Larger opinion getting shaped against Modi govt for ignoring flood survivors: Deve Gowda

We, the undersigned express our solidarity with Dr Zafarul Islam Khan, renowned scholar, journalist and presently Chairman of the Delhi Minorities Commission.

We strongly condemn the continued media trial and targeting of Dr Zafarul Islam Khan for his Facebook post thanking Kuwait for expressing solidarity with Indian Muslims. In his Facebook post, he mentioned the appalling deterioration of human rights of Indian Muslims who have been targeted by Hindutva bigots. A few politicians with ulterior motives and news channel anchors known for spreading bigotry and Islamophobia have mischievously sought to misinterpret his statement and ridiculously label him as anti-Hindu and anti-India.

He has only reiterated what many citizens of India, public figures, international institutions, various European governments, the United States of America and United Nations human rights mechanisms have repeatedly underlined their concern at the increasing human rights abuse and violations of religious minorities in India.

Dr Zafarul Islam Khan is a man of integrity. He is a scholar who is known to stand up for constitutional freedoms and values.

His work as the Chairman of Delhi Minorities Commission has been warmly applauded by human rights activists and NGOs across different faiths. His timely interventions on problems of minorities in Delhi have made him a respectable figure among not only Muslims but Sikh, Christians, Jains and Parsis. He is a humanist in the truest sense of the word.

The hateful propaganda against Dr Khan is one more illustration as how certain Indians fail to differentiate between Hinduism, a religion and Hindutva which is a supremacist political ideology.

Dr Zafarul Islam Khan is a leading Indian intellectual whose niche area is Islamic studies and Arab world. He enjoys great respect in the Arab and Muslim world for his understanding and knowledge. He is an alumni of the esteemed Jamia Al-Azhar and Manchester University.

Dr Khan is known for taking bold public positions. He was the first Muslim scholar in the world who denounced ISIL, which later became IS or ISIS. He issued a statement opposing the barbaric crimes of ISIL (IS or ISIS) and Boko Haram against minorities. He takes strong stands against extremism of all sorts. That makes him a prominent critic of RSS.

Dr Khan is a scholar ambassador and earned international prestige for the India. Any attack and targeting of him, is actually an insult to Indian constitution and ethos.

We demand the appropriate authorities of the Government of India take strong legal action against those who are distorting Dr Khan’s Facebook post, and spreading vicious false propaganda against him.

Signed by:

Swami Agnivesh

Mohammad Adeeb
Arun Kumar (Prof)

Zafar Jung

Kamal Faruqui

Annie Namala

Kavita Krishnan

Subhash Gatade

Jawed Naqvi

Indu Pratap Singh

Avinash Kumar

Iftikhar Gilani

Anil Chamadia

Xavier Dias

Denzil Fernandes (Dr)

Irfan Engineer

Faisal Khan

John Dayal (Dr)

Mujtaba Farooque

Ravi Nair

Abubakr Sabbaq (Adv)

Gopal Menon

Bilal Khan

Ashok Choudhury

Jaffer Latief Najar

Mujahid Nafis

Aseem Sundan

Poojan Sahil

Ankur Otto

Mariya Salim

Tanweer Alam

Juned Khan

E M Abdul Rahiman

Aditi Dutta

Devika Prasad

Ameeque Jamei

Suhaib Ansari

Gurminder Singh

A C Michael

Neelima Sharma

Aftab Alam (Dr)

Dhruva Narayan

Syed Saif Ur Rahman

Tanweer Fazal (Dr)

Thouseef Madikeri (Dr)

N.D. Jayaprakash

Salahuddin Ansari

Satyajeet Nambiar

Suhail KK

Abu Sufiyan

Sujata Madhok

Tariq Khan

Violin Mathew Benjamin

Shamsul Islam (Prof)

Sreedhar Ramamurthi

Mohd. Shahid (Prof)

Anand Vivek Taneja (Dr)

Kush Kumar Singh (Dr)

Mangla Verma

Vipul Kumar

Waquar Hasan

Braham Prakash

Abdul Rashid Agwan

Fawaz Shaheen

Guman Singh

Mohammed Hafeez Ulla

Kp Sasi

Mushfique Raza Khan

Partha S Banerjee

Gautam Majumdar

S.Q. Masood

Aiman J Khan

M. K. Faizy

Tasleem Rehmani (Dr)

Mohammed Shafi

Lenin Raghuvanshi (Dr)

Malik Motasim Khan

Kripal Singh Mandloi

Labeed Shafi

Qamar Intakhab

Raees Ahmed Siddiqui

Laeeq Ahmed Khan

Anthony Arulraj

Sadiq Zafar

Biju Gopidasan

George Pulikuthiyil

Mohd Abdullah

Mohd Sorab Hussain

Mukunda Kattel

Sandeep Pendse

Paul Newman

Ovais Sultan Khan

Bengaluru, Jul 17: Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa on Friday said lockdown is not the solution for controlling COVID-19 and made it clear that there was no proposal before the government to extend it in Bengaluru.

Bengaluru urban and rural areas are currently under "complete lockdown" since 8 pm of July 14 and it will be effective till 5 am on July 22.

With the spike in cases, speculations were rife that the current lockdown is likely to be extended for 15 days, as that much time is required to break the chain.

"Lockdown is not the solution to control COVID. There is no proposal before the government to extend the lockdown," Yediyurappa was quoted as saying by his office in a release.

The Chief Minister today chaired a meeting with Ministers who have been made in-charge of eight zones in the city and officials regarding the COVID-19 situation in Bengaluru.

Earlier too, on July 13, the eve of the lockdown, Yediyurappa had said the government did not plan to extend it in Bengaluru urban and rural districts, and had appealed to the people to cooperate by not paying heed to rumours.

However, earlier today city Mayor M Goutham Kumar and commissioner of the civic body Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike B H Anil Kumar had favoured its extension.

They had said that in their personal opinion, a 15 day lockdown would be good, as that much time is required to break the chain.

The Opposition Congress too had asked for a minimum of 15 days lockdown after taking expert opinion.

"Respected Chief Minister, you have imposed lockdown in Bengaluru, but it is difficult to expect results from this lockdown, which has been imposed just for for the sake of it.

Take expert opinion and enforce strict lockdown in Bengaluru at least for 15 days.

If not, even if God comes,it will be difficult to protect Bengaluru," KPCC Working President Eshwar Khandre tweeted.

Speaking to reporters after attending the meeting chaired by the CM, Revenue Minister R Ashoka said lockdown will not be extended and all activities can resume as usual from July 22.

"Lockdown will not be extended. I'm saying this after discussing with the Chief Minister. There is no such thinking before the government.

CM has got report from the experts, it was discussed in the meeting.

By lockdown we can only postpone things, we have taken that breathing time.

If we continue lockdown it will keep on continuing," he said.

The Minister said the process of sealing places, wherever required, would continue.

He said the plan to conduct more tests was discussed at the meeting and all the required zone wise arrangements would be made

"We also discussed about beds and shortage of ventilators and steps will be taken to arrange for them," he said.

As of July 16 evening, cumulatively 51,422 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 1,032 deaths and 19,729 discharges.

Bengaluru urban district tops the list of positive cases, with a total of 25,288 infections.

Out of 4,169 fresh cases reported on Thursday, a whopping 2,344 were from Bengaluru urban alone

At the meeting, the Chief Minister said all necessary steps should be taken to clear all the difficulties faced by infected patients in getting admitted to hospitals.

The CMO statement quoted Yediyurappa as directing Ministers to hold meetings with private hospitals to ensure that COVID and non COVID patients get treatment.

Warning of strict action against private hospitals if they don't allocate beds for COVID patients,he said volunteers and nodal officers would be appointed to gather information about admission of such patients and availability of beds

The Chief Minister said rapid antigen tests should be conducted on those dying at hospitals or homes and necessary action taken to hand over the bodies or to conduct last rites as per the procedures, depending on the cause of death.

Recruitment was on to appoint doctors to resolve shortage, he said,adding that volunteers have been identified in each ward for micromanagement and ambulances allocated.

Marriage halls and lodges have been selected in all wards for those not having separate quarantine facilities, Yediyurappa said and stressed on increasing testing.

Deploying extra police force at places where there are chances of people gathering in large numbers, ensuring beds availability and ambulances within two hours of a patient testing positive- with decentralized monitoring, giving priority to those symptomatic above 65-years during allocation of beds were among directions given by the Chief Minister.

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.