From Western - centric Human Rights to Asian - centric Human rights
Did UN & CHRI function
with religious bias?
‘UN
Secretary-General Antonio Guterres wants the death of a father and a son from
Sathankulam in Tamil Nadu while in police custody with alleged signs of torture
investigated, according to his Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric.
"Every
death of all these cases as a principle need to be fully investigated,"
Dujarric said on Friday when he was asked about the deaths of P Jayaraj and his
son J Fennix, allegedly due to torture by police after their arrest on June 19.’;
The
UN Human Rights Council is now on the death bed after the exit of US and the questionable
induction of 18 newly elected members.
‘The
US quit the council in June, saying it made a mockery of human rights.
Countries that have been widely criticised for severe human rights abuses are
among 18 newly elected members of the UN Human Rights Council;’
‘The
Executive Committee (India) of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI)
took strong note of the brutal torture which caused the death of a father and
son in the city of Thoothukudi in Tamil Nadu.’
Did
UN & CHRI take note of the following earlier still worse attack in
Tamilnadu on 9 May 2007?
While
the victims in the above incident were Christians, the victims in the news
below were Hindus, questioning the credentials of UN & CHRI.
The
Dinakaran attack was a firebomb attack by M. K. Alagiri's supporters[1][2] on 9
May 2007 on the Madurai office of Dinakaran, a Tamil newspaper, which resulted
in the deaths of three people.[3] The attack was a response to a survey
published by Dinakaran on who people preferred as the future heir of M. Karunanidhi,
chief of the political party Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK). During mass
protests throughout the region, the offices of the newspaper were firebombed
and two press employees and a private security guard died. 17 people were
charged by the Central Bureau of Investigation, but were all acquitted by the
district court.
I
doubt if UN & CHRI is aware that the western centric homogeneous
UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) is becoming a threat to the
Asiatic societies forcing modernization along the path of the westernization.
Next, a brief on how my
discovery of the social mechanism, on how the western individual centric human
rights in Asiatic societies would derail the rule of law in the Asiatic
societies.
The western individual centric Human rights leaders and the politically strong thug leaders - Strange bedfellows
Around the year 2000, when I
was working in (India) Chennai Presidency College, I had a discussion with a
professor about his experiences in the previous college he had worked. I was
shocked to hear that one famous human rights professor in that college never
dared to challenge the ‘powerful’ persons in that college or in that area.
Instead he was always careful to challenge only relatively weak persons.
In Tamilnadu, political thug
leaders emerged strong after 1969; From 1991 their corruption entered into the
next higher phase of snatching private property by threats and killing.
Interestingly the growth of the human rights activity and the above growth of
the politically strong thug leaders were taking place simultaneously without
disturbing each other. Only a study will reveal their interdependence.
In my view, the visible
growth of the human rights leaders served as a protective shield to the
invisible growth of the human rights violations by the political thug social
circle as explained below.
As a college professor,
right from 1980s, I had taken part in
many struggles, imprisoned few times, and associated with human rights forum
PUCL, publishing an article in the journal.( 'ENCOURAGING NEW TRENDS IN HUMAN
RIGHTS ACTIVITIES’ (by Prof.S.A.Veerapandian, Member, Tamilnadu PUCL '- PUCL
BULLETIN -People's Union for Civil Liberties, India. May 1994)
The above social mechanism
came to my field of view, only because, with the help of a famous human rights
leader, I tried to help a deserted wife living alone in the ancestral house in
a village, who dared to challenge her politically powerful husband living with
his concubine. When the relatives of the deserted wife heard about my efforts,
they laughed at my ignorance; the human rights leader was in the social circle
of that notorious husband.
Certainly, the deserted wife (who
had undergone criminal intimidation followed by death) referred above, if lived in Singapore, would not have faced the sufferings
witnessed in TN. Instead, her husband would have been sent to jail upholding
the rule of law. (See note 1 below)
But in the ranking of the
countries upholding human rights, Singapore is in the bottom list. In such
rankings of Singapore (151) is placed below India (140) ;
Human rights violations at
the microlevel, when invisible to the macrolevel observations with respect to
UDHR, led to such absurd rankings.
Amnesty International
supported human rights leaders in Tamilnadu close their eyes to the activities
of the strong political thug leaders, and hence the paradox in the above
ranking.
Human rights leaders who are
blind to the human atrocities committed by the politically strong thug leaders,
and who preferred to target risk free and relatively weak persons in the human
rights issues, could not gain the social respect in the micro-world. Instead of
social respect, most of the foreign funded NGO leaders in the micro-world of
Tamilnadu had earned social ridicule, unknown to the macro-level world human rights
ranking agencies.
The above blindness of the
foreign funded Human Rights activists coupled with the western human rights
forced weak monitoring of the micro-world by the govts, had led to the
inevitable situation in which all political parties in India depend on the
political thugs to survive.
Right from Independence till
the recent anti-CAA Delhi riots, the above Western human rights induced
mischief proved to be the main culprit, beyond the control of the govt,
irrespective of the party in power.
Why UDHR needed to undergo the wholistic revision?
The following article,
criticizing Singapore for its ‘deep flaws’ in human rights, conceded
Singapore’s success in anti-corruption.
‘While Singapore tightly
restricts civil liberties like freedom of expression and freedom of assembly,
it has an independent anticorruption commission and has built a reputation for
relative probity.’
In Asiatic societies, an
independent anticorruption commission with the reputation for relative probity
is possible only with the reasonable restrictions for the freedom of expression
and the freedom of assembly.
Modernization of the western
societies initiated the govt supported process of divorcing the individual’s
duties to the family and the society. The resulting social ills included
weakening families, parenting
(https://melaka.cccmy.org/gep/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI35CxsJ-H5wIVF4iPCh3epA2hEAAYAiAAEgKoBfD_BwE
),suicides, depression, drug addiction, etc.
The Asiatic microworld and
macroworld are different from those in the Western countries. Hence
modernization of the Asiatic Societies could take place without Westernization
and the consequent social ills. The western centric homogeneous UDHR is
becoming a threat to the Asiatic societies forcing modernization along the path
of the westernization.
The social mechanism behind
the socially intertwined individual rights and the individual’s duties in the
Asian countries were derailed due to the modernization, with the western
centric homogeneous UDHR, acting as a catalyst.
To check this social menace,
the human rights movements in Asia must be de-westernized and reoriented to
reviving the above social mechanism, highlighting the socially intertwined
individual rights and the individual’s duties. Also, the Asian govts, instead
of treating all human rights activists as enemies, need to segregate genuine
activists from the foreign funded agent activists; and implement proactive
measures to initiate debates, as part of the reorientation programmes to
strengthen Asian values based socially intertwined individual rights and the
individual’s duties.
Hence to free the Asian
countries from the western centric nuisances, the western centric homogeneous
UDHR, needed to undergo a holistic revision to accommodate the heterogeneous
Asian & other Societies concerns in the human rights issues.
(Dr.Vee, former member of
Tamilnadu PUCL, pannpadini@gmail.com)
Note:
1. ‘law punishes
victim(deserted wife)&rewards culprit husband’;
http://www.driftline.org/cgi-bin/archive/archive_msg.cgi?file=spoon-archives/third-world-women.archive/third-world-women_2002/third-world-women.0205&msgnum=1&start=1&end=442
2. According to the 2002 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development Report, nearly one-fifth of the world’s 37,000 NGOs were formed in the 1990s. Much like social movements, NGOs contested spaces previously held by labour unions and political parties, in both the political and social arenas. Supposedly, the increase in numbers and presence were part and parcel of the advent of civil society—and civil society organizations (CSOs)—at the national and international level.
http://www.driftline.org/cgi-bin/archive/archive_msg.cgi?file=spoon-archives/third-world-women.archive/third-world-women_2002/third-world-women.0205&msgnum=1&start=1&end=442
2. According to the 2002 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development Report, nearly one-fifth of the world’s 37,000 NGOs were formed in the 1990s. Much like social movements, NGOs contested spaces previously held by labour unions and political parties, in both the political and social arenas. Supposedly, the increase in numbers and presence were part and parcel of the advent of civil society—and civil society organizations (CSOs)—at the national and international level.
While the prevalent image of
NGOs is that of entities independent and critical of governments, one cannot be
naive. Powerful governments turn to, or
even create, NGOs—government-organized NGOs—in order to further the interests
of the state. While the NGO would argue
endlessly that it is independent, the reality could be different, whether by
direct control or by setting a political, financial or even ideological
framework defined by the powers that be. The difference may be that even
governments may claim that the NGOs they work with are independent, albeit the
close working relationship on many issues raises eyebrows.
Other governments have no
such qualms. For example, the United States (US) government makes no apology
for the use of NGO-delivered “humanitarian aid” that happens to also serve
Washington’s political and military objectives.’; from : ‘NGOs and Social
Movements - A North/South Divide? By Alejandro Bendañ;
The leaked IB report on the
‘Impact of NGOs on Development' had alleged that protests against development
projects fuelled by some foreign-funded NGOs had caused a presumptive loss of
2-3% to India's GDP. The report also named a number of NGOs namely Greenpeace
India, Cordaid, Amnesty as those fuelling such protests. NGOs receive over Rs
11,500 crore in foreign funds annually. The 21-page report calls the NGOs'
activities "anti-development" and has highlighted their plans for
2014. These include a campaign against palm oil imports from Indonesia and
disposal of e-waste of Indian IT firms, organising construction workers in
urban areas, protests against identified projects such as Gujarat's Special
Investment Regions, Par Tapi Narmada River Interlinking Project and the
Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor.
Who is pumping money to
stall development in India?
According to the 2010-2011
Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) reports published by the MHA, the
top three donor countries were USA, Germany, and UK. Over the last decade, more
than Rs 20,000 crore by the US and nearly Rs 8000 crores by Germany/UK have
been donated to the NGOs. What the facts say: According to a Home Ministry
report, NGOs receive over Rs 11,500 crore in foreign funds annually and the
number of such associations is increasing very fast. There are more than 20
lakh NGOs in the country but less than 2 per cent of them - which is 43527 -
were registered under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act up to March 31,
2012. During 2011-2012, 22,702 NGOs reported receipt of foreign contributions
amounting to Rs 11546.29 crore. Among all States and Union Territories, NGOs in
Delhi received the highest amount of foreign funds- Rs 2285.75 crore in
2011-12.
The IB report has thrown
light on an alarming issue. Realising gravity of the issue, the Modi Government
should take immediate step to make the process of funding more transparent
beside making Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act more stringent it should
have close watch on the NGOs, which have emerged out as den of corruption. All
NGOs should be made accountable and this could only be done by putting them
under RTI ambit.’;
On February 11, the Sunday
Times (London) revealed that nearly 120 charity workers had been dismissed over
the past seven years for sexual offences that British prime minister Theresa
May has dubbed “horrific.” There were 87 incidents involving Oxfam, 31
involving Save the Children and two that concerned Christian Aid. There was
even a reported case of child abuse in India by an employee of the Grail Trust.
The worst cases, however, related to the cynical sexual exploitation of local
women in Haiti in the aftermath of the horrific earthquake in 2011. At a House
of Commons Committee hearing, a British MP suggested that the aid workers
viewed local women like “trinkets” and Priti Patel, a former minister, said
that the sector had become a refuge for “predatory paedophiles”. The outrage
was strong enough for the British government to suspend the 32 million pounds
of public money it donated to Oxfam annually and some 7,000 individual donors
to cancel their standing orders.;
An investigation by The
Times unveiled how the charity had allowed three senior male staff to resign
following an inquiry into sexual misconduct, and fired four others for gross
misconduct and bullying, including the use of prostitutes in Haiti. It also emerged
that one of the alleged perpetrators had faced allegations while working in
Chad for Oxfam, but had still been assigned to Haiti following the
earthquake……“The Charity Commission and government departments have serious
questions to answer: why did they take no action in response to concerns raised
by Helen Evans in June 2015 and August 2015? Are there other whistleblowers
that have brought safeguarding concerns to the Charity Commission only to be
ignored?,” asked the Labour’s spokesperson on international development Kate
Osamor.’;
No comments:
Post a Comment