An army court Friday stuck to its earlier finding and pronounced that former 33 Corps commander Lt. Gen. P.K. Rath was not guilty of the charge of intent to defraud the army in the Sukna land scam in West Bengal.
From: http://ping.fm/SeDXd
Popular Posts
-
A lady doctor Dr Stuti Shukla was found hanging in her husband's home in Aligarh district of Uttar Pradesh on Sunday night and her paren...
-
Food inflation eased to 10.63 per cent for the week ended November 5 even as prices of agricultural items, barring onions and wheat, continu...
-
Afghan security forces and their NATO allies have launched a new push against the Al-Qaeda-linked Haqqani network along the troubled Pakista...
-
Yoga guru Swami Ramdev today said black flags being shown or shoes being thrown at leaders like Rahul Gandhi were because of their karma (wo...
-
Tung (North Sikkim), Sep 23: With rescue teams facing difficulties to reach some farflung quake-hit areas in Sikkim, hundreds of survivors a...
-
In a majority verdict, the Supreme Court today upheld the criteria of the Election Commission (EC) for granting symbols to unrecognised regi...
-
Italian authorities arrested Lazio captain Stefano Mauri and more than a dozen others Monday as part of a wide-ranging investigation into ma...
-
Maria Sharapova beat Caroline Wozniacki in an exhibition at Madison Square Garden on Monday -- though she lost the only point she played aga...
-
New York, Nov 14: Calling Air India “one of the most poorly-run airlines in the world”, American carriers have opposed the US Exim Bank’s US...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
GCM stuck to its verdict and thus upheld its independence. If it had succumbed to the pressures from the Convening Officer ( GOC Eastern Command), it would have been a clear case of UCI (Unlawful Command Influence)!
ReplyDelete"This Court has consistently held that any circumstance which gives even the appearance of improperly influencing the court-martial proceedings against the accused must be condemned."- United States v. Hawthorne, 22 C.M.R. 83, 87 (US Court of Military Appeals. 1956). The presence of an inelastic attitude on the part of convening authority (CA) may suggest that the CA may not adhere to the appropriate legal standards in the post-trial review process and that he may be inflexible in reviewing convictions because of his predisposition to approve certain harsher findings ( intent to defraud) and corresponding harsher sentences. Is this not a classic case of UCI ? Once the issue of command influence is properly placed at issue, "no reviewing court may properly affirm findings and sentence unless [the court] is persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that the findings and sentence have not been affected by the command influence." United States v. Thomas, 22 M.J. 388, 394 (C.M.A. 1986) may be very persuasive.
Any criminal justice system should not only be fair but should appear to be so! Does the present facts of the case pass this test?
GCM sticking to its earlier verdict upholds the foundation of independence of the court. GCM needs to be commended for this stand. Kudos to the the GCM and its members.
GOC Eastern Command must have sought the formation Hq JAG advise in arriving at declaring the GCM finding as "perverse"! Does it speak very high of the JAG of the Eastern Command? It is a sad commentary on the JAG that instead of advising against UCI, it was acting as an instrument of unlawful command influence!
It is the judge advocate of the GCM that needs to be appreciated for sane advise to the GCM. Please note that the members of the court are all untrained in law!
“The lack of legal qualification or expe-
rience in the officers making the deci-
sions either at the court martial or review
stages made it impossible for them to
act in an independent or impartial man-
ner.” writes European Human Rights
Court (in Findlay v. United Kingdom
in 1997) while declaring that the Army
Courts Martial of UK are violative of Hu-
man Rights.
Please see: http://www.udayindia.org/content_23july2011/spotlight.htm