The Right to Freedom of Information in Inida

This thesis entitled “The right to freedom of information in india”.In a democracy, the citizens being the persons to choose their own governors, the right to know from the Government is a pre-condition for a properly evaluated election. Freedom of speech and expression, one of the repositories of self~government, forms the basis for the right to know in a wider scale. The functions which the free speech rights serve in a society also emphasize the need for more openness in the functioning of a democracy.Maintanance of law and order and investigation of crimes are highly important in a country like India, where no risk may be taken on account of the public‘s right to know. The Indian situations relating terrorist activities, riots based on language, region, religion and caste are important in this respect. The right to know of the citizens may be regulated in the interests of secrecy required in these areas.On the basis of the conclusions reached in this study, a draft Bill has been proposed for the passing of an Access to Public Documents Act. This Bill is appended to this Thesis.

A dissertation on the right and obligation of the civil magistrate to take care of the interest of religion, and provide for its support; in which the arguments in confirmation of said right and obligation, both from reason and the Sacred Scriptures, are adduced: the usual objections examined,--together with several corollaries deduced from the subject.

right secured according to Act of Congress.>

The scientific basis of morals : and other essays : viz.: Right or wrong ; The ethics of belief ; The ethics of religion /

Caption title.

Logic, or, The right use of reason in the enquiry after truth : with a variety of rules to guard against error in the affairs of religion and human life as well as in the sciences /

Mode of access: Internet.

Logic; or, the right use of reason in the enquiry after truth: with a variety of rules to guard against error, in the affairs of religion and human life, as well as in the sciences.

Mode of access: Internet.

Speech of John Quincy Adams, of Massachusetts, upon the right of the people, men and women, to petition; on the freedom of speech and debate in the House of representatives of the United States; on the resolutions of seven state legislatures, and the petitions of more than one hundred thousand petitioners, relating to the annexation of Texas to this Union. Delivered in the House of representatives of the United States, in fragments of the morning hour, from the 16th of June to the 7th of July 1838, inclusive.

Mode of access: Internet.

The advancement of religion is still a valid charitable object in 2001

“The Relevance of Religion” is the title of a recent address delivered by The Honourable Chief Justice Murray Gleeson of the High Court of Australia.1 In making the point “about the continuing public importance of religion”, the Chief Justice referenced Lord Devlin’s contention that “no society has yet solved the problem of how to teach morality without religion”....

Religion, the study of religion and other products of transnational and colonial imaginings

The category of ‘religion’ as contemporary scholarship has demonstrated is a fairly recent innovation, dating back only a few hundred years in Western thought, and ‘world religions’ as we think of it and as we teach it is an even more recent category, emerging out of European colonialism. Thus the academic study of religion is both the product and, at times, the agent of colonial modes of knowledge. And yet, it is perhaps because ‘religion’ continues to be invented and reinvented through connections across cultures that investigating the work of religious ideas and practices offers such fruitful possibilities for understanding the work of culture and power. This article investigates religion and the study of religion as a mode of anti-colonial practice, seeking to understand how each have the potential to cross boundaries, build bridges and produce critical insights into assumptions and worldviews too often taken for granted.

'Leaving Nothing to Chance'?: Joint Tenancies, The 'Right' of Survivorship and Unilateral Severance

The joint tenancy with its inherent right of survivorship is the most prevalent form of co-ownership in the common law world today. Most couples will be joint tenants of a family home, while relations (such as siblings) who purchase property together may opt for this arrangement. Inter vivos acquisitions aside, the huge intergenerational transfer of wealth within families on death can result in a joint tenancy, and it may also be a convenient estate planning device. The fact that property automatically vests in the surviving joint tenants on death is the reason why many people choose this form of co-ownership. However, there is one serious disadvantage. A joint tenancy is an inflexible form of landholding where relationships sour or family circumstances change over time, and co-owners want their respective `shares' of the property to pass to someone else on death. Where consensual severance is not possible, one joint tenant can sever unilaterally. The latter mechanism is vital in terms of giving effect to the wishes of the severing joint tenant, especially in situations of discord or a breakdown in relations with their fellow co-owners. However, unilateral severance also has serious implications for the non-severing joint tenant(s) who expected to inherit property through survivorship, and can impact significantly on ownership of the home and other family property. This article looks at unilateral severance as a means of subverting the right of survivorship. The focus is on personal and inter-family relationships, and the various legal issues and policy considerations associated with unilateral severance across the common law jurisdictions of Britain, Ireland, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. It assesses the various methods of effecting unilateral severance and proposes specific measures, as well as considering novel arguments for preventing unilateral severance based on contractual agreements to the contrary and proprietary estoppel.