上海闵行颛桥小树林

Three journalists face prison in legal tussle over cartoon

first_img May 18, 2021 Find out more AlgeriaMiddle East – North Africa June 5, 2008 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Three journalists face prison in legal tussle over cartoon May 12, 2021 Find out more Organisation Reporters Without Borders today noted with concern an upsurge in legal proceedings against members of the media as the trial of three journalists on the daily Liberté ended with the state prosecutor making an outrageous call for jail sentences against them.The prosecutor on 1st June called for two months imprisonment for editor, Ali Ouafak, managing editor, Farid Alilat, and cartoonist Ali Dilem for “defamation” under Article 146 of the press law which provides for prison sentences for insulting state bodies.The offending cartoon, published on 29 July 2004, of retired Chief of Staff of the Algerian Army, General Mohamed Lamari, prompted a complaint from the defence ministry to the Sidi M’hammed correctional court in Algiers. The court is set to deliver its verdict on 15 June.“With days to go before sentence in this case, we appeal to the justice system to show restraint and discernment. Since the Algerian authorities always turn a deaf ear to calls to amend the draconian law on the press, we hope that the judges will not serve any political interests by insisting on handing down harsh sentences to the Liberté journalists” the worldwide press freedom organisation said. “Ali Dilem’s cartoons, which are widely appreciated outside Algeria, should be seen for what they are, journalistic sketches that justify a degree of mockery”, it added.Diliem is already under a suspended prison sentence and could end up behind bars if he was sentenced again. He has had a total of more than 20 legal cases brought against him.Lawyer for Liberté, Khaled Burayu, told Reporters Without Borders that he had urged the court to show tolerance over the cartoons. “We would like Algerian jurisprudence to take a lead from European jurisprudence which provides for moderation. The cartoonist did not act in bad faith,” he added.Two journalists on the daily al-Watan were sentenced to two months in prison for defamation in March this year in a suit brought by the prefect of the eastern region of Jijel. Other Algerian journalists have regularly been brought before the court in a number of similar cases. News Help by sharing this information Follow the news on Algeria Algeria : Reporter jailed after covering Tuareg protests in southern Algeria Algeria pressures reporters by delaying renewal of accreditationcenter_img News Receive email alerts AlgeriaMiddle East – North Africa Harassment of Algerian reporters intensifies in run-up to parliamentary elections News News to go further RSF_en April 29, 2021 Find out morelast_img read more

Karnataka HC Rejects Plea By Relative Of DK Shiva Kumar Against Consent Given For CBI Investigation In To Corruption Charges

first_imgNews UpdatesKarnataka HC Rejects Plea By Relative Of DK Shiva Kumar Against Consent Given For CBI Investigation In To Corruption Charges Monisha Purwar29 July 2020 12:12 AMShare This – xThe Karnataka High Court rejected a petition filed by a close relative of formerMinister D.K. Shivakumar challenging Karnataka Government’s “sanction” to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe charges against D.K. Shivkumar, the petitioner and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The alleged offences came to light in August 2017 when the Income…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Karnataka High Court rejected a petition filed by a close relative of formerMinister D.K. Shivakumar challenging Karnataka Government’s “sanction” to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe charges against D.K. Shivkumar, the petitioner and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The alleged offences came to light in August 2017 when the Income Tax Department raided the New Delhi premise of the minister and found him to be the beneficiary of benami investments in a number of properties. The petitioner, a close relative of Shivkumar was also found to have been involved in transactions on behalf of Shivkumar. The Enforcement Directorate thereby started investigations into the matter under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and also forwarded its report to the Karnataka Government in 2019 to take appropriate action for alleged violations of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Karnataka Government under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 gave permission to the CBI to investigate the alleged offences of corruption against DK Shivkumar and other officials of the Government of Karnataka after seeking opinion from the Advocate General of Karnataka. The primary contention of the petitioner is that a “sanction” to prosecute cannot be given by the State on the basis of vague allegations and without an application of mind, both of which were rejected by the Court. The Court clarified that the use of the term “sanction” in the impugned order of the State Government was wrongly employed as the action of the Government to grant permission to the CBI under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 was only “consent” to enable the CBI to investigate the offence. The Court elaborated on the distinction between the terms “sanction” and “consent” as follows: “In so far as the term “consent” found in Section 6 of the DSPE Act, 1946, it only means a “permission” of the concerned State in the constitutional scheme of things. On the other hand, the word “sanction” found in Sections 17A and 19 of the PC Act, 1988, Section 197 in the Criminal Procedure Code inheres a thoughtful application of mind to ascertain whether the record placed before the Authority bears out enough material to proceed to prosecute. The requirement of application of mind while granting “sanction” is intended to avoid frivolous or vexatious proceedings from being adopted, particularly against public servants in the discharge of their official duties.” In response to the petitioner’s contention that Section 6 of the DSPE Act cannot be invoked without an application of mind, the Court stated that grant of consent under Section 6 of the DSPE Act was more in the nature of an administrative order and does not require enormous rejigging. The Court also stated that the petitioner had no locus standi to challenge the impugned order of consent as he failed to establish how any of his rights were infringed or vitiated by the grant of such consent. It further reiterated the well-established jurisprudence that an accused has no choice of the investigating agency to suggest that the claim of the petitioner stands null in the given circumstances. Further, the Court noted that a locus standi to challenge the impugned order can exist with the petitioner as a matter of right only when Section 6-A of the DSPE Act, 1946 is violated and investigation and inquiry by the CBI is commenced without approval of the Central Government. This source of this right rested in the fact that the petitioner was a government employee employed as Chief Manager of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited.Click Here To Download Order[Read Order] Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more

Watch Bernie Worrell And Gov’t Mule Rule This ‘Cortez The Killer’ In 1999

first_imgThe best way to celebrate the life of keys legend Bernie Worrell is through his music. A pioneer of funk, having been involved in Parliament/Funkadelic and Talking Heads in the early years, and continuing on with some of today’s greatest, he also frequented the stage with Warren Haynes and Gov’t Mule.Check out this bone-chilling footage of the the Wizard of Woo performing Neil Young‘s “Cortez the Killer,” back in 1999 at Irving Plaza in NYC alongside Warren Haynes, Allen Woody with his double neck guitar, and Blues Traveler bassist Bobby Sheehan. Simply mind-blowing!Warren Haynes posted a thoughtful message to his Facebook page about the tragic loss in music, accompanied by a video of their “Killer Mosquito” performance:RIP Bernie Worrell!last_img read more

Three new members announced for Sports Betting Hall of Fame

first_img Related Articles StumbleUpon GVC absorbs retail shocks as business recalibrates for critical H2 trading August 13, 2020 Danske Spil calls for esports makeover with Pinnacle Solution August 25, 2020 Share Share Jason Ader – No Boogeyman… Activism will play a vital part in reshaping gambling August 20, 2020 Submit Nominations have opened for the latest inductees to the Sports Betting Hall of Fame, which recognises those people who have made an outstanding contribution to the industry. In a revamped ceremony, this year’s Hall of Famers will be recognised at a lavish event held at the prestigious National History Museum (Thursday 20 September) during Betting on Sports Week. This year will see the number of inductees increase to five and three members have already been confirmed to join the Hall of FameNorbert Teufelberger – Co-founder of BwinConstantinos Antonopoulos – Founding member and former CEO of IntralotWarwick Bartlett – Former Chairman of ABB, founder of Global Betting and Gaming Consultants (GBGC)The Sports Betting Hall of Fame has been curated in order to recognise the individuals who have contributed a great deal to the industry over the course of their careers with a lasting legacy. The purpose of the Hall of Fame is to honour, preserve and perpetuate the names and outstanding accomplishments of personalities who have brought lasting fame to the sports betting sector.Previous inductees include Pinnacle CEO Paris Smith, Sportingbet Founder Mark Blandford, Sportradar Founder Carsten Koerl, Betfred Founder Fred Done, BetConstruct Founder Vigen Badalyan and Bookmaker Technology Consortium director Howard Chisholm.Constantinos Antonopoulos commented: “The industry brings a lot of joy and entertainment to its customers, but also needs to protect them through integrity transparency and social responsibility. So it is only right that the pioneers are called to pass their foresight and experience towards this great balance.“It is for this reason I am thrilled to be asked to join the Sports Betting Hall of Fame and honoured to join the existing members.”Bartlett added: “I’ve spent most my working life in and around the betting industry, so it’s a great honour for me to be recognised by my peers in this way. There are already some real inspirational names in the Sports Betting Hall of Fame and I’m looking forward to getting involved in September.”Members of the industry are now invited to put nominate people who they believe deserve to be recognised by the industry and welcomed into the Hall of Fame. To make a nomination, click here. Reflecting the change in format, the Betting on Sports Conference at Olympia London (19-20 September) will now close with a special Hall of Fame panel containing previous and new members discussing a range of issues and how they see the future of the betting industry.SBC CEO & Founder Rasmus Sojmark commented: “We have secured an iconic venue for some of the industry’s most iconic names and I see no better way of closing off Betting on Sports Week than with a celebration of the best that sports betting has to offer.”Entry to the Hall of Fame is included in every ticket for the Betting on Sports Conference and additional tickets for the extravaganza are also available from [email protected] more information about Betting on Sports week, visit www.sbcevents.com.last_img read more