Washington, Apr 29: A US government panel on Tuesday called for India to be put on a religious freedom blacklist over a "drastic" downturn under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, triggering a sharp rebuttal from New Delhi.
The US Commission on International Religious Freedom recommends but does not set policy, and there is virtually no chance the State Department will follow its lead on India, an increasingly close US ally.
In an annual report, the bipartisan panel narrowly agreed that India should join the ranks of "countries of particular concern" that would be subject to sanctions if they do not improve their records.
"In 2019, religious freedom conditions in India experienced a drastic turn downward, with religious minorities under increasing assault," the report said.
It called on the United States to impose punitive measures, including visa bans, on Indian officials believed responsible and grant funding to civil society groups that monitor hate speech.
The commission said that Modi's Hindu nationalist government, which won a convincing election victory last year, "allowed violence against minorities and their houses of worship to continue with impunity, and also engaged in and tolerated hate speech and incitement to violence."
It pointed to comments by Home Minister Amit Shah, who notoriously referred to mostly Muslim migrants as "termites," and to a citizenship law that has triggered nationwide protests.
It also highlighted the revocation of the autonomy of Kashmir, which was India's only Muslim-majority state, and allegations that Delhi police turned a blind eye to mobs who attacked Muslim neighborhoods in February this year.
Coronavirus state-wise India update: Total number of confirmed cases, deaths on April 29
The Indian government, long irritated by the commission's comments, quickly rejected the report.
"Its biased and tendentious comments against India are not new. But on this occasion, its misrepresentation has reached new levels," foreign ministry spokesman Anurag Srivastava said.
"We regard it as an organization of particular concern and will treat it accordingly," he said in a statement.
The State Department designates nine "countries of particular concern" on religious freedom -- China, Eritrea, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan.
The commission asked that all nine countries remain on the list. In addition to India, it sought the inclusion of four more -- Nigeria, Russia, Syria and Vietnam.
Pakistan, India's historic rival, was added by the State Department in 2018 after years of appeals by the commission.
In its latest report, the commission said that Pakistan "continued to trend negatively," voicing alarm at forced conversions of Hindus and other minorities, abuse of blasphemy prosecutions and a ban on the Ahmadi sect calling itself Muslim.
India's citizenship law fast-tracks naturalization for minorities from neighbouring countries -- but not if they are Muslim.
Modi's government says it is not targeting Muslims but rather providing refuge to persecuted people and should be commended.
But critics consider it a watershed move by Modi to define the world's largest democracy as a Hindu nation and chip away at independent India's founding principle of secularism.
Tony Perkins, the commission's chair, called the law a "tipping point" and voiced concern about a registry in the northeastern state of Assam, under which 1.9 million people failed to produce documentation to prove that they were Indian citizens before 1971 when mostly Muslim migrants flowed in during Bangladesh's bloody war of independence.
"The intentions of the national leaders are to bring this about throughout the entire country," Perkins told an online news conference.
"You could potentially have 100 million people, mostly Muslims, left stateless because of their religion. That would be, obviously, an international issue," said Perkins, a Christian activist known for his opposition to gay rights who is close to President Donald Trump's administration.
Three of the nine commissioners dissented -- including another prominent Christian conservative, Gary Bauer, who voiced alarm about India's direction but said the ally could not be likened to non-democracies such as China.
"I am deeply concerned that this public denunciation risks exactly the opposite outcome than the one we all desire," Bauer said.
Trump, who called for a ban on Muslim immigration to the US when he ran for president, hailed Modi on a February visit to New Delhi.
The PIL, filed by seven Uttar Pradesh residents, has sought the court's direction to ensure that no animal is killed during the festival, called the feast of sacrifice, which is to be celebrated early next week.
Comments
they train how to slit the throat for their kids .. no wonder ISIS militrants love throat slitting and beheading ...they rejoice the kill ... it must be banned ...countries throat slitting activities are terrorism , rapes , smugling , hawala , robbing and thefts .. needless to say who are in large no ... hahaha ... so it is the effect of this ..makla justification nodri .. upper part na slice maadi pain agda haage koltaranthe ...adu dodda rocket science nanmaklige ...haha.. 150 crores iddu ondu nobel tegello yogyathe illa ...science bagge maatu .. hogree hogree fish sales madi hogi ... delivery time aithu :)
Halal best method.
Even yogesh also certified that halal is best way. In halal method. Animals and plants doesnt feel pain.
@yogesh
Well said, that's why we say that halal method either veg or animal, is the best method. because of the speed both doesn't feel pain at all.
at last u agree Halal is the best Method. When u accidentally cut ur finger, u wont
in halal method animals don't feel pain. what about fish, which die very painfully.
stop eating fish also. fish is also vishnu's avatar, which is more holier than cow.
muslims don't eat pig, because it is dirty and filthy, carries lots of diseases
hindus don't eat cow. why. is it dirty and filthy too.
in halal method, animals feel zero pain, proved by science. it is also proved that halal food is more tastier than non halal. and there is no blood in the meat in halal method, even science says halal is the best method. even non-muslims in western countries wants halal chicken, just check the restaurant in usa name is halal guys restaurant. people stand in queue, most of them are non-muslims. next to the restaurant there is one more restaurant, which is non-halal. which is fully empty
Do animals have rights?
The vegetarian argument is that killing animals for the benefit of humans is cruel and an infringement of their rights. They put both on the same level without conceding any superiority to humans over animals. This argument is seriously flawed, because if animals had rights comparable to those of humans, they must also have equivalent duties. In other words, we must be able to blame them and punish them if they violate the rights of others. It is absurd that it should be considered a crime for humans to kill a sheep, but natural for a lion to do so. The problem stems from a misconception of the role of human life within the animal kingdom: a denial of purposeful creation within a clearly defined hierarchy degrades humans to the level of any other creature. Yet even then, the argument is illogical: Why should plants, for example, be denied the same protection from a violation of the sanctity of their life?
Is Islamic slaughter cruel?
The question of how an animal should be slaughtered to avoid cruelty is a different one. It is true that when the blood flows from the throat of an animal it looks violent, but just because meat is now bought neatly and hygienically packaged on supermarket shelves does not mean the animal didn’t have to die? Non-Islamic slaughter methods dictate that the animal should be rendered unconscious before slaughter. This is usually achieved by stunning or electrocution. Is it less painful to shoot a bolt into a sheep’s brain or to ring a chicken’s neck than to slit its throat? To watch the procedure does not objectively tell us what the animal feels.
The scientific facts
A team at the university of Hannover in Germany examined these claims through the use of EEG and ECG records during slaughter. Several electrodes were surgically implanted at various points of the skull of all the animals used in the experiment and they were then allowed to recover for several weeks. Some of the animals were subsequently slaughtered the halal way by making a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries of both sides together with the trachea and esophagus but leaving the spinal cord intact. The remainder were stunned before slaughter using a captive bolt pistol method as is customary in Western slaughterhouses. The EEG and ECG recordings allowed to monitor the condition of the brain and heart throughout.
The Halal method
With the halal method of slaughter, there was not change in the EEG graph for the first three seconds after the incision was made, indicating that the animal did not feel any pain from the cut itself. This is not surprising. Often, if we cut ourselves with a sharp implement, we do not notice until some time later. The following three seconds were characterized by a condition of deep sleep-like unconsciousness brought about by the draining of large quantities of blood from the body. Thereafter the EEG recorded a zero reading, indicating no pain at all, yet at that time the heart was still beating and the body convulsing vigorously as a reflex reaction of the spinal cord. It is this phase which is most unpleasant to onlookers who are falsely convinced that the animal suffers whilst its brain does actually no longer record any sensual messages.
The Western method
Using the Western method, the animals were apparently unconscious after stunning, and this method of dispatch would appear to be much more peaceful for the onlooker. However, the EEG readings indicated severe pain immediately after stunning. Whereas in the first example, the animal ceases to feel pain due to the brain starvation of blood and oxygen – a brain death, to put it in laymen’s terms – the second example first causes a stoppage of the heart whilst the animal still feels pain. However, there are no unsightly convulsions, which not only means that there is more blood retention in the meat, but also that this method lends itself much more conveniently to the efficiency demands of modern mass slaughter procedures. It is so much easier to dispatch an animal on the conveyor belt, if it does not move.
Yogesh, Lol, you explained halal veg in best way... anyone can understand now.. all doubts cleared.
after sacrifice animal we are not throwing meat and not keeping meat to eat ghost. we share all the meat to poor people and our family.we are not wasting the meat. if you care that much about animal you should ban eating non veg (chicken mutton)
I am surprised to see why they dont file PIL from banning export of beef meat. Very strange. Why they are maintaining double standard.
Government can allow Indian cow meat for foreigners to eat....this is very bad and disgusting policy....
On Eid day he feels \Cruel\" other days ?
What about vegetables right? even number of studies prove that plants feel pain. Can people stop using plant and vegetable ?
Court should have right to panish if some one file the IPL which does not make any sence and causing unnessary focus, contradict the constituional rights and waste of court time etc.,"
We Muslims sacrifice animals once in a year.But our Hindu brother's sacrifices animals every now and then in the name of Balidhan.We Muslims are not bothered about the PIL.Bec we blindly believe in Almighty Allah.
You have to file PIL against killing of HUmans first
Add new comment