Boycott shouting matches held in the name of debate: Tejashwi Yadav
Patna, Mar 11: Patna, Mar 11: RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav on Monday urged opposition leaders to take a united stand against what he called a "campaign of distortion" by pro-BJP news channels, and he was backed by his father Lalu Prasad who gave the call - "boycott Modi media".
While they didn't name any particular channel, the BJP hit back accusing Yadav of "sitting in the lap of the Congress which is famous for its blatant use of the media".
The leader of the opposition in the Bihar Assembly shared on his official Twitter handle a letter dated March 8, copies of which were addressed to Congress president Rahul Gandhi, BSP supremo Mayawati, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav and West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.
In the strongly-worded letter, Yadav alleged, "A spectacle is produced every evening with the sole aim of denigrating all the opposition parties. It is an open secret that a powerful section of the television media is deeply vested in the electoral fortunes of the BJP".
Lalu Prasad, who heads the RJD and is in Ranchi now serving sentences in fodder scam cases, retweeted the post on his own twitter handle, operated by his close aides, with the hashtag #Boycott_Modi_Media.
The BJP reacted with indignation, accusing the RJD heir apparent of "sitting in the lap" of the Congress notwithstanding alleged indifference of Gandhi to his plank of social justice and reminding him of throttling of the media during the Emergency.
The former deputy chief minister said, "If it was a case of subtle siding with the party in power, the spokespersons of various opposition parties would have expected to counter the tilt in rational debates held in news channel studios."
Many news channels "have not only given up pretence of impartiality... but have gone ahead to spout vitriolic hate in Indian society and incite violence", he said.
Without naming any media outlet or personality, Yadav alleged that many senior and well-respected journalists have been warning about the "near-total breakdown of the ethics of journalism in these corporate house-funded news channels".
He claimed that the news channels have been seized fully by fascist tendencies and that no rational debate is possible at these studios.
"We appeal to all political parties in the opposition and conscientious voices of the Indian public sphere not to participate in the shouting matches held in the name of debate by these channels and anchors and to refuse to be complicit in their campaign of distortion and deceit.
"Conspicuous absence of voices from opposition shall not allow them to continue with their pre-scripted debates and discussions," the RJD heir apparent added.
He urged the opposition parties and people to take a "united and collective call" on this.
Reacting to Yadav's initiative, BJP state spokesman Nikhil Anand advised him not to sermonise sitting in the lap of the Congress which is "famous for its blatant use of media".
"Your echo on social justice has never got any support from @RahulGandhi. Remember Congress is hard core anti-Mandal, anti-Dalit and anti-OBC," he said.
"Why don't you remember those days when public broadcasters were called Indira Darshan and Rajiv Darshan. Hope you are well aware of the media ban during Emergency. @RJDforIndia and @CongressforIndia must not force media to be their mouthpiece," Anand said in another tweet.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
