Triple

Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).

Phrase: In re Special Reference No. 1 of 2012 (2G spectrum case) | Statement: [Article 143 of the Constitution of India, usedInCase, In re Special Reference No. 1 of 2012 (2G spectrum case)]

Target entity: In re Special Reference No. 1 of 2012 (2G spectrum case)
Context triple: [Article 143 of the Constitution of India, usedInCase, In re Special Reference No. 1 of 2012 (2G spectrum case)]

• A. Joint Committee on 2G Spectrum
  The Joint Committee on 2G Spectrum was a special parliamentary panel in India formed to investigate alleged irregularities and corruption in the allocation of 2G telecommunications spectrum licenses.
• B. L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India
  L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India is a landmark 1997 Supreme Court of India judgment that reaffirmed judicial review as part of the Constitution’s basic structure and held that decisions of tribunals are subject to scrutiny by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227.
• C. United States v. AT&T
  United States v. AT&T was a landmark antitrust lawsuit in which the U.S. government forced the breakup of the Bell System telecommunications monopoly in the early 1980s.
• D. Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 1999)
  Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 1999) is a leading House of Lords decision in English criminal law that clarified the principles of transferred malice and causation in homicide cases involving injury to a pregnant woman and the subsequent death of her child.
• E. Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India
  Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India is a landmark 2017 Supreme Court of India judgment that unanimously affirmed the fundamental right to privacy under the Indian Constitution.
• F. None of above. chosen
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Target entity: In re Special Reference No. 1 of 2012 (2G spectrum case)
Target entity description: In re Special Reference No. 1 of 2012 (2G spectrum case) is a landmark Supreme Court of India advisory opinion concerning the allocation of 2G telecom spectrum and the constitutional validity of the first-come, first-served policy versus auction-based allocation of natural resources.

• A. Joint Committee on 2G Spectrum
  The Joint Committee on 2G Spectrum was a special parliamentary panel in India formed to investigate alleged irregularities and corruption in the allocation of 2G telecommunications spectrum licenses.
• B. L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India
  L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India is a landmark 1997 Supreme Court of India judgment that reaffirmed judicial review as part of the Constitution’s basic structure and held that decisions of tribunals are subject to scrutiny by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227.
• C. United States v. AT&T
  United States v. AT&T was a landmark antitrust lawsuit in which the U.S. government forced the breakup of the Bell System telecommunications monopoly in the early 1980s.
• D. Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 1999)
  Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 1999) is a leading House of Lords decision in English criminal law that clarified the principles of transferred malice and causation in homicide cases involving injury to a pregnant woman and the subsequent death of her child.
• E. Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India
  Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India is a landmark 2017 Supreme Court of India judgment that unanimously affirmed the fundamental right to privacy under the Indian Constitution.
• F. None of above. chosen