No vested interest in revoking Dileep's suspension: Mohanlal
Thiruvananthapuram, June 30: Superstar Mohanlal on Saturday said there was no vested interest in revoking the suspension of actor Dileep, an accused in the actress kidnap case, from Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA).
For the first time since the massive row broke out over the revoking of suspension of actor Dileep, superstar Mohanlal on Saturday broke his silence.
He said there was no vested interest and that they just followed the democratic principles adopted in any organisation. "We are, however, willing to look into the resignation of a few women members."
Dileep is an accused in the actress kidnap case that took place last year and was in jail for 85 days and now out on bail. He was suspended from AMMA last year.
Those who have resigned include the victim in the case, Rima Kallingal, Remya Nambisan and Geetu Mohandas, all of whom are leading lights in the Malayalam film industry.
Mohanlal was ordained as the president of artists body last Sunday, when he replaced CPI-M backed Lok Sabha member Innocent who stepped down after 18 years in that post.
In an email from London to the media, Mohanlal stated at the annual general body meeting that it was a unanimous decision the suspension of Dileep should be revoked.
"All what we did was to follow the accepted democratic practice that is taken in such circumstances and there was no other vested interests. I am deeply pained by the response against AMMA that has come out. We have always stood strongly behind the victim.
"What has to be noted is that we are an organisation with 485 members, of which more than 50 per cent find it difficult to go forward. We are giving a monthly pension to A137 of our members," wrote Mohanlal.
He further states it has to be noted that they have not even communicated the unanimous decision to Dileep as even before that there has been a huge opposition to it.
"We also saw that there have been differences of opinion raised by a few members who have announced that they are resigning from AMMA. We very well understand their emotions and the new office-bearers of AMMA are willing to take a re-look.
"Corrections, if it has to be there, will be done and let the differences of opinion amongst us be rectified and we will go forward. Let those who throw mud on us from outside do it , but we will stand together," Mohanlal added.
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.
Neutrality of polls can't be assured if EC dependent on contestants: Justice Nagarathna
New Delhi (PTI): Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna, while highlighting that the Election Commission is the primary institution entrusted with maintaining the integrity of polls, has said if those who conduct elections are dependent on those who contest them, the neutrality of the process cannot be assured.
The apex court judge raised a critical concern regarding the structural independence of those tasked with overseeing the ballot while delivering the Rajendra Prasad Memorial Lecture at the Chanakya Law University in Patna on Saturday.
Citing a 1995 verdict where the Supreme Court recognised the Election Commission as a constitutional authority of high significance, entrusted with ensuring the integrity of elections, she said, "The concern, once again, was structural: if those who conduct elections are dependent on those who contest them, the neutrality of the process cannot be assured."
Justice Nagarathna said elections are not merely periodic events but a mechanism through which political authority is constituted.
"Our constitutional democracy has amply demonstrated smooth changes in government due to elections being held on a timely basis. Control over that process is, in effect, control over the conditions of political competition itself," she said.
The Supreme Court judge said power is not exercised only through formal institutions but also through the processes that sustain them, including elections, public finance, and regulation.
"A constitutional structure that seeks to restrain power must therefore go beyond its classical forms and address these fourth-branch institutions. A set of institutions, while not always fitting within the classical tripartite scheme, is nonetheless central to the maintenance of constitutional order," she said.
Justice Nagarathna said the unmistakable lesson of history is that constitutional collapse occurs through the disabling of its structure, and the violation of rights merely follows.
"The dismantling of structure, in turn, occurs when institutions stop checking each other. At that moment, elections may continue, courts may function, laws may be enacted by Parliament, and yet, power is effectively not restrained because the structural discipline no longer exists," she said.
The apex court judge also urged the Centre to view states as "coordinates and not subordinates" and asserted that the separation of powers was a "constitutional arrangement of co-equals."
Justice Nagarathna also called for keeping aside "inter-party differences" in the matter of "Centre-state relations", underscoring that governance must not depend on "which party may be ruling the Centre and which other party may be ruling at the state level".
