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.
Comments
This has been repeatedly happening by those who practice against the law of the nature.
The urge OR desire of the sex is natural phenominon. Not only human being, alos Every living creature is subject to it.
Therefore Islam persists every affordable mena and women to marry and multiply. Muslims have also priesets of different grades. But it never prevents any priest from marrying.
If they dont marry, definitely the God knows, that the priests would be subject to take sideways to quench thier desire of sex illegally, by doing all mischieves to poor innocent women.
therefore study the religion which is true and scientific. Do not blindly follow what our ancestors have erred, wrongly taught and misguided us.
Every priest, nun should be allowed to marry and fulfil their sexual desire legally without harming illegally other women.
Islam has come as light with illumination to bring from dark for everyone. This is not just for Arabs or any particular sects. Islam's main preaching believe in one and only God and worship him, who has no associates, no family, no wives, no children, n oparents and partners.
Meh..
Pity on you for your blind belief and thoughts
hello fools, who told india belong to hindus...the name itself give by arab muslim long back(selute me now)...1000 ys muslim ruled india and also they build and develope this country not like christens who stole and run to UK...only true nationalist is muslim then comes rest..you sitting in some forst place and think that you can die for this country fighting you are big fool, MUSLIM NOT SHOW OFF LIKE YOU DO.when time comes we know how to protect our belovd country india..JAI HIND
LOL
Short story
Once Bishop of Jalandhar, Franco Mulakkal went to watch the movie NUN, after getting information that nun (in the movie) is beautiful and the movie is scariest one.
After seeing Bishop of Jalandhar in theatre, the movie character nun got scared.
(the end)
For all commentator, This the reason for calling India as secular country. We respect all religions
Very true. If we talk anything then they will absuse us. We are the true nationalist. We are the real Indians
This is why we suggesting Hindu rashtra. India suitable for only Hindus. Ony Hindus are following Indian laws and court orders. For muslims and christian they are completely depending on some other countries or some other rubbish laws. They wanted to live in India and they cant follow our rules and laws fully.
Living in India, rule are laws are from different countries. Total injustice
Why Kerala cop cant probe. They are making Indian laws institutions as rubber stamp
Add new comment