Banning bitcoins is against the law

[fiulpro]

Let's discuss what is the definition of property
a thing or things belonging to someone; possessions collectively.

Taking this into account , We can consider all the assets that we own as our property.

So is the bitcoins .
We haven't earned it doing some shady business and at the same time it's our money that we have invested in it , a money that we have earned .


Now let's talk about the Right to property in India
The right to property was initially present in Indian constitution under part III : Fundamental right , Article 31 but it was abolished by 44 th Amendment Act ,1978. ... Now it is made a constitutional right under Article 300A which states that no person can be deprived of his / her property except by authority of law.

Here the only thing is see is *except by the authority of law*

But this authority of law is being manipulated time and again by various communities , shouldn't they make decisions in accordance to everyone in this country not just some big committee set up by old leaders who doesn't even know a thing about blockchain.

Now we have some Fundemental rights
Right to freedom: It includes freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association or union or cooperatives, movement, and residence. It also includes the right to practice any profession or occupation.

We have the right to practice any profession or occupation.

What we do in Signature campaign , the trading is no easy profession but it earns better than most of the daily jobs.

So aren't they breaching this right too ?

[avikz]

That's the exact point that IAMAI is using to defend the case on cryptocurrency in Supreme Court of India, the fundamental right to carry out any occupation. But sadly the hearings are getting postponed every single day giving time to government  prepare their case against the crypto community.

No matter what the existing law says, the Government can always pass an amendment to that to make things favorable for them. Even worse, they can simply pass an ordinance in parliament to supersede the existing law. In either way, government has the power to do anything they want! Let's not have much hope now!

[stompix]

Let's discuss what is the definition of property
a thing or things belonging to someone; possessions collectively.
Taking this into account , We can consider all the assets that we own as our property.
<>
Now let's talk about the Right to property in India
The right to property was initially present in Indian constitution under part III : Fundamental right , Article 31 but it was abolished by 44 th Amendment Act ,1978. ... Now it is made a constitutional right under Article 300A which states that no person can be deprived of his / her property except by authority of law.

So you're telling me that as long as I declare it my own property and I have a receipt for every part I can safely park a MGM-31 Pershing or (since we talk about India my Agni-I missile) next to my home?   
You've quoted that article and you don't realize that the law is the government.
If they pass a bill saying bitcoin is illegal, then by the authority of the law your fundamental right is toilet paper.

No matter what the existing law says, the Government can always pass an amendment to that to make things favorable for them. Even worse, they can simply pass an ordinance in parliament to supersede the existing law. In either way, government has the power to do anything they want! Let's not have much hope now!

Exactly, and rather than trying to win an argument in court you can always try a different and far more effective method.
Stop voting for morons next time in the elections!!

Even if this hurdle is passed, I'm pretty sure they find another way and another and another, stop the non-sense at the root, stop voting for them.

[Carlton Banks]

"possession is 9/10ths of the law" - old legal maxim



can you take my Bitcoin from me? is that a "no" I'm hearing?



banning Bitcoin is against the laws of reality, which are of course infinitely stronger than any gangsterment edicts.

so if anyone says "give me your BTC", as with drugs, "just say no"

[virendarnagpal]

I do not see any future for concurrency / bitcoin in India.
Indian Government policy is clearly against crypto. I think we are unable to do anything against the government. 
https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/govt-committee-recommends-ban-on-cryptocurrency-in-india-1572446-2019-07-23
Governement committee has already recommended ban on any private or say crypto currency. 
even fines penalities have been proposed for any activity relating to crypto buiness. 
We will have to follow the rules and regulations laid down by the Government. 

[muslol67]

Every country has its own legal regulations. But there is something that applies to all countries. It's not possible to ban Bitcoin. Only a number of measures can be taken. These will not be enough. Remember, restricted things arouse more interest.

[carter34]

I like your post backed up by law which makes it complete and sound. I think it will be better taken to legal board.

Meanwhile, I don't think the law in my country restrict any transaction of digital means of payment and cryptocurrency has not been mentioned in the constitution to the best of my knowledge.

[sehoon]

Every country has its own legal regulations. But there is something that applies to all countries. It's not possible to ban Bitcoin. Only a number of measures can be taken. These will not be enough. Remember, restricted things arouse more interest.

I checked our constitution if there's anything that could make banning a bitcoin law possible and there is none too. Banning bitcoin here seems unconstitutional since it won't affect any citizen's interest and won't affect any bad thing in the country.

[freedomgo]

There is no international law for bitcoin so the law varies from individual countries.
If your government will ban bitcoin and you still use it, you are the one who is against the law, banning bitcoin maybe against our rights but not against the law.

The government before making a law, they will consult the people and because sometimes they only saw the bad side of bitcoin that's why they ban it, and we as believer can't allow that but we need to show in action that we support bitcoin so they will know there are people who are against on banning bitcoin. 

[Darker45]

I'm speaking in general terms here. I think the law is never absolute. What I mean to say is that the right to private property is not absolute. Even the most fundamentals of rights such as the right to freedom or even the right to life are not absolute. The state could stifle these rights as they deem fit. They could, for instance, lawfully take away one's property, issue gag orders, or even take one's life.

My point here is that instead of fighting tooth to tooth against the government's law, if indeed there is, against Bitcoin, I would rather employ a more amiable approach. Less hostile approach such as lobbying through India's congress, or perhaps negotiation with the proper persons, or backdoor channeling with the authorities could work more. Most of the time, fighting against the government itself is futile.

[timerland]

The rule of property isn't very clear in your post. You are being a bit naive here and thinking that anything you buy or was given is now yours and none, not even the government will be able to take it away, and that type of thinking is just bad.

I get that you can apply this to crypto, and since it's your money and the government shouldn't be able to control it, it's similar to buying an illegal item and then not giving it to the government since it's yours.

As much as I hate that BTC gets restricted from countries - if it does happen, you should follow the law and leave BTC alone.

[YuginKadoya]

Manipulation is always there and I think even if the government would show this as not truly a manipulation they can show this to the public as part of the law, but I guess the government would not give any law if they didn't see any wrong things about it, I guess you can surely own something that is your right, for example, you can own a gun with a proper paper license but that very gun is used to killing someone or used illegally I guess the government will do a proper action about this they may implement a gun ban, Then even if a person would have proper property with the gun it can still be confiscated, I guess the government will lead to something like this if Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies would be used illegally.

[ValleyOfTheWolves]

if a coin is decentralized then  banning it is useless.
Still it is possible to ban Blockstream not bitcoin.

[ityandsyn]

Let's discuss what is the definition of property
a thing or things belonging to someone; possessions collectively.

Taking this into account , We can consider all the assets that we own as our property.

So is the bitcoins .
We haven't earned it doing some shady business and at the same time it's our money that we have invested in it , a money that we have earned .


Now let's talk about the Right to property in India
The right to property was initially present in Indian constitution under part III : Fundamental right , Article 31 but it was abolished by 44 th Amendment Act ,1978. ... Now it is made a constitutional right under Article 300A which states that no person can be deprived of his / her property except by authority of law.

Here the only thing is see is *except by the authority of law*

But this authority of law is being manipulated time and again by various communities , shouldn't they make decisions in accordance to everyone in this country not just some big committee set up by old leaders who doesn't even know a thing about blockchain.

Now we have some Fundemental rights
Right to freedom: It includes freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association or union or cooperatives, movement, and residence. It also includes the right to practice any profession or occupation.

We have the right to practice any profession or occupation.

What we do in Signature campaign , the trading is no easy profession but it earns better than most of the daily jobs.

So aren't they breaching this right too ?

      All laws have an exemption and every government  have all the rights to revise the law for a particular exemption by virtue of the Congress or any law makers of the  country , so if they declared bitcoin as banned to a certain country , then that's the law and it should be followed .

[BrewMaster]

as far as legality goes and the "law", the government sets it and bends it. so we really can't say something is against the law as they are the lawmakers and set anything they want. we already have a couple of third world countries like Bangladesh that have banned bitcoin and there was no law to prevent that.
someone said a good thing: if you don't like the law makers then don't vote for the same idiots again and again...

[dothebeats]

The 'law' is the government, so technically they can break and bend it to their own will, own agenda, own liking etc. One reason why I see that this hearing in India keeps on getting postponed is because some lawmakers and analysts are still trying to find a loophole within the said law that they can capitalize on. When they finally saw one, for sure the hearing will proceed as they want it to be and present their case without hesitations and such. For sure, revisions will be made to that particular law so as to accommodate the 'needs' of the Indian government to ban crypto.

[pundit]

Indian govt is in powerful hands since 2014 and  India has made very vast diplomatic relations with most powerful countries in the world .  Current Indian govt is focusing on overall development of the country including digitization of payment systems. I know there is a bill against cryptocurrency which will be presented in parliament in Dec2019 positively but it is required to get passed from both the houses of Parliament. Before implementation of any bill there is always a discussion in Parliament and if both the houses agree then only a bill can be implemented. Lets us wait and see what is there for cryptocurrencies in India, I hope cryptocurrencies will not be completely banned in India.

[oleg681010]

In fact, it's a controversial issue, the government can make it look like a matter of state security and ban whatever.

[arpon11]

Every country has its own legal regulations. But there is something that applies to all countries. It's not possible to ban Bitcoin. Only a number of measures can be taken. These will not be enough. Remember, restricted things arouse more interest.

The India government was not well informed about what bitcoin is, the benefits of holding it and the positions it stand in the future as regard to our exchange rate and stores of values. If India goes ahead and makes a law that should criminalize bitcoin's holding, then she might be left out in the scheme of things in the future and her citizen are going to leave in regret! Bitcoin is an asset that worth like gold to me and any governments that hold a large quantity of it might stand in a chance to control the world in the future.

[pandowoe]

It is an obligation of the government to make laws to protect its citizens and there may be a separate reason for prohibiting bitcoin. At this point the government does not violate the law, because we live and live within the legal sphere of a country. The good thing is we fight for how to make bitcoin acceptable by proposing new legal rules and proving that bitcoin is a safe and good investment.