Vote split: After SDPI, Owaisi’s AIMIM haunts Congress in Karnataka

Mangaluru, Mar 5: As many as 29 police officers and personnel were examined by Udupi Deputy Commissioner G Jagadeesha, head of the magisterial enquiry into the police firing in the city in December 2019 which killed two anti- Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) protesters.

A total of 176 police personnel have been directed to present their evidence before the magistrate for the enquiry.

ACPs K U Belliappa and Kodandarama presented his evidence on Wednesday, while ACP (central sub division) M Jagdish and ACP (traffic) M Manjunatha Shetty submitted their evidencein writing.

The next hearing is slated to be held on March 9 when statements of 41 officers including DCP (law and order) Arunangshu Giri will be recorded.

City police commissioner P S Harsha has been asked to submit his evidence on March 12, Jagadeesha said.

The enquiry report is to be submitted to the government on March 23.

Jagadeesha said he will seek an extension in the case of any delay in the recording of evidences.

Two people - Nausheen and Jaleel - were killed in the firing on December 19, 2019 during the protests here against the CAA.

The Karnataka government had decided to hold a CID probe and a magisterial enquiry into the incident.

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, Jul 18: Veteran actor Hulivana Gangadharaiah has passed away due to novel Coronavirus at the age of 70 on Friday night at a private hospital. He has acted in films, plays and serials as well.

He was acting in the romantic serial Premaloka which has Vijay Suriya and Ankitha Navya Gowda in lead roles.

According to reports, after he showed the symptoms of having Coronavirus, he got self-isolated at his farm house. When his health condition deteriorated, he was admitted to the hospital. Gangadhariah has acted in over 100 films, 150 plays and many serials lived his life in a simple way.

Condoling the death of Gangadharaiah, T N Seetharam on his Facebook page posted, “The death of a friend and a wonderful actor Hulivana Gangandharaiah is painful. In Aaspota play, the role of a driver he played brought immense popularity ro the play. When George Fernandes watched the play he appreciated his character. In the serial Muktha Muktha, he played the role of a politician Rajanandaswamy with ease which was aired for over three years brought us closer. In the modern theatre, Nagesh whom I consider as Guru used to cast Gangadharaiah in each play he directed which reflected the kind of faith he had in him. After a few years, he got involved in agriculture so I did not had much contact with him. It’s been nearly eight years I last met him. It is very sad that we have lost him.”

Lead actor of the serial Premaloka, Vijay Suriya has also mourned the death of Hulivana Gangadharaiah who was seen in a pivotal role in the serial.