Congress Party Agreement With China

Sonia and Rahul Gandhi were both transformed into parties next to the Congress Party. The Supreme Court expressed surprise on Friday with the persuasive power in a petition to investigate the alleged agreement reached on August 7, 2008 in Beijing between the Indian National Congress and the Chinese Communist Party. In contrast, the ruling BJP retaliated by referring to the MoU signed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on behalf of Congress with the Chinese Communist Party. The MoU was signed in Beijing in the presence of Sonia Gandhi, who was then president of the Progressive Alliance of Workers (UPA) under the leadership of the Congress. A bank run by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde has asked petitioners to go to the Supreme Court first before moving the Supreme Court out of the way. The petitioners then withdrew the petition. At the Lawyer pointed out that this was the case, the bank said, „We will allow you to withdraw this and file a new petition. We will check what you say in the petition, and if we find a false statement, we can sue you. Petitioners Shashank Shekhar Jha and journalist Savio Rodrigues called for an investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in the agreement.

The chief lawyer, Mahesh Jethmalani, who represented the petitioners, said there were obscure reasons behind the agreement and that it should be made public. Even the SC is surprised by the MoU that the Congress Party has signed with the Chinese government… Ms. Gandhi and her son, who led the signing, must explain it. Does this explain the donations to RGF and the opening of the Indian market to the Chinese in return, which affects Indian companies? pic.twitter.com/hidmbcbO7Z How can a political party reach an agreement with China, the Supreme Court asked on Friday, refusing to file a request for consultation on a 2008 pact between Congress and the Chinese Communist Party. The Supreme Court asked the petitioner to go to the Supreme Court to make his application. The counter-attack on the Congress party and its leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi also wanted the court to make the details of the agreement public. The Supreme Court allowed the petitioners to be heard „with the freedom to go to the Supreme Court.“ A bank run by Chief Justice S A Bobde asked lead counsel Mahesh Jethmalani, who was appearing for PIL petitioner Shashank Shekhar Jha and journalist Savio Rodrigues, to withdraw his plea and address the Supreme Court. The petitioners argued that they had asked Congress to make the details of the agreement public, but it did not pay for the supply, reflecting the evil intent of the big old party. „Give an order that NIA orders to review as part of the AUPA,“ the petitioners asked.

The CJI told senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, who appeared for the petitioners: „We will allow you to withdraw this. But we have to tell you that we want you to look at the averments… Asked why they did not go to the High Court, Jethmalani said that the subject was serious and that these were offences related to the Law on Illegal Activities (Prevention). #Breaking MASSIVE TIMES NOW IMPACT NEWSBREAK. The Supreme Court questions the „MoU“ of the Chinese Congress and says, „How can a political party sign moU with China?“ TIMES NOW`s Harish with details. pic.twitter.com/UgdbdvIM9C The court said, „In our limited experience, we have not heard that a political party has reached an agreement with other countries.“ According to the plea, „the petitioners are firmly convinced that the security of the nation cannot and should not be put at risk by anyone. This petition was therefore postponed in accordance with Article 32 of the Bharat Constitution, which aims to ensure transparency and clarity regarding the agreement signed between respondent No. 1 (INC) and the Communist Party of China, which is also the de facto government of the People`s Republic of China. „The Congress Party brought the right to information during his reign, but it is not transparent in this matter, which is of national importance,“ the petition states.