On November 26, 2017 Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) celebrated its 5 years of making. The Foundation Day was celebrated by organizing a rally at Ram Lila Maidan in New Delhi.
AAP was formed on the basis of 3 cardinal principles:
Decentralization of Power by ushering in Local Governance
Inner party Democracy
Today, after 5 years, AAP stands as a lie to its own promises.
The very fundamental principle of Financial Transparency (Chande kee pardarshita) has been violated by none other than Kejriwal and his his corrupt coterie. A party which came to fight corruption killed the very principle of financial accountability! Thus, in hindsight, all the noise about fighting corruption was a flim- flam.
Thus, yesterday’s news that Tax Department has slapped a 30 Cr Tax notice on AAP comes as a no surprise to me. The thugs within our AAP can do anything. If I am wrong, why they do not show the donation lists to the public?
Within AAP, several volunteers and supporters stood against the violation of the principle of Financial Transparency by Kejriwal. A Chanda Bandh Satyagraha was launched by AAP’s own prominent NRI supporter Dr Munish Raizada. The Satyagraha was based upon the fact that since party has hidden the donation list, we take a vow not to donate to it anymore.
The EC recommended disqualification of 20 AAP MLAs under the ‘office of profit’ pretext
AAP looks forward to approaching the Delhi High court
The controversy started after Prashant Patel had submitted an application to the President
The Election Commission has recommended the disqualification 20 AAP MLAs. The EC found them guilty of holding an ‘office of profit’. The recommendation has been sent to the President. If cleared, the disqualification would mean that AAP’s strength in Delhi Assembly will reduce from 67 to 47.
The 20 AAP legislators were accused of being unconstitutionally appointed as parliamentary secretaries to assist various ministers of the Delhi government. The EC’s opinion on this matter means that the AAP legislators are set to be disqualified, which could soon force a mini Assembly election in the national capital.
“This is unprecedented. The MLAs in question didn’t get a chance to present their case before the EC. In fact, we didn’t hear the news from the EC, but news channels,” AAP spokesperson Saurabh Bhardwaj said.
The ‘office of profit’ controversy had started after a lawyer, Prashant Patel, had filed an application in 2015 to the President’s office. It questioned the appointment of AAP MLAs as parliamentary secretaries.
The Congress had filed a petition in Election Commission in 2016 as a follow-up, based on this application. The opposition party sought disqualification of 21 AAP MLAs.
AAP had argued that this post did not qualify as an office of profit as there is no monetary benefit attached to it. But then President Pranab Mukherjee refused to give assent, following which the appointments were set aside by the Delhi High Court in September 2016, declaring them illegal since the order had been passed “without concurrence/approval of the Lt Governor”.
In the first reaction to the EC recommendation, AAP spokesperson Nagendar Sharma tweeted:
This must be the first ever recommendation in EC history where a recommendation has been sent without even hearing the main matter on merits. NO HEARING TOOK PLACE IN EC ON THE POINT OF OFFICE OF PROFIT