AAP to expand network in Saudi Arabia, other Gulf countries

Bengaluru, Jun 15: The total number of COVID-19 cases in Karnataka reached the 7,000-mark on Sunday, with the state reporting 176 new cases and five related fatalities, taking the toll to 86.

The day also saw 312 patients getting discharged in the state after recovery while the total number of positive cases in the Udupi district alone breached 1000 cases mark.

As of June 14 evening, cumulatively 7,000 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 86 deaths and 3,955 discharges, the health department said in its bulletin. It said, out of 2,956 active cases, 2,940 patients are in isolation at designated hospitals and are stable, while 16 are in ICU.

The five dead include- thee from Bengaluru urban, and one each from Dakshina Kannada and Bidar. The three from Bengaluru include- two women aged 57 and 60 respectively and a man who was 50 years; while the person who died in Dakshina Kannada was a 24-year-old man.

Also, a 76-year-old man from Bidar, who died at his residence on June 6, later tested positive for COVID-19. Out of 176 new cases, 88 are returnees from other states, the majority of them from neighboring Maharashtra. While 6 are those who returned from other countries.

Among the districts where new cases were reported, Bengaluru urban accounts for 42, Yadgir 22, Udupi 21, Bidar 20, Kalaburagi 13, Dharwad 10, Ballari 8, Kolar 7, Uttara Kannada 6, five each from Mandya and Dakshina Kannada, Bagalkote 4 and Ramanagara 3. Besides, two each from Raichur and Shivamogga, and one each from Belagavi, Hassan, Vijayapura, Bengaluru rural, and Haveri.

Udupi district tops the list of positive cases, with a total of 1,026 infections, followed by Kalaburagi 896 and Yadgir 809.

Among discharges also Udupi tops the list with total of 713 discharges, followed by Kalaburagi 427 and Bengaluru urban 327. A total of 4,43,969 samples were tested so far, out of which 7,451 were tested on Sunday alone. So far 4,27,608 samples have been reported as negative, and out of the 6,835 were reported negative today.

Bengaluru, May 7: A 55-year old woman from Davanagere became the 30th COVID-19 related fatality in Karnataka, where a total number of infections has crossed 700-mark, with eight new positive cases being confirmed, the health department said on Thursday.

The deceased woman was a known case of diabetes and hypertension, she was admitted with a complaint of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SARI) and was on a ventilator, the department said in its mid-day situation update.

She died today at a designated hospital in Davanagere, it said.

"Eight new positive cases have been reported from last evening to this noon...

Till date 701 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed. This includes 30 deaths and 363 discharges," the update said.

The eight new cases reported include three from Davangere, indulging the deceased patient; also three from Kalaburagi, and one each from Hirebagewadi in Belagavi district and Bengaluru urban.

While four cases are contacts of patients earlier tested positive, three are with the history of Influenza-Like Illness (ILI) and one is a SARI case.

Five among eight new cases are women and three are men.

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.