Will decide on Nov 26 to accept 5-acre land or not: Sunni Waqf Board President

Ballari, June 30: A video clip of dead bodies of covid-19 victims being disgracefully thrown into a pit said to be in Karnataka’s Ballari has gone viral on social media triggering outrage from netizens.

Ballari Deputy Commissioner SS Nakul ordered a probe. He told media persons that the veracity of the video is still under question and that it still needs to be established if the video was taken in Ballari.

In the video, a pit is seen which appears to be disinfected. The video features masked men covered in body suits bringing dead bodies from a black hearse van in black body bags one by one and throwing the dead bodies into the same pit. In all, three dead bodies are thrown into the same pit in the video.

"We have assigned an Additional Deputy Commissioner (ADC) to enquire and verify the same. We are awaiting reports. We don't know yet if it (the video) is from Ballari or not," Nakul said.

The district which has so far reported around 800 cases in the last three months has also witnessed around two dozen deaths.

Twitterati on Tuesday raised questions about the handling of the bodies. "Even dead have some respect and they deserved a decent burial," said a social activist from Ballari. Similar reactions echoed on social media and some also pointed out on how the family members who have to stay away from burials feel about it.

Covid burial protocol

According to the protocol set by the Union Health Ministry for the burial of Covid-19 patients, the patients' orifices (nose, mouth and ears) have to be sealed and the body has to be wrapped in three layers of personal protective equipment (PPE). Thereafter it should be placed in a body bag. Family members should not be allowed to accompany the body in the hearse van. Covid-19 victims have to be given a deep burial. The grave should be minimum 10-feet deep.

The grave should be disinfected with bleaching powder and the area should be cordoned off so that the general public is not in the vicinity.  The vehicle used to transport the dead body of a Covid-19 victim -- ambulance or a hearse van -- has to be disinfected for 16 hours before being used again. Most Covid-19 victims in the state have had burials in the absence of family members as they are generally in quarantine for being the primary contacts of the patient.

Karnataka | Covid victims’ bodies thrown into pit; probe ordered after video goes viral pic.twitter.com/gOykDU7UKn

— coastaldigest.com (@coastaldigest) June 30, 2020

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.

New Delhi, Feb 3: Congress leader BK Hariprasad on Monday condemned BJP MP Anantkumar Hegde's remark on Mahatma Gandhi and termed him as "son" of Nathuram Godse, the assassin of the freedom fighter.

"Only sons of Nathuram Godse can make such comments on Mahatma Gandhi," Hariprasad said.

Hedge had attacked Mahatma Gandhi by calling the freedom struggle led by him a "drama" and also questioned as to how "such people" come to be called 'Mahatma' in India.

"None of these so-called leaders were beaten up by the cops even once. Their independence movement was one big drama. It was staged by these leaders with the approval of the British. It was not a genuine fight. It was an adjustment freedom struggle," he had said.

The Trinamool Congress also lent its support to Congress as its leader Saugata Roy said people like Anant Hegde cause shame to the nation. "We are a supporter of Gandhi and they (BJP) are Nathuram Godse supporters. People of this country should see how BJP MPs are as they insult father of the nation," he added.

BJP leaders too found it difficult to defend Hegde on the controversial remarks.

Senior leader Jagdambika pal was cautious in his defence and said, "The whole world knows about Gandhi and it may be his personal opinion."

Whereas senior BJP leaders avoid commenting on Hegde, Union Minister Ashwani Choubey said that Hegde should not have made the comment and added that Gandhi is a well-respected figure in the nation.

Another BJP MP from Haryana Sanjay Bhatia also tried to shy away from making a direct comment and instead said," Congress did not implement what Gandhi preached. It is Prime Minister Narendra Modi who implemented Gandhi's teachings in letter and spirit."