0
When a collection acquires a new item, that item has been accessioned and an accession number name be assigned to it to help track it. When a library acquires a book, that is a library accession of that book.
2 answers
The cast of Accession - 2012 includes: Vusumuzi Ndumo as Sibu Pethro Themba Mbole as John
1 answer
An accession country is a country which is in the process of joining a union, used specifically to refer to new countries joining the European Union.
1 answer
Accession is when a country agrees to be bound by a treaty that it did not initially take part in negotiating, while ratification is the formal approval by a country's legislative body of a treaty that it has already signed. In essence, accession is the process of joining a treaty after it has been negotiated, while ratification is the formal approval process after a country has signed the treaty.
2 answers
At most State Tumor Registries, accession numbers are assigned serially, as the reports come in, and currently number in the millions in some states. At hospital tumor registries, the first 4 digits of the accession number is the year the patient was first seen AT THAT FACILITY for cancer or a benign reportable tumor; the remaining digits are assigned serially. Note that the accession number does not contain information about the YEAR OF DIAGNOSIS of cancer. Thus, the first cancer patient in 2005 at Hospital A received accession number 2005-00001. If the same patient returned to Hospital A in 2007 with new tumors, the accession number would be 2005-n (where n is the next number in the 2005 accession series). I could not be determined from this information, however, when this patient was first diagnosed with cancer. If the same patient went to Hospital B for the first time in 2007, that hospital would assign its own accession number beginning with 2007-.
1 answer
The 2009 British Five Pound coin commemorated the 500th Anniversary of the accession of Henry VIII to the throne.
1 answer
There are many reasons one might reference the term 'by accession.' The definition of the phrase would be 'by way of addition' as in one receiving additional property.
1 answer
On October 28th 1993, Washington D.C. stated that it did not recognise the fraudulent Instrument of Accession to India as meaning that Kashmir is not forever more an integral part of India. She expressed the view that the whole of Kashmir is a disputed territory, the future status of which must be determined in accordance with the wishes of the people of Kashmir.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), based in Geneva, recently, passed a resolution proclaiming Kashmir's accession to India as bogus and null and void. The ICJ went further by condemning the human rights violations in Occupied Kashmir. These events serve to highlight the disputed status of Kashmir by focusing on the fraudulent nature of the Instrument of Accession which was 'signed' by the Mahrajah of Kashmir on 26th October 1947.
The Indians claim that the Instrument of Accession was signed by Mahrajah Hari Singh on 26th October 1947, in which the Mahrajah agreed to accede to India in return for military assistance to put down the popular rebellion against him, seen at that time as an invasion by tribesmen from neighbouring Pakistan. The details of the accession were worked out between the Kashmiri Prime Minister, MC Mahajan and the Indian official, VP Menon, in Dehli. However, there are serious doubts about the signing of the document. Alastair Lamb (in his book, Kashmir - A disputed legacy 1846-1990) points out that the Instrument of Accession could not have been signed by the Mahrajah on 26th October as he was travelling by road to Jammu (a distance of over 350 Km). There is no evidence to suggest that a meeting or communication of any kind took place on 26th October 1947. In fact it was on 27th October 1947 that the Mahrajah was informed by his MC Mahajan and VP Menon (who had flown into Srinagar), the the Instrument of Accession had already been negotiated in Dehli. The Mahrajah did not in fact sign the Instrument of Accession, if at all, until 27th October 1947. This sheds doubts on the actions of the Indian regime. Some Indian troops had already arrived and secured Srinagar airfield during the middle of October 1947. On 26th October 1947, a further massive airlift brought thousands of Indian troops to Kashmir - BEFORE the signing of the Accession. Therefore, this situation begs the question: would the Mahrajah have signed the Instrument of Accession had the Indian troops not been on Kashmiri soil?
No satisfactory original of the Instrument of Accession has ever been produced in an international forum; a published form has always been shown. Further, the document was not presented to Pakistan or to the UN. In the summer of 1995, the Indian authorities reported the original document as lost or stolen. This sheds further doubt on whether the Mahrajah actually signed the Instrument of Accession.
The Governor-General of India at the time, Lord Mountbatten, stipulated that the permanent accession of Kashmir to the Indian Union will only be accepted once the people of Kashmir had been consulted. He noted in a letter to the Mahrajah, "the question of the states's accession should be settled by a reference to the people".
Lord Mountbatten, the Governor-General of India, on conditionally accepting the Instrument of Accession wrote:
"consistently with their policy that in the case of any state where the issue of accession has been the subject of dispute, the question of accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the state. "Furthermore, when the Kashmir crisis broke out in October 1947, the principle of reference to the people through plebiscite was already established as similar disputes in some other states had been resolved this way. The Indian Prime Minister J Nehru, accepted this principle and reiterated his position in a letter to the British Prime Minister on 25th October 1947, "our view, which we have repeatedly made public, is that the question of accession in any disputed territory must be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people and we adhere to this view". Therefore, at the time of the so-called accession, the Indian regime accepted the principle of reference to the people. Based on this principle, the Instrument of Accession should have been provisional and conditional upon the outcome of a plebiscite.
When India took the Kashmir issue to the UN in 1948, it did so under article 35 of Chapter VI which outlines the means for a peaceful settlement of disputes. It is interesting to note here that India did not present the Kashmir case under the UN Chapter VII which relates to acts of aggression as India was alleging Pakistan. Therefore, it is evident that by raising the issue under Chapter VI, India recognised the Kashmir issue as a dispute, thus conceding that the Instrument of Accession had not confirmed the state to be an integral part of India. India is still party to all the UN resolutions on Kashmir. Moreover, India and Pakistan accepted the UN resolutions of January 1948 calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir to exercise the right of self-determination of the people of Kashmir. India's acceptance of the UN resolutions establishes beyond a doubt, that the future of status of Kashmir would be determined by its people. Therefore, the Instrument of Accession, even if genuine, is rendered null and void.
In the past, attempts to hold a plebiscite have been met with fierce opposition from India. India has known, right from the start, that the result of a plebiscite is a foregone conclusion - the population of Kashmir would have voted to rid themselves of Indian rule. This has been the case from 26th October 1947 to the present day. On the practicality of holding a plebiscite, a paper by the US state department, presented to the UN on 2nd December 1947, noted , "the dominion of India may attempt to establish the extant electoral rolls on the basis for the referendum. As these rolls are said to contain less than 7% of the population and were compiled on a basis which served the weight to the members of the wealthiest educated Hindu majority who would obviously vote for accession to India, it is important that the electoral body should in fact be composed on a basis of complete adult suffrage in order that the result of the referendum may be representative of the actual wishes of the people of Kashmir".
In view of the above arguments, it is clear that the Indian case on Kashmir is politically, legally and morally unjustified. The commitment made by India and the UN to allow the people of the state to choose their own future are neither time bound nor do they provide an escape clause for the Indian regime. It is only through fraud and repression that India continues to forcefully occupy a large portion of Kashmir.These events serve to highlight the disputed status of Kashmir by focusing on the fraudulent nature of the Instrument of Accession which was 'signed' by the Mahrajah of Kashmir on 26th October 1947.
The Indians claim that the Instrument of Accession was signed by Mahrajah Hari Singh on 26th October 1947, in which the Mahrajah agreed to accede to India in return for military assistance to put down the popular rebellion against him, seen at that time as an invasion by tribesmen from neighbouring Pakistan. The details of the accession were worked out between the Kashmiri Prime Minister, MC Mahajan and the Indian official, VP Menon, in Dehli. However, there are serious doubts about the signing of the document. Alastair Lamb (in his book, Kashmir - A disputed legacy 1846-1990) points out that the Instrument of Accession could not have been signed by the Mahrajah on 26th October as he was travelling by road to Jammu (a distance of over 350 Km). There is no evidence to suggest that a meeting or communication of any kind took place on 26th October 1947. In fact it was on 27th October 1947 that the Mahrajah was informed by his MC Mahajan and VP Menon (who had flown into Srinagar), the the Instrument of Accession had already been negotiated in Dehli. The Mahrajah did not in fact sign the Instrument of Accession, if at all, until 27th October 1947. This sheds doubts on the actions of the Indian regime. Some Indian troops had already arrived and secured Srinagar airfield during the middle of October 1947. On 26th October 1947, a further massive airlift brought thousands of Indian troops to Kashmir - BEFORE the signing of the Accession. Therefore, this situation begs the question: would the Mahrajah have signed the Instrument of Accession had the Indian troops not been on Kashmiri soil?
No satisfactory original of the Instrument of Accession has ever been produced in an international forum; a published form has always been shown. Further, the document was not presented to Pakistan or to the UN. In the summer of 1995, the Indian authorities reported the original document as lost or stolen. This sheds further doubt on whether the Mahrajah actually signed the Instrument of Accession.
The Governor-General of India at the time, Lord Mountbatten, stipulated that the permanent accession of Kashmir to the Indian Union will only be accepted once the people of Kashmir had been consulted. He noted in a letter to the Mahrajah, "the question of the states's accession should be settled by a reference to the people". Furthermore, when the Kashmir crisis broke out in October 1947, the principle of reference to the people through plebiscite was already established as similar disputes in some other states had been resolved this way. The Indian Prime Minister J Nehru, accepted this principle and reiterated his position in a letter to the British Prime Minister on 25th October 1947, "our view, which we have repeatedly made public, is that the question of accession in any disputed territory must be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people and we adhere to this view".Therefore, at the time of the so-called accession, the Indian regime accepted the principle of reference to the people. Based on this principle, the Instrument of Accession should have been provisional and conditional upon the outcome of a plebiscite.
When India took the Kashmir issue to the UN in 1948, it did so under article 35 of Chapter VI which outlines the means for a peaceful settlement of disputes. It is interesting to note here that India did not present the Kashmir case under the UN Chapter VII which relates to acts of aggression as India was alleging Pakistan. Therefore, it is evident that by raising the issue under Chapter VI, India recognised the Kashmir issue as a dispute, thus conceding that the Instrument of Accession had not confirmed the state to be an integral part of India. India is still party to all the UN resolutions on Kashmir. Moreover, India and Pakistan accepted the UN resolutions of January 1948 calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir to exercise the right of self-determination of the people of Kashmir. India's acceptance of the UN resolutions establishes beyond a doubt, that the future of status of Kashmir would be determined by its people. Therefore, the Instrument of Accession, even if genuine, is rendered null and void.
In the past, attempts to hold a plebiscite have been met with fierce opposition from India. India has known, right from the start, that the result of a plebiscite is a foregone conclusion - the population of Kashmir would have voted to rid themselves of Indian rule. This has been the case from 26th October 1947 to the present day. On the practicality of holding a plebiscite, a paper by the US state department, presented to the UN on 2nd December 1947, noted , "the dominion of India may attempt to establish the extant electoral rolls on the basis for the referendum. As these rolls are said to contain less than 7% of the population and were compiled on a basis which served the weight to the members of the wealthiest educated Hindu majority who would obviously vote for accession to India, it is important that the electoral body should in fact be composed on a basis of complete adult suffrage in order that the result of the referendum may be representative of the actual wishes of the people of Kashmir".
In view of the above arguments, it is clear that the Indian case on Kashmir is politically, legally and morally unjustified. The commitment made by India and the UN to allow the people of the state to choose their own future are neither time bound nor do they provide an escape clause for the Indian regime. It is only through fraud and repression that India continues to forcefully occupy a large portion of Kashmir.
1 answer
you engrave your address your full name and your phone number so if you loose it the person will now where to return it to or if it is for a accession say what accession it is like happy birthday merry Christmas
1 answer
A file containing a list of the numbers that have been used.
1 answer
40614948
1 answer
The Treaty of Accession for the 10 countries that joined the European Union on the 1st of May 2004 was signed on the 16th of April 2003.
1 answer
Star Trek Deep Space Nine - 1993 Accession 4-16 was released on:
USA: 26 February 1996
1 answer
Marlys Chevrefils has written:
'The Clark Blaise papers, first accession and second accession' -- subject(s): Archives, Catalogs, University of Calgary, University of Calgary. Libraries. Special Collections Division
1 answer
You cannot become "Sovereign" unless you are in the line of accession of one of the royal families.
1 answer
It provides a unique tracking number for the specimen with its test order.
1 answer
The War of the Roses ended with the accession of Henry VII to the English throne.
1 answer
The accession of Augustus in 28 BCE.
1 answer
An accession register is a record of all items that have been added to a collection. This can include items that have been donated, purchased, or found. The accession register can be used to track the growth of a collection over time, and to ensure that all items in the collection are accounted for. The register can also be used to help plan future acquisitions, and to track the provenance of items in the collection.
2 answers
a.maharaja of baroda
b.dewan of travancore
c.nizam of hydrabad
d.raja of jodhpur
1 answer
Antonio de Guaras has written:
'The accession of Queen Mary'
1 answer
The Borbon royal family.
1 answer
At the moment of his accession, upon the death of Queen Elizabeth II
1 answer
xinjie Lu has written:
'What will be the impacts of China's WTO accession on Chinese agriculture?'
1 answer
- Yes, because sonic only like her as a friend
- & Amy has a accession with him
1 answer
"Accession"? Do you mean "excision" or something else?
Also, define "soft tissue" which could mean many different things such as: tendon, ligament, fascia, fibrous tissue, synovial membranes, muscles, nerves, blood vessels.
1 answer
The general definition of accession describes a person coming into possession of an object or title/rank by their right of authority. The most commonly used example is a member of a royal family makes an accession to the throne.
The origin of accession, while based on Latin root words, was used in middle English. It can be split into three sections. Something to keep in mind when reviewing root words is that a single word has multiple ways of being spelled.
To break down the word accession:
ac | cess | ion
(ac-) - "to go" as a prefix
(cess) - root word, a derivative of the Latin word cedēr, meaning "yield" or "move"
(-ion) - a suffix that signifies the action or results the word describes
This can also be done with the word accede, which is the act one takes to make an accession.
(ac-) - "to go" as a prefix
(cede) root word, derivative of the Latin word cedēr, meaning "yield" or "move"
(?) - Not all words have a suffix. The word "accede" only uses a suffix that's inflectional. An inflectional suffix modifies the word to give it different parameters. An inflectional suffix can be attached to accede to make it acceded, which is only an indication that the action was past tense. They can also add an ending with ing, es, s, etc.
Although the question was specifically for the word accession the word accede contains the same root word. Both words have a root word that is defined by the act of yielding and or moving.
2 answers
a musical instrument? a wind instrument? a string instrument? a percussion instrument?
1 answer
A secondary instrument is a instrument whose sound is in comparison to the main instrument. It also can be a back up instrument.
1 answer
Accession numbers in library science are unique identifiers used to track and manage library materials. These numbers are typically assigned sequentially to each item in the library’s collection and are often included on the barcodes of books to help with organization and inventory management.
1 answer
Type your answer here...Italy was one of the founding members of the European Union so accession was never needed.
- Open in Google Docs Viewer
- Open link in new tab
- Open link in new window
- Open link in new incognito window
- Download file
- Copy link address
- Edit PDF File on PDFescape.com
1 answer
JAMES KER-LINDSAY has written:
'EU ACCESSION AND UN PEACEMAKING IN CYPRUS'
1 answer
Accession has many meanings and includes something that is added to the land naturally or by the improvement by others.
For example, suppose a property owner has a new driveway installed along what she believes to be her land along the property line. She later finds out that the new driveway is entirely on her neighbors property. That new driveway becomes the property of the neighbor.
In another sense, accession refers to the addition of property along a stream or river as a result of a flood. Accession may also occur through the natural flow of a river over time whereby additional land builds up along the riverbank due to natural deposits. Another word that can be used in this sense is accretion.
1 answer
Yes, any instrument that you blow through is a wind instrument.
2 answers
The two essential indexes for all subject files are the subject index and the accession index. The subject index helps locate specific topics within the files, while the accession index assists in tracking the order and arrangement of the files.
2 answers
yes, it is a low brass instrument, but it is an instrument.
1 answer
accession, total, sum, increase, increment, in all, altogether, plus and +
2 answers
