----------------------------------------------------------
Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/goa-net/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Goanet2003/
----------------------------------------------------------

It is apparent that the decision of the CM to bull-doz the Panjim
Corporation Bill with or without the consent/approval of the people has, I
believe just one consideration:

It is in the air and mostly Panjimites are of the  opinion that:

That the CM is increasingly nervous of his electoral stand in the Panjim
Constituency, especially after the very narrow margin that gave him the
victory in the last forced assembly elections. The missing 3000 odd voters
from the Panjim voters list has left a bad taste in the mouths of
Panjimites.

The crucial point is that Panjim must see him re-elected in the next
assembly election. He cannot afford to change his constituency at this
moment as it would be a near political harakiri.

Therefore Panjim with the added Porvorim, Soccorro, Betim Britona etc under
the belt and which is heavily under the influence of his aid-in-arm
Velingkar of the RSS,  electoral victory in Panjim for Manohar Parrikar will
be ensured. (even at the cost of  Ribandar and Taleigao).

Therefore, the Corporation Bill is rather more important to Manohar Parrikar
than the people of Panjim.

Cheers


PANJIM CORPORATION BILL.
>
> The People?s Movement for Civic Action (PMCA) had an Extraordinary General
> Body Meeting on Thursday, January 23, 2003 to discuss the recently passed
> City of Panaji Corporation Act, 2002.
>
> Recent statements emanating from Official sources, including the Chief
> Minister, Mr. Manohar Parikkar, have caused both concern and consternation
> among the general public.
>
> The passing of the City of Panaji Corporation Bill by the Goa Legislative
> Assembly without soliciting the opinions of the Panchayats concerned, has
> been universally and vehemently condemned by the respective Panchayats
which
> are sought to be included in the ambit of the proposed City of Panaji
> Municipal Corporation. Even more disturbing is the fact that the Panjim
> Municipal Council, which is sought to be upgraded to a Corporation, was
not
> consulted by the Government before it tabled this Bill in the Assembly and
> had it passed. Such an attitude is unprecedented and bodes ill for the
future
> of democracy in Goa.
>
> The Chief Minister is reported to have stated that he will go ahead with
the
> formation of the Municipal Corporation of Panaji, but that he will leave
it
> to the Panchayats to decide whether they want to become part of the
> Corporation. If this is true, it makes a complete mockery of the Rule of
Law.
>
> It has never been heard of anywhere in the world that a piece of
Legislation
> is enacted which allows citizens to decide whether they want to be covered
by
> the Legislation or not. A Law is either applicable or not. It is not left
to
> the discretion of the citizens to decide whether it will apply to them or
> not. Statements such as those reported in the media about the coverage of
> this particular legislation only add to the general perception that the
> Government is either ignorant about, or is callous about the sanctity of
> legislation.
>
> The inherent contradictions in the legislation, reinforced by official
> pronouncements, only add to the disrespect for the Law, which is widely
> prevalent among the citizenry.   While, on the one hand, the legislation
> seeks to bring within the ambit of the Municipal Corporation far-flung
> Panchayat areas, on the other hand it seeks to exclude areas which are
> presently part of the Panjim Municipal Council.  There is no explanation
for
> this gross contradiction in the official position of the Government of
Goa.
> If Taleigao can be allowed to opt out of the Corporation limits, why can't
> Ribandar be allowed the same option?
>
> The meeting, chaired by Mr. Averthanus D?Souza, Vice President of the
> People's Movement for Civic Action, was addressed by Advocate Ms. Agni,
who
> presented an overview of the legislation and indicated the inherent
> contradictions contained in it.
>


Reply via email to