‘Modi wave’ sweeping Karnataka, says Yeddyurappa

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.

Mar 5: The Karnataka government on Thursday proposed to increase rate of tax on petrol and diesel by three per cent which would make the fuel dearer by Rs 1.60 and Rs 1.59 per litre, respectively.

Presenting the 2020-21 budget in the Legislative Assembly, Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa proposed to increase rate of tax on petrol from 32 per cent to 35 per cent and diesel from 21 per cent to 24 per cent, as part of additional resource mobilisation measures.

Yediyurappa, who also holds the finance portfolio, increased excise duty on Indian Made Liquor (KML) across 18 slabs by six per cent.

However, to promote affordable housing, the government proposed to reduce stamp duty on first time registration of new apartments/flats costing less than Rs 20 lakh from existing five per cent to two per cent.

This is the first budget of the BJP government after coming to power last year; it's the seventh presented by Yediyurappa.

"For the year 2020-21, a total amount of Rs 55,732 crore is provided for stimulating economic growth sector", the Chief Minister said.

He said the revenue collection target for the Commercial Taxes department for the year 2020-21 is fixed at Rs 82,443 crore.

Stating the government had fixed a revenue target of Rs 20,950 crore for the excise department for the year 2019- 20, he said at the end of February Rs 19,701 crore had been collected.

"We hope to achieve the budget target."

He also hoped with the increase in rates and effective enforcement and regulatory measures, the Excise department would be achieving the target of Rs 22,700 crore fixed for the financial year 2020-21.

On the transport sector, Yediyurappa said it is proposed to levy motor vehicle tax on contract carriages having seating capacity to carry more than 12 passengers, but not more than 20 passengers at the rate of Rs 900 per seat per quarter.

He said it is also proposed to levy vehicle tax on new model sleeper coaches which are granted permits under section 88 (9) of MV Act 1988 at the rate of Rs 4,000 per sleeper per quarter.

Noting that a target of Rs 7,100 crore revenue collection is expected to be achieved in 2019-20 in transport sector, he said for 2020-21 revenue collection target has been fixed at Rs 7,115 crore.

He said the revenue collection target for 2019-20 under stamps and registration was fixed at Rs 11,828 crore and against this Rs 10,248 crore has been collected till the end of February 2020 which is 87 per cent of full year target.

While the revenue collection target for 2020-21 under stamps and registration is fixed at Rs 12,655 crore.

Bengaluru, Mar 27: India should take a cue from the UK and Italy and allow final year medical students to skip exam and bring them into the hospital system immediately to fight the war against COVID-19, noted cardiac surgeon Devi Prasad Shetty on Friday said.

The Chairman and Founder of the city-based Narayana Health said there should be some reforms in medical education like the UK and Italy.
In the UK, he noted, final year medical students have been told that they don't need to appear for the exam, and they will be given pass based on the past performance and they can get into the hospital system to fill the shortage.

Italy got 10,000 more doctors following the move to cut short the duration of MBBS by nine months, according to him.

COVID-19 battle can be only won by young doctors and young nurses. Its like a war, Shetty told PTI.

He said: Senior doctorsnone of them will be able to touch the patients because they are past the age of 50. A person who is past the age of 50 is very vulnerable himself.

This is a very contagious disease. "But we dont have that many battalion (of doctors). We need one and half lakh doctors to manage all these government
hospitals and private hospitals (to fight COVID-19)", he added.

​​​