Mangaluru: Hikmah International Academy observes Van Mahotsav

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, Jun 15: Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa on Monday said those coming to the state from Chennai and Delhi will have to undergo three days of institutional quarantine followed by 11 days of home isolation.

Up till now a seven-day institutional quarantine was prescribed for those returning from Maharashtra, while there was no mandatory institutional quarantine for asymptomatic people returning to Karnataka from other states.

Those returning from states other than Maharashtra were asked to quarantine themselves at home.

"Those coming from Maharashtra are subjected to seven days of institutional quarantine followed by seven days of home quarantine, while those coming from Chennai and Delhi will have to go for three days of institutional quarantine and eleven days of home quarantine," Yediyurappa said.

Speaking to reporters here, he said the decision has been taken following the increase in the number of coronavirus cases from these states.

"It is because of returnees from other states the cases have increased, not because of the local (intra-state) movement, so we have to control people coming from outside, we have to quarantine them and have to tighten measures.

We are making honest efforts in this regard," he added.

Yediyurappa was speaking to reporters after chairing a meeting with top ministers and officials to discuss about the surge in COVID cases in the state.

"There are no plans for any lockdown, and we will request the Prime Minister for more relaxations," the Chief Minister said in response to a question.

Out of total 7,000 cases in the state 4,386 are returnees from Maharashtra and their contacts are 1,340.

Those who returned from abroad comprise 216.

Returnees from other states constitute- Delhi 87, Tamil Nadu 67, Gujarat 62.

Noting that there are indications that the coronavirus infections are expected to increase in the days to come, Yediyurappa assured people that the government will take all precautionary measures required, and appealed to people to cooperate, follow social distancing, and wear masks.

He said it has been decided to observe the coming Thursday as "mask days" by organising a walk across the state and the main event will be held at Vidhana Soudha, the state secretariat.

"Strict measures will be taken against those not wearing masks and not maintaining social distancing here on.

Initially Rs 200 fine will be imposed, this will be throughout the state," he said.

Further stating that the government has made special efforts to control the spread of COVID, he said a special COVID-19 taskforce has been constituted for Bengaluru and surrounding areas, BBMP (city civic body) commissioner and Deputy Commissioners of neighbouring districts have been asked to pay special attention.

As of June 14 evening, cumulatively 7,000 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 86 deaths and 3,955 discharges.

Out of 2,956 active cases in the state till last evening, 2,940 patients are in isolation at designated hospitals and are stable, while 16 are in ICU.

Yediyurappa said the state's mortality rate is 1.2 per cent while the national average is 2.8 per cent.

The state's recovery rate is 56.6 per cent and the national average is 51 per cent, he said, adding that 93 per cent of the total cases are asymptomatic while the remaining seven per cent are symptomatic.

In Bengaluru, there are 697 cases and out of them 330 are active. The city has reported 36 deaths.

Newsroom, Apr 30: Beleaguered billionaire B R Shetty, who went into hiding after after a multi-billion fraud at UAE-based NMC Health came to light, has now put the blame on his companies employees.

The former chairman of the Abu Dhabi headquartered hospital operator said, investigations he commissioned found following things:

1. The fraudulent creation and operating of bank accounts in my name including many fraudulent transfers that I neither authorised, consented to, or had any knowledge of.

2. The fraudulent creation of loans, personal guarantees, cheques and bank transfers in my name, and using my forged signature, that I neither authorised, consented to, or had any knowledge of.

3. The creation and set-up of companies in my name that I neither authorised, consented to, or had any knowledge of, and that were seemingly created with the express intention to commit or conceal fraud.

4. The fraudulent creation of powers of attorney, and the misuse of existing powers of attorney, again in my name, that I that I neither authorised, consented to, or had any knowledge of.

5. The creation and provision to me of false and misleading financial statements and information regarding the performance of some of my private companies and investments by members of my own management team.

6. The payments of expenses using my private companies and personal bank accounts, I believe to hide the true financials of the public companies."

This is the first time Dr. Shetty, who is reportedly hiding in India for the last couple of months, issued a statement based on investigations he commissioned privately. He had brought in a consultancy to conduct it after initial revelations came to light that NMC Health had not been fully transparent with its finances.

Dr. Shetty had stepped down as executive chairman after the then Board of Directors barred him from attending any meetings. “I intend to work tirelessly to clear my name and assist any authorities in getting to the truth and help them ensure that misappropriated or missing funds are returned by the perpetrators to their rightful owners,” said Dr. Shetty.

This month, ADCB, which has the highest exposure among UAE banks to NMC Health, brought charges against five former officials, including ex-board of directors, with Abu Dhabi prosecution. The former CEOs of NMC Health and Finablr are also currently not in the UAE.