Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; 
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 2 October, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-quick-uturn/article5192465.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22887,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tainted MPs and MLAs,ordinance,crime,Political Parties&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; 
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 2 October, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-quick-uturn/article5192465.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22887,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 22733
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Tainted MPs and MLAs,ordinance,crime,Political Parties&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br /><em>Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons</em></p><p align="justify">Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.</p><p align="justify">Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &quot;unanimous&quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.</p><p align="justify">The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.</p><p align="justify">Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People's Act,&quot; it said &quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&quot;</p><p align="justify">Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening's decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government's decision to rescind the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA's allied parties - the NCP's Sharad Pawar, the RLD's Ajit Singh and the National Conference's Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&quot; </p>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; 
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 2 October, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-quick-uturn/article5192465.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22887,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tainted MPs and MLAs,ordinance,crime,Political Parties&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; 
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 2 October, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-quick-uturn/article5192465.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22887,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 22733
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Tainted MPs and MLAs,ordinance,crime,Political Parties&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br /><em>Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons</em></p><p align="justify">Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.</p><p align="justify">Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &quot;unanimous&quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.</p><p align="justify">The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.</p><p align="justify">Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People's Act,&quot; it said &quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&quot;</p><p align="justify">Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening's decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government's decision to rescind the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA's allied parties - the NCP's Sharad Pawar, the RLD's Ajit Singh and the National Conference's Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&quot; </p>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67fd72c31f160-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; 
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 2 October, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-quick-uturn/article5192465.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22887,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Tainted MPs and MLAs,ordinance,crime,Political Parties&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 22733,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; 
&lt;/p&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 2 October, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-quick-uturn/article5192465.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 22887,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 22733
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Tainted MPs and MLAs,ordinance,crime,Political Parties&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Questions over advisability &amp;amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &amp;quot;unanimous&amp;quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &amp;quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People&#039;s Act,&amp;quot; it said &amp;quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening&#039;s decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government&#039;s decision to rescind the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA&#039;s allied parties - the NCP&#039;s Sharad Pawar, the RLD&#039;s Ajit Singh and the National Conference&#039;s Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &amp;quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&amp;quot; &lt;/p&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br /><em>Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons</em></p><p align="justify">Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.</p><p align="justify">Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &quot;unanimous&quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.</p><p align="justify">The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.</p><p align="justify">Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People's Act,&quot; it said &quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&quot;</p><p align="justify">Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening's decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government's decision to rescind the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA's allied parties - the NCP's Sharad Pawar, the RLD's Ajit Singh and the National Conference's Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&quot; </p>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 22733,
		'title' => 'A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Hindu
</div>
<p align="justify">
<br />
<em>Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons</em>
</p>
<p align="justify">
Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &quot;unanimous&quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.
</p>
<p align="justify">
The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People's Act,&quot; it said &quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&quot;
</p>
<p align="justify">
Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening's decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government's decision to rescind the ordinance.
</p>
<p align="justify">
The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA's allied parties - the NCP's Sharad Pawar, the RLD's Ajit Singh and the National Conference's Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&quot; 
</p>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 2 October, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-quick-uturn/article5192465.ece?homepage=true',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 22887,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 22733,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Tainted MPs and MLAs,ordinance,crime,Political Parties',
	'metaDesc' => '
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br /><em>Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons</em></p><p align="justify">Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.</p><p align="justify">Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &quot;unanimous&quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.</p><p align="justify">The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.</p><p align="justify">Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People's Act,&quot; it said &quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&quot;</p><p align="justify">Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening's decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government's decision to rescind the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA's allied parties - the NCP's Sharad Pawar, the RLD's Ajit Singh and the National Conference's Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&quot; </p>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 22733,
	'title' => 'A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Hindu
</div>
<p align="justify">
<br />
<em>Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons</em>
</p>
<p align="justify">
Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &quot;unanimous&quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.
</p>
<p align="justify">
The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People's Act,&quot; it said &quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&quot;
</p>
<p align="justify">
Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening's decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government's decision to rescind the ordinance.
</p>
<p align="justify">
The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA's allied parties - the NCP's Sharad Pawar, the RLD's Ajit Singh and the National Conference's Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.
</p>
<p align="justify">
Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&quot; 
</p>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 2 October, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a-quick-uturn/article5192465.ece?homepage=true',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'a-quick-u-turn-smita-gupta-22887',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 22887,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 22733
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta'
$metaKeywords = 'Tainted MPs and MLAs,ordinance,crime,Political Parties'
$metaDesc = '
-The Hindu



Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons


Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br /><em>Questions over advisability &amp; validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons</em></p><p align="justify">Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based.</p><p align="justify">Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as &quot;unanimous&quot;, but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined.</p><p align="justify">The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification.</p><p align="justify">Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: &quot;Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People's Act,&quot; it said &quot;the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill.&quot;</p><p align="justify">Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening's decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government's decision to rescind the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA's allied parties - the NCP's Sharad Pawar, the RLD's Ajit Singh and the National Conference's Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance.</p><p align="justify">Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. &quot;Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance.&quot; </p>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

A quick U-turn -Smita Gupta

-The Hindu Questions over advisability & validity of ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers cited as reasons Five days after Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi publicly censured the government, the Union Cabinet, at a brisk 20-minute meeting on Wednesday evening, decided to withdraw the controversial ordinance on convicted lawmakers, as well as the Bill that sought to amend the Representation of the People Act on which it was based. Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting Manish Tiwari described the cabinet decision as "unanimous", but it was taken only after Union agriculture minister and Nationalist Congress Party leader Sharad Pawar, government sources said, read his colleagues a homily. Such a dramatic U-turn was embarrassing for the government, he said, because it showed that the ordinance was rushed through without careful thought. He also underscored the fact that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are institutions that cannot afford to be undermined. The government had walked into an opposition trap, Mr. Pawar said, referring to the fact that the government had initially wished to amend Articles 101 and 102 of the Constitution (that relate to vacancy of seats and disqualification of members) along with the proposed changes in the Representation of People Act, so that the two would be in sync. But the BJP, while agreeing to the changes in the RPA Act, had refused to cooperate on amending the Constitution. Later, as Union parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath has publicly said, the BJP reneged even on this. And the government went along with the Bill and the ordinance as it was keen to overturn the July 10 Supreme Court ruling that had said that convicted lawmakers would face immediate disqualification. Indeed, it is learnt that on Wednesday, shortly before the Union cabinet met, Attorney General (AG) Goolam Vahanvati met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and stressed that without the constitutional amendments, the ordinance could be challenged in court. The government statement announcing the withdrawal of the ordinance hinted at this: "Having regard to various concerns, which have been expressed in relation to the validity and advisability of the proposed Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People's Act," it said "the Cabinet has decided to withdraw the proposal for promulgating the Ordinance as well as the Bill." Congress sources said that after the Union cabinet had cleared the ordinance on September 24, Mr. Gandhi had sought the opinion of a government legal officer who had pointed out the pitfall mentioned above. It is also learnt that President Pranab Mukherjee, too, had consulted legal experts who had given him the identical view - after which he had called Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde for a briefing on September 26. Wednesday evening's decision came at the end of a long day for the Prime Minister: Mr Gandhi met him at his 7, Race Course residence to express his regret for the timing and language of his public censure, but reiterated his staunch opposition to the order. After the 25-minute meeting with Mr. Gandhi, the Prime Minister called on the President to inform him of the government's decision to rescind the ordinance. The Congress Core Group - of which both the Prime Minister and Congress President Sonia Gandhi are members - too met on Wednesday morning on the issue. The Prime Minister called up the leaders of the UPA's allied parties - the NCP's Sharad Pawar, the RLD's Ajit Singh and the National Conference's Farooq Abdullah - ahead of the cabinet meeting. He told them of his intention of withdrawing the ordinance. Meanwhile, Mr. Tewari sought to give a positive spin. "Yes, there was a view articulated by Rahul Gandhi and possibly it was based on the widest possible feedback... under those circumstances it was decided to take back both the bill and ordinance."