Sedition charges against Dr Zafarul Islam Khan for warning bigots sparks row

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, Apr 20: Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa on Monday came down heavily on Congress legislator BZ Zameer Ahmed Khan over the Padarayanapura vandalism that saw a mob run amok against efforts to quarantine suspected COVID-19 persons late on Sunday evening. 

Khan, who represents the Chamarajpet constituency where Padarayanapura is located, said that authorities should have gone to the area during day time.

“Who is he to say that? What does he have to do with this? Why should we ask him? Should we get his permission to carry out government work? Instead of saying that action should be taken, he is speaking like this. Should we then think that he incited the mob? This is the height of being irresponsible,” Yediyurappa said. 

Following the violence, the police have arrested 54 persons and “five more will be arrested,” Yediyurappa said.

Khan clarified that he did not defend those who indulged in vandalism. “I condemn the incident and action should be taken. I’m not saying officials shouldn’t have gone. My point is that they should’ve gone during the day and by creating awareness beforehand that people need to be quarantined,” he said, adding that the BBMP had identified 57 people to be quarantined in Padarayanapura. 

“People in this area are poor, uneducated and are mostly coolie workers and daily wagers. But whatever happened was wrong,” Khan said. He also pointed out that he was the one who arranged for 80 people to be quarantined in Tipu Nagar. 

Yediyurappa said the Padarayanapura incident was unprecedented. “In the entire state, never had such incidents taken place. Everybody agrees this is unacceptable,” the CM said. “Whoever breaks the law - Hindu, Muslim, Christian or anyone - should face action,” he said.

Bengaluru, Jan 5: A day after senior Congress leaders in Karnataka met to build consensus for the way ahead, the race for the post of KPCC President hotted up on Sunday with aspirants and their supporters stepping up efforts to secure the coveted posts.

Senior leader D K Shivakumar, seen as a frontrunner for the post, met former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah at his residence amid reports that he was lobbying in favour of one of his confidants.

Meanwhile, another senior party legislator Satish Jarkiholi made it clear he was capable of discharging the responsibility if the high command asked him to do so.

Also, loyalists of senior leader and former Minister Ramalinga Reddy came up with social media posts, pushing forward his name for KPCC President.

Congress Legislature Party leader Siddaramaiah and state Congress chief Dinesh Gundu Rao quit their posts after the party fared poorly, winning only two of the 15 seats in the bypolls while it had held 12 of them.

According to party sources, though Siddaramaiah is likely to retain the position of Leader of Opposition, the CLP leader post may be given to some one else.

The sources also said replacement of KPCC President was most likely as Dinesh Gundu Rao's resignation could be accepted.

Shivakumar is seen as the frontrunner for the KPCC President post and has already held discussions with high command in this regard.

His meeting with Siddaramaiah, who is expected to travel to Delhi soon to hold discussions with the high command, assumes significance amid reports that the former chief minister was favouring one of his confidants for the post.

Shivakumar during the meeting sought Siddaramaiah's cooperation for his appointment to the coveted post, with a promise to work under his leadership, sources said.

However, speaking to reporters after the meeting, Shivakumar said he had worked under Siddaramaiah as legislator and Minister, and there was nothing special about the nearly two-hour-long meeting.

"...Im not a competitor for any post, I won't ask for any post, that time is over. I'm a karyakarta of the party and will work as karyakarta," he said in response to a question, adding he will abide by the party's decision.

On the other hand, Congressleader andYamakanamaradi MLASatish Jarkiholi said he was ready to take up the responsibility if the party high command decides so.

"It has been decided to cooperate and work under the leadership of anyone, whom the party high command decides (as President). Let's see, it is for the high command to decide (who will be KPCC President)," he said.

In response to a question from reporters in Belagavi if he was aspiring for the post, Jarikholi said, "I havent asked, but if given I will manage it efficiently..."

Meanwhile, loyalist of seven-time Congress MLA Ramalinga Reddy, came up with a social media post, demanding KPCC President post for the leader.

"Seven-time @INCKarnataka MLA and former Home Minister Sri @RLR_BTM for #KPCC President. #Congress #Karnataka #RamalingaReddy #BTMLayout #BBMP #Bengaluru," former Mayor of Bengaluru City and a close confidant of Reddy, B N Manjunatha Reddy tweeted.

Last year during the political turmoil faced by the coalition government, Ramalinga Reddy had threatened to resign, unhappy at being sidelined in the party.

He had later decided to stay with the Congress after the high command intervened.

With a virtual vacuum in the state Congress following the resignation of its top leadership after the rout in the recent Assembly bypolls, senior party leaders had met here on Saturday with an aim to build a consensus for the way ahead.

According to sources, the meeting was convened after instructions from the high command to iron out differences and build consensus on taking the party forward and regarding appointments to key posts, before coming to Delhi for discussions.

Senior leader K H Muniyappa and KPCC Working President Eshwar Khandreare seen as the other aspirants for the President post.

Ssenior leaders G Parameshwara along with H K Patil are among those seen as the frontrunners for the CLP leader post vacated by Siddaramaiah.