt, the police said yesterday, adding all the officers were later released from hospital.

Singapore will boost the police presence in Little India, Tanglin Police Division Commander Lu Yeow Lim said in an interview broadcast on Channel NewsAsia yesterday. Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew, a member of parliament for the district, said in a post on his Facebook page that he will look into limiting liquor licenses within the Little India area.

Story: How Poland Became Europe's Most Dynamic Economy

The Committee of Inquiry will look into the reasons for the riot and how it was handled, and review how the government manages areas where foreign workers congregate, Lee said yesterday.

Spontaneous Act

"In perspective, this is a spontaneous act. It is not something politically motivated," NUS's Singh said. The government would need to act sternly against those who rioted, he said. "The future insecurities of Singapore are one, internal, two, important. Singaporeans won't tolerate this because Singaporeans are becoming very nationalistic."

Large-scale demonstrations have been almost unknown in Singapore since race riots in 1964 killed 36 people and contributed to the island's ouster from a federation with Malaysia. Singapore and Malaysia were united from 1963 to 1965. Clashes between the Chinese and Malay communities culminated in race riots in 1969 in Malaysia, which spilled briefly into Singapore. After the violence of the 1960s the Singapore government imposed curbs on public assembly.

Story: Bad Loans Could Spark an Emerging-Markets Crisis

Income Inequality

The city's income inequality as measured by the Gini co-efficient widened last year, according to the Statistics Department. The central bank forecasts inflation will probably be 2.5 percent to 3 percent this year and the island is the world's third-most expensive Asian city to live in, according to an Economist Intelligence Unit ranking.

"We shouldn't assume that the kind of issues that the local population faces, like the cost of living, would not affect the foreign worker population," said Leong Chan-Hoong, a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies in Singapore. "Most of them will get a very decent wage but a very small minority may not, and maybe this is the minority group that happened to be there at the wrong place at the wrong time."

Worker Influx

The number of people in Singapore has jumped by more than 1.1 million to about 5.3 million since mid-2004 as the government used immigration to make up for a low birth rate. Foreign workers make up about a third of the total workforce.

Story: Japan's Abe Seeks Friends in Asia—but Not China

As part of its effort to reduce imported labor, the government said in February that companies must pay higher levies for lower-skilled foreign employees over the next two years and cut the proportion of overseas workers in some industries. In 2012, the National Wages Council recommended raising the pay of low-wage Singaporean workers as their income growth had lagged the rest of the workforce for the past decade.

In November last year, Singapore authorities charged four Chinese nationals over their involvement in an illegal strike that led to a disruption in some bus services, an unusual public display of labor discord.

To contact the reporters on this story: Sharon Chen in Singapore at schen462@bloomberg.net; Weiyi Lim in Singapore at wlim26@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Rosalind Mathieson at rmathieson3@bloomberg.net

by Taboola