Will ask centre to ban PFI, SDPI if they involved in Rudresh murder: RSS

Bengaluru, Jun 15: A total of over 4,000 COVID patients have been discharged in Karnataka so far, as the state on Monday reported 213 new cases of coronavirus and two related fatalities, taking the total number of infections to 7,213 and the death toll to 88.

On Monday alone 180 patients were discharged in the state after recovery. As of June 15 evening, cumulatively 7,213 COVID-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 88 deaths and 4,135 discharges, the health department said in its bulletin.

Out of the 2,987 active cases, 2,931 patients are in isolation at designated hospitals and are stable, while 56 are in Intensive Care Units. Among the two deaths were a 65-year-old man from Dharwad, who was the contact of another patient already tested positive.

He was admitted on June 14 at a designated hospital and died the same day. The other was a 75-year-old woman from Bengaluru, diagnosed with ILI (Influenza Like Illness) A known case of Diabetes mellitus and Hypertension , she was admitted on June 13 at a designated hospital and died on June 15.

Out of 213 new cases 103 are returnees from other states, a majority of them from neighbouring Maharashtra, while 23 are those who returned from other countries.

Among the districts where the new cases were reported, Kalaburagi accounted for 48, followed by Bengaluru urban 35, Dharwad 34, Dakshina Kannada 23, Raichur 18, Yadgir 13, Bidar 11, Ballari 10, Koppal 4, three each from Vijayapura, Bagalkote and Shivamogga, two each from Udupi, Haveri and Ramanagara, and one each from Hassan and Davangere.

Udupi district tops the list of positive cases with a total of 1,028 infections, followed by Kalaburagi 944 and Yadgir 822.

Among discharges also Udupi is on top with total of 736 discharges, followed by Kalaburagi 459 and Bengaluru urban 329. A total of 4,49,331 samples have been tested so far, out of which 5,362 were tested on Monday alone.

So far 4,32,346 samples have been reported as negative, out of which 4,738 reported negative today, the bulletin said.

Bengaluru, Jun 8: Facing a shortage of labour, some top builders in the city have initiated efforts to bring back the migrant workers, who have returned to their native places following the COVID-19 lockdown, and are holding parleys with Railway authorities for operation of special trains to ferry them.

After the lockdown was announced, many construction projects came to a halt and accordingly the labourers were rendered jobless. These migrant workers preferred to go back to their home state as they were not paid when the projects were stopped and were caught in the big financial mess. Many of these migrants even chose to cover thousands of kilometres by foot when even trains, buses or any motor vehicles were not operating.

Keeping their woes in view, the Centre decided to run the Shramik Special trains to ferry them to their native places. But, after they were gone, the builders found themselves in a lurch. An executive of a builder told PTI "Yes, our builder and a few others are in talks with the Railways to run the special train to bring back the labourers." She said nothing has been materialised as of now.

According to her, the builders took the contact numbers of the workers when they left the city to their home states and are now contacting them one by one. The South Western Railway has so far sent 3.11 lakh migrant workers in 216 Shramik Special trains starting from May 3 to June 6.

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.