Sand labourer dies after jumping into river during police raid

Bengaluru, Jul 21: A man was arrested on Tuesday for riding his high-end bike up to a speed of almost 300 km per hour on a flyover here during ongoing lockdown, police said. After a selfie video of the man's reckless ride went viral on social media, police arrested him for putting his life and that of others at risk and seized his 1000 CC bike.

Identified by police as Muniyappa, he rode his bike on the nearly 10-km long Electronic City flyover, accelerating almost to 300 KMPH as he whizzed past some vehicles, including cars autorickshaws and trucks that were moving in both directions.

"This video made viral by the rider...going at a dangerous speed of almost 300 kmph at Ecity flyover putting his own & others life at risk..CCB traced the rider & seized bike Yamaha 1000 CC.. handed over to traffic (police)," Bengaluru Joint Commissioner of Police Sandeep Patil tweeted, tagging the video.

A case of reckless driving has been registered against him, police said. They said the incident occurred during the week-long lockdown in force in the city and outskirts till Wednesday morning to contain the spread of coronavirus, leaving most roads deserted as people remained indoors. However, it was not known when exactly he undertook the ride. A fortnight ago, three youths who were doing wheelies on the city roads met with a ghastly mishap and lost their lives.

Click here for video

Bengaluru, Jul 25: The Karnataka government on Saturday announced a waiver of crematorium fees for those who succumb to the COVID-19 infection in Bengaluru and said the city civic body would bear the cost.

It said that from now on, families of the COVID deceased need not pay any fees fixed by the city civic body- Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP)- across 12 electric crematoriums in the city.

"There were reports in the media about difficulties faced in performing the last rites of those who died due to COVID-19 infections. Aimed at resolving those difficulties, certain decisions have been taken," Revenue Minister R Ashoka said.

He told reporters here that BBMP had fixed Rs 250 as the cremation fee, Rs 100 for the ash collection pot and Rs 900 for the bier (bamboo stretcher on which the body is carried), all of which have been waived for COVID deaths.

"So it will be a waiver of Rs 1,250 per cremation. The BBMP will bear this cost," he added.

Ashoka also announced Rs 500 per body incentive for the personnel who conduct the last rites of COVID victims.

"This is in recognition of their services at a time when family members of the deceased are not ready to touch the body and not ready to take the body in some cases," he said.

Noting that the government has identified 23 acres of land at five places around Bengaluru for burial or cremation of COVID victims, Ashoka locals in all these areas are protesting against it.

Appealing to the people for cooperation during these difficult times, he said the government's intention was to ensure respectful burial or cremation for the deceased.

"Obstructing it is not right, it is not Indian tradition," he said.

Pointing out that it takes almost a day's time for a COVID victim's body to be handed over for burial or cremation, he said "scientifically, according to experts and doctors, the virus will not remain alive for more than three hours.

...Also, bodies are either burnt or buried eight feet below. So there will not be any problem for those living in nearby areas and it will not spread infection. Cooperate with humanity," he said.

"These lands identified are for all religions and communities and once the pandemic subsides, can be used for other deaths as well," he said.

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.