Cow is no more ‘mother’? Human life more valuable than cow, says BJP leader

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.

Bengaluru, Feb 27: Chief minister BS Yediyurappa has again kindled hope for several ministerial aspirants by suggesting he will expand his council of ministers in April. A dozen senior BJP legislators are aspiring for ministerial berths, but there are only six vacancies in Yediyurappa’s cabinet.

However, Yediyurappa suggested on Tuesday he will fill only three spots, one of which would go to Hukkeri legislator Umesh Katti. With this, lobbying has intensified for the two remaining berths as the expansion exercise is expected soon after the budget session that ends on March 29.

The aspirants include Murugesh Nirani, S Angara, Appachhu Ranjan, SA Ramdas, Aravind Limbavali, Narasimha Nayak and GH Thippareddy besides others.

Yediyurappa, it is being said, is keen on inducting Katti and Limbavali since they are close to him. He will leave the decision on choosing legislators for the remaining two berths to the party’s central leadership.

On more than one occasion in the past, Yediyurappa has publicly stated that his wish is to induct Katti, a former minister, into the cabinet. In fact, the CM had wanted to induct Katti in the previous expansion that took place last month, but dropped the idea at the last minute due to pressure from party bosses.

The CM is also under pressure to induct Athani legislator Mahesh Kumatalli, who was among 17 Congress-JD(S) MLAs who resigned to help the saffron party form the government. Several BJP MLAs and Lingayat seers have been piling pressure on Yediyurappa to make Kumatalli a minister as promised.

Kumatalli was denied a cabinet berth only to accommodate Katti. Both are Lingayats and from Belagavi district. As the Lingayat community already has a lion’s share in cabinet berths, the CM cannot afford to induct both.

Nirani, who has been leaving no stone unturned to secure a spot, reiterated his wish to become minister, but insisted he will not lobby for the post.

Yediyurappa has been upset with Nirani for lobbying for a berth through Panchamasali Mutt seer Vachananand Swami. The former minister was also part of the team of alleged disgruntled MLAs which met Jagadish Shettar at his residence to put pressure on the CM for cabinet berths.

However, while expressing confidence of being made minister when Yediyurappa’s expands his cabinet next, Nirani said, “Yediyurappa is not upset with me. My relationship with him is that of father and son. He knows me and what I am.”

Mangaluru, Feb 1: “1) Take necessary precautionary measures. 2) Don’t blindly believe in social media rumours.” These are the two important advisories issued by the authorities in Dakshina Kannada district in the wake of coronavirus scare.

According to DHO Dr Ramakrishna there is no specific antiviral treatment recommended for coronavirus infection. Supportive care for infected people can be highly effective, but, there is no vaccine available for coronavirus.

In a health meeting, he advised people to take precautionary measures to prevent the spread of the virus. Following are some of the precautionary measures.

1) Wash your hands often with soap and water or an alcohol-based sanitiser.

2) Avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth with unwashed hands.

3) Avoid close contact with people who are sick.

4) Stay home when you are sick, and cover your mouth when you cough or use a tissue while sneezing.

5) Throw the used tissue in the dustbin. Clean and disinfect surfaces frequently.

Deputy commissioner Sindhu B Rupesh said there is no need for people to panic about coronavirus.

Dakshina Kannada zilla panchayat CEO R Selvamani said IEC programmes will be held to create awareness on possibilities of spread of diseases.

He also advised people not to follow blindly the advisories being shared on social media, especially WhatsApp without proper verification.

“Posts on cures for coronavirus which are not scientifically proven are being shared on social media. Do not follow such advisories without verifying facts,” he said.