Lessons on How to demolish a Mosque for HINDRAF dummies

babrisaffron.jpgIANS Reports from Delhi:

“A delegation of Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf), a rights group from Malaysia met leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Thursday for support against the plight of ethnic Indians in that country. Moorthy informed the BJP leaders, that about 10,000 Hindu temples have been systematically demolished in Malaysia since its independence 50 years ago”

Mr. Waytha Moorthy met his God Father in India, Lal Krishna Advani, the extremist demon of Hindutva Politics and leader of BJP. These idiots don’t have any respect to the concept of “Rule of Law”. LK Advani is India’s former Home Minister, who rolled out a nation wide tour to demolish 800 year old Babri Masjid which later caused plenty of communal riots and national mayhem. To Indian historians the event is equal to 9/11. Now, HINDRAF need such a satan to protect Hindu Temples in Malaysia!

See utube.png Video of Babri Masjid Demolition by Saffron gang.

Do they sign a technology transfer deal on” How to Demolish a Mosque?”. If it is done, Malaysia’s world famous Shah Alam Mosque can be another Babri Masjid. Or it can be a disputed site like Taj Mahal in future by Hindutva historians.

Advani personally oversaw Babri Masjid demolition on 6 December 1992.

Gauri Advani, his daughter-in-law, has said in a statement to the Liberhan Commission that her father-in-law conspired with Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Vinay Katiyar, the then leader of the militant youth outfit, Bajrang Dal, to demolish the Babri Masjid. ‘Iska kaam kar do…. Kya, Babri Masjid ka kalank nahin mit sakta?’ [Finish this off.. Is the blot of the Babri Mosque unremovable?’], Read her report to the commission

The Liberhan Commission, probing the circumstances leading to demolition of Babri Masjid, was recently granted its 42nd extension which will end by December 31. It is the way India’s legal system offer justice to minority Muslims. That 15-year old Commission has already cost the state exchequer about Rs 7.20 crore! This is what we call Republic of India. Period.

I would say, Malaysian police is right in its argument about HINDRAF’s association with global terrorism. I don’t think LTTE is that much bad comparing to RSS of India, the Indian partner of HINDRAF. An American research centre has placed India’s ultra-nationalist Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) on its terrorist list. The East Virginia-based Terrorism Research Center (TRC) is closely connected to the American government and many of its directors and researchers have closely worked with US administrations and have taken part in research and planning for the US administration. In the list of in India, the TRC has placed RSS under no. 21. Here is the link as it appeared on 9 September 2004 on the group’s website under the caption “Known Terrorist Groups Operating in India“.

Considering national security of India, RSS was banned thrice: 1948 (ploting to kill Mahatma Gandhi) , 1975 (national emergency), 1992 (Babri Masjid demolition). The bans were later lifted by judicial manipulation, but various governmental policing branches tagged them along with Islamic militants and still under close surveillance. There are still active campaigns by Indian diaspora to ban this extremist Hindu group around the world.

RSS office in Jandewalan Street of Delhi is the epic centre of hindu extremism in India and the globe. The traces of their criminal saga didn’t end up with crime of the millennium, the killing of Mahathma Gandhi. Watch utube.pngVideo on Gandhi Killing.

Read the full story from IANS here

If you want to read more about LK Advani’s role on Babri Masjid demolition, listen to this lawyer, Anupam Gupta

Only 8 % of Indians go for higher education

Only eight percent of Indian students finishing school go for higher education – compared to 20 per cent in China – and the country needs 1,500 new universities in the next seven years to bridge the shortfall of skilled workers, India’s Knowledge Commission has said.

The 82nd annual conference of the Association of Indian Universities (AIU) that came to an end here Wednesday saw some such hard truths being spoken about universities in India.

The three-day meet at the Anna University campus discussed the content of the Knowledge Commission policy and the various higher education policies being implemented in India at present.

‘Higher education sets the standards for development,’ said Y.C. Simhadri, AIU president.

A Knowledge Commission report has said that India would need 1,500 new universities in the next seven years.

It also says that only eight percent of Indian students finishing school go for higher education. In China, the figure is 20 percent while in developed countries, as much as 70 percent students leaving school go to college.

Nasscom chairman and Cognizant chief N. Lakshmi Narayanan said India may face a shortfall of half a million skilled workers by 2010 if universities do not churn out well-trained students.

‘If India wants to be a knowledge economy, it will need 2.3 million professionals in three years time,’ he added.

‘The need of the hour is to create more research parks in the country and encourage innovation by students,’ he said. He advocated that a statutory body should be given the task of enforcing regulation.

‘A major cause of concern about higher education in India is the regulatory system.’

Pitching for self-regulation, he said: ‘This may well be the time for the country’s academic leaders to evolve a new self-regulatory regime that puts the onus of maintaining standards on the collective wisdom of academicians.’

He also advocated the need to look at opening up the education sector to foreign universities to ensure a steady flow of globalised talent.

Narayanan said that Nasscom is planning to introduce a National Assessment of Competence-Technical (NAC-Tech) that would test the skills of technical graduates from higher education institutions across the country.

Tamil Nadu Minister for Higher Education K. Ponmudi, in his opening address, said in many Indian universities, especially the private ones,today ‘we have a situation where the father is the chancellor of the deemed university, one son is the pro-chancellor and another is the vice-chancellor.’

‘Where is the space for scholarly academicians to lead such institutions into latest and relevant research and produce brilliant students?’ he asked.

‘Most vice chancellors give more importance to administrationthan academics,’ the minister charged.

‘You should concentrate more on academics because that alone can help improve the quality of institutions,’ he told the gathering of 150 vice chancellors from Indian universities and delegates from 20 foreign universities, including France and the Netherlands.

‘We only have vice chancellors, whereas we need wise chancellors!’ was his parting shot.

INDIAENEWS.COM From correspondents in Tamil Nadu, India,  Nov 29, 2007

17 million children in India work out of compulsion

Children’s Day under the shadow of the rape of childhood

We observe November 14, the birthday of the first Prime Minister of India, Chacha Nehru as Children’s Day. But a look at the condition of children in India makes one question the significance of November 14?  Do we really cherish our future citizens?

THE DEFINITION OF a ‘child’ in the Indian legal and policy framework is someone below 18 years. Our laws are neither child friendly nor child oriented. Here are few figures:

* Less than half of India’s children between the age of six and 14 go to school.
* Only 38 per cent of children below two years are immunized.
* Over 50 per cent children are malnourished.
* One out of every six girls does not live to see her 15th birthday.
* Of 12 million girls born, one million do not see their first birthday.
* Females are victimized far more than males in their childhood.
* 53 per cent of girls in the age group of five to nine years are illiterate.
* There are two million child commercial sex workers between the age of five and 15 years.
* 17 million children in India work out of compulsion, not out of choice.

The child is the future of a nation. But children are a neglected lot in India, which is evident from the distressing statistics of infant mortality, child morbidity, child malnutrition, childhood disability, child abuse, child labour, child prostitution, street children, child beggary, child marriage, juvenile delinquency, drug addiction and illiteracy.

Trafficking in humans, including children, is a violation of the fundamental rights of human beings. International estimates indicate that at least 1.2 million children are trafficked each year, many of them subjected to prostitution, forced into marriage or unpaid labour, or are recruited into armed groups. Child labour is, generally speaking, work undertaken by children that harm them or exploit them in some way (physically, mentally, morally, or by blocking access to education). 40 per cent of India’s population is below 18 years of age. At 400 million, we have the world’s largest child population. At 17 million, we have the ‘distinction’ of being home to world’s largest population of child labourers. These are official figures; activists say that the real number is even larger.

Constitutions of most countries, including India, have provisions forbidding child labour. Its elimination is one of the millennium development goals adopted unanimously by the United Nations.

Children should not have to work for a living. Childhood is when a person needs nurturing, schooling, time to play and explore, and opportunity to grow, both emotionally and physically. When a child is forced to work, it hampers his growth, stunts his psychological and intellectual development, and prevents him from realising his full potential.

Child labour is an unmitigated evil and any society that suffers from it should be grossly ashamed of that fact. Child labour, trafficking are symptoms, not the problem. The problem lies elsewhere and unless the problem itself is addressed, merely addressing the symptoms makes the situation immensely worse for the victim children.

In India, children’s vulnerabilities and exposure to violations of their protection rights remains spread and multiple in nature. There are a wide range of issues that adversely impact on children in India, making them especially vulnerable. With such future citizens in large numbers, the future of our country is bleak.

Rishabh Srivastava, MeriNews.COM, 13 November 2007, Tuesday

Absent teachers resulting in 22.5 % education funds India

A classroom struggle

Schools be damned. That seems to be the only message that keeps getting hammered with every disheartening report on the status of schooling in India. If last week it was the severe step of having to file FIRs against teachers in the face of a staggering number of cases of abuse of children, a Unesco report has found that 25 per cent of teachers do not bother with attending school. Absent teachers result in a whopping 22.5 per cent of education funds being wasted. Add to this a previous report compiled by the Ministry of Human Resource Department that shows 23,000 schools across India have no teacher, and the picture is frightening. The cataclysmic deterioration in government education services, coupled with corruption and a bureaucratic set-up that dissuades many private players from starting schools has at its crux one issue: the lowering standards of teachers in India.

The bar is so low today that the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights’ (NCPCR) proposal to expand the definition of corporal punishment to cover any form of adverse treatment meted out to schoolchildren is actually welcome. The Delhi High Court banned corporal punishment six years ago. According to the panel, school officials may be jailed for scolding students or calling them ‘stupid’ or ‘mindless’. The commission has also asked parents to fearlessly file FIRs against teachers and officials if their wards are rapped on the knuckles, made to run on the school ground or kneel for hours, beaten with a ruler, pinched and slapped. The restrictions may seem severe, but we can get some perspective once we consider that sexual abuse of minors is one of the most reported crimes today. States have been cavalier in enforcing the ban on corporal punishments, despite the fact that the National Policy on Education’s recommendation of banning physical punishment more than two decades ago.

India’s teacher problem is multi-dimensional. From recruitment to training, from remuneration to accountability, the teaching community has failed schools on most counts. Until teacher reform is addressed in a far more aggressive and scientific manner, there is little hope that the much-flaunted demographic dividend can ever be utilised for a knowledge economy.

August 13, 2007, Hindustan Times

21.9 million disabled in India, 2.13 % of the total population

Enabling the 21.9 million disabled persons in India

With India signing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, laws pertaining to the disabled are likely to undergo a dramatic change. V. Kumara Swamy reports

A fortnight ago, NGO activist Rajiv Ranjan was denied permission to board a flight from Chennai to New Delhi because he was a cerebral palsy patient. Later, the directorate general of civil aviation pulled up the guilty airline. Had there been more awareness about the rights of disabled people and had clear guidelines been issued, the incident could have been avoided, sparing Ranjan needless humiliation.

Shikar Narang also underwent similar humiliation. A dyslexic student, he scored 75 per cent marks in Class XII, and wished to join the University of Delhi (DU) under its three per cent disability quota. But he was denied admission.

The university wasn’t aware that dyslexia came under the purview of the Persons with Disability Act, 1995. Narang challenged the university through a rights group. Finally, Delhi High Court ordered DU to treat dyslexia as a disability.

There are many disabled citizens who face such hurdles not only because of a lack of comprehensive definition of disability in the law, but also because of a lack of understanding of policy-makers about the problems of the disabled and insensitivity towards their rights as individuals.

And this is despite the fact that they constitute 2.13 per cent of the total population. According to the 2001 census, there are 21.9 million persons with disabilities in India. Yet, only 34 per cent of the disabled are employed.

But now there is good news around the corner. With India signing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on March 31 this year, and signalling that it will ratify it soon, laws in India are likely to undergo a dramatic change.

The convention describes discrimination on the basis of disability as “any distinction, exclusion or restriction on the basis of disability which has the purpose or effect of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal basis with others, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field. It includes all forms of discrimination, including denial of reasonable accommodation.”

“The convention is a blueprint to end discrimination and exclusion of the physically and mentally disabled in education, jobs and everyday life,” says Ratnabali Ray, founder of Anjali, a Calcutta-based non governmental organisation that works for the mentally disabled.

So those deprived to date have reason to rejoice. “All of us in the disability sector are very happy that India has signed the convention. It means that in addition to our existing laws, the Indian government will now have to adhere to clear-cut international standards and expectations and will also be subject to greater scrutiny,” says Javed Abidi, executive director, National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People (NCPEDP), Delhi. “At present, gross discrimination takes place all the time, especially in the private sector. After the convention is adopted and its various tenets become firmly applicable, that would no longer be possible.”

Some of the measures that India would have to take include anti-discrimination legislation, eliminating laws and practices that discriminate against persons with disabilities, and considering persons with disabilities when adopting new policies and programmes. Other measures include making services, goods and facilities accessible to persons with disabilities.

Rukmini Sen, a lecturer at the National University of Juridical Sciences, Calcutta, highlights another pertinent point. “The most important change that we need is a new definition of disability. The manner in which disability is defined in the Persons with Disability Act, 1995, is a medical understanding of disability. The UN Convention gives a comprehensive combination of medical, social and human rights perspective to disability,” she says.

Some other changes, which have been demanded for long by activists working in the field, are also expected. “The signing of this law means that we have to do away with the Mental Health Act which segregates the feeble-minded and mentally ill for other people’s safety, purity, and to keep society sanitised. That is a colonial concept,” says Ray.

The government would also have to change its local by-laws and make it compulsory for buildings to be easily accessible to the disabled. “Going by the convention, building by-laws of all the states have to change. Transportation also needs to be changed keeping disability in mind,” says Sen.

However, in spite of India having ratified the treaty, it will come into force only after 20 signatories ratify it. Currently, Jamaica is the only country to ratify it. “The secretariat of the convention expects the 20 ratifications by the year’s end,” says Edoardo Bellando of the UN department of public information, New York.

Once the convention comes into force, a committee on the rights of persons with disabilities will monitor its implementation. Countries that ratify the convention will need to report regularly on their progress to the committee.

However, people in the field are divided over India opting out of the optional protocol which would have meant that anybody in the country could have appealed to the UN body under the convention, in case the country was not abiding by the rules. Sen says that by not signing the optional protocol, “accountability in a way has been squandered”.

Ray, however, disagrees. “I feel that it is the right thing to do. India is self-reliant. It can and will take care of addressing violations through its national instruments. We certainly do not want foreign agencies to interfere,” she says.

The onus is now on the Indian government to implement the laws. But the disability organisations will also have to ensure that the government keeps the pledge it makes by ratifying the convention, stresses Bellando.

The ministry for social justice and empowerment has set the ball rolling. “We have approached the Law Commission to suggest changes to various laws to adhere to the convention and once they come out with a report, we will proceed accordingly on this matter and place the amendments before Parliament,” says Ashish Kumar, deputy director general, ministry of social justice and empowerment.

According to the ministry, certain changes to the Persons with Disability Act have already been proposed and consultation seminars in various parts of the country are being held to fine-tune the changes.

“The sincerity of the government of India will be tested, and if we unite and fight for our legitimate rights, I am sure tomorrow will belong to us,” says Abidi.

The Telegraph , Calcutta, 4 July 2007

54 % Indians back UN probe on Human rights abuses in India

Majority of Indians are likely to support an investigation by United Nations on human rights violations in india, a survey result released by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) of Philippines said Monday. 54 % Indians welcomed UN probe on Human rights abuses in their own country while only 29 % opposed to such an action.

Globally, support for “giving the UN the authority to go into countries in order to investigate violations of human rights” had on the average 64% in favor and 23% opposed. Most people in 13 countries are in favor of such UN investigations, led by an overwhelming 92% of the French, followed by Americans (75%), Peruvians (75%) and South Koreans (74%).

But Filipinos are 46% in favor and 46% opposed to such UN investigations. Filipinos show the highest opposition to this idea, followed by Israelis (31%).

France scored the highest with 92 percent of the respondents saying that they are privy to a UN-led human rights probe in their country.

South Korea (74%), Armenia (67%), Ukraine (66%) and Russia (64%) also gave their thumbs up to the UN rights investigation.

The survey also showed the majority of the people in Poland (58%), China (57%), and Thailand (52%) will permit the UN to investigate human rights abuses in their own countries.

The survey was done during the third and fourth quarters in the Philippines and was commissioned by the SWS, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the WorldPublicOpinion.org.

The study was conducted in 18 countries including China, India, the United States, Indonesia, Russia, France, Thailand, Ukraine, Poland, Iran, Mexico, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia, Argentina, Peru, Israel, Armenia and the Palestinian Territories

The margin of error was +/- 3 percent.

The Philippines is considered a special case in the international human rights arena.

Philippine-based human rights group have been saying that over 800 cases of forced disappearances among the ranks of labor and left-wing activists took place after President Arroyo assumed office in 2001.

Complainants said that the Philippine military is behind the abductions.

Earlier this year, the UN sent Philip Halston to conduct an investigation into the cases of human rights abuses that took place during the term of Mrs. Arroyo.

The President also created a special commission headed by a retired Supreme Court justice to conduct its own probe into cases of alleged human rights abuses.

http://www.sws.org.ph/pr070702.htm

The false pride of the National Human Rights Commission of India

Indians take pride in several issues ranging from democracy to unity in diversity. Most of this “pride speech” is often by India’s middle class and neo-rich that are sometimes completely disconnected from reality. The government and its various agencies often reflect similar pride.

The government of India has spared no venue to boast about itself whenever and wherever it has had a chance. This attitude was reflected in the interventions and representations made by the Indian government’s delegation during the fifth session of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva. Quite surprisingly, the interventions made by the representative of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India, in the same session were also similar in tone.

The NHRC made oral interventions during the session, much of it praising itself and claiming that it was successful in promoting, protecting and fulfilling human rights and human values in India. The oral interventions made by its representative was evident that it was serving more as a backbench supporter of the government than a independent agency monitoring human rights in India. It appeared to be the victim of its own false pride.

The NHRC’s intervention at the council was also to show off its pride as an effective, authoritative and independent agency committed to rooting out human rights violations in India. However, to date, its work and that of its state subsidiaries proves contrary to this claim. The NHRC and its state bodies lack precisely two elements–independence and authority.

The government at its convenience and pleasure makes appointments to the NHRC and state human rights commissions. In most state human rights commissions, the appointment of the chairperson is at the whims and fancies of the particular state government. For example, despite legally challenging the appointment of the chairperson of the Kerala State Human Rights Commission on allegations of nepotism and corrupt practices, the person continues to serve the commission.

Regarding effective redress for victims, the human rights commissions at both the national and state level are not considered as replacements for the courts. The role of the commission at all levels, among other duties, is to recommend to the government actions required by the government in cases involving human rights violations. The question is whether the government adheres to these recommendations.

The representation made by the NHRC of India to the U.N. Human Rights Council was as if the government follows all its recommendations. A well-worded statement was made to the council to indicate that the government adheres to the recommendations of the commission and that the commission does have some influence upon the government and its actions and polices pertaining to human rights. Both statements are wrong and highly exaggerated.

The state human rights commissions, as well as the NHRC in India, do not have enough resources for effectively investigating a case brought to its notice. Instead, the commissions usually refer cases to the respective state police to investigate. The commissions function in a make-believe world when the complaint is against the police and expect it to be effectively investigated by the same police department.

The NHRC also made a false claim to the council by saying that “100,000,000 Indian rupees [US$2.47 million] had been recommended and also distributed to the victims or next of kin.” Though the recommendations were true, it lacked compliance. Hundreds of victims have not received any compensation awarded by the commission leaving one to wonder where all the money went. The recommendations of the commission seemingly end in a black hole within the government; they are just not implemented.

If the government fails to comply with the recommendations of the commission, the aggrieved party, which includes the commission, can approach the court where one has to wait decades for the verdict. Consequently, why is a person not able to go straight to the court instead of approaching the commission to save time?

If the commission enjoyed a privileged position with the government of India, as claimed at the U.N. Human Rights Council, why has the government not fulfilled the commission’s request for more resources for investigating cases? If the government had provided the commission with the necessary physical and human resources to function effectively, the victims would have had a better chance for redress from the commission.

What was evident during the U.N. Human Rights Council session was a failed attempt of the NHRC of India to show itself as a body respected by the government and its functionaries, though no one believes that the NHRC as an agency is well respected and fully supported by the Indian government.

Forums like the United Nations with their limited opportunities must be utilized by agencies like the NHRC to present facts, not fiction. This is required because one of the roles of agencies like the NHRC is to provide redress to victims and to make recommendations to the government. However, when agencies like the NHRC reduce themselves to blind supporter’s of the government due to their false pride and acts of self-deceit, what is suppressed is the possibility for victims to make their voice’s heard, and, in the process, human rights suffers.

(Bijo Francis is a human rights lawyer currently working with the Asian Legal Resource Center in Hong Kong. He is responsible for the South Asia desk at the center. Mr. Francis has practiced law for more than a decade and holds an advanced master’s degree in human rights law.)

By BIJO FRANCIS, UPIASIA , HONG KONG, Jun. 19,2007