Siddu-Kharge meet sets tongues wagging

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.

Mangaluru, May 27: Mangaluru MLA U T Khader today urged Dakshina Kannada MP and Karnataka BJP chief Nalin Kumar Kateel to pave the way for immediate repatriation of Mangalureans stranded across Gulf countries.

The development comes amidst reports that lack of preparedness on part of the authorities concerned in Dakshina Kannada compelled the Centre to delay the operation of repatriation flights from various Gulf to Mangaluru International Airport under Vande Bharat Mission.

Lakhs of people from Mangaluru region (coastal Karnataka) alone are working in middle eastern countries like Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar. Thousands of them are currently stranded thanks to covid-19 lockdown and are helplessly waiting for repatriation.

Speaking to coastaldigest.com, Mr Khader said he already spoke to Mr Kateel and brought to his notice the plight of Mangalureans in Saudi Arabia and other gulf countries. "There are a large number of pregnant women, senior citizens and patients who need immediate repatriation. It is the responsibility of the elected representatives and district administration to pave the way for the repatriation of our people and arrange quarantine facilities for them," he said. 

"Mr Kaeel is not only MP of Dakshina Kannada. He is also the chief of Karnataka's ruling party. Hence, he must play a crucial role in facilitating the return of Kannadigas in general and Mangalureans in particular," Mr Khader said. 

Bengaluru, May 5: Life is limping back to a new normalcy in most parts of Karnataka with easing of Covid-19 induced restrictions yesterday as the State headed into the third phase of lockdown started since March 24.

According to the guidelines issued by the Centre, industrial activities, construction works, essential, non-essential shops, delivery of essential goods through e- commerce, courier and postal services, banking and agriculture activities, plying of four-wheelers and two-wheelers and inter-state movement of goods vehicles is permitted in all the zones, whereas buses are allowed to ply only in green and orange zone districts.

This apart, sale of liquor was also allowed at the designated shops. Police said vehicular movement is allowed only from 7am to 7pm for ordinary citizens.

Clarifying about the movement of people, Bengaluru police commissioner Bhaskar Rao tweeted, "From Monday you don't need a pass to move in Bengaluru between 7am and 7pm. After 7 pm and up to 7am the following morning, even if you have a pass you are not allowed to move except medical and essential service. Checkpoints will remain and your ID may be asked. Please be responsible." After the restrictions were lifted, heavy vehicular movement was witnessed in parts of Bengaluru leading to traffic jam in some areas.

Chikpet, which is the main trade area in Bengaluru, saw some activities.

With restrictions on public transport continuing, this unusually crowded place had very less footfall. "Movement of public is limited due to ban on public transport, such as city buses and Metro Rail.

"The trade activities are taking place between retailers," trade activist and joint secretary of Jain International Trade Organisation Sajjanraj Mehta said .

Select liquor shops in the city and other parts of the state pulled up shutters after being closed for about six weeks due to the lockdown with tipplers thronging them in huge numbers at many places.

Some traders in the city complained that they received notices regarding the Tax Deduction at Source for the month of April "thought here were no trading activities."

Meanwhile, Chief minister B S Yediyurappa announced on Monday that free bus service for migrant labourers, which is operating smoothly, has been extended till Thursday.