Karnataka will urge Modi govt to ban SDPI: CT Ravi

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, May 14: Michael Madhu was one of the popular actors in Sandalwood. He was widely known for portraying comedy roles. The news of his demise has come as a shock to all the members in the Kannada film industry and also his fans. Michael Madhu died on May 13 after suffering from a heart attack. As per a report in Zoom, the actor was rushed to the KIMS Hospital in Bengaluru after he suddenly collapsed at his home.

Michael Madhu, in his career spanning of almost two decades, has acted in more than 300 films. Some of his notable works include Bhajarangi, Shhh! and Ashwamedha. Besides being an impeccable actor, especially his perfect comic timings, Michael was also passionate about dancing and was huge fan of Michael Jackson. This was one of the major reasons why he added Michael to his name. He had entered the film industry with an aim to become a popular choreographer, but destiny had something else in store for him. Michael Madhu is survived by his wife and two daughters.

Fans of Michael Madhu have been sharing condolences on social media ever since the news of his death hit the internet. As per a report in media, the actor’s last rites will take place today.

Bengaluru, May 13: Former chief minister and senior Congress leader Siddaramaiah on Wednesday called the measures announced by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman as 'disastrous' and said it is 'non-existent' in terms of benefits to poor migrants, labourers, contract employees and farmers.

"The first set of measures announced by @FinMinIndia @nsitharaman, after 8 PM speech by @narendramodi, is disastrous & non-existent in terms of benefits to poor migrants, labourers, contract employees, farmers, etc," Siddaramaiah said in a tweet.

The Congress leader said most of the intended benefits may not reach the end recipient.

This comes a day after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a Rs 20 lakh crore special economic package to revive the COVID-19 hit economy.

"The contribution by the government for the schemes announced are mostly notional and less of actuals and the devil lies in the detail," the Congress leader said in another tweet.

After Sitharaman announced support measures for MSMEs, Siddaramaiah said, "The credit infusion to MSMEs may help them clear dues to vendors but it is doubtful if they shall utilise the credit available to pay their labourers & to prevent job cuts. @FinMinIndia should have taken measures to pay part of the salaries to the employees in MSMEs."

Further questioning the Centre on 'ignoring the spending for boosting consumption', Siddaramaiah said, "The government is interested in capital infusion in the form of credits but totally ignorant of the actual spending that needs to be done to boost consumption. How can credit be considered as government spending?"

Siddaramaiah said the next set of measures should benefit the marginalised sections.

"Will be looking forward to next set of measures & I hope it will be something to benefit the marginalised sections. Direct benefits to the poorest sections will help them survive this pandemic. COVID-19 fight should not be another perception battle but a real one," he added in another tweet.

Sitharaman earlier announced Rs 3 lakh crore collateral-free automatic loans for businesses, including MSMEs.

Besides this, she also stated that to provide stressed MSMEs with equity support, the government will facilitate the provision of Rs 20,000 crore as subordinate debt.