Why lady be obliged to please her husband? SC questions practice of female genital mutilation

Agencies
July 30, 2018

New Delhi, Jul 30: The Supreme Court on Monday while hearing the writ petition filed against the practice of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) questioned the practice and said that a lady cannot be made available to her husband like a cattle.

The petition filed in the top court has sought issuance of orders to impose a complete ban on the practice of Female Genital Mutilation throughout India and for making it a cognizable non-compoundable and non-bailable offence.

Chief Justice of India, Dipak Misra, who was heading the bench of the top court, said that "why should a lady make such an effort that she is available to her husband as cattle. Why should only a lady have obligation to please her husband."

The CJI said that the practice is against gender sensitivity and is possibly hazardous for health.

Justice D Y Chandrachud also opposed the practice and while hearing the case observed that "genital is central of identity. So this is against one's identity."

Meanwhile, Attorney General KK Venugopal said that the government supports the ban on female genital mutilation.

FGM or 'khatna' is a process which involves the removal of skin from the clitoral hood of women, at the age of seven or between the ages of six and 12. It is generally practiced in the Bohra community.

The resolutions passed in December 2012, by the United Nations General Assembly regarding the rights of the children banning Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) or Khatna or female circumcision, of which India is a signatory and has also ratified UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and issue appropriate guidelines to this effect.

Comments

AU
 - 
Tuesday, 31 Jul 2018

dear SC

 

Hellooooo.....concentrate on other major issues rather than interfering family matters. 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 2,2020

Mathura, Mar 2: Union Minister of state Sadhvi Niranjan Jyoti on Sunday said after the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), the Centre might bring a population control law.

Jyoti claimed that she has already spoken to Prime Minister Narendra Modi in this regard.

She said she believes that this issue is under the prime minister's consideration and he himself has discussed the importance of bringing this law.

Jyoti arrived here on Sunday to attend a tribute meeting held at Swami Vamdev Jyotirmath in Chaitanya Vihar. Unnao MP Sakshi Maharaj was also present at the event.

"There was a time when abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir was impossible. It was feared that if such thing happens, there will be bloodbath. No one will be hold the national flag in Kashmir. But this government can bring any law in favour of the nation," Jyoti said.

"Now, everyone believes that if Article 370 can be removed...Prime Minister Narendra Modi can bring any law which is important for the country," she added.

Comments

expat
 - 
Monday, 2 Mar 2020

already people are childless. struggling for IVF treatment. no need of population control. it is automatically getting control byu nature.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 15,2020

New Delhi, Apr 15: A day after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the extension of COVID-19 lockdown till May 3, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on Wednesday issued consolidated revised guidelines on measures to be taken by Ministries and Departments of Government of India, state and Union Territory governments and authorities for the containment of COVID-19.

As per the guidelines, all domestic and international air travel of passengers (except for security purposes), passenger movement by trains (except for security purposes), buses for public transport, metro rail services will remain prohibited.

It stated that all educational, training, coaching institutions etc. shall remain closed. Inter-district and inter-state movement of individuals except for medical reasons or for activities permitted under guidelines shall remain prohibited.

Taxis (including auto-rickshaws and cycle rickshaws) and services of cab aggregators to remain prohibited until May 3.

Also, all cinema halls, malls, shopping complexes, gymnasiums, sports complexes, swimming pools, entertainment parks, theatres, bars and auditoriums, assembly halls and similar places shall remain closed.

All social/political/sports/entertainment/academic/cultural/religious functions/other gatherings will also not be allowed.

"All religious places or places of worship shall be closed for public. Religious congregations are strictly prohibited. In the case of funerals, a congregation of more than 20 persons will not be permitted," the guidelines stated.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.