No intention of disturbing peace; I was not well: BJP MP on arson threat

Jan 14: A day after it moved the Supreme Court against the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), the Kerala government on Tuesday said it would continue its fight against the legislation as it "destroys" the secularism and democracy in the country.

The CPI(M)-led government had on Monday moved the apex court challenging the CAA and sought to declare it as 'ultra vires' of the Constitution. State Industries Minister E P Jayarajan told reporters here that the state has moved the apex court and will explore all options to fight the Act.

"The state government will to go to any extent and continue its fight against CAA. This Act destroys democracy in the country. This will only help in implementing the RSS agenda, to drive the nation through a fascist regime, and destroying the secularism and democracy in the country. The RSS and the Sangh Parivar cannot implement this law just by using muscle power," Jayarajan said.

Tourism Minister Kadakampally Surendran tweeted that the state became the first in the country to approach the top court against the Act. "Kerala government files lawsuit against the unconstitutional CAA. Kerala becomes the first state in the country to go to the Supreme Court against CAA.

"Kerala leads the way," he said in the tweet. In a suit filed in the apex court, the Kerala government has sought to declare that the CAA 2019 was "violative" of Article 14 (Equality before law), 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty) and 25 (Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion) of the Constitution.

It also claimed that the law was violative of the basic principle of secularism enshrined in it. The state Assembly had on December 31, 2019, passed a unanimous resolution against the CAA and became the first state to do it.

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, Feb 12: Mohammed Nalapad, son of Karnataka Congress MLA NA Harris, who allegedly rammed his sports car into vehicles and a kiosk, injuring 4, on Bellary road in Bengaluru on February 9, said that he was not in the car which met with the accident.

Bengaluru Joint Commissioner of Police, Traffic, Ravikante Gowda told media, "Mohammed Nalapad appeared before the investigating officer today. He was arrested following interrogation. We are collecting evidence and will file a charge sheet shortly."

Nalapad is out on bail, in connection with the matter where he had assaulted a man in a pub in Bengaluru in 2018.

"I was not in the car which met with accident. I was travelling in a Lamborghini car which was moving ahead of the car. However, I called people to rescue the victims. We took them to the hospital and paid their hospital bill," said Mohammed Nalapad.

Further, details are awaited

Also Read: MLA N A Harris’ son Nalapad, out on bail, now crashes his luxury Bentley car, injures 4