Criticise Lalu Prasad over Ambedkar's portrait placed at his feet: Prashant Kishor challenges Rahul Gandhi
Claiming that the RJD has subordinated itself to the RJD in Bihar, former poll strategist Prashant Kishor on Sunday challenged Rahul Gandhi to criticise Lalu Prasad for having a portrait of Ambedkar placed at his feet.
Kishor, whose fledgling outfit Jan Suraaj Party seeks to make a splash in the upcoming Bihar assembly elections, addressed a press conference in the district of Muzaffarpur.
Replying to a query on the Congress' prospects, Kishor, who had sought to join that party before launching Jan Suraaj campaign, said 'The Congress has reduced itself to a sidekick of the RJD in Bihar. Earlier, the state Congress was beholden to Lalu Prasad, now it is the turn of (younger son and heir apparent) Tejashwi Yadav'.
The 47-year-old added, 'I ask Rahul Gandhi to do a small thing to prove me wrong. Let him issue just one statement criticising Lalu Prasad for having a portrait of Ambedkar placed at his feet'.
Kishor also lashed out at the Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha for 'never taking to task Chief Minister of Telangana, where the Congress is in power, for mocking people of Bihar with the statement that menial jobs were in their DNA'.
The Jan Suraaj Party founder also demanded the resignation of state health minister and senior BJP leader Mangal Pandey over the recent death of a minor Dalit girl, hailing from Muzaffarpur, who succumbed to injuries days after a brutal sexual assault.
Kishor also took potshots at senior minister and JD(U) national general secretary Ashok Choudhary who has sued him for alleging that the latter's daughter Shambhavi, the MP from Samastipur, got the ticket from Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) of Union minister Chirag Paswan, after money changed hands.
'Ashok Choudhary and his daughter should tell the people of Bihar what they have done for Dalits. They have always used their Dalit identity to their own advantage', the Jan Suraaj Party founder alleged.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
38 minutes ago
- Mint
US attacks on Iran: ‘Well done', Donald Trump gets praise from Republicans, sole Democrat John Fetterman
US-Iran war updates: United States President Donald Trump has recieved 'immediate praise' from Republicans in Congress and at least one Democrat, for bombing three nuclear sites in Iran. Dissenting from his fellow party-mates, Pennsylvania's Democract Senator John Fetterman, joined Republicans in praising Donald Trump for joining Israel's offensive against Iran, according to an AP report. Posting on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), South Carolina's Republican Senator Lindsey Graham wrote: 'Well done, President Trump'. Congressional Republicans — and at least one Democrat — immediately praised President Donald Trump after he said Saturday evening that the U.S. Further, Senator John Cornyn, the Republican rep of Texas called the US military bombing three sites in Iran a 'courageous and correct decision.' And Alabama Senator Katie Britt, also Republican, called the bombings 'strong and surgical'; while Oklahoma's Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin posted: 'America first, always.' The Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said Trump 'has made a deliberate — and correct — decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime.' Wicker posted on X that 'we now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies.' The quick endorsements of stepped up U.S. involvement in Iran came after Trump had publicly mulled the strikes for days and many congressional Republicans had cautiously said they thought he would make the right decision. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Saturday evening that 'as we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.' Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., were briefed ahead of the strikes on Saturday, according to people familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it. Johnson said in a statement that the military operations 'should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says.' House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Ark., said he had also been in touch with the White House and 'I am grateful to the U.S. servicemembers who carried out these precise and successful strikes." Breaking from many of his Democratic colleagues, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, an outspoken supporter of Israel, also praised the attacks on Iran. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,' he posted. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.' Both parties have seen splits in recent days over the prospect of striking Iran. Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican and a longtime opponent of U.S. involvement in foreign wars, posted on X after Trump announced the attacks that 'This is not Constitutional.' Many Democrats have maintained that Congress should have a say. The Senate was scheduled to vote as soon as this week on a resolution by Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine requiring congressional approval before the U.S. declared war on Iran or took specific military action. Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House intelligence panel, posted on X after Trump's announcement: 'According to the Constitution we are both sworn to defend, my attention to this matter comes BEFORE bombs fall. Full stop.'
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
War Powers Act vs. Article II: Is the US bombing of Iran constitutional? Could Trump be impeached?
On Saturday night, President Donald Trump took to Truth Social to announce that the United States had conducted what he described as a 'very successful attack' on three Iranian nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. Donald Trump said US had conducted 'successful attack' on three Iranian nuclear facilities.(AP) 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home," Trump wrote. "Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter,' he added. The announcement reignited a constitutional debate, with critics pointing to a June 16 post on X by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who called such strikes unconstitutional. 'This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution. I'm introducing a bipartisan War Powers Resolution to prohibit our involvement,' he had tweeted. Also Read: Iran Israel war news LIVE updates: US strikes on Iran a 'spectacular military success,' says Trump What Is the War Powers Act? Enacted in 1973 over President Richard Nixon's veto, the War Powers Resolution (WPR) was designed to limit the president's ability to engage US forces in military conflicts without congressional approval. It followed public outrage over Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam War, which resulted in significant civilian casualties and sparked widespread protests. The WPR requires the president to: Notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying U.S. forces into 'hostilities' or situations where hostilities are imminent. End military actions within 60 days (or 90 days in emergencies) unless Congress approves continued engagement through a declaration of war or specific authorization. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Rep. Massie have argued that Trump's strikes on Iran violate the WPR, as they were launched without congressional approval. What does Article II say? Trump's supporters, citing Article II of the Constitution, argue that as 'Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy,' the president has broad authority to direct military operations. 'The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment,' the article states. However, this power is constrained by Article I, Section 8, which grants Congress the authority to 'declare war' and regulate the armed forces Legal scholar John Yoo, speaking to Fox News Digital, defended Trump's actions. He argued that a limited airstrike does not constitute 'war' in the constitutional sense and thus doesn't require congressional approval. 'As a legal matter, the president doesn't need the permission of Congress to engage in hostilities abroad. But as a political matter, it's very important for the president to go to Congress and present the united front to our enemies,' he told Fox News Digital. Also Read: US bombs Iran: 10 key developments after strikes on nuclear sites Can Trump be impeached? Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution allows impeachment for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." If Congress determines that violating the WPR or bypassing its constitutional war powers constitutes a 'high crime,' impeachment could be pursued.
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Judicial reforms must if India aspires to become a global leader by 2047
As India prepares to celebrate 100 years of its independence in 2047, the nation stands at a critical juncture, one that calls not just for reflection, but for resolute reaffirmation of the foundational ideals enshrined in our Constitution, that is, equality, justice, fraternity, inclusivity, and liberty. However, if our intent, content, character, and commitment to these ideals are compromised, no vision, no matter how grand, can lead to genuine, sustainable progress. Lofty slogans, glittering events, and ambitious roadmaps may create temporary excitement, but without authentic adherence to our core democratic values, such displays are hollow. They amount to little more than hype, hoopla, and hypocrisy. India's journey from colonial rule to becoming the world's largest democracy is a powerful story of resilience and aspiration. Yet, as we look toward 2047, celebrating a century of freedom cannot simply be an act of commemoration. It must be a collective mission to realize the unfulfilled promises of independence. True development cannot be built on foundations where voices are silenced, inequalities deepen, or where institutions falter due to compromised ethics. A nation can only rise as high as the strength of its moral spine, and this strength is defined not by rhetoric, but by action rooted in fairness, truth, and unity. A troubling paradox persists but no one is bothered. Nearly 85 per cent of the population, comprising Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), Other Backward Classes (OBCs), and other economically disadvantaged communities, continues to grapple with entrenched socio-economic, educational, and political deprivation. Despite decades of constitutional safeguards and welfare policies, the journey toward equitable development remains riddled with systemic barriers and broken promises. SCs, STs, and OBCs, along with the rural and urban poor from other communities, overwhelmingly occupy the bottom rung of India's socio-economic pyramid. Their lives are often marked by landlessness, insecure livelihoods, wage exploitation, and poor access to health and nutrition. A significant proportion remains dependent on the informal sector, which offers neither security nor dignity. The intersection of caste and poverty further compounds the exclusion, as Dalits and Adivasis continue to face discrimination in accessing even the most basic services like housing, clean drinking water, and sanitation. Even within economic growth narratives, the benefits have remained concentrated among the upper-caste urban elite, with only marginal trickle-down effects. Wealth inequality has widened alarmingly, with the richest 10 per cent holding over 75 per cent of the country's wealth, while the poorest majority are denied the opportunity to break free from generational poverty. Education remains a powerful tool for emancipation but for the marginalized, it is often out of reach or poor in quality. Despite affirmative action policies such as reservations in educational institutions, dropout rates remain disproportionately high among SCs and STs, particularly at the secondary and higher levels. Majority of rural and government schools suffer from understaffing, poor infrastructure, caste bias, and language barriers, conditions that particularly disadvantage first-generation learners. Moreover, digital exclusion during the COVID-19 pandemic laid bare the inequalities in access to technology and online education. Students from marginalized families were left behind, deepening the already wide learning gap. While the Constitution provides for political reservation for SCs and STs in legislative bodies, real political empowerment remains elusive. In many instances, elected representatives from marginalized communities serve as mere figureheads, with actual decision-making controlled by dominant social groups. Tokenism and co-optation have replaced genuine inclusion, and grassroots participation in governance is minimal. Furthermore, policy-making continues to be shaped by upper-caste bureaucracies and think tanks, with limited representation of the lived experiences and voices of the deprived majority. Despite the rise of some regional political formations centered around OBC and Dalit identities, the larger structure of Indian politics remains steeply unequal and resistant to transformative change. India's democratic promise will remain incomplete unless it fundamentally addresses the historical and structural inequalities faced by its marginalized majority. This calls for redistributive justice, radical educational reform, and authentic political representation. True nation-building will require dismantling caste and class hierarchies, not just in words, but in practice, through inclusive growth, dignity for all, and a renewed commitment to constitutional morality. Our judiciary, often hailed as the guardian of democracy, is grappling with a crisis that threatens the very essence of justice—delay. The principle - justice delayed is justice denied – has never been more relevant, as over 5 crore cases are currently pending in Indian courts (National Judicial Data Grid, May 2025). Of these, more than 4.2 crore are pending in subordinate courts, 60 lakh in High Courts, and over 80,000 in the Supreme Court. Shockingly, more than 2.5 crore cases have been pending for over one year, and over 50 lakh for more than 10 years, reflecting a judicial system crippled by chronic delays. The average time to dispose of a civil case in India often stretches between 8 to 15 years, depending on the jurisdiction. One of the key causes is the severe shortage of judges. India has just 21.03 judges per million population as compared to 107 in the US and 51 in the UK (Law Commission of India, 2014, reaffirmed in 2023 by NITI Aayog). Additionally, frequent adjournments, outdated procedures, and inadequate court infrastructure compound the delays. This wait is not just a legal issue. It has deep human and economic costs. Victims languish without closure, undertrials rot in jails, and businesses suffer due to commercial disputes stuck in litigation for years. According to the Economic Survey 2018, judicial delays cost India up to 1.5 per cent of its GDP annually. If India aspires to be a global leader by 2047, judicial reforms must be treated as a national emergency. Justice cannot be a privilege for the few. It must be timely, transparent, and accessible for all. The idea of a free, fair, and equitable India in 2047 must be a lived reality for all. Let 2047 not just be a milestone in our history, but a testament to a conscious civilizational leap, a moment when India proves that its growth is as just as it is rapid, as inclusive as it is innovative, and as principled as it is powerful.
