HDK to go ahead with son's wedding on April 17 with precautionary measures against COVID-19

Bengaluru, Jun 10: Janata Dal-Secular (JD-S) supremo and former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda said on Tuesday that he filed his nomination for the June 19 Rajya Sabha elections from Karnataka in response to a collective call from national leaders to be back in the Parliament.

"Though I was not personally interested to contest, national leaders from Congress President Sonia Gandhi, National Conference President Farooq Abdullah, TMC and Left parties want me back in Parliament," he told reporters here.

Gowda, 87, filed his nomination in the Vidhana Soudha, submitting the papers to Assembly Secretary and Returning Officer M.K. Vishalakshi, a party official told IANS.

Gowda''s second son and former minister H.D. Revanna and third son and former Chief Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy were present on the occasion.

"Our party''s all 34 legislators also urged me to contest as my presence is necessary in Parliament at a time when the country was grappling with multiple crises in the aftermath of coronavirus," said Gowda.

Claiming that there was no pressure from his two sons as they are more concerned with his health, Gowda said he was touched by the requests of the national leaders, especially Gandhi who personally called him and asked him to contest as the country needed his presence in Parliament.

Gowda agreed to contest in the bypoll as his party''s candidate after the Congress state unit assured him of its support with its surplus votes, as the JD-S with 34 legislators is short of 10 votes of the required 44 votes.

It will be second time Gowda will enter the Rajya Sabha, 24 years after he was its member as the Prime Minster from June 1996 to April 1997 of the United Front government.

"Congress General Secretary K.C. Venugopal informed Kumaraswamy on June 6 that the party was fielding only its senior leader Mallikarjun Kharge from Karnataka and had surplus votes to ensure my victory as our party is 10 votes short of the required 44 votes to win," Gowda said.

Kharge filed his nomination on Monday.

Party''s outgoing member Kupendra Reddy, whose 6-year term ends on June 25, told Gowda that he was not interested for a second term as he did not get enough time in the upper house to raise issues.

"As our party does not have numbers in Parliament to get more time allotted to raise issues and participate in debates, Reddy wanted me to be in the Rajya Sabha in his place so that I could serve the nation better," Gowda said.

Gowda lost in the May 2019 general elections from Tumkur to G.S. Basvaraj of the BJP.

With the term of the four members -- Congress'' B.K. Hariprasad and Rajeev Gowda, BJP''s Prabhakar Kore and JD-S''s Reddy ending on June 25, the Election Commission notified the poll on June 1.

According to the poll panel, the nominations will be scrutinised on Wednesday and last date for withdrawal by candidates is June 12. Polling and vote count is on June 19.

From the ruling BJP, its grassroot cadres Eranna Kadadi and Ashok Gasti filed their nominations after Gowda.

By fielding Gowda for the fourth seat, the Congress and JD-S, who had post-poll and pre-poll alliances for the Lok Sabha and state Assembly elections in May 2019 and May 2018, queered the pitch for the BJP, denying it the chance to win a third seat.

Udupi, May 4: Udupi Deputy Commissioner G Jagadeesha said that mechanised boat fishing will be permitted in Udupi district in another two days.

He further said that the decision was taken after the district was declared as a Green Zone as no fresh cases of COVID-19 were reported from the district in the past several days.

The Deputy Commissioner told the media here that fishing will be permitted but social distancing has to be practised and only 30 boats will be permitted in a day.

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.