|

Human Rights Are Universal and No Longer Accepted as Domestic Jurisdiction: Dr. Fai

Articles, Uncategorised

Washington, D.C. July 8, 2012. “No human rights are self-executing. Thus, everyone who participates in raising the issues of civil and political rights does yeoman’s service on behalf of the oppressed. What is even more impressive is the willingness to invite risks to life, liberty, and property by those who would speak in the name of civil and political rights against autocratic or cruel regimes. How many unknown champions lie unremembered and unheralded in graves?” said Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai on the eve of the 105th session of the United Nations, Human Rights Committee which will be meeting in Geneva between July 9 – 27, 2012. The Human Rights Committee is the body of internationally known 18 independent experts who are elected for a term of four years. Currently, Dr. Zonke Zanele Majodina of South Africa is the Chairman of the Committee. The Committee monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights all over the world.

Fai emphasized that human rights are no longer accepted as within the exclusive domestic jurisdictions of individual nations. The winds of international law are thus blowing against absolute defense shields for egregious human rights violations. That trend seems to me sound, at least with respect to torture and summary executions. And virtually all civilized mankind concur in categorically condemning the two crimes as morally reprehensible in all circumstances period, with no commas, semi-colons, or question marks.

“The good news is that the globalization of news and broadcasting has brought human rights violations into the living rooms of more and more people, and most are horrified by the pictures. Only a handful of the inveterately cruel celebrate over human rights violations. There would have been no intervention in Kosovo, East Timor or Southern Sudan without television, and ditto for United States mediation in Northern Ireland. That is why many countries fiercely resist broadcast transparency in their domain. Indian Occupied Kashmir is the prime example of that. Sunshine is the best disinfectant for human rights violations,” Fai explained.

Fai warned that “Kashmir is an inferno for fundamental human rights celebrated in both the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The scale of the human rights atrocities in Kashmir dwarf those in Kosovo, Bosnia, Sierra Leone, East Timor and Southern Sudan which have triggered international interventions. But the United States and the United Nations have remained silent, not even employing moral suasion against India’s shocking indiscriminate violence in Kashmir . Is it because they feel less pain, shed fewer tears, or enjoy fewer intimacies? No, it is because the big powers care more about India’s military and nuclear profile and a potential economic market than the human rights of 17 million Kashmiris.”

Dr. Fai asked, “Are Kashmiris less human than peoples of other nations? To borrow from Shakespeare in The Merchant of Venice: Hath not a Kashmiri eyes? Hath not a Kashmiri hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as other peoples are? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?

“The best estimate of extrajudicial killings in Kashmir since 1989 approaches a staggering 100,000. That number dwarfs the killings in Libya and Syria which have brought the world rightfully to tears and revulsion. The 100,000 corpses also tops the death toll for United States forces in Vietnam over 10 years,” Fai highlighted.

“India’s policy towards Kashmir has been uniformly brutal and deceitful. It initially championed, fashioned, and expressly accepted United Nations Security Council resolutions mandating a self‑determination plebiscite in Kashmir administered by the United Nations. India soon dishonored its obligation when it perceived Kashmiris would never vote accession to Indian sovereignty in a free and fair election. It unilaterally proclaimed Kashmir had fallen into its territorial universe irrespective of international law and the contrary insistence of the United Nations,” Fai added.

President John F. Kennedy brilliantly recognized that, “Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind.” Winston Churchill advised that it is invariably better to jaw-jaw than to war-war. And Benjamin Franklin advised that, “There never was a good war or a bad peace.” “India and Pakistan must realize that Kashmir has no military solution. It is a political issue and must be resolved through peaceful tripartite negotiations between, India, Pakistan and the leadership of the people of Kashmir,” Fai concluded.

Similar Posts

  • |

    The fundamental human rights are universal: Dr. Fai

    Washington, D.C. December 10, 2012. “The fundamental human rights are universal. That is the tacit assumption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which needs to be applauded. Even if all of its lofty provisions safeguarding fundamental human freedoms and liberties remain dishonored in many parts of the globe, it stands as a moral reproach to wrong doing nations that may facilitate reform,” said Dr. Syed Ghulam Nabi Fai from Cumber Prison Camp in Maryland, USA.

  • |

    Kashmir Beyond Platitudes: The Responsibility to Protect

    Oh let the sun beat down upon my face, stars to fill my dream / I am a traveler of both time and space, to be where I have been / To sit with elders of the gentle race, this world has seldom seen / They talk of days for which they sit and wait and all will be revealed….  –lyrics by Jimmy Page from the song Kashmir, performed by Led Zeppelin

    Why, after 67 years of dispute, is the question of Kashmir, land of the “gentle race,” still lurking in the shadows of international relations, still unresolved, despite its seemingly relative unimportance to global interests in matters of resources and international trade?

  • |

    Universal Development Agenda & Our Priorities

    The issue of ‘universal development agenda’ is the issue of the twenty-first century. Never before have so many suffered amidst liberty and luxury for the few. The wealth of single individuals exceeds the wealth of many nations. In highly developed countries, the number of persons living past 80 years is soaring. In deprived and convulsed countries, the average longevity is but half that age. While citizens of some African and Asian countries are starving, the rich countries are beset with obesity. Discrepancies of these types are morally disturbing. The United Nations is ideally suited to ending these shocking inequalities because it hosts all the nations of the world and endows each with identical voting power in the General Assembly. The poorest and the weakest are equal to the richest and the strongest.

  • |

    Human Rights: Are They Universal?

    “Only on paper has humanity yet achieved glory, beauty, truth, knowledge, virtue, and abiding love.” George Bernard Shaw

    It is tragic that civilized nations have fallen from their lofty calling: namely, human rights for all mankind. There is a sad commentary on the state of human rights all over the globe. It seems to me that until there evolves a generally accepted moral duty among peoples and nations to assist all victims of widespread human rights violations by force or other stiff retaliation, human rights enforcement mechanisms will operate haphazardly and whimsically for reasons unrelated to the harm to the victims or the villainy of the perpetrators. It is the job of all human rights defenders to jump-start that moral evolution.

  • |

    Kashmir: Legal and Moral History

    These are my views on the principle of ‘right of self-determination’ and its applicability to the 67-year-old Kashmir conflict to be considered during the United Nations Working Group meeting that is taking place this week at its headquarters in New York. What I do hope to offer is an unstarry-eyed view of the fate of self-determination in Kashmir; and, the indispensability of convincing India that its national and economic security would be strengthened, not weakened, by ending its military occupation.

  • |

    Reflections on Modi’s Visit to the U.S: What’s in it for Kashmir?

    “Is it true Narendra Modi just boarded a flight to visit India?” Tweeted a critic of Indian Prime Minister’s globe-trotting jaunts. “Welcome home, Pradhan Mantriji! How long will you be staying this time?” Modi has already been to 33 countries just this year alone. The Donald Trump of South Asia, the man out to make India great again, a nationalist and sectarian, divisive at home but the man with the grand plan on the global stage, on June 7, 2016 marked his fourth visit to the U.S. since taking office in 2014.

    The joint statement of Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India and President Obama on the occasion, noteworthy for its lack of any real substance, in part says, “…the leaders reviewed the deepening strategic partnership between the United States and India that is rooted in shared values of freedom, democracy, universal human rights, tolerance and pluralism, equal opportunities for all citizens, and rule of law.”