World News

32351 readers

316 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

202

India preps for G20 summit of world leaders by bulldozing homes (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

32 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The annual summit of the Group of 20 economies is the largest gathering of world leaders ever in New Delhi, with attendees including President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and others.

They will be greeted by some of the cleanest streets New Delhi has seen, ornamented by hundreds of thousands of lush flowers potted on freshly painted pavements. What they will not see are the hundreds of thousands of people who have been displaced, or the slums that have been flattened or obscured by temporary fences bearing the G20 summit’s logo and photos of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Modi’s government hopes the beautification project will help showcase the best of what the world’s most populous country has to offer, further cementing its position on the global stage.

Anything that might disrupt that effort is unwelcome.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] emergencyfood 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Have the courts found them to be illegal? There is a procedure to be followed for demolishing illegal encroachments. Demolitions of 'illegal' houses have recently been stopped by if I remember correctly the Punjab High Court.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

sadly thats not punjab and those house were illegal

[–] emergencyfood 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

those house were illeagal

First, the word is 'illegal'. Second, the houses are only illegal if a court has found them to be encroaching on public property. Third, even if they are illegal, the owners have to first be served notice to vacate. (It appears they were not.)

Also I mentioned the Punjab HC's verdict because in India the judgement of a High Court or the Supreme Court establishes a legal precedent that applies across the entire country.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

thanks for pointing out my mistake in spelling

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

(It appears they were not.)

thanks fo assuming

This is following a Delhi high court hearing on May 2 wherein the court refused to stay the demolition drive against the illegal JJ cluster and gave the inhabitants time till May 31 to vacate the area.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/pwd-demolishes-illegal-slums-near-pragati-maidan-101685643834416.html

if my spelling is wrong is correct it in your head

[–] emergencyfood 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks for the source. But I was saying they do not seem to have been served notice. I made that assumption based on this line:-

'Residents … alleged that the demolitions were carried out in complete violation of laws … that eviction notices were only served as bulldozers were rolling into their street.'

(Source: https://www.thehindu.com/article66838590.ece)

I haven't listened to the complete podcast, and I'm sure this is just one side of the story; the municipality will have their own version.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

thanks