Latest news with #non-Indian
Focus Malaysia
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Focus Malaysia
Ramasamy: Mandor system should not be blamed but those behind the system of subservience
THE Malaysian Indian People's Party (MIPP) deputy president S. Subramaniam has suggested that the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim heads the Indian Community Action Committee (ICAC) rather than appointing Indian mandor from PKR or the Pakatan Harapan (PH)-led coalition. Editor's Note: On Monday (June 16), a source told Malaysiakini that Deputy Entrepreneur Development and Cooperatives Minister Datuk Seri R. Ramanan would be appointed chair of a newly formed committee to look into the interest of Malaysian Indians. The mandor system was used by British planters during the colonial period in which Indians mandor or supervisor were appointed to manage the labour affairs. The mandor might be a South Indian Tamil but he took instructions from the white managers in managing labour affairs in the plantations. Unlike the Chinese kepala who had the material interest of Chinese labour, the Indian mandor functioned on behalf of the plantation bosses. My book on plantation labour describes in detail that Chinese contract labourers earned higher wages than Indian labourers because the former who operated under the kepala system provided better material incentives than the mandor system. 'Blame non-Indians elites' The political relevance of the analogy of mandor system was first used by the HINDRAF (Hindu Rights Action Force) leaders to describe and belittle Indian leaders who functioned on behalf of the Chinese and Malay leaders in DAP and PKR. The use of the mandor analogy is to show that Indian leaders in the PH-led coalition have no real power but are subservient to the non-Indian leaders. Subramaniam might be making a valid point by saying that Indian leaders in the government have no real power as it is being wielded by the Chinese and Malay leaders. However, I differ from Subramaniam on the point of Anwar himself heading the ICAC to channel financial benefits to the Indian community. While Subramaniam blames the Indian mandor, he has discounted the notion that the mandor phenomenon in the government is the consequence of the government adhering to the racist majoritarian policies. In other words, the Indian mandor is not the real problem but those non-Indian elite who manipulate the subservience of these leaders for their particular interests. Even if Indian leaders or mandor are not appointed, the result will be no different. It must be remembered that the crux of the problem is not the mandor system but those non-Indian leaders in power who make use of Indian leaders to camouflage the majoritarian racial and religious system for political expediency. Political camouflage Indian leaders or mandor are used by the non-Indian elite to impress upon the community of the existence of Indian representation. However, such a projection is nothing but a political farce. Unfortunately, this Indian representation in the form of Indian leaders playing second fiddle to non-Indian leaders does not augur well for the economic and political well-being of the Indian community. The pliant Indian leaders in the ruling coalition are a disgrace and humiliation to the Indian community that has immensely contributed to the nation in blood, sweat and tears. This is the reason why the Malaysian Rights Party (Urimai) makes it a point to chart an independent political course for the Indian community without being entrapped by the vicious mandor system that prioritises the interest of the elite of the majoritarian community at the expense of ordinary Indians and others in the country. At the core of the political struggle of Urimai is that Indians should be led by Indian leaders who are in a position to articulate the broader concerns of the community. Urimai definitely does not want to exchange one form of domination to another form. Urimai is open to coalition building but such an effort will be predicated on independence, integrity and dignity. It is not enough to decipher the vicious nature of the political system that has parallels with how plantation labour was controlled and exploited under the mandor system. The present Indian mandor leaders are no different from their earlier counterparts but serve different masters under different political circumstances. – June 20, 2025 Former DAP stalwart and Penang chief minister II Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy is chairman of the United Rights of Malaysian Party (Urimai) interim council. The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.
India Gazette
a day ago
- Business
- India Gazette
Bar Council stands by foreign law firm policy amid SILF resistance
New Delhi [India], June 19 (ANI): The Bar Council of India (BCI) has initiated a nationwide consultative process led by a high-level expert committee to review feedback on its amended Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2025. The move comes amid criticism from the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF), which the BCI has accused of monopolising access to international legal work and misrepresenting the broader interests of the Indian legal community. The expert panel, chaired by eminent corporate lawyer Cyril Shroff, includes senior legal figures such as Ajay Bahl, Suhail Nathani, Sandip Bhagat, Mahesh Agarwal, and Amit Kapur. It has been tasked with collecting and incorporating stakeholder suggestions while reaffirming the BCI's commitment to fairness, accountability, and legal sovereignty. The Bar Council has invited written submissions from law firms, professionals, and the public within 15 days. The points of reference for the consultation are available on the official BCI website, according to the BCI statement issued on Thursday... The BCI's response targets what it describes as SILF's 'obstructionist stance,' asserting that the group represents only a small clique of large, established firms and not the majority of India's 90-95% small and mid-sized practices. These emerging firms, the BCI argues, have long been excluded from cross-border legal opportunities due to the gatekeeping and foreign affiliations maintained by SILF's dominant members. The Bar Council emphasised that its amended 2025 Regulations are designed to democratise access to global legal practice, particularly for young lawyers and underrepresented law firms seeking international exposure. Contrary to SILF's claims, BCI clarified that foreign law firms are not permitted to practice Indian law, appear before courts or tribunals, or handle litigation-related matters. The 2025 Regulations, as clarified by the BCI, impose strict boundaries on foreign participation: No practice of Indian law in any form is allowed. No appearances in Indian courts, tribunals, or quasi-judicial authorities (Rule 8(2)(b)). Permitted activities are confined to advisory roles involving foreign law, public/private international law, or international arbitration. Prohibited activities include conveyancing, title verification, and legal drafting related to Indian proceedings (Rule 8(2)(c)). International arbitration participation is allowed only where disputes involve foreign law or non-Indian parties (Rule 8(2)(e)). All foreign firms must first obtain a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Government of India (Rule 4(a)). In a bid to make policymaking more inclusive, BCI has also announced a National Conference of Indian Law Firms to be held in Mumbai in September 2025. The event will provide a platform for nationwide participation, particularly from regional and smaller firms traditionally excluded from SILF's centralised control. Simultaneously, the BCI is working to create a central registry of law firms and their lawyers, which will eventually enable a democratically elected national body to represent India's legal profession--a contrast to SILF, which the BCI notes has not held internal elections for decades. The BCI alleged that SILF's core motivation stems from fear of losing its exclusive foreign work pipeline. 'Many of these same firms already maintain foreign offices or unofficial tie-ups with foreign law firms,' said the Council. 'Their opposition is not to foreign entry per se, but to the possibility that foreign clients may choose to engage with newer and smaller Indian firms instead.' BCI has firmly rejected claims that the amended rules compromise India's legal independence. 'The Regulations explicitly protect Indian legal sovereignty. No foreign lawyer or firm will be allowed to interpret, argue, or practice Indian law,' the statement reads. Any attempt to circumvent the provisions by Indian or foreign entities will attract regulatory action, including monetary penalties, suspension of registration, disqualification, and possible disciplinary or criminal proceedings, the BCI stated in the statement. The BCI has reiterated that the Regulations are legally valid, currently in force, and not under abeyance or judicial challenge. They are designed to uplift the entire legal profession, especially young, talented advocates who seek a global presence. While the Council expressed its openness to genuine concerns, it condemned misinformation campaigns and fear-mongering. 'The BCI is committed to reform--not for the few, but for the many,' it stated. 'The future of Indian law must be inclusive, competitive, and global.' (ANI)
Mint
3 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Mint Explainer: What's at stake as Bar Council reviews its rules on foreign law firms
On 12 June the Bar Council of India (BCI) set up a high-powered committee headed by Cyril Shroff, managing partner at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, to evaluate the implications of newly notified rules that permit foreign law firms to practice foreign and international law in India in a regulated, non-litigious capacity. Mint explains why the BCI set up the committee and what its recommendations could mean for the future of India's legal sector. Why was the committee formed? The committee was formed following the BCI's notification on 13 May of new rules that allow foreign lawyers and law firms to advise on foreign law, international law and arbitration matters in India on a reciprocal and regulated basis. These rules prohibit litigation and focus on cross-border transactions and international disputes. The BCI's aim is to promote India as a hub for international arbitration while protecting the interests of Indian legal professionals. The new framework also allows Indian lawyers to register as foreign law practitioners abroad without relinquishing the right to practice Indian law domestically. Also read: Why India's law firms are in a disputes hiring frenzy Previously, foreign firms could only offer legal advice on a 'fly-in, fly-out' basis, meaning they couldn't set up shop in India and only conduct specific, short-term, advisory engagements related to non-Indian legal matters by sending their lawyers on temporary visits. Now, with strict registration and compliance requirements in place, the move marks a cautious opening up of the India's legal sector, with corporate legal spending expected to cross ₹60,000 crore this year. However, a backlash from Indian law firms—especially over potential constitutional conflicts and competitive disadvantages—prompted the BCI to initiate a thorough review of the plan. What concerns have law firms raised? Several Indian law firms argue that the new rules bypass the Supreme Court's BCI vs A.K. Balaji judgment of 2018, which held that only Indian citizens may practice law in India, even in non-litigation matters, unless Parliament amends the Advocates Act. Their main concerns include: Also read | So many law graduates, so few top jobs: What's holding them back? Lalit Bhasin, president of the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF), previously cautioned against the unchecked entry of foreign law firms in a press release. 'Allowing foreign law firms without a legislative amendment is not only legally untenable but also threatens to destabilise the domestic legal profession," he said. What will the committee look into? The committee, headed by Cyril Shroff, includes other top legal minds such as Ajay Bahl (AZB & Partners), Suhail Nathani (ELP), Sandip Bhagat (S&R Associates), Mahesh Agarwal (Agarwal Law Associates), and Amit Kapur (JSA). BCI chairman Manan Kumar Mishra is a special invitee. Its mandate includes: The committee has been asked to submit its final report in 30 to 40 days. Based on its recommendations, the BCI will take a final call after consulting both Indian and foreign stakeholders. What are the likely outcomes? Legal experts expect the committee to recommend phased reforms that promote global integration while ensuring regulatory parity. 'If the committee plays it right, it has a chance to turn the current unease into long-term strategic strength for Indian law firms," said Prachi Shrivastava, founder of Lawfinity Solutions, a legal marketing firm. She added that a reciprocity-first model and a phased-entry approach—starting with backend advisory work—could ease the transition for Indian firms. Automated systems for fee disclosures, conflict checks, and jurisdictional limits could boost transparency without overwhelming smaller firms. Also read: Can Vijay Mallya return home? He could. But it won't be a smooth landing. Amit Tungare, managing partner at Asahi Legal, expects the panel to push for 'clearer demarcation of practice areas, standardised partnership frameworks, and reciprocity mechanisms that actually benefit Indian firms seeking global expansion—not just foreign firms entering India". 'This committee has the opportunity to usher in clarity and balance—by ensuring fair competition, pushing for domestic reforms that modernise Indian practice models, and encouraging global visibility for Indian firms," he added. Ashima Obhan, senior partner at Obhan & Associates, emphasised that 'phased liberalisation, symmetry in regulation, capacity-building measures, and clear delineation of permissible activities would go a long way in harmonising interests".
Indian Express
12-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Alia Bhatt's hotel note in Cannes addresses her as ‘Alia Kapoor', fans speculate whether the actress has changed her surname
Alia Bhatt, who recently marked her Cannes debut, shared a video of her time at the International Film Festival and her transition through her many outfits. While, her video exhilarated her fans who 'missed' her YouTube content, some eagle eyed fans noticed the change in her surname as it read, 'Alia Kapoor'. In a nearly five-minute-long video, Alia gave a glimpse of her time at Cannes. While she was seen getting her makeup done under the guidance of her stylist Rhea Kapoor for her many looks, a part of the video featured the welcome note by the hotel she stayed at. It read, 'Dear Alia Kapoor'. This prompted many of her fans to think whether she has legally adopted her husband Ranbir Kapoor's surname, dropping Bhatt. A screenshot of the same was shared by a Reddit user which attracted a lot of attention. A user speculated, 'Must've taken her husband's name and kept Bhatt for her public facing career since she is widely known by that surname.' Others expressed, 'It's her choice to keep whatever last name she likes, buttt I really think Alia Bhatt has more ring to it. Alia Kapoor just sounds so basic. I think there must be an alia Kapoor in every block of South Delhi. I hope she never changes this publicly at least.' ALSO READ | Housefull 5 director blames viewers for focusing on 'skin show, objectification of women' in the Akshay Kumar-starrer: 'The plot is driven by women' Another user took a wild guess and wrote, 'Someone pointed out here that it's a French Hotel, so probably took her name from there which means that She's legally taken the name Alia Kapoor.' Another comment read, 'How will a hotel in France know her husband's surname? Anyway, hotel booking is done according to your legal name on IDs.' In the video, Alia Bhatt was seen having a fun banter with Rhea Kapoor and her team. Expressing her feelings of debuting at Cannes, Alia shared, 'I am both excited and nervous.' In the video, the actress was seen signing autographs for her non-Indian fans and also adhering to their photo request. Alia Bhatt still maintains Bhatt as her surname in her movies and brand endorsements. Alia Bhatt married her Brahmastra co-star Ranbir Kapoor in 2022. The couple are now parents to a daughter, Raha Kapoor.
India.com
30-05-2025
- Entertainment
- India.com
Who is Varun Navani, Indian-origin Gujarati techie whose 'baraat' halted Wall Street? Here's how much he paid to book this famous venue
Image: Instagram/Screengrab An Indian wedding that brought New York's famous Wall Street to a halt, is trending on social media platforms, and netizens are amazed at how the groom, Varun Navani– an Indian-origin techie of Gujarati ancestry– managed to pull off the remarkable feat of blocking one of busiest spots in The Big Apple. The wedding on Wall Street According to media reports, around 400 guests attended the extravagant wedding ceremony, which went viral on the internet after video of the event, showing the bride and the groom, as well as the 'baraatis', dancing to popular Bollywood numbers on Wall Street. Another notable thing about the event which stood out was that even non-Indian guests had donned traditional Indian party attires, giving the ceremony a uniquely Indian look, as if it was taking place somewhere in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, or any other Indian metro city. 'We shut down Wall Street for a 400-person Baraat, Who would've ever thought?! (sic),' wrote the DJ who played at the wedding event as she shared several videos from the ceremony on his Instagram page @djajmumbai. View this post on Instagram A post shared by DJ AJ (@djajmumbai) How much did Varun Navani pay for booking the Wall Street? As per media reports, Wall Street can be rented for $11,000 with proper permits, while the cost of blocking each area in the vicinity ranges between $25,000 to $60,000. These included roads, sidewalks and alleyways in New York's bustling Financial District, commonly known as the Wall Street. With over 400 guests, the event had the typical vibe of an extravagant Indian wedding procession, with the New York Mayor's Office describing it as an 'extra large' event. Who was the bride? Varun Navani married Amanda Soll, a risk–management legal compliance director at MasterCard, in a grand wedding at the Wall Street, which has earned him the moniker 'The groom of Wall Street', a play on words of the famous Hollywood flick 'The Wolf of Wall Street' starring Leonardo Di Caprio. According to reports, Amanda was draped in a red Sabyasachi lehenga, looking very much like an Indian bride, as her friends and family attended the key event. Meanwhile, Varun had donned a stylish ivory sherwani, and made his entry in a vintage white car accompanied by groomsmen. The grand wedding has gone viral on social media, and is being talked about across India as well as the United States. Who is Varun Navani? Varun Navani is a Gujarat-born techie who now resides in Boston, and is the founder of and CEO of Rolai– an AI platform that provides adoption solution and data analytical skills for higher education institutions. Notably, Varun Navani was featured in the prestigious Forbes 30 under 30 list from Boston in 2023, as per his LinkedIn page.
