AAP to expand network in Saudi Arabia, other Gulf countries

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.

Bewngaluru, Jun 23: Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa on Tuesday said Covid-19 related fatalities in the state was far less compared to other major states, as he called on people and front line corona warriors infected by the virus not to lose courage.

The Chief Minister made the statement following the alleged suicide of a constable attached with the Karnataka State Reserve Police after he tested positive for Covid-19. "The total number of COVID related deaths in the state is very less compared to other major states.

There is no reason for any infected citizen or government employees to lose courage. The government is always with you," a tweet on the Chief Minister's official twitter handle said.

Of the total of 14,011 deaths reported so far, Maharashtra accounted for the highest with 6,283 fatalities, followed by Delhi with 2,233, Gujarat with 1,684 and Tamil Nadu with 794.

Acknowledging that police form the frontline of corona warriors and were working putting their lives at stake, he said a special Covid-19 testing center is being set up for them and all measures will be taken to provide the best treatment for those infected.

As of June 22 evening, cumulatively 9,399 Covid-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 142 deaths and 5,730 discharges.

The constable, aged about 50 years, was attached with the Karnataka State Reserve Police and was said to be depressed after getting tested positive for Covid-19, sources said.

Expressing condolence over his death, another tweet on the Chief Minister's handle said he has directed officials to to provide all necessary compensation and facilities to the family of the deceased at the earliest. Bengaluru has in the last few days has seen a spike in the number of police personnel getting infected by the virus. At least 74 of them have tested positive in the city and are undergoing treatment, while three have died so far, official sources said.

Mangaluru/Bengaluru, Jan 23: A day after two senior functionaries of the BJP — a deputy chief minister and a political secretary to the chief minister — made provocative speeches against a minority community, Nalin Kumar Kateel, state president of the saffron party, on Wednesday issued a gag order, banning functionaries from talking on issues without the party’s approval.

Deputy CM Govind Karjol and Honnalli legislator MP Renukacharya had passed comments castigating Muslims, in the process seriously denting the image of the party which is trying to avoid controversies in its efforts to allay fears on the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. The comments come on the heels of Ballari City legislator Somashekara Reddy warning Muslims at a pro-CAA rally of repercussions if they do not fall in line.

Kateel said a gag order has been “clearly” communicated to all concerned at a recent meeting that he and chief minister BS Yediyurappa had chaired. “Our message to party functionaries is in line with what Prime Minister Narendra Modi has told his council of ministers and party MPs — to focus on their work and constituencies rather than comment on issues. Let them leave this task to official spokespersons of the party,” Kateel said.

However, it appears the message hasn’t gone through to Renukacharya, Yediyurappa’s political secretary. A day after courting controversy by saying anti-nationals were using mosques to store weapons, Renukacharya said he stood by his comments and launched a fresh tirade against madrasas, saying they were manipulating youth and encouraging terrorism.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Renukacharya said: “In our [temple-run] institutions, nothing anti-national is taught. We only teach values that are mandated for life. But at madrasas, youth are manipulated by teaching terrorism. Why do we need such schools? The majority of those accused of terrorism are Muslims.”

He immediately followed up this comment by saying he did not imply all Muslims were terrorists. The Honnalli MLA justified his comments saying he did not receive a single Muslim vote in the 2018 assembly elections. “They [Muslims] come to us seeking our help. They want the BJP for development, but when it comes to elections, they vote for Congress and JD(S),” Renukacharya said. He said no “special packages” will be distributed to Muslims in his constituency.