OpinionPolitics

Know why UNHRC is failing, and it should not preach India anything on Kashmir issue

Pakistan is another attempt to rise the issue of Jammu and Kashmir to the world has asked UNHRC(united nations human rights council. On 10th September India presented effective and crisp rebuttal for the fake narrative presented by Pakistan.

Responding to the comments by Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, first secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs, Vimarsh Aryan, said the recent modification of Article 370 was ‘within India’s sovereign right and entirely an internal matter’.

India also rejected Pakistan’s Demand for UNHRC Probe on Kashmir and that Islamabad Has No ‘Locus Standi'(the right to appear in court).

Exercising its right to respond to Pakistan’s statements at the 42nd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, India made a firm point stating that Article 370 was a temporary provision of the Indian Constitution.

India also made sure to hit out at Pakistan and said-

“We are not surprised at Pakistan’s hysterical statements with false narratives aimed to politicise and polarise this forum (UNHRC). Pakistan realises that our decision cuts away ground from under its feet by creating obstacles in its continuing sponsorship of cross-border terrorism”. Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan has been issuing provocative anti-India statements ever since the Abolishment of Article 370. Some Pakistani leaders have even gone as far as calling for jihad to encourage violence in Jammu and Kashmir and third countries to create a picture of genocide, which even they know is far from reality.

The Indian diplomat from Jammu and Kashmir said the people of Kashmir are united to preserve the core values of democracy and Islamabad has “no locus standi to talk on Kashmir”.

Pakistan has pretended to speak as the voice of the global community on human rights. But the world cannot be fooled. Pakistan’s record speaks for itself. The rhetoric from Pakistan will not distract international attention from persecution and elimination of religious and ethnic minorities in Pakistan – be it the Christians, Sikhs, Shias, Ahmadiyas and Hindus. Vimarsh Aryan said, persecution of minorities in Pakistan is well documented.

When all these proofs are against the narrative Pakistan has presented, what can we expect from UNHRC and why UNHRC should not try to advice anything on Kashmir issue to India?

UNHRC chief Michelle Bachelet expressed concerns over the ‘’communication shutdown’’ and ‘’detention’’ of political leadership in J&K.

And Pakistan and its sympathizers in India who parade under the false name of ‘human rights activists’ are relying on these comments that were made in the context of her opening statement at the 42nd session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

These activists and Pakistanis are claiming measures carried out by the centre in Jammu and Kashmir is vindictive.

Michelle Bachelet revealed that the assessments were made on the reports received by her office. These reports are filed by some human rights NGOs and sections of the Indian and foreign media. Most of these reports are not fact based and created with a sole agenda of criticizing Modi government. Some Kashmiris have also dismissed these reports as propaganda.

For years now the UNHRC’s actions have been questioned for being unable to fulfil its mandate particularly when some of the world’s most notorious human rights violators have secured their spot and passing judgement of others.

In UNHRC there is a vote to secure a berth on the Council. 47-seats are up for grabs. The aspirants are expected to voluntarily submit pledges to demonstrate their commitment to promote and protect human rights.

The trouble is that only a very few do. Even if nations like China, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Venezuela pledge to protect human rights the reality is well known. It is like wolf guarding chicken coop.

Quite naturally, the Council is often accused of ignoring the most notorious human rights abuses committed around the globe.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNHDR),  has been rejected by the Organisation of Islamic Countries(OIC) in preference for a Shari’at. And we all know how that works.

The irony doesn’t end here. Pakistan – the country that is most pleased by UNHRC chief Bachelet’s statement and which is pressing for a resolution to name and shame India – has not even agreed fully with two important covenants of UNHRC which, in addition to UNHDR, form the “International Bill of Human Rights.”

Pakistan has problems with:

Article 3 (equal right of men and women),

Article 6 (right to inherent life and death penalty abolition),

Article 7 (capital punishment and torture),

Article 12 (freedom of movement and no force expulsion),

Article 18 (freedom of choice of religion and no coercion),

Article 19 (freedom of expression) and

Article 25 (equal rights to all citizens in public services and affairs and the right to vote).

With such blasphemy, the rampant imposition of religious laws to control its women, with a history of state sponsored killings in Balochistan, and its army murdering democratic rights in ಫೋಕ್, it doesn’t take a genius to explain why Pakistan has calculatedly rejected these articles of faith.

Yet, Pakistan was elected by two-thirds majority to the membership of the Council in 2017.

How Pakistan could do it and grabbed a place on the Council reveals the deep-seated flaw in the UNHRC’s terms of association. Given Pakistan’s half-hearted adoption of the UN human rights architecture, UNHRC in fact should have denied Pakistan full-member status.

The UNHRC could have done what Common Wealth of Nations did. They suspended Pakistan twice for undermining the tenets of Democracy.

The first of these suspensions were in 1999 after the military coup by General Pervez Musharraf against the government of Nawaz Shariff.

then again in 2007 when President Musharraf declared an emergency.

And India,

In stark contrast, as a responsible member of the international community, has embraced the “International Bill of Human Rights.’’

Under the circumstances, it is highly condemnable that the UNHRC is allowing Pakistan to use its platform to run its campaign against India.

China being its all weather friend, all the back hand support are being delivered from there. It is important to point out, China routinely uses its heft to cut secret deals to ensure that resolutions against it are either averted or then soundly defeated.

Given the facts that expose the UNHRC’s deficiencies and the selectivity of its member states (incidentally China is one of them this year) India should not pay heed to the comments made by UNHRC.

And USA pulled of from UNHRC in July, 2018 saying human rights councils is the greatest failure of United Nation.

And for those who are celebrating Secretary Michelle’s word, their lies have been busted countless time and the phenomenon will continue in future too.

Pakistan is another attempt to rise the issue of Jammu and Kashmir to the world has asked UNHRC(united nations human rights council. On 10th September India presented effective and crisp rebuttal for the fake narrative presented by Pakistan.

Responding to the comments by Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, first secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs, Vimarsh Aryan, said the recent modification of Article 370 was ‘within India’s sovereign right and entirely an internal matter’.

India also rejected Pakistan’s Demand for UNHRC Probe on Kashmir and that Islamabad Has No ‘Locus Standi'(the right to appear in court).

Exercising its right to respond to Pakistan’s statements at the 42nd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, India made a firm point stating that Article 370 was a temporary provision of the Indian Constitution.

India also made sure to hit out at Pakistan and said-

“We are not surprised at Pakistan’s hysterical statements with false narratives aimed to politicise and polarise this forum (UNHRC). Pakistan realises that our decision cuts away ground from under its feet by creating obstacles in its continuing sponsorship of cross-border terrorism”. Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan has been issuing provocative anti-India statements ever since the Abolishment of Article 370. Some Pakistani leaders have even gone as far as calling for jihad to encourage violence in Jammu and Kashmir and third countries to create a picture of genocide, which even they know is far from reality.

The Indian diplomat from Jammu and Kashmir said the people of Kashmir are united to preserve the core values of democracy and Islamabad has “no locus standi to talk on Kashmir”.

Pakistan has pretended to speak as the voice of the global community on human rights. But the world cannot be fooled. Pakistan’s record speaks for itself. The rhetoric from pakisthan will not distract international attention from persecution and elimination of religious and ethnic minorities in Pakistan – be it the Christians, Sikhs, Shias, Ahmadiyas and Hindus. Vimarsh Aryan said, persecution of minorities in Pakistan is well documented.

When all these proofs are against the narrative Pakistan has presented, what can we expect from UNHRC and why UNHRC should not try to advice anything on Kashmir issue to India?

UNHRC chief Michelle Bachelet expressed concerns over the ‘’communication shutdown’’ and ‘’detention’’ of political leadership in J&K.

And Pakistan and its sympathizers in India who parade under the false name of ‘human rights activists’ are relying on these comments that were made in the context of her opening statement at the 42nd session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

These activists and Pakistanis are claiming measures carried out by the centre in Jammu and Kashmir is vindictive.

Michelle Bachelet revealed that the assessments were made on the reports received by her office. These reports are filed by some human rights NGOs and sections of the Indian and foreign media. Most of these reports are not fact based and created with a sole agenda of criticizing Modi government. Some Kashmiris have also dismissed these reports as propaganda.

For years now the UNHRC’s actions have been questioned for being unable to fulfil its mandate particularly when some of the world’s most notorious human rights violators have secured their spot and passing judgement of others.

In UNHRC there is a vote to secure a berth on the Council. 47-seats are up for grabs. The aspirants are expected to voluntarily submit pledges to demonstrate their commitment to promote and protect human rights.

The trouble is that only a very few do. Even if nations like China, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Venezuela pledge to protect human rights the reality is well known. It is like wolf guarding chicken coop.

Quite naturally, the Council is often accused of ignoring the most notorious human rights abuses committed around the globe.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNHDR),  has been rejected by the Organisation of Islamic Countries(OIC) in preference for a Shari’at. And we all know how that works.

The irony doesn’t end here. Pakistan – the country that is most pleased by UNHRC chief Bachelet’s statement and which is pressing for a resolution to name and shame India – has not even agreed fully with two important covenants of UNHRC which, in addition to UNHDR, form the “International Bill of Human Rights.”

Pakistan has problems with:

Article 3 (equal right of men and women), Article 6 (right to inherent life and death penalty abolition),

Article 7 (capital punishment and torture), Article 12 (freedom of movement and no force expulsion),

Article 18 (freedom of choice of religion and no coercion),

Article 19 (freedom of expression) and Article 25 (equal rights to all citizens in public services and affairs and the right to vote).

With such blasphemic laws, the rampant imposition of religious laws to control its women, with a history of state sponsored killings in Balochistan, and its army murdering democratic rights in ಫೋಕ್, it doesn’t take a genius to explain why Pakistan has calculatedly rejected these articles of faith.

Yet, Pakistan was elected by two-thirds majority to the membership of the Council in 2017.

How Pakistan could do it and grabbed a place on the Council reveals the deep-seated flaw in the UNHRC’s terms of association. Given Pakistan’s half-hearted adoption of the UN human rights architecture, UNHRC in fact should have denied Pakistan full-member status.

The UNHRC could have done what Common Wealth of Nations did. They suspended Pakistan twice for undermining the tenets of Democracy.

The first of these suspensions were in 1999 after the military coup by General Pervez Musharraf against the government of Nawaz Shariff.

then again in 2007 when President Musharraf declared an emergency.

And India,

In stark contrast, as a responsible member of the international community, has embraced the “International Bill of Human Rights.’’

Under the circumstances, it is highly condemnable that the UNHRC is allowing Pakistan to use its platform to run its campaign against India.

China being its all weather friend, all the back hand support are being delivered from there. It is important to point out, China routinely uses its heft to cut secret deals to ensure that resolutions against it are either averted or then soundly defeated.

Given the facts that expose the UNHRC’s deficiencies and the selectivity of its member states (incidentally China is one of them this year) India should not pay heed to the comments made by UNHRC.

And USA pulled of from UNHRC in July, 2018 saying human rights councils is the greatest failure of United Nation.

And for those who are celebrating Secretary Michelle’s word, their lies have been busted countless time and the phenomenon will continue in future too.

Dr Sindhu Prashanth

Tags

Related Articles

Close