United Nations, May 20: Highlighting India's long-standing history of promoting inclusive and peaceful societies, a top UN official on Tuesday voiced concern over incidents of "increased hate speech and discrimination" against minority communities in the country following the adoption of the Citizenship Amendment Act.
Under-Secretary-General and UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide Adama Dieng, however, welcomed Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s call for unity and brotherhood in the wake of the COVID19 pandemic.
Dieng said in a note to the media on Tuesday that he is "concerned over reports of increased hate speech and discrimination against minority communities in India" since the adoption of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in December 2019.
The Indian government has maintained that the CAA is an internal matter of the country and stressed that the goal is to protect the oppressed minorities of neighbouring countries.
The CAA, which was notified on January 10, grants Indian citizenship to non-Muslim minorities migrated to India from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh till December 31, 2014, following persecution over their faith.
"While the objective of the act, to provide protection to minority communities is commendable, it is concerning that this protection is not extended to all groups, including Muslims. This is contrary to India’s obligations under international human rights law, in particular on non-discrimination,” Dieng said.
The Special Adviser recognised "India’s long standing and well recognised history of promoting inclusive and peaceful societies, with respect for equality and principles of non-discrimination.”
He also welcomed recent statements by Prime Minister Modi that the COVID-19 pandemic “does not see race, religion, colour, caste, creed, language or border before striking and that our response and conduct...should attach primacy to unity and brotherhood.”
Dieng encouraged the Government of India to "continue to abide by this guidance by ensuring that national laws and policies follow international standards related to non-discrimination and to address and counter the rise of hate speech through messages of inclusion, respect for diversity and unity.”
He further reiterated that he would continue to follow developments and expressed his readiness to support initiatives to counter and address hate speech.
The hate speech and the dehumanisation of others goes against international human rights norms and values, he added.
“In these extraordinary times brought about by the COVID-19 crisis it is more important than ever that we stand united as one humanity, demonstrating unity and solidarity rather than division and hate,” he said.
Dieng also expressed concern over reports of violence during demonstrations against CAA in some regions of India.
Comments
Who is RAMA ?
Answer : he the king of ayodhya.
is he human being
Answer : yes.
how come an human being can become GOD.
my dear hindu brother, please understant the concept of GOD,
rama cannot save sita from kidnapping then how he will save you??
rama need army to capture ravana then how he will become GOD.
Rama born and died, so you think GOD also born & die.
if there is so many gods then there is no justic...same as indian political party one want to pull the leg of other to get power..
Who is GOD ?
The Most Concise Definition of God:
The most concise definition of God in Islam is given in the four verses of Surah Ikhlas which is Chapter 112 of the Qur’an:
"Say: He is Allah,
The One and Only.
"Allah, the Eternal, Absolute.
"He begets not, nor is He begotten.
And there is none like unto Him."
What does Islam say about ‘god-men’?
India is often called the land of ‘god-men’. This is due to the abundance of so-called spiritual masters in India. Many of these ‘babas’ and ‘saints’ have a large following in many countries. Islam abhors deification of any human being. To understand the Islamic stand towards such pretenders to divinity, let us analyze one such ‘god-man’, Osho Rajneesh or RAMA.
Let us put this candidate, ‘Bhagwan’ Rajneesh, to the test of Surah Ikhlas, the touchstone of theology:
i) The first criterion is "Say, He is Allah, one and only". Is Rajneesh one and only? No! Rajneesh was one among the multitude of ‘spiritual teachers’ produced by India. Some disciples of Rajneesh might still hold that Rajneesh is one and only.
ii) The second criterion is, ‘Allah is absolute and eternal’. We know from Rajneesh’s biography that he was suffering from diabetes, asthma, and chronic backache. He alleged that the U.S. Government gave him slow poison in prison. Imagine Almighty God being poisoned! Rajneesh was thus, neither absolute nor eternal.
iii) The third criterion is ‘He begets not, nor is He begotten’. We know that Rajneesh was born in Jabalpur in India and had a mother as well as a father who later became his disciples.
God does not become a human being:
God does not take human form:
Some may argue that God does not become a human being but only takes a human form. If God only takes a human form but does not become a human being, He should not possess any human qualities. We know that all the ‘God-men’, have human qualities and failings. They have all the human needs such as the need to eat, sleep, etc.
The worship of God in human form is therefore a logical fallacy and should be abhorred in all its forms and manifestations.
That is the reason why the Qur’an speaks against all forms of anthropomorphism. The Glorious Qur’an says in the following verse:
"There is nothing whatever like unto Him."
GOD is beautiful, GOD is Merciful, GOD is Loving his creation based on his good deeds.
GOD want human being to live in this earth happly and cooperate each other in bad time.
one important thing GOD want that he want him to worship alone. he is supreme
dont add idol, photo, animal, stone, humans, sun, star etc.
all belong to HIM.
hope you will find the truth before you die!!!
Dear Advocate Sir,
Saying is not enough sir, All courts need concrete evedence to prove and to discharge the verdict.
Please provide the concrete evidence to get the verdict in favor.
We ask advocate Vaidyanathan to respect his post and constitution by not giving incorrect statement. We ask him the base he say that babri masjid was constructed by razing temple. Where is the proof. He is throwing ball in darkness. He is betraying his oath taken while receiving lawyer certificate that he will say truth only. Dear Vaidyanathan, please dont misguide the court and show the evidence. How about the home you are staying. What will be your response if I say that it was constructed demolishing church or gurudwara or masjid.
Add new comment