...Would have cut the heads of those who don't say 'Bharat Mata Ki Jai': Ramdev

Kottayam, Mar 31: A 91-year-old and 88-year-old senior citizen couple were discharged from the isolation ward of government medical college after getting treated from COVID-19 on Monday.

"It is a testimony to the dedication and expertise of the medical staff as well as the strength of the Kerala public health system. We shall overcome," Kerala Finance Minister Thomas Issac tweeted as he praised the healthcare services for treating the elderly couple considered as highly vulnerable to the contagious virus.

Apart from the two senior citizens, five others suffering from COVID-19 have also been treated and discharged from the hospital.
Thomas, 91, and his wife Mariyamma, 88, who were under treatment at the Kottayam Medical College were already suffering from various age-related problems. The 91-year-old had a heart attack and severe breathing trouble when he was under treatment.

"The aged couple based in Ranni in Pathanamthitta district had got infected with the virus after coming into contact with their son, wife and grandson who had arrived from Italy. COVID-19 was confirmed in them on March 8. They were admitted to Pathanamthitta hospital. However, they were shifted to the Medical College in Kottayam the very next day as their condition was critical," the Kerala government said.

The family will have to remain in home-quarantine for 14 more days.

The Union Health Ministry said the death toll due to COVID-19 has risen to 32 and the number of total coronavirus cases to 1,251 as on Monday. 

There are 1117 active cases in the country with the state of Kerala contributing the highest number of cases which stands at 202.

Bengaluru, Mar 21: Appealing for support to the Prime Minister's call for observing 'Janata Curfew' on Sunday to contain the outbreak of COVID-19, Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa has asked people not to come on roads immediately after the end of curfew time as it can nullify the measure.

Noting that people have extended both moral and societal support to this unique curfew, he said "Now, my appeal to people on behalf of Prime Minister Narendra Modiji is, don't come on roads and out of your dwellings immediately after nine in the night when curfew time ends. Remain settled in your houses and bungalows avoiding all public appearances on roads and other public places."

"Your coming out in open can nullify the 14-hour measure to contain the spread of virus. As a co-operation to authorities and the society, please remain indoors and stay with your near and dear ones," he said in a release.

Calling for "resolve and restraint" to fight the virus, the Prime Minister during his address to the nation on Thursday had asked the entire country to observe 'Janata curfew' on Sunday.

Calling for a 'Janata curfew' on March 22 from 7 am-9 pm, Modi had said no citizen, barring those in essential services, should get out of their house, and asserted that it will be a litmus test to show how much India is ready to take on the challenge of the coronavirus pandemic.

Stating the Karnataka government has so far been dealing successfully in containing the Covid-19 virus, Yediyurappa said this has happened because of people's co- operation.

He also asked people not to forget to involve in a bout of applause as a mark of appreciation to people involved in containing the spread of the virus and treating those affected by it.

Three new COVID-19 cases have been confirmed in Karnataka on Saturday, taking the total number of infections to 18 in the state.

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.