This guest post by RAJINDAR SACHAR comes to us via the PEOPLE’S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES.
Nations which do not remember their immediate past are in danger of repeating their tragic mistakes. This thought came to me on June 26th, 2013 (the Emergency day of 1975) when on random questioning of age group of 35 in the country (who are said to make up about half the population) I found that most of them did not know of any particular significance of the day – and more tragic, fairly large number of people above the age of 35 fared no better. Continue reading The shameful role of the Indian Supreme Court in the Emergency of 1975: Rajinder Sachar
Press release put out 24 March by the JAMMU AND KASHMIR COALITION OF CIVIL SOCIETY
Srinagar: The 21 March 2013, United Nations Human Rights Council [UNHRC] resolution is a welcome initial step in the ongoing struggle to hold countries responsible for human rights violations, ranging from Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes to Enforced Disappearance, Torture, Rape and Extra-judicial executions. The watered down resolution, moved by the United States, and India’s support for the resolution, requires both commendation and severe criticism at the same time.
There can be no selective morality when it comes to standing against the commission of human rights violations by State’s. Every country must be held to the same standards, as Sri Lanka has been in the instant case, regardless of economic or geo-political concerns. In this regard, the United States and India stand accused of hypocrisy in their dealings with human rights violations in their regions or across the world. Similarly, Pakistan’s vote against the resolution raises serious questions on its own approach to human rights violations in the region or elsewhere. Continue reading India, International Law and an Act of Hypocrisy: JKCCS
This release was put out by AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL on 1 June
On 24 May 2012, India’s human rights record came under renewed international scrutiny during its second Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council. Amnesty International welcomes the recommendations made to India by the reviewing states, many of which reflect concerns raised previously by the organization.
Amnesty International is disappointed, however, that despite India’s assertion that it sees the UPR mechanism as one of “constructive engagement,” the government did not immediately accept any of the recommendations made, some of which were put forward in 2008 during India’s first UPR. Amnesty International urges India to demonstrate by September 2012, a genuine resolve to deliver on its outstanding human rights commitments and the UPR recommendations, when the report on India’s second UPR is formally adopted at the 21st session of the Human Rights Council. Continue reading India must deliver on its repeated commitments to the human rights council: Amnesty International