Now, this CM Ibrahim lambasts Siddu; praises Deve Gowda

Bengaluru, May 24:The first 'Sunday curfew' imposed by the Karnataka government to try and contain the spread of COVID-19 got underway in the state today, with people by and large adhering to norms, roads wearing a deserted look and almost no vehicular traffic, barring essential services.

With barricades being up across most roads in the state, people ventured out only to purchase groceries, vegetabes and medicines.

Instances of violation of Sunday curfew lockdown norms were reported in COVID-19 hotspots of Shivajinagar and Rayapura in Bengaluru and Nelamangala and Devanahalli.

Temples, malls, bars, eateries and small food joints remained shut throughout state.

In most parts of the state buses, autorickshaws and cabs did not ply.

In Bengaluru, the ever bustling Majestic area, which houses the central city bus stand, inter-city bus stand, Metro Railway Station and the City Railway Station, did not see any activity as buses did not ply and all shops were shut, police said.

Reports from Mysuru, Tumakuru, Kolar, Mangaluru, Udupi and other towns across the state said there were no lockdown violations.

Amid the rigid curfew marriages were conducted in a simple manner in various parts of the state like Gollarahatti and Yashwanthapura in Bengaluru and also in Davangere.

Families of the brides and grooms invited only a few people for the event, adhered to social distancing norms and wore masks.

In Gollarahatti, the event organisers cleaned the road, after which the invitees, who were hardly 25 to 30 in number, sat down to have a feast.

The Karnataka government had eased restrictions during Lockdown 4 for start of economic activities like city buses, inter-district bus service, intrastate train services, opening of shops and markets.

However, the government had made it clear that there will be 'Janata Curfew' every Sunday during which only essential services would be permitted.

Mangaluru, Feb 10: Life of a 40–year-old man, who suffered a massive cardiac arrest, was saved by an ambulance driver who covered 80-km distance between Dharmasthala and Mangaluru in just 40 minutes.

The patient, a Chikkaballapur native sustained a heart attack near Sakleshpur on Saturday while he was on his way to Dharmasthala. He was provided preliminary treatment at a private hospital in Ujire, where doctors advised his relatives to shift him to a hospital in Mangaluru immediately.

The patient’s condition was critical and the odds were completely against him. Moreover owing to the ongoing double lane project work, the road too had been dugout. Despite all this, ambulance driver Hameed drove at a fast pace and managed to take the patient to the hospital within 40 minutes.

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.