11 An introduction to my “Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa aka Right to Recall” Group

(A detailed version of this chapter in notes #301.010 on http://facebook.com/mehtarahulc )

Download this chapter 11 : http://www.righttorecall.info/301.pdf

11.1 The name of the Group\Party

At the time of writing this manifesto, my political group is yet unregistered. I will register a group as Association and a Party as political party. For registration, I will keep the name as “Right to Recall Party” and “Right to Recall Party” and I will keep the official acronyms as RRP\RRP. In common conversation, I will refer it by following names :

o Right to Recall Group\Party

o Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa Group\Party

o Right to Recall Ministers, Officers, judges Group\Party

o MRMC-Recall Group\Party

o MRCM Group\Party

The abbreviations I will use will be RRP, PRRRP, MRCM-Recall and RRMOjG with a lowercase “j”. MRCM stands for “Mineral Royalties for Commons and Military”, and is my key economic motive to form RRP and bringing RTR-PM, RTR-CM, RTR-judges, RTR-RBIG laws etc are my key political motives. The words Ministers, Officers and judges in the title “Right to Recall Ministers, Officers, judges Group” are important for me to tell all that how I differ from those Recallists who insist that Right to Recall should be confined to MLAs, MPs only and must not be applied on Ministers, officers, judges. I categorically say that we are not interested in confining Recall to MLAs and MPs, and I hate all those psuedo-recallists who insist that Recall should be confined to Panchayats, MPs, MLAs only. They are all anti-Recall in reality.

“Right to Recall Party” will be a non-political organization, and will be used to spread information on RTR laws in places where political groups are banned. And another name I will use is Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa Movement, as unregistered movement. The words “Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa Movement” will be used to spread the information on RTR etc where other organizations are banned.

I chose the name “Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa Group aka Right to Recall Party” or MRCM Group or MRCM-RRP because I want the group to be known for its purpose. The purpose of PRRRP is to enact TCP, RTR, MRCM etc laws and establish the Vedic concept of Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa. And so instead of a catchy generic name with catchy keywords, I chose the name that will reflect core purposes.

11.2 The summary of RRP goal and my proposed plan to achieve the goal

The RRP goal is to get one Gazette Notification issued – nothing more and nothing less. The proposed Gazette Notification namely TCP-GN described in section-1.3 is the one and only item in RRP goal..

What plan do I propose to get these laws passed? The plan I propose is :

1. I will request PM\CMs to print the draft in the Gazette

2. I will inform as many people as possible about TCP, MRCM and RTR drafts,

3. I appeal to Mahatma Udham Singh to ask PM\CMs to print this in Gazette after Mahatma Udham Singh is convinced that majority of citizens have asked PM\CMs to print this draft in the Gazette

4. I will request every activist and citizen of India to take actions (1)–(3) and add actions he likes.

The details on Ahimsamurti Mahatma Udham Singh are in chap-13.

11.3 Main difference between RRP and other parties

Almost all parties, be new or old, be small or big have same method at core : they insist that citizens must elect their party’s candidates as MPs first. They say that unless citizens elect them as MPs first, there is nothing they can do to improve India. And they promise that once citizens elect them, they will enact laws to improve India, though they don’t disclose the drafts of those laws.

I at RRP differ from them. We don’t say that citizens must elect even one of us to fix India. My request is : if citizens can force existing PM to print TCP draft in the Gazette, then the citizens of India will be able to improve India thereafter using TCP draft. This is a major difference between us and rest – my proposed method doesn’t at all depend on requiring citizens to elect us.

Further, no party outlines how they will ensure that their own MPs will not become as corrupt as existing MPs after they win elections. The other parties only give empty statements like “see, you must put faith in some people”. I and my colleagues at RRP differ. We officially claim that we know only one way to ensure that MPs, Ministers etc from our parties will be non-corrupt – the citizens will have to force the existing PM to print TCP-draft and using TCP draft, citizens should enact Right to Recall laws. And Right to Recall law-draft will ensure that our MPs or other MPs reduce their corruption.

So RRP’s method to improve India involves enacting TCP draft as first step, and enacting more laws and then replace MP, Ministers, IAS, IPS, judges etc if the need be. Most parties method insist on “elect our candidates as MPs” alone as their first step. IMO, their method is flawed because if citizens don’t change laws first, no matter which set of individuals arrive, the corruption will not decrease.

The action items I have worked out for RRP is listed in chap-13 of this book. The actions are clone-positive i.e. if more Right to Recall parties comes in politics and even if they compete, they will add up, not cut each other. The action items need no more than 2-4 hours a week from 200,000 activists. So in terms of time, the RRP method is very efficient.

11.4 My world view on violence, revolution etc

I am against using violence against Ministers, officers, judges, policemen and I am also against using violence against wealthy individuals who own these Ministers, officers and judges. But if officers, Ministers start imprisoning or throwing frivolous Income Tax cases, frivolous Sales Tax cases, frivolous Service Tax cases or frivolous rape cases etc against “Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa” activists, then I will re-think my stand on use of violence against Ministers, officers, judges and particularly the wealthy ones who own the judges, Ministers etc. But till then I oppose violence and every form of violence.

I oppose revolution. I strictly believe in evolution i.e. one small change at a time, which is why each and each of 200 Gazette Notifications I have demanded is one small change at a time. TCP draft is just 3 lines, MRCM draft is just 4 pages. RTR-PM is just 1 page and so forth.

11.5 Religion of Democracy and Constitutionalism

I am a devout believer in the Religion of Democracy. I have full and firm faith in the Constitution as interpreted by We the People of India. I see no major compelling need to change the Constitution anymore, though I am not against any demand to amend the Constitution as long as draft of the Amendment is given in writing. I believe that Indian State has been overthrown and usurped by not following the Constitution as interpreted by Citizens and instead imposing the Constitution as interpreted by the judges. And my aim is restoration of the Indian State by making Constitution as interpreted by us Commons as the Supreme force in India.

I dont need modification in Constitution, I only insist we should interpret the Constitution as it was interpreted by the citizens on Jan-25-1950. As on Jan-25-1950, there was no Supreme Court as it is today, and so the only authority to give meanings to the words in the Constitution was the citizenry of India. Now the citizenry has added the word “Democracy” in preamble, which on Jan-25-1950 meant – a regime where majority enacts laws and the majority’s interpretation is final. This has been the definition of Democracy in West since 1200 AD, wherein Jurors interpretation of law-draft was final. This ideal was re-stated in Maryland Constitution Art-23 : “In the trial of all criminal cases, the Jury shall be the Judges of Law, as well as of fact, except that the Court may pass upon the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction. The right of trial by Jury of all issues of fact in civil proceedings in the several Courts of Law in this State, where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $10,000, shall be inviolably preserved” .

Thus the meaning of word “Democracy” in Constitution on Jan-25-1951 was — a regime where majority enacts laws and the majority’s interpretation is final. We want restoration of the Constitution with the same meaning.

11.6 Faith in Ahimsamurti Mahatma Udham Singh

The words “Ahimsamurti Mahatma Udham Singh” means people who are like Ahimsamurti Mahatma Udham Singh.

I and most f my colleagues at RRP have utmost faith in Ahimsamurti Mahatma Udham Singh and I believe that all pro-common positive changes, where elitemen lost, came only because of efforts of Ahimsamurti Mahatma Udham Singh. Eg Freedom of India Act , 1946 passed in UK Parliament because of decades of efforts of Mahatma Udham Singh, the contribution of Duratma Gandhi and Congress of below 0.01%. The Gandhians love to insult our icon, Mahatma Udham Singh. Eg Duratma Gandhi himself said once that Mahatma Udham Singh and Mahatma Madanlal Dhingra were mad persons, and Duratma Gandhi also said that Mahatma Bhagat Singh etc were misguided youth. But for us, Mahatma Udham Singh is next God.

The central faith we have is that – if at all PM prints TCP , RTR, MRCM etc drafts in printed in Gazette, it would be due to efforts of Mahatma Udham Singh and no other reason.

11.7 Other books/articles by myself

All Party publications are available for free at http://rahulmehta.com/publications.htm

1. Culture, Political Culture and National Character are not the reasons : This book has an analysis of causes of the problems in India that no longer exist in West. And book has proofs that culture, religion etc are not the reason. This book, will be available at rahulmehta.com/331.htm

2. Right to Recall Party Manifesto : Part-2: Many topics couldn’t be discussed in part-1 (this book) and I have will discuss in part-2. Part-2 will be available at rahulmehta.com/311.htm

3. Right to Recall Party Manifesto : Part-3: Many topics couldn’t be discussed in part-1 (this book) and I have will discuss in part-3. Part-3 will be available at rahulmehta.com/321.pdf

4. Questions on RRP proposals: A list of 1000-2000 multiple choice questions on existing RRP agenda. If a person can answer these questions, he can assume that he knows RRP agenda. Once RRP has over 1000 members, passing a test from these questions will be the only membership condition. This book will be available at rahulmehta.com/341.htm

5. Questions on Indian Administration: A list of 1000-2000 multiple choice questions on existing Indian administration. This book will be available at http://rahulmehta.com/351.htm

6. Duratma Gandhi : The book is on Mohandas Gandhi aka Duratma Gandhi, Rashtrapita Ahmisamurti Mahatma Subhashchandra Bose, Ahmisamurti Mahatma Udham Singh and other topics in Indian Freedom Struggle. The book explains why\how Duratma Gandhi partnered with British to delay freedom struggle of India and how silence of activists who knew that Duratma Gandhi was wrong resulted into death and abduction of lakhs of Hindus in Pakistan. And that British passed Freedom of India Act not due to Duratma Gandhi and useless fellows of Congress, but due to fear of Ahimsamurti Mahatma Udham Singh. And how Azad Hind Fauz played most important role in passing of Freedom of India Act. This book will be available at http://rahulmehta.com/361.htm

7. Selected topics in World History : This book will be available at http://rahulmehta.com/371.htm

8. Selected topics in Indian History : This book will be available at http://rahulmehta.com/381.htm

11.8 Contacts, Internet communities etc

Following are the important URLs

1. rahulmehta.com : the main website for MRCM-Recall Group

2. http://forum.righttorecall.info : the main website to post questions

3. google group http://groups.google.com/group/RightToRecall

4. http://orkut.co.in/Community.aspx?cmm=21780619 : the orkut community

5. Facebook community : http://www.facebook.com/#!/home.php?sk=group_154461117936671

6. MehtaRahulC is my email address , my mobile number is +91-98251-27780

The readers requested to join internet discussion communities such as bharat-rakshak.com , india-forum.com and “Indian Politics” community on orkut. We request readers to campaign without spamming on all internet communities for RRP laws.

11.9 How can YOU help in Prajaa-aadheen Raaja Group?

Please read chap-13 of this book http://rahulmehta.com/301.htm . It has several steps where-in you can spend 4 hours a week and help RRP aka Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa Group bring Right to Recall law-drafts in India.

11.10 Differences between RRP and all most other intellectuals, leaders

We radically differ from most parties and most intellectuals. Following are main differences

What we at RRP say What other parties’ MPs andthe eminent intellectuals of India say
1. Ownership of mineral mines and the Govt plots
RRP insists that we Indians (we citizens) and not the State of India own the mines and Govt plots. And so we insist that we citizens and our Military should get all the rents and royalties. To be specific, RRP firmly believes citizens must get rents from GoI plots such as IIMA plot, JNU plot, airport plots etc The leaders of Congress, BJP, CPM and all eminent intellectuals of India have firmly said that the mineral mines and Govt plots are the property of “State” of India and common Indians shall have no ownership, control over them. And they have categorically refused to give rents to Indians (citizens) over IIMA, JNU and airport plots.
2. We are Democracyists , MPs of other parties and eminent intellectuals of India are fascists
We at RRP are the only ones in political arena who insist that we commons MUST have legislative powers and we commons MUST have powers to expel and replace officers/judges. IOW, we are Democracyists All other parties and all eminent intellectuals of India consider us commons and voters as fools, and insist that we commons should have no say in law-making and appointments/replacements of officers, policemen, judges. And we commons should have no say in taking judgments in the courts. India’s most intellectuals have fascists mentality and so they firmly insist that all discretion in administration should be with Ministers, IAS, IPS, judges and intellectuals only. Forget discretionary powers, so fascists are Indian intellectuals that they even oppose TCP – merely letting citizens post complaints on PM’s website. We abhor their fascism, and they abhor over Democracyism.
3. Citizens’ interpretation of Constitution shall be final ; SCjs’ interpretation shall not be final
We are the only group in India who believe that India’s Constitution as interpreted by us Citizens of India shall be the final voice, and the Constitution’s interpretation by the two dozen Supreme Court judges may be important but not final. We agree that Supreme Court judges’ interpretation is above the interpretation of Ministers, and is indeed important for Citizens to take note of. But it is not final. Our Constitution itself in the Preamble clearly says that India shall be a Democracy and a Republic which clearly supports the “Citizens’ Review System” which states that the Constitution as interpreted by Citizens is final and it is above the Judocratic Review. Which is why we insist on Jury System from lower to Supreme Court, and demand citizens Review System wherein citizens can register YES on validity of SCjs’ judgments. IOW, we believe in Constitutional Democracy. All other parties’ MPs and all eminent intellectuals of India have always opposed to the Citizens’ Review System and also opposed the Jury System. They have always supported the judge system and the judocratic review. While all other parties and all intellectuals insist that Constitution as interpreted by the two dozen Supreme Court judges as final and us common’s interpretation is some garbage. All parties and intellectuals insist that us Citizens’ interpretation of Constitution should be ignored, and our YES/NO on SCjs’ judgments should not be even taken. And all intellectuals insist the interpretation of SCjs should be mercilessly and ruthlessly imposed over the commons using media, education and Police and Military if the need be. IOW, other parties and intellectuals believe in Constitutional judocratic Fascism.
4. Disclosing drafts of GNs (Gazette Notifications) and GOs (Govt Orders , Ordinances)
We are the first and only group in India, who show the drafts of GNs we demand. We do not ask people to put faith in us. We request people to read our GNs and decide on their own if these GNs are something they would support. That way a citizen voter shall have full opportunity to decide whether he should support us or oppose us. Every group makes policy promises, but each party’s MPs and MLAs refuse to publish the drafts of the GOs they would pass. Their answer is “you vote for us first and we will show you the drafts after we become Ministers”. Well, Mr. Candidate, what if the drafts turn out be useless and against the well being of us commons? Their answer is “Have faith in me”. We dont give us such obscure and vague answers
5. On the myth of the ‘Political Culture’
The problems of India are due to bad law-drafts that intellectuals and other Party’s MPs have enacted. Nothing is wrong with the culture of us commons. The eminent intellectuals have created a myth of political culture and claim that problems of India are due to this culture of us common Indians and not due to flawed laws they support.
6. Other parties’ are to win elections, collect bribes ; we are ONLY to enact laws we demand
Our primary goal is to get some Gazette Notifications printed and NOT winning the elections. We are contesting only to give publicity to GN drafts we have proposed. We do not insist that voters vote for us – we insist that citizens force their CMs, PM, MLAs and MPs to enact laws we are proposing. And we ask voters to vote for us only if they are convinced that the leaders of other group shall not print these Govt Orders. Every other party, their main goal is to win elections and they are not committed to any change in administration.
7. Reducing corruption, nepotism in courts
We are the only group who speaks against nepotism in courts. All other group leaders and intellectuals have been supporting nepotism in courts by supporting the laws (such as interview system and judge system) that promote nepotism in courts. And they have opposed laws like Jury System and abolition of interviews which are must to put an end to nepotism in the courts.
8. Respect for commons
We have utmost respect for commons, and insist that his YES/NO on legal administrative issues should be registered and given weight The other Parties’ leaders and all intellectuals of India have nothing but insults for us commons. They consider us commons as “immature” (read : idiot, moron etc) and so insist that us commons’ YES/NO on laws, judgments, appointments etc should not be even registered forget giving any weightage.
9. Against donations
We are against donations. We believe that activists must allocate time, and may spend money on xeroxes, newspaper advertisements etc but should send no money to top. All parties ask workers to gather donations. And by giving donations, the donors are only spoiling the parties and worsening political scene in India.
10. Some 100-120 more differences
And there are about 120 differences. So many? Yes, so many, and many more. We have proposed about over 120 Govt Orders to bring changes in administration. To see these differences, please see the list of Govt Orders we demand and promise on http://www.rahulmehta.com/all_drafts.htm . And the other parties and all intellectuals of India oppose each one and every one of them. And thus there are about 120 differences between MRCM party and other parties’ MPs and all intellectuals of India.
11. Approach with other Party’s volunteers
The leaders of other parties always ask activists to leave other parties and join their own parties. Whereas, I and other volunteers at RRP never ask activists of other parties, NGOs to leave their parties, NGOs. Instead we request them – “can you convince your leaders to add Right to Recall PM, RTR CM, RTR Supreme Court judges etc drafts in your Manifesto? My goal is to convert as many political parties as possible into RRP clones by injecting RTR, TCP etc drafts in their manifesto by influencing their own workers.

11.11 The most important difference in campaign method

There are at least 100+ more differences. The 11th difference cited above shows a fundamental difference in method as well as motive. The leaders of other parties always ask activists to leave other parties and join their own parties, because these leaders want to become center of power. Whereas, I and my other volunteers at Right to Recall Party never ever ask activists of other parties, NGOs to leave their parties, NGOs. Instead we request them – “can you convince your leaders to add Right to Recall PM, RTR CM, RTR Supreme Court judges etc drafts in your Manifesto”?

And I openly insist that I would be happier if activists form one more different competing RRP or continue to force their leaders to add TCP , RTR, MRCM drafts in their organization’s agenda !! Why? Why do I ask a non-80G-activists to form a competing Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa Party? Or why do I ask them to add RTR drafts in their organization’s agenda? Because instead of one Right to Recall Party campaigning for TCP draft, MRCM draft and RTR drafts, I would prefer to have 100 Right to Recall Partys each asking for MRCM draft, RTR draft etc. Now if 100 Right to Recall Partys demand RTR drafts and unleash a extremely competitive politics for RTR drafts, then all Right to Recall Partys may lose elections due to division in votes. But information on RTR drafts would spread amongst maximal number of citizens of India at fastest possible speed. Also, if there are 100 organizations demanding RTR drafts, it will be more difficult for opponents to finish the demand for RTR drafts. As I said several times, my goal is not to win electionsmy goal is to get the TCP drafts, RTR drafts passed. And so 100 RRPs and organizations each demanding RTR draft will do better than one RRP demanding RTR draft. And so I am happy when a true activist doesn’t join me, but he starts one more RRP or tries to add RTR drafts in the agenda of his organization.

Review questions

1. Whose interpretation of Constitution is final in our RRP views? Whose interpretation of Constitution is final in the intellectuals’ views?

2. Do intellectuals consider minerals as the property of us commons? Do intellectuals consider GoI plots such as Delhi airport or IIMA plot as the property of us commons?

3. Does RRP believe in “Political Culture” theory?

Exercises

1. Please obtain draft of law Shourie or other BJP MPs or any other MP proposed in Parliament to enact National ID system.

2. Please obtain draft of law that the MPs of CPM, BJP, Congress etc proposed in the Parliament to reduce the nepotism in Supreme, High and Lower courts

3. Please obtain draft of law Congress, BJP and CPM MPs proposed in Parliament to recall MPs, MLAs, CMs, PM etc.

4. Please obtain draft of law that Jayprakash Nayaran proposed to recall MPs, MLAs, CMs, PM etc.

Advertisements

About RTR

3 line law can reduce corruption and bring peoples to power

One response to “11 An introduction to my “Prajaa-aadheen Raajaa aka Right to Recall” Group

  1. Pingback: Three Line Law Can Reduce Corruption And Let Citizens Comes To Power « Three Line Law Can Make "Citizens Are Supreme" For Ever

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: