Posts Tagged ‘Discrimination’

Eulogy of deceased Indian human rights defender Dr R.M.Pal

October 21, 2015

How broad the human rights movement is nowadays, is demonstrated by this eulogy of Dr R M Pal by Vidya Bhushan Rawat, a social and human rights activist in India. It is a very personal story and I provide the text in toto below. The writer states that at this crucial moment is a great blow to all the right thinking secular forces as Pal was the man who always believed in the idea of a secular inclusive India and spoke regularly against the Hindutva’s communalism.

Dr R.M.Pal: Human Rights of The Most Marginalised Was His Uncompromising Passion

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

20 October, 2015
Countercurrents.org

It was Prof Y.P.Chibbar, the PUCL General Secretary for years, who introduced me to Dr R.M.Pal when I visited him at ARSD College where he was teaching. ‘Dr Pal is the right person for you. He is the editor of PUCL Bulletin and lives in Greater Kailash. You must meet him,’ suggested Prof Chibbar. And after that it was a relationship that grew up every passing day. As a young aspiring boy from a nondescript town of Uttarakhand, I had come to Delhi ‘incidentally’, during the tumultuous years of anti Mandal agitation where most of our ‘intellectuals’ had been exposed. Staying with Dr Mulk Raj Anand, pioneer of English writing in India, there was a period of great personal churning for me and Dr Pal made it clear to me to earn to learn. ‘What are you doing there’, he asked. Jee, I am looking after his work, typing his scripts and accompany him to various places where he moves, I said. My aim is to do social work and it is a great honor to be with a man who calls himself a ‘Gandhian’. For a young person like me who had so many fantasies about Gandhism as perhaps we did not have the opportunity to know and understand ‘others’ and it seemed the only way to fight against oppression particularly untouchability which Gandhi had claimed to be the biggest ‘sin’ of Hinduism. So for me any one who had seen Gandhi or worked with him became a hero and ‘Lokayat’ where Dr Mulk Raj Anand stayed became my ‘sabarmati’. Dr Pal was a no nonsense person who could speak fearlessly without being hypocritical in front of you and he remained unimpressed. ‘Well, I can tell you Mulk Raj Anand will not help you’, he said. ‘ Don’t live under the romance of ‘Gandhian’ fame as it is good to do ‘social work’ but you need to be independent and earn to do things, he suggested. I know you came from Dehradun and may face prejudices here because of your village background. Better you do some evening courses as you plan and earn for your living and hopefully you will be able to contribute to society as you wish. And I can say with firm conviction that after coming to Delhi and staying here as meek and submissive person for over two and half years, Dr Pal gave me the confidence in myself and helped me become independent and rebuild my self respect and confidence.

Over the years our interaction grew and he became fond of me. He would guide me and ask me write in particular way. He suggested diverse topics to me and so much was the trust that many times he would send me to go on fact finding on particular issues and get direct information for him. It was not just he would ask to write but he would call me and discuss with me the issue in detail and point out those particular references which he would wish me to focus. I was fortunate to have met and acquaint with a number of eminent, Human Rights activists, Ambedkarite scholars and writers at young age and all of them respected me and appreciated my courage and enthusiasm but Dr Pal remain the one who mentored me and guided me. He would appreciate a number of my elderly friends but unlike them he would guide me and even point to me the grammatical mistakes in my writings. I knew them very well and the fact was that being a teacher, it was like a student sitting in his class as if he is dictating and then checking our assignment. Many times, he warned me of being neutral in my criticism and asked me to be as ruthless to Muslim fanatics too who try to defame the community but one thing was clear that he made a distinction between minority communalism and majoritarian communalism and cautioned India of the dangers of the Hindu communalism. He was afraid of the fact that India might become victim of the majoritarian communalism and for that all the like-minded parties and people have to join hand. He would often quote that no movement will succeed unless it is preceded by a political philosophy.

I still remember how he guided me to write a paper for a seminar being organized by Indian Social Institute, Delhi, in collaboration with UGC, on Ambedkar and M N Roy’s relationship and Roy’s thought on rationalism and Buddhism. He was determined despite my own feeling that it was a misfit for a seminar on Human Rights education issue yet he felt only I could have done justice to this and he guided me. Yes, that paper took me to various files including that information where Dr Ambedkar had, as a minister in Viceroy’s Council, sanctioned an amount of Rs 13,000 for anti war efforts of M N Roy and on the basis of this information ‘inspired’ Arun Shourie to write ‘Worshipping the False God’, a book based on hard prejudices and lies. I met Justice Tarkunde several time and got those letters where he mentioned that it was he who took the money many time on behalf of the Party and that Roy never took the money himself. Ambedkar was in deep appreciation of MN Roy and his intellectual honesty and that is why there are lots of similarities on their thoughts and philosophy, which need further elaborations. I can say with conviction that if Dr Pal had not guided me in this regard, I would have missed the great opportunity and work of M N Roy related to caste, religion and fascism.

As the editor of PUCL Bulletin he was able to focus a lot on atrocities against Dalits and issue of communalism in India. Both the issue of caste violence against Dalits and communalism were matter of great concern for him and he remained uncompromising in his condemnation of them. At the various national and international forums he always focused on the issue that Human Rights are not just state laws and their steady implementation which of course are important, but what he spoke and emphasized was ‘societal violation of human rights’ which he always felt, got out of the scrutiny of the human rights defenders and the organsations working for the human rights. It was his conviction that Dalits, Muslims and other marginalized people should join Radical Humanist and Human Rights Movement to raise their issues. As he became president of Delhi PUCL, he ensured that these segments are fairly represented and we know personally many of the radical humanists and PUCL ‘leaders’ were not very happy with his ‘casteist’ approach.

For long he listened to many youngsters claiming that ‘human rights’ organisations in India have no space for the Dalits. He always mentioned to me this point that PUCL is a membership based organisations and if the Dalits, Muslims wanted to lead it, they need to become member and increase their numbers. He introduced many eminent persons in the human rights and said that there is no point complaining if you are unable to be member of it. People’s organisations are led by people and need further understanding and working of the organisations and its structures. Merely blaming the organisations for being representative of ‘upper castes’ was not correct according to him though we knew that many activists became members but frankly speaking the functioning of the organisations like PUCL did not change. The dark fact is that he was not liked inside the PUCL as well as in the Radical Humanists circle for his ‘overemphasis on caste and communalism. His unambiguity and openness made many people his enemy who would be jealous of his forthrightness. The man always enjoyed being with young activists, guiding them and providing ideas to write on particular issues. I can vouch with my own experience having met numerous people of eminence how they just use you. The dirty secret of the ‘intellectual’ world is that it does not want to engage in dialogue with people but work on ‘networking’.

We had lots of disagreement particularly on the issue of Gandhi and Ambedkar. He knew it well that I have no liking for Gandhian philosophy, which I called humbug and absolutely patronizing as far as Dalits are concern. He would always say that though Gandhi made eradication of untouchability and fight against communalism pivot of his philosophy, he failed in both count yet he felt that Gandhi’s intention were not wrong but lots of discussions and debate on the issue actually saw his opinion changing. He said any one who read ‘annihilation of caste’, will only find Gandhi on the wrong side and Ambedkar fighting for the rights of the people. He felt Ambedkar was wronged.

His personal association with M N Roy and later working on the human rights issues had broadened his horizon much bigger than many of his contemporaries who remained very narrow in their personal lives. There are very few who would spare time for you and guide you whatever possible ways and feel good at your achievements. He loved speaking Bangla and always followed the incidents happening in East Bengal or what we call today Bangladesh. The pain of division and migration was always with him and that is why he was always warm to people like me who left home in search of a new identity and to fulfill their commitments. He would always warn me like a teacher of what to do and what not to do. There are so many things to remember where he asked me to write on and suggested me to attend particular programmes.

The last togetherness of mine with him was at a seminar that he has been trying to organize for years in Mumbai on Dr Ram Manohar Lohia but always felt lacking supporting hands there as he would have them in Delhi as it was the city he always missed and left after he had paralytic stroke that confined him on wheelchair and external help. Many of my friends actually spoke to me after visiting him and felt pained to see a vibrant man depended on people for help, a man who was always active doing things at his own. But it was his strong willpower that despite being confined to bed he could do a lot of work, which is highly impossible for many of us to do. I never saw him complaining about himself whenever I spoke to him on phone as it was work work and work. He would ask for certain book or speak to certain person or provide the phone numbers of some friends. He complained that being in Mumbai has curtailed his freedom as he always enjoyed his friendship circle in Delhi and felt that he has got isolated in Mumbai.

The seminar on Ram Manohar Lohia in Mumbai reflected how he wanted to do things so fast. Academics saw him speaking passionately on Lohia-Ambedkar relationship where he quoted Lohia saying that he wanted Dr Ambedkar to lead the entire Indians and not confined to the leadership of the Dalits even when people like me questioned Lohia suggesting his vision ended at Gandhsim, Dr Pal remain open to new ideas which supported freethinking and secular democratic traditions in India.

There are so many fond memories of him. I can only say that he was the one on whom I could count for guidance and support. He never failed and once promised would go to any extent to finish the task. I grew up admiring him for his courage and forthrightness as whenever he spoke he was to the point and blunt. At a seminar, a leading human right academic, who happened to be a Muslim, actually supported practice of Sati as cultural practice and therefore outside the purview of human rights laws in the name of ‘personal laws’ of Hindus. I got up and objected saying whether he feel that veil and Burqa should be put beyond the limit of human rights laws. It became heated and Dr Pal came for my rescue saying that he always wanted human rights defenders and organisations to speak against societal violation of human rights as human rights in South Asia are not just violated by the state but majority of violation happen because of cultural practices and we need to come out in open against such rigid and inhuman practices such as caste system and untouchability.

The demise of Dr R M Pal at this crucial moment is a great blow to all the right thinking secular forces as we would often go to him and seek his advice on many issues confronting us. He was the man who always believed in the idea of a secular inclusive India and spoke regularly against the Hindutva’s communalism. Though he is no longer with us, his writings will always inspire us to work for a secular democratic India. We promise to carry on his legacy for our better future.

Vidya Bhushan Rawat is a social and human rights activist. He blogs at http://www.manukhsi.blogspot.com twitter @freetohumanity Email: vbrawat@gmail.com

Source: Dr R.M.Pal: Human Rights of The Most Marginalised Was His Uncompromising Passion By Vidya Bhushan Rawat

U.N. Rapporteur on Myanmar called “whore” by radical Buddhist monk

January 21, 2015
Myanmar monk's U.N. whore rant
Wirathu:”Just because you hold a position in the United Nations doesn’t make you an honourable woman. In our country, you are just a whore,”

For those who think that hate speech has no place in peace-loving Buddhism, this is sobering item:

A radical Myanmar Buddhist monk, Wirathu,  called the U.N. human rights envoy – Ms Yanghee Lee –  a “whore”, and accused Lee of bias towards Rohingya Muslims, a stateless minority in the western Myanmar state of Rakhine. Wirathu denounced Yanghee Lee, the U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar before a cheering crowd of several hundred people, in a speech in Yangon on Friday, after she questioned draft laws that critics say discriminate against women and non-Buddhists. “You can offer your arse to the kalars if you so wish but you are not selling off our Rakhine State,” he said. Kalars is a derogatory word for people of South Asian descent.

His speech was condemned by Thawbita, a leading member of the progressive Saffron Revolution Buddhist Monks Network in Mandalay, where Wirathu is also based. “The words used that day are very sad and disappointing. It is an act that could hurt Buddhism very badly,” Thawbita told Reuters. But he is unlikely to face censure. A senior official at the Ministry of Religious Affairs told Reuters there were no plans to act against Wirathu. This is the more remarkable as in December a New Zealander and two Burmese were charged with insulting Buddhism. The arrest was triggered by a complaint by an official from the country’s religious department. [see: http://news/world-asia-30527443]

 

Rapporteur Lee in a statement released by her office on Monday said:  “During my visit I was personally subjected to the kind of sexist intimidation that female human rights defenders experience when advocating on controversial issues“.

Myanmar monk’s U.N. whore rant “could hurt Buddhism” | Asia-Pasific | Worldbulletin News.

Jimmy Carter’s new book on the rights of woman and how religions have kept them suppressed

April 8, 2014

Former President Jimmy Carter (89 years old!!) has incredible stamina but his latest book – A Call to Action: Women, Religion, Violence, and Power – is remarkable not just because of that high age but because it is incredibly blunt in describing how religions have systematically denigrated women, leading to prejudice, infanticide and horrific violence. The highlights of the interview below with KERA’s vice president of news, Rick Holter, about “the human and civil rights struggle of our time”, in too interesting to try and summarize and the same goes for the long excerpt from the book following: Read the rest of this entry »

Conflicting views on proposed secular charter in Canada

February 8, 2014

Although not directly related to human rights defenders, I thought this article interesting because two top judges taken such openly opposing views. Also interesting to note – at least in this short piece – is the absence of references to international case law on the same topic e.g. by the European Court on Human Rights, which has pronounced itself on Turkey and France:

“Two former Supreme Court of Canada justices delivered conflicting views on Friday on whether Quebec’s proposed secular charter would hold up in court. Louise Arbour, a member of Canada’s highest court from 1999 to 2004, wrote in a letter to Montreal La Presse she firmly believes the Parti Quebecois government’s proposed charter violates the right to freedom of religion. Arbour, who also served as the UN high commissioner for human rights, wrote that the prohibition of wearing so-called conspicuous religious symbols will mainly target Muslim women who wear a head scarf. “It is particularly odious to make women, who are already marginalized, pay the price,” Arbour wrote. “Women, for whom access to employment is a key factor for their autonomy and integration. “Meanwhile in Quebec City, Claire LHeureux-Dube offered her unconditional support for the proposed charter during hearings at the legislature. The former justice said the charter should withstand any court challenge. And if necessary, the government could use the notwithstanding clause in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, she added. LHeureux-Dube, a Supreme Court justice between 1987 and 2002, said she sees no discrimination in the most controversial aspect of the proposed charter — a ban on state employees from wearing conspicuous religious symbols. The proposed legislation would ban public-sector employees, including teachers and daycare workers, from displaying or wearing religious symbols at work. It would also forbid public employees from wearing other visible religious symbols such as turbans, kippas and bigger-than-average crucifixes. LHeureux Dube said the wearing of religious symbols is not a fundamental right. And, she adds, no right is absolute.  Religious symbols “are part of the display of religious beliefs and not the practice of a religion,” LHeureux-Dube said. She finds it perfectly reasonable for the state to impose restrictions on its employees, comparing it to the state’s restriction on political expression. LHeureux-Dube also took the opportunity to lash out at Quebec Liberal Leader Philippe Couillard, accusing him of breaking from what she described as his past position as a defender of secularism and women’s rights. She expressed dismay the party had drifted away from its roots. She noted the Liberals frequently battled with the Roman Catholic Church, notably during the right to vote for women in 1940. “I wonder how one can deny that great tradition of secularism,” she said….” 

via mysask.com – News.

Where is it (il)legal to be gay?

February 6, 2014

The BBC has produced a map which shows the broad legal status of gay people living in UN member states, according to data provided by the UN’s human right’s office, who built on information from the International Lesbian Gay Bisexual Trans and Intersex Association.

The legal status of people in same-sex relationships depends very much on where they live. At one end of the spectrum there are those countries that punish homosexuality with the death penalty – Iran, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen – as well as in parts of Nigeria and Somalia. At the other end, there are those countries where gay couples have the same marriage rights as heterosexual couples. However, the categorisation of countries according to their approach to gay rights is not without problems. Some states have conflicting laws on same-sex relationships, simultaneously having laws that punish and protect, while other countries have different laws in different regions. This is reflected in the key. Countries have been categorised by their most progressive or regressive laws, apart from where laws are contradictory. Countries where gay rights vary between states have been coloured by their most progressive or regressive law. [The map does not reflect day-to-day experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans and intersex people. In many places where anti-discrimination laws exist, gay people continue to be persecuted by state authorities and wider society.]

There is also an interesting timeline, pulled together by the UN, which uses 1789 – the date of the French Revolution – as its starting point. It was chosen by the UN as a baseline, as it was a time when homosexuality was criminalised in many countries.

BBC News – Where is it illegal to be gay?.

Human rights defender Ou Virak: a lonely voice in Cambodia against all discrimination

December 20, 2013
Human rights activist Ou Virak talks to the media outside the Phnom Penh Municipal Court last year.

(Human rights activist Ou Virak talks to the media outside the Phnom Penh Municipal Court last year. Vireak Mai)
A vicious backlash on social media (including death threats) has started against human rights activist Ou Virak in reaction to his call for opposition leader Sam Rainsy to stop inciting discrimination against the Vietnamese. Virak, president of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights, has been attacked on his Facebook page in comments ranging from disappointment to outright vulgar abuse. In a statement released on Wednesday, Virak clarified that Rainsy singled out the Vietnamese in speeches, inciting discrimination against them. Virak said the virulent reaction against him reaffirmed his concerns about using anti-Vietnamese sentiment as a campaign platform in the first place. David Boyle in the Phom Penh Post reports on 19 December 2013 more on how thin and important the line is between opposition and human rights defenders.

Read the rest of this entry »

UN expert body urges action to prevent violation of indigenous rights due to business

October 30, 2013

(Indigenous people in Totonicapán, Guatemala. Photo: OHCHR/Rolando Alfaro)

Yesterday’s post about the G.A. report of UN Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders pointing to the pressure on environmental HRDs, is followed immediately by another on a similar topic: on 28 October 2013 the ‘UN Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises‘ made its report to the General Assembly and concludes that States and corporations need to do more to prevent the violation of indigenous peoples’ rights as a result of business-related activities.

Greece: xenofilia with racist edge says HRW report today

June 12, 2013

I happen to live – and quite happily – in Greece but there are moments that I am almost ashamed. I reported on some of these moments before, but today’s report by Human Rights Watch Read the rest of this entry »

Statement by Women Human Rights Defenders International Coalition on equality in public life

June 4, 2013

women human rights defenders

The Women Human Rights Defenders International Coalition submitted the following statement to the UN Human Rights Council whose Working Group on women’s equal, full and effective participation in Read the rest of this entry »

High Commissioner Pillay speaks out against homophobia

May 17, 2012

High Commissioner’s message for International Day Against Homophobia 2012

Today is the International Day Against Homophobia and the UN has published a video. In this video message the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay  (the one whose mandate has just been renewed for 2 years) talks about the human cost of homophobia and transphobia. Around the world, people are arrested, attacked, tortured and killed, just for being in a loving relationship. “We cannot let these abuses stand”, she says, calling on States to repeal discriminatory laws and ban discriminatory practices. “Punish violence and hatred, not love”.