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
After all these sufferings,it pains a section of us,common peole still support demonetisation !
What was supposed to be a surgical strike against tax cheats and counterfeit currency became an attack on a large informal economy that ran almost entirely on cash. The hardships caused by a shortage of new legal tender, and the rush to deposit old 500 and 1,000 rupee ($15.40) notes in bank accounts before the Dec. 31 deadline, took a heavy toll. More than 100 people died in bank and ATM queues, although it's impossible to confirm if the deaths from heart failure or exhaustion were directly a result of demonetization.
I Will donate one rope to hang him.
@Truth Teller - I share your views 100%
Honestly, i am not sure what is there to like about Congress! Besides all the scams running to several thousand crores and losing face in the international scene (thanks to Kalmadi) they have played religion & caste politics for decades for vote bank ruining the country. For the first time after independence perhaps there is some move towards honesty, improving infrastructure, education and cleanliness. Why some continue to hate Modi is just beyond me if you truly love this country. Rahul is bad news for India unless they find someone else who can be like Modi - hardworking & with a vision to change.
Honesty is incompatible with the amassing of a large fortune - Mahatma Gandhi
Modiji is the true and honest man after Gandhi
Demonetization in India was a war against dishonesty and it is a movement against corruption.This exercise has brought an awareness to the people not to make wealth dishonestly.Majority of the people wanted honest system in India and supported the Government's initiative on demonetization.
I am a hardworking sincere person. I earn for a living and to support my family, because of demonetization me and my family suffered without any cause. This man freezes our transactions to a minimum of 2000 and what not. Who was he to do it, By law it is not permissible unless a person is held guilty by law agencies.
Because of one man 100 innocent died standing in queue. How come once company made 160000 times profit during demonetization, Where is the black money, what happened to panama papers. These statistics have to shown after demonetization. Even now they are misleading crores of people with data not important to Aam Admi.
Dinesh Gundu will soon be under police custody
Nobel prize winner praised Modi for demonetisation and digital India and later he confessed he told wrong after knowing that Modi banned old 100&500 notes and implemented 2000 rupees notes..
I can say Modi is the best intelligent person in the world. And he should get business man of the year award.
Because,
1. Modi made huge benefit to Paytm (paytm ceo didnt do this much profit for his company)
2. Modi made profit to the private agency which made/maintaning aadhar things.
3. Modi made profit to Jio
4. Modi made profit to big companies by implementing demonetisation and GST (same time it affected badly on small scale retailer shop)
Add new comment