Read Editorial with D2G – Ep 395

In Read Editorial With D2G
May 22, 2019

Being responsive: on the Jammu & Kashmir report

READ BEFORE YOU PROCEED:
D2G wears no responsibility of the views published here by the respective Author. This Editorial is used here for Study Purpose. Students are advised to learn the word-meaning, The Art of Writing Skills and understand the crux of this Editorial.

Read Editorial

Meanings are given in Bold

The government’s decision to shut down communication with UN Special Rapporteurs (a person who is appointed by an organization to report on the proceedings of its meetings) seeking to question India on alleged ( said, without proof, to have taken place or to have a specified illegal or undesirable quality) human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir may appear extreme, but is in line with its reaction to such international reports over the last few years. In a letter dated April 23, India’s permanent mission to the UN in Geneva wrote to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights rejecting any reference to the UN’s original June 2018 report on J&K as well as Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, and refused to respond to questions about deaths of 69 civilians between 2016 and 2018 in violence in the Valley.

In its objections, the government said the report was “false and motivated”, that its conclusions and recommendations were violative of India’s sovereignty (supreme power or authority) and territorial integrity, and accused the Special Rapporteurs preparing the report of “individual prejudices” against India. In addition, India drew notice to the Pulwama attack this year, calling terrorism the “grossest (very rude or coarse; vulgar)” violation of human rights, not the allegations against the security forces. As a result, the government has decided to treat all allegations made by the UN Special Rapporteurs as a “closed chapter” and will not engage further on it.

India’s objections to the OHCHR report, the first of its kind when it was released in 2018, and the follow-up this year are understandable, given the often selective nature of allegations (a claim or assertion that someone has done something illegal or wrong, typically one made without proof) raised by the UN body. It is also clear that demands for action against Indian officials and amendment ( a minor change or addition designed to improve a text, piece of legislation, etc) of laws can cross the line on Indian sovereignty. The call by the previous HCHR that the UN Human Rights Council set up an independent and international tribunal ( Board ; Committee) to investigate India’s record in Kashmir was seen to be invasive, and could be dismissed by New Delhi as well.

However, the government cannot quell ( put an end to (a rebellion or other disorder), typically by the use of force) the troubling questions that the UN report and the Special Rapporteurs’ submissions raise simply by rejecting them. To begin with, most of the sources for the OHCHR report are official Indian authorities, State and national human rights commissions, international human rights agencies as well as reputed Indian NGOs. This is therefore a view from within India, not some disengaged ( separate or release (someone or something) from something to which they are attached or connected ) UN official, and must be taken very seriously.

Two Kashmiri NGOs also released a report on Monday documenting 432 specific cases of alleged brutality ( savage physical violence; great cruelty) by security forces in Kashmir, including electrocution ( the injury or killing of someone by electric shock), ‘water-boarding’ and sexual torture of civilians, of which only about 27 were taken up by the State Human Rights Commission. The government must press for due process and justice in each of these. Eventually ( in the end, especially after a long delay, dispute, or series of problems), India will be judged not only by how close it stands to the world’s most powerful countries, but how much the state extends itself to the most vulnerable ( exposed to the possibility of being attacked or harmed, either physically or emotionally) within its own boundaries.