| By ,
on 14-01-2004 11:13
|
Views : 1124  |
Favoured : 17 |
Published in : , Articles |
“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people.
Whereas it is essential, if man is not compelled to have recourse as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law…
The general assembly, proclaims this universal declaration of human rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for the rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of member states themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.” - From the text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights presented in the resolution 217 M (111) adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948
“We have 50 percent of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3 percent of its population. In this situation, our real job in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which permit us to maintain this position of disparity. To do so we have to dispense with all sentimentality…we should cease thinking about human rights, the raising of living standards and democratization.” – George Keenan, US Cold War Planner, 1948
“The battle to reclaim democracy is going to be a difficult one. Our freedoms are not granted to us by any governments. They were wrested from them by us. And once we surrender them, the battle to retrieve them is called a revolution. It is a battle that must range across continents and countries. It must not acknowledge national boundaries, but, if it is to succeed, it has to begin here. In America. The only institution more powerful than the US government is American Civil Society. The rest of us are subjects of slave nations. We are by no means powerless, but you have the power of proximity. You have access to the Imperial Palace and the Emperor’s Chambers. Empire’s conquests are being carried out in your name, and you have the right to refuse. You could refuse to fight. Refuse to move those missiles from the warehouse to the dock. Refuse to wave that flag. Refuse the victory parade.” - From the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) sponsored lecture delivered by Arundhati Roy at the Riverside Church in Harlem, New York, on May 13, 2003.
It would be no exaggeration to state that we are passing through difficult times: times that are fraught with reminders of man’s continuing inhumanity to his own kind. With the most ‘developed’ nations of the twenty second century of the Christian calendar showing the way, by example, to a world order dictated by greed, capriciousness, and an appalling lack of sensitivity to the violation of man’s ennobling and humane nature, the UN General Assembly’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, proclaimed in 1948 amidst a perceptible sense of longing for a sane world, has become all but reduced to just that: a mere declaration. A declaration on paper; not one in the hundreds of thousands of hearts, minds and lives that it was purportedly supposed to transform for the better. Yet, in these difficult, turbulent times; in times such as these where millions of innocent lives are snuffed out; when an entire nation is decimated and denied its right to exist on its own on the mere pretext of suspicion, of whims and fancies of the hypocritical powers that be, there continues to be raised from various quarters around the world the voice of protests and of reminders of man’s humanity and compassion, feeble as they are. The Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) sponsored lecture by Arundhati Roy, the Booker Prize winning author of The God of Small Things, at Harlem, New York on May 13th marked an important addition towards this campaign of protest. Five days later, on May 18th, a similar, but lower profile, programme took place in Bangalore in the South Indian State of Karnataka in the form of the Karnataka State Conference of the People’s Movement for Human Rights (PMHR). While one could hardly describe the PMHR meet, to which this writer was witness, as being equal in any measure to the one at which Arundhati Roy spoke, it was, nevertheless, the same with respect to the message and spirit that animated the other.
The state conference of the PMHR staged within the premises of the Bharathiya Vidya Bhawan along the Racecourse Road in Bangalore was inaugurated by the City Mayor, Mr. C. M. Nagaraj, himself. With messages of felicitation coming in from all the invited guests who included Dr. Siddique Jaferi, Chairman of the Bangalore based International Seerah Academy, Fr. Terence Francz, a social activist and preacher, Prof. L. S. Sheshadiri Rao and Dr. Hemalatha Mahishi, an advocate and member of the Women’s Commission of India, it was left to Dr. Abraham Chettissery, the President of the All India Central Committee of PMHR, to deliver the key note address for the meeting.
Dr. Chettissery, a doctorate holder in law who hails from the Kottayam district of Kerala, in his keynote address squarely put the blame for the infringement on the rights of the citizens of this country upon the political parties which, with their shameless opportunism have played havoc with the lives of the common men and women in our land. In particular, he singled out the political beaureaucrats, as being the main source of such human rights violations in India. While Dr. Chettissery did recognize the need, and importance, of political parties in a democratic set up such as the one prevalent in India, he also stressed upon the urgency of the need for the common masses to be constantly on the look out, for, ultimately, it is going to be their rights which will be violated in one way or the other. ‘The fear amongst the Indian ruling classes’, said Dr. Chettissery, ‘to constitute a Human Rights Commission in India had forced the Indian government to pass an act for the protection of human rights only in 1993. This was while the international bill on human rights was moved, and passed, in the UN general assembly on the 10th of December, 1948’. Dr. Chettissery further highlighted the fact that even IAS and IPS officers are imprisoned in Tihar Jail. To have a country’s civil servants of the highest administrative ranks within its own prison walls speaks volumes for the unspeakable state of affairs in the civic life of the nation. Furthermore, as the crimes committed by these ‘civil’ servants essentially involve the infringement upon the basic human rights of the poorer sections of the country’s population, the crimes are necessarily crimes against humanity. Dr. Chettissery ended his keynote address with an exhortation to human rights activists in the country to forge a united front and to come forward for the protection, and enforcement, of human rights as guaranteed in the constitution of India.
While Fr. Terence Francz, in his felicitation message, reminded the audience at the meeting of the birthday of Pope John Paul II, the ‘great champion of human rights and freedom’, Dr. Siddique Jaferi, Chairman of the International Seerah Academy which is a center for holistic personality development, brought to the fore the message of Islam with regard to the issue of human rights. Dr. Jaferi began his presentation of the vision of Islam on human rights with the Islamic greeting of peace which, according to him, was ‘so common an expression in the life of the lay Muslim’, and which ‘so forcefully denotes the idea of the place in Islam occupied by a fundamental right of every individual: the right to be addressed peacefully or the right to be at peace with the world around us.’ ‘Indeed’, he said, ‘the very name Islam signifies the peace that is to ensue in the world as in the individual; a peace that is begotten of an act of submission before the Maker of man.’ Dr. Jaferi, in his rather elaborate speech, went on to list the fundamental rights conferred by Islam on human beings. He identified these as the right to life, respect for the chastity of women, the right to freedom, the right to justice and the equality of human beings as members of the same species. It must be noted here that while the Geneva Convention spoke of the issue of human rights only within the purview of the past half a century, Muhammad, the last prophet of Islam, had put forth a broad and innately humane agenda of human rights almost fifteen centuries ago in the deserts of Arabia. Indeed, for those aware of the historical personality of the prophet of Arabia, his sermon on mount Arafa on the occasion of his last pilgrimage (Hajj) is a veritable declaration of human rights in itself. He had declared during the course of that sermon that an Arab can, in no wise be superior to a non-Arab nor can a non-Arab be superior to an Arab; nor yet a black man over a white man nor a white man over a black man except in the matter of God consciousness. ‘Indeed’, said the Qur’an, ‘the best of you in the sight of God is he who is the most God conscious.’ Dr. Jaferi also dwelt upon, at some length, the rights of the citizens of an Islamic state. In the context of today’s world wherein the demand for the establishment of the Islamic state is fast becoming a popular rallying cry in most Muslim countries that are ruled by pro-western puppet regimes, this part of Jaferi’s talk assumed particular relevance as did his statements on the right of self defence which he explained drawing upon numerous references from the Holy Qur’an. He described the rights of the citizens in an Islamic state as being the right to security of life and property, the right to the sanctity and security of one’s personal life, the right to security of personal freedom, the right to protest against tyranny, the right to freedom of expression, the right to the basic necessities of life and the right to equality before the law. The Islamic state, in its fullest expression, is obliged to implement itself in such a way that each and every one of these rights are assured to all citizens whether Muslim or otherwise.
Against the backdrop of contemporaneous world events wherein ‘terrorist’ or liberation movements, as the case might be, operating in Muslim lands claim for Islam its advocacy of the divinely ordained right to self defense, Dr. Jaferi’s account of this very relevant issue of our times provided for further clarification. To this end, he made it abundantly clear that ‘in addition to all the other rights granted by Islam, the individual’s (as well as the state’s) right to defend himself (or itself) in the event of his (or its) being attacked has also been granted by God in the Holy Qur’an. Indeed, this right is in no way less important than all the other rights.’ He quoted God as saying in the Qur’an that ‘permission to fight is given to those who are the victims of aggression’ and that ‘God forbids you to fight those who fight you not for your faith and who do not drive you out of your homes.’ Thus, it is clear that in Islam, self-defense has been permitted but only to the extent that it is only the aggressor himself who is hit back in the effort.
The state secretary of the PMHC, Mr. T.K.Subramani, who welcomed the audience and Mr. A.Chandramohan, the state president of the organization, who expressed the vote of thanks were both united in their common desire to see the movement flourish and take root in the soil of Karnataka and in the nation as a whole. They expressed the hope that such movements driven by the people at the grass roots level would hopefully pave the way for the creation of a healthy understanding and appreciation of the value of human rights in these otherwise darkening times.
In some ways, the PMHR meet in Bangalore seemed to echo the same sentiments and aspirations as was expressed at the earlier meeting at Harlem in New York. The only difference being Arundhati Roy’s powerful anti-imperialistic rhetoric. In her direct head-to-head confrontationist speech against the hypocritical machinations of the American government, she had warned: ‘It would be naïve to imagine that we can directly confront Empire.’ Not satisfied with that, she went even further in charting out a plan of action: ‘Our strategy’, she said, ‘must be to isolate Empire’s working parts one by one. No target is too small. No victory too insignificant. We could reverse the idea of the economic sanctions imposed on poor countries by Empire and its Allies. We could impose a regime of people’s sanctions on every corporate house that has been awarded with a contract in post war Iraq, just as activists in this country and around the world targeted institutions of apartheid. Each one of them should be named, exposed and boycotted. Forced out of business. That could be our response to the Shock and Awe campaign. It would be a great beginning.’ But then that beginning has probably already been made. The movement, perhaps, is already on the march.
Last update : 14-01-2004 11:13
|
|
|
(0 vote)
