e Paper For Justice

Enact JANLOKPAL

2012-01-31T02:05:00.001-08:00

S.O.S e - Voice For Justice - e-news weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom

Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.08..Issue.05........04/02/2012

Editorial : Enact JANLOKPAL - An Appeal to Honourable Prime Minister of India , GOI
We have suffered enough due to corruption. We are deeply hurt and disappointed with any lack of a real and meaningful solution from you and your government. The Parliament session meant for passing Lokpal Bill was wasted by Unparliamentary behaviour of some MPs.

We want change, and we want accountability and we cannot wait any longer to have this! We will not vote for you if an effective anti-corruption bill is not enacted. Not the farce Lokpal Bill proposed by your government, but the peoples “Jan Lokpal Bill” which is more stringent than the ones proposed by GOI & Team Anna. We want strict and effective punishment for the corrupt. They MUST go to jail! Or you Mr. PM, along with your party, will fall from the people’s grace. We assure you, stand by us, and we will stand by you. The opposite will also hold true.

Your government has appointed a GoM to draft the Lokpal Bill. This GoM includes -
Sharad Pawar,Veerapa Moily and Kapil Sibal. Mr. Pawar and Mr. Moily have a past of allegations of corruption and mis-deeds that the entire country is aware of. Mr. Sibal does not feel there was corruption in the 2G scam. Having these people draft the anti-corruption law – is it not an insult to the people of India? How can the corrupt be asked to draft an anti-corruption bill? We urge you to consider the choice put forth by the people – credible names such as Justice Santosh Hegde, Prashant Bhushan, Shanti Bushan and others, to be part of the committee to draft the Lokpal Bill. Just look at the draft proposed by GOI , it has left out many public servants and tax evading corporate , industrialists (who are the origin & source of black money corruption) from lokpal ambit , only good thing is NGOs are included.

Shri Anna Hazare, one of the Greatest Social Reformers India has ever seen has demanded for a Lokpal which has the power to investigate & prosecute all public servants from peon to Supreme Court Judges , president of india. We urge you to immediately accept the demands of the people of India represented by the demands of Shri Anna Hazare lest the discontent among the people grows out of control.

The sentiments against rampant corruption in this country are quickly becoming as strong as those that led to the uprising in Tahrir Square. The honest and hardworking people of this country refuse to be innocent bystanders in the wholesale public looting that is taking place as you read this letter. We request your immediate and strong response to this concern of the people as corruption should be the top priority of your government. If the challenge is not met effectively and promptly, it has the potential of undermining every valuable effort made by upright citizens of this country over the last century - including you. It also has the potential of leaving your government with a legacy of shame.

Tahrir square can yet be a reality in India.

We trust you will take immediate steps to give us our solution, and not force us to take the above steps! Jai Hind. Vande Mataram.

Your’ssincerely, NAGARAJA.M.R. Citizen of India

Jan Lokpal Bill

The Jan Lokpal Bill (Citizen's ombudsman Bill) is a draft anti-corruption bill drawn up by prominent civil society activists seeking the appointment of a Jan Lokpal, an independent body that would investigate corruption cases, complete the investigation within a year and envisages trial in the case getting over in the next one year.
Drafted by Justice Santosh Hegde (former Supreme Court Judge and former Lokayukta of Karnataka), Prashant Bhushan (Supreme Court Lawyer) and Arvind Kejriwal (RTI activist), the draft Bill envisages a system where a corrupt person found guilty would go to jail within two years of the complaint being made and his ill-gotten wealth being confiscated. It also seeks power to the Jan Lokpal to prosecute politicians and bureaucrats without government permission.
Retired IPS officer Kiran Bedi and other known people like Swami Agnivesh, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Anna Hazare and Mallika Sarabhai are also part of the movement, called India Against Corruption. Its website describes the movement as "an expression of collective anger of people of India against corruption. We have all come together to force/request/persuade/pressurize the Government to enact the Jan Lokpal Bill. We feel that if this Bill were enacted it would create an effective deterrence against corruption."
Anna Hazare, anti-corruption crusader, went on a fast-unto-death in April, demanding that this Bill, drafted by the civil society, be adopted. Four days into his fast, the government agreed to set up a joint committee with an equal number of members from the government and civil society side to draft the Lokpal Bill together. The two sides met several times but could not agree on fundamental elements like including the PM under the purview of the Lokpal. Eventually, both sides drafted their own version of the Bill.
The government has introduced its version in Parliament in this session. Team Anna is up in arms and calls the government version the "Joke Pal Bill." Anna Hazare declared that he would begin another fast in Delhi on August 16. Hours before he was to begin his hunger strike, the Delhi Police detained and later arrested him. There are widespread protests all over the country against his arrest.
The website of the India Against Corruption movement calls the Lokpal Bill of the government an "eyewash" and has on it a critique of that government Bill.

A look at the salient features of Jan Lokpal Bill:
1. An institution called LOKPAL at the centre and LOKAYUKTA in each state will be set up
2. Like Supreme Court and Election Commission, they will be completely independent of the governments. No minister or bureaucrat will be able to influence their investigations.
3. Cases against corrupt people will not linger on for years anymore: Investigations in any case will have to be completed in one year. Trial should be completed in next one year so that the corrupt politician, officer or judge is sent to jail within two years.
4. The loss that a corrupt person caused to the government will be recovered at the time of conviction.
5. How will it help a common citizen: If any work of any citizen is not done in prescribed time in any government office, Lokpal will impose financial penalty on guilty officers, which will be given as compensation to the complainant.
6. So, you could approach Lokpal if your ration card or passport or voter card is not being made or if police is not registering your case or any other work is not being done in prescribed time. Lokpal will have to get it done in a month's time. You could also report any case of corruption to Lokpal like ration being siphoned off, poor quality roads been constructed or panchayat funds being siphoned off. Lokpal will have to complete its investigations in a year, trial will be over in next one year and the guilty will go to jail within two years.
7. But won't the government appoint corrupt and weak people as Lokpal members? That won't be possible because its members will be selected by judges, citizens and constitutional authorities and not by politicians, through a completely transparent and participatory process.
8. What if some officer in Lokpal becomes corrupt? The entire functioning of Lokpal/ Lokayukta will be completely transparent. Any complaint against any officer of Lokpal shall be investigated and the officer dismissed within two months.
9. What will happen to existing anti-corruption agencies? CVC, departmental vigilance and anti-corruption branch of CBI will be merged into Lokpal. Lokpal will have complete powers and machinery to independently investigate and prosecute any officer, judge or politician.
10. It will be the duty of the Lokpal to provide protection to those who are being victimized for raising their voice against corruption.

Occupy and its Indian sister movement are fighting the same battles

By Dr Kailash Chand OBE

From Greece to London; from Spain to Syria; from the occupiers in Zuccotti Park to the milling crowds at Ramlila ground - the forms are different but the anger and frustration of the people with the state of affairs is the same.
Be it the denial of human rights or economic deprivation, be it a clean system of governance or lack of transparency, be it price rise or corruption, the anger of the people is directed against those responsible for the manifold multiplication of their problems. It may be premature to draw parallels but only the naïve would miss the common thread running through such movements across the globe.

Analysts, many of whom represent the interests of the establishment are busy dishing out local, regional and social explanations for this world wide unrest because they would not likes to challenge the system that has benefitted them so long.
Sooner or later the world has to recognize that at the root of this unrest lies in the unviable economic system, concentration of power and wealth in a few hands and the unabashed corporate greed.
One cannot treat a malady without finding the bug that causes the ailment. People in the more advanced western democracies have been closer to the diagnosis while in countries like India we are striking at the symptoms of the disease.
While the slogans in the west are “one per cent versus 99 per cent”, “fight the rich, not their wars” and “human need, not corporate greed” the ire in India is directed against the scheming politician, the bribe taking babu or the Hawala trader with Swiss accounts.
In India the contribution of big business and the corporate world to the all prevailing corruption and social degeneration has not received the attention it deserves. Even the more ‘enlightened’ and ‘educated’ organizers and supporters of the Anna movement are silent on this issue. The western protester seems to be more aware of the reality.
The common man in India is perhaps too harassed by the day to day corruption, bribery, human rights violations etc to look beyond his nose and indentify the real culprit. In fact a section of the middle class is in awe of the corporate culture and views them as ‘achievers’ rather than ‘usurpers’. They are willing to be fodder for the corporate machine in the false hope of being in the driver’s seat sooner or later.
Their beliefs were strengthened by a corporate controlled media and entertainment industry that presented a rosy picture of the system run by them and a distorted picture of any economic system different than theirs.
Bedazzled by the glitter of wealth and extravagance; oblivious of the ugly reality that was clothed in an attractive attire of democracy and free market; the educated middle class in India has been behaving like hypnotised zombies.
The global discontent against the status quo is an indication that the zombies are coming out of the hypnotic spell. They may not be able to pin point the malady in political, social and economic terms but they are very near the mark.
The diehard supporters of the system are loath to admit this and are using all the tricks in the trade to ignore, belittle or defame this movement. One finds a striking similarity in the tactics of the critics of the occupiers and the detractors of the Anna movement.
They have been called naive, directionless and trouble makers. They have been called commies in the US and lefties in India. On their part the protesters have set up kitchens, organized medical care set up information cells and taken extreme care to prevent the protests turning violent be it the Zuccotti Park or the Ramlila ground.
Such commentators are either divorced from reality or are consciously trying to prevent the inevitable: the overthrow of an unviable, undemocratic, one sided political and economic dispensation. The weaknesses of capitalism stand exposed. It is not only a bad economic system but a poor democracy as well.
The real face of democracy is apparent from the fact that the biggest exporter of democracy is busy these days firing plastic bullets and tear gas shells on the protestors.
This what Stephen Lendman, radio host and author says about the system:
“Whoever controls the power of money has supreme power.
“The bankers in Wall Street have the power of money and literally run the government. Goldman Sachs runs the government, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America - they run the government. This has to stop. The people in the streets across America have to understand this and demand that the power of money returns to the Congress.”
Recent reports from the US have exposed the tall claims of this country on human rights and freedom to protest.
Boston Mayor Thomas Menino told the local Fox 25 News in Boston:
“Civil disobedience will not be tolerated.”
Another report says:
“A new chapter in the annals of American police brutality has been written, as two Vietnam war veterans who joined Occupy Boston protests suffered injuries after being beaten by police and arrested along with some 50 other demonstrators.”
The Guardian reported:
“In New York a section of Occupy Wall Street protesters are planning a “millionaires march” to wealthy Manhattan residents’ homes.
“The action is being planned by UnitedNY, the Strong Economy for All Coalition, the Working Families Party, and New York Communities for Change, all of whom helped swell the largest Occupy Wall Street march so far last Wednesday”.
If the ‘experts’ are unable to see a precursor of a class division in the “millionaires march” they are either pretending or being a bit too clever.
The Indian middle class and their largely apolitical leadership have not yet grasped the dangerous dimensions of the ‘new world order’. The middle class is being rapidly pushed downwards as a result of price rise, increased cost of housing and shrinking job opportunities. The agriculture sector, an important component of Indian economy is severely affected by a slow growth.
On the other hand despite recession the number of the super rich has gone up. India has 55 billionaires, according to 2011 Forbes’ list. The combined fortune of the wealthiest citizens in India was pegged at about $247 billion by Forbes, which was well above 2010 total of $222 billion.
India has been aptly called “a rich country, where poor live.”
Indian rulers are ignoring the writing on the wall and are persisting with implementation of a western style economic system. And the common man is yet to realize and see the negative impact of corporate greed and power on their day to day life.
They dictate government policies; they corrupt government officials and have no hesitation in sabotaging the public sector enterprise. While they pay a pittance to their employees they fix absurd and astronomical salaries for themselves and their CEOs at the cost of shareholders. They oppose subsidy for the poor but want more for themselves in the form of SEZs, excise concessions and tax holidays.
How much they owe to the nation in the form of bank default, tax arrears, and Swiss Bank Accounts is not revealed to the nation. The tree of corruption gets its nutrition through its corporate roots. The wily politician, the bribe taking bureaucrat, the crafty middle man; they are all the front men of the corporate word.
Despite all this they are projected as image builders and flag bearers of the nation by the corporate controlled media and governments alike.
Successive governments of the “free world” have not only allowed this pathological greed for money to flourish but have actually helped it to grow into a monster that is threatening to devour the very system that created it.
This monster is not only cornering all the wealth and resources but is devouring the very fabric of society. Ethics and morality have been relegated to the background; money, money and more money is the modern mantra of success.
Gone are the days when intellectuals, poets, teachers, philosophers were the role models. The role models today are the successful and the only parameter of success is accumulation of assets or wealth for their companies.
The destruction of the value system, the deterioration of living standards, the concentration of wealth in a few hands and the blatant misuse of money as power to manipulate governments was bound to take its toll. The frustration, the anger and despair has burst out in the form of a global protest. The 99 per cent in the US are already braving plastic bullets and tear gas shells of the one per cent.
Whether the anger and frustration of the Indian 99 per cent translate into a struggle for economic equality and justice is yet to be seen. Will the Indian David be able to stand up to the corporate Goliath? Will the proponents of globalization of business in India get a taste of globalization of protest?
In the absence of a competent leadership there is always the danger of this movement losing its way.
World over there is a huge a vacuum of leadership for many reasons. The society has been systematically depoliticized by a corporate controlled media and entertainment industry. One hardly comes across a movie, a TV serial or a theater show that highlights any social issues. The emphasis is on religion, superstition and fundamentalism.
In such circumstances what type of leadership can one hope for?
The mainstream left has not just abdicated its responsibility but has covertly crossed the fence.
What is left of the left has been so demonized by the corporate controlled media that many genuine activists are avoiding the label. David stands alone with his sling broken and half the stones stolen. It is a tribute to his grit that he is still standing.
In fact the people are ahead of the leaders. Whether or not the protests evolve into a significant political force with a clear agenda or a concrete set of demands remains to be seen.
For this to happen, India needs more than anything a mass social and political movement to reassert the democratic control over the economy and the State and to effectively end the control of the corporate-driven neoliberal capitalism. The ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement offers just the spark to trigger such a movement needed in India.
Will the civil society throw up a leadership that has the political maturity to indentify the genesis of the present moral, social, political and economic crisis? Will the progressive left in India rise to the occasion and grab this opportunity?

Occupy Wall Street and India's struggle against corruption have much in common, but Occupy goes much beyond ..

By Devinder Sharma

The screaming headlines provide insight into the dichotomy that prevails in our society. This newspaper reported that in Chandigarh alone (in northwest India) Rs 80-crore worth of gold ornaments and nearly 800 cars were sold on the occasion of Dhanteras. Far away in Patna, Rs 400-crore were withdrawn on the same day from ATMs. It seems buying metals on this auspicious occasion had beaten all records.

Most families consider Dhanteras to be an auspicious occasion to buy gold and silver. Unfortunately for them, the prices of these precious metals have gone through the roof in the last few months, making it difficult for many to buy even a coin of few grams. Completely unable to comprehend the reasons behind such high price-rise, many of them can be heard asking, “Why have gold prices increased so much”?

Little do they know that the unprecedented escalation in gold prices is only because of speculation in which just one per cent of the investors are raking in huge profits while 99 per cent end up paying through the nose. This in short is the essence of the slogan, ‘We are the 99 per cent’, that is sweeping across the continents. More than 950 cities in 82 countries have seen thousands of people streaming in to the roads, squares and the parks to protest against economic inequalities. What began as a silent sit-in by a handful of protesters in the Wall Street -- the financial capital of the world -- New York a month back, has now spread like a wildfire.

In India too, some groups, including the Communist Party, have launched of the Indian version ‘Occupy Dalal Street’ from Nov 4.

Well, before we follow the global trends let me take you back to the days when petrol price internationally had shot up to $ 140 a barrel. This was barely two years back in 2009, just before the world witnessed an economic meltdown. I remember even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh saying that he wasn’t sure whether it was because of a slump in production or rise in demand. The fact is the stupendous rise in oil prices was not because of supply-demand constraints. It was simply because of speculation in trading. The companies which have invested in its stocks on the Wall Street try best to garner more profits.

Oil prices subsequently slumped to a low of $ 40 a barrel. From $ 140 a barrel to $ 40 a barrel certainly proves that demand had nothing to do with prices. It was all in the game of speculation.

In lot many ways Anna Hazare’s movement against corruption looked similar. But while, Team Anna is crusading for the removal of graft from public life, Occupy movement goes much beyond and hits at the very foundations of the growing inequalities. Removing corruption will make available more resources for development activities, and as Swami Ramdev has been saying bringing back Rs 400 lakh crore of black money stacked abroad will make available abundant resources that can be ploughed back to fight poverty and hunger.

Removing corruption is certainly the crying need. But what makes Swami Ramdev and Anna Hazare’s struggle against corruption and black money different from Occupy campaign is that while you may not have to pay underhand for getting admission for you child in a school or a university but you will still end up pay exorbitantly for the gold ornaments that you need to buy for your daughter’s marriage. You will still continue to pay dearly and periodically for hike in petrol and diesel prices. You will end up paying more not because of supply demand constraints, but because some people are raking in more money through speculations in trading. You and I eventually pay for the greed of one per cent people.

Occupy movement is a global struggle for a decent living. It hits at the very fundamental of the growing economic disparities, the inequalities and injustice that prevails.

OCCUPY WALL STREET

Occupy Wall Street is the original protest that began the worldwide movement beginning September 17, 2011 in Zuccotti Park, located in New York City's Wall Street financial district, initiated by the Canadian activist group Adbusters. The protests are against social and economic inequality, high unemployment, greed, as well as corruption and the undue influence of corporations on government—particularly from the financial services sector. The protesters' slogan We are the 99% refers to the growing income and wealth inequality in the U.S. between the wealthiest 1% and the rest of the population. The protests in New York City have sparked similar Occupy protests and movements around the world.

In a blog post from July 13, 2011, the Canadian-based Adbusters Media Foundation, best known for its advertisement-free, anti-consumerist magazine Adbusters, proposed a peaceful occupation of Wall Street to protest corporate influence on democracy, the absence of legal repercussions for those behind the recent global financial crisis, and a growing disparity in wealth.^[5][6] They sought to combine the symbolic location of the 2011 protests in Tahrir Square with the consensus decision making of the 2011 Spanish protests.^[7] Adbusters' senior editor, Micah White, said they had suggested the protest via their email list and it "was spontaneously taken up by all the people of the world.”^[6] Adbusters' website said that from their "one simple demand, a presidential commission to separate money from politics," they would "start setting the agenda for a new America."^[8] They promoted the protest with a poster featuring a dancer atop Wall Street's iconic Charging Bull statue.^[9][10]

The internet group Anonymous encouraged its readers to take part in the protests, calling for protesters to "flood lower Manhattan, set up tents, kitchens, peaceful barricades and occupy Wall Street for a few months."^[11][12] Other groups began to join in the organization of the protest, including the U.S. Day of Rage^[13] and the NYC General Assembly, which became the governing body of Occupy Wall Street.^[14] The protest itself began on September 17; a Facebook page for the demonstrations began two days later on September 19 featuring a YouTube video of earlier events. By mid-October, Facebook listed 125 Occupy-related pages, and roughly one in every 500 hashtags used on Twitter—all over the world—was the movement's own #OWS.^[15]

Adbusters' Kalle Lasn, when asked why it took three years after the implosion of Lehman Brothers for people to begin protesting, said that after the election of President Barack Obama there was a feeling among the young that he would pass laws to regulate the banking system and "take these financial fraudsters and bring them to justice." However, as time passed, "the feeling that he's a bit of a gutless wonder slowly crept in" and they lost their hope that his election would result in change.^[16]

Zuccotti Park, the site of the occupation, was chosen because it was private property and police could not legally force protesters to leave without being requested to do so by the property owner.^[17] At a press conference held on the same day as the protests began, New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg explained, "people have a right to protest, and if they want to protest, we'll be happy to make sure they have locations to do it."^[14] Writing for CNN, Sonia Katyal and Eduardo Peñalver said that "a straight line runs from the 1930s sit-down strikes in Flint, Michigan, to the 1960 lunch-counter sit-ins to the occupation of Alcatraz by Native American activists in 1969 to Occupy Wall Street. Occupations employ physical possession to communicate intense dissent, exhibited by a willingness to break the law and to suffer the -- occasionally violent -- consequences."^[18]

More immediate prototypes for Occupy Wall Street are the British student protests of 2010, Greece and Spain's anti-austerity protests of the "indignados" (indignants), as well as the Middle East's Arab Spring protests. These antecedents have in common with Occupy Wall Street a reliance on social media and electronic messaging to circumvent the authorities, as well as the feeling that financial institutions, corporations, and the political elite have been malfeasant in their behavior toward youth and the middle class.^[19][20] Occupy Wall Street, in turn, gave rise to the Occupy movement in the United States and around the world.^[21][22][23]

[edit] The 99%

The phrase "The 99%" is a political slogan of "Occupy" protesters.^[30] It was originally launched as a Tumblr blog page in late August 2011.^[31][32] It refers to the vast concentration of wealth among the top 1% of income earners compared to the other 99 percent, and indicates that most people are paying the price for the mistakes of a tiny minority.^[19][33] Paul Taylor, executive vice president of the Pew Research Center told NPR that the slogan is "arguably the most successful slogan since 'Hell no, we won't go,' going back to the Vietnam era." According to Taylor, majorities of Democrats, independents and Republicans see the income gap as a cause of friction in the United States.^[34]
The top 1 percent of income earners have more than doubled their income over the last thirty years according to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report.^[35] The report was released just as concerns of the Occupy Wall Street movement were beginning to enter the national political debate.^[36] According to the CBO, between 1979 and 2007 the incomes of the top 1% of Americans grew by an average of 275%. During the same time period, the 60% of Americans in the middle of the income scale saw their income rise by 40%. Since 1979 the average pre-tax income for the bottom 90% of households has decreased by $900, while that of the top 1% increased by over $700,000, as federal taxation became less progressive. From 1992-2007 the top 400 income earners in the U.S. saw their income increase 392% and their average tax rate reduced by 37%.^[37] In 2009, the average income of the top 1% was $960,000 with a minimum income of $343,927.^[38][39][40]
In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. Financial inequality (total net worth minus the value of one's home)^[41] was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.^[42] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.^[42][43][44] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.^[24] This is in stark contrast with surveys of US populations that indicate an "ideal" distribution that is much more equal, and a widespread ignorance of the true income inequality and wealth inequality.^[45]

[edit] Goals

Protesters targeted Wall Street because of the part it played in the economic crisis of 2008 which started the Great Recession. They say that Wall Street's risky lending practices of mortgage-backed securities which ultimately proved to be worthless caused the crisis, and that the government bailout breached a sense of propriety, and created a state of moral hazard in the banking industry. The protesters say that Wall Street recklessly and blatantly abused the credit default swap market, and that the instability of that market must have been known beforehand. They say that the guilty parties should be prosecuted.^[23]
The protesters want, in part, more and better jobs, more equal distribution of income, bank reform, and a reduction of the influence of corporations on politics,^[46][47] which they sometimes refer to as corporatocracy.^[48][49] Adbusters co-founder Kalle Lasn has compared the protests to the Situationists and the Protests of 1968 movements.^[23][50] and addresses critics saying that while no one person can speak for the movement, he believes that the goal of the protests is economic justice, specifically, a "transaction tax" on international financial speculation, the reinstatement of the Glass-Stegall Act and the revocation of corporate personhood.^[7]
Some journalists have criticized the protests saying it is hard to discern a unified aim for the movement, while other commentators, such as Douglas Rushkoff, have said that although the movement is not in complete agreement on its message and goals, it does center on the problem that "investment bankers working on Wall Street [are] getting richer while things for most of the rest of us are getting tougher". According to Rushkoff, "... we are witnessing America's first true Internet-era movement, which -- unlike civil rights protests, labor marches, or even the Obama campaign -- does not take its cue from a charismatic leader, express itself in bumper-sticker-length goals and understand itself as having a particular endpoint".^[46]
The General Assembly, the governing body of the OWS movement, has adopted a “Declaration of the Occupation of New York City,” which includes a list of grievances against corporations,^[51] and to many protesters a general statement is enough. However, saying, "‘Power concedes nothing without a demand' " others within the movement have favored a fairly concrete set of national policy proposals.^[52] One group has written an unofficial document, "The 99 Percent Declaration”, that calls for a national general assembly of representatives from all 435 congressional districts to gather on July 4, 2012, to assemble a list of grievances and solutions.^[53][54][55] OWS protesters that prefer a looser, more localized set of goals have also written a document, the Liberty Square Blueprint,^[56] a wiki page edited by some 250 occupiers and still undergoing changes. Written as a wiki the wording changes, however, an early version read: "Demands cannot reflect inevitable success. Demands imply condition, and we will never stop. Demands cannot reflect the time scale that we are working with."^[53] The Guardian interviewed OWS and found three main demands: get the money out of politics; reinstate the Glass-Steagall act; and draft laws against the little-known loophole that currently allows members of Congress to pass legislation affecting Delaware-based corporations in which they themselves are investors.^[57]

JANLOKPAL BILL

Jan Lokpal Bill version 1.8

An act to create effective anti-corruption and grievance redressal systems at centre so that effective

deterrent is created against corruption and to provide effective protection to whistleblowers.

1. Short title and commencement:- (1) This Act may be called the Anti-Corruption, Grievance

Redressal And Whistleblower Protection Act, 2010.

(2) It shall come into force on the one hundred and twentieth day of its enactment.

2. Definitions:- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-

(1) “Action” means any action taken by a public servant in the discharge of his functions as such public

servant and includes decision, recommendation or finding or in any other manner and includes

willful failure or omission to act and all other expressions relating to such action shall be construed

accordingly;

(2) “Allegation” in relation to a public servant includes any affirmation that such public servant-

(a) has indulged in misconduct, if he is a government servant;

(b) has indulged in corruption

(3) “complaint” includes any grievance or allegation or a request by whistleblower for protection and

appropriate action.

(4) “corruption” includes anything made punishable under Chapter IX of the Indian Penal Code or

under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988;

Provided that if any person obtains any benefit from the government by violating any laws or rules,

that person along with the public servants who directly or indirectly helped that person obtain

those benefits, shall be deemed to have indulged in corruption.

(5) “Government” or “Central Government” means Government of India.

(6) “Government Servant” means any person who is or was any time appointed to a civil service or post

in connection with the affairs of the Central Government or High Courts or Supreme Court either on

deputation or permanent or temporary or on contractual employment but would not include the

judges.

(7) “grievance” means a claim by a person that he sustained injustice or undue hardship in

consequence of mal-administration;

(8) “Lokpal” means

a. Benches constituted under this Act and performing their functions as laid down under

various provisions of this Act; or

b. Any officer or employee, exercising its powers and carrying out its functions and

responsibilities, in the manner and to the extent, assigned to it under this Act, or under

various rules, regulations or orders made under various provisions of this Act.

c. For all other purposes, the Chairperson and members acting collectively as a body;

(9) “Mal-administration” means action taken or purporting to have been taken in the exercise of

administrative function in any case where,-

a. such action or the administrative procedure or practice governing such action is

unreasonable, unjust, oppressive or improperly discriminatory; or

b. there has been willful negligence or undue delay in taking such action or the administrative

procedure or practice governing such action involves undue delay;

(10)“Misconduct” means misconduct as defined in CCS Conduct Rules and which has vigilance angle.

(11)"public authority" means any authority or body or institution of self- government established or

constituted—

a. by or under the Constitution;

b. by any other law made by Parliament;

c. by notification issued or order made by the Government, and includes any body owned,

controlled or substantially financed by the Government;

(12)“Public servant” means a person who is or was at any time,-

(a) the Prime Minister;

(b) a Minister;

(d) Judges of High Courts and Supreme Court;

(e) a Government servant;

(f) the Chairman or Vice-Chairman (by whatever name called) or a member of a local

authority in the control of the Central Government or a statutory body or corporation

established by or under any law of the Parliament of India, including a co-operative

society, or a Government Company within the meaning of section 617 of the

Companies Act, 1956 and members of any Committee or Board, statutory or nonstatutory,

constituted by the Government;

(g) Such other authorities as the Central Government may, by notification, from time to

time, specify;

(13)“Vigilance angle” includes –

(a) All acts of corruption

(b) Gross or willful negligence; recklessness in decision making; blatant violations of systems and

procedures; exercise of discretion in excess, where no ostensible/public interest is evident;

failure to keep the controlling authority/superiors informed in time

subordinates on complaints of corruption or dereliction of duties or abuse of office by the

subordinates

(d) Indulging in discrimination through one’s conduct, directly or indirectly.

(e) Victimizing Whistle Blowers

(f) Any undue/unjustified delay in the disposal of a case, perceived after considering all relevant

factors, would reinforce a conclusion as to the presence of vigilance angle in a case.

(g) Make unfair investigation or enquiry to either unduly help culprits or fabricate the innocent.

(h) Any other matter as notified from time to time by Lokpal

(14)“Whistleblower” is any person who faces threat of (1) professional harm, including but not limited

to illegitimate transfers, denial of promotions, denial of appropriate perks, departmental

proceedings, discrimination or (2) physical harm or (3) is actually subjected to such harm; because

of either making a complaint to Lokpal under this Act or for filing an application under Right to

Information Act.

3. Establishment of the institution of Lokpal and appointment of Lokpal:

(1) There shall be an institution known as Lokpal which shall consist of one Chairperson and ten

members along with its officers and employees. The Lokpal shall be headed by its Chairperson.

(2) The Chairperson and members of Lokpal shall be selected in such manner as laid down in this

Act.

(3) A person appointed as Chairperson or member of Lokpal shall, before entering upon his office,

make and subscribe before the President, an oath or affirmation in the form as prescribed.

(4) The Government shall appoint the Chairperson and members of the first Lokpal and set up the

institution with all its logistics and assets within six months of enactment of this Act.

(5) The Government shall fill up a vacancy of the Chairperson or a member caused due to

a) Retirement, 3 months before the member or the Chairperson retires.

b) Any other unforeseen reason, within a month of such vacancy.

Chairperson and Members of Lokpal

4. The Chairperson and members of Lokpal not to have held certain offices- The Chairperson and

members of Lokpal shall not be serving or former member of either the Parliament or the Legislature of

any State and shall not hold any office or trust of profit (other than the office as Chairperson or

member) or would have ever been connected with any political party or carry on any business or

practice any profession and accordingly, before he enters upon his office, a person appointed as the

Chairperson or member of Lokpal shall-

(i) if he holds any office of trust or profit, resign from such office; or

(ii) if he is carrying on any business, sever his connection with the conduct and

management of such business; or

(iii) if he is practicing any profession, suspend practice of such profession.

(iv) If he is associated directly or indirectly with any other activity, which is likely cause

conflict of interest in the performance of his duties in Lokpal, he should suspend his

association with that activity.

Provided that if even after the suspension, the earlier association of that person with

such activity is likely to adversely affect his performance at Lokpal, that person shall

not be appointed as a member or Chairperson of Lokpal.

5. Term of office and other conditions of service of Lokpal– (1) A person appointed as the Chairperson

or member of Lokpal shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his

office;

Provided further that.-

(a) the Chairperson or member of Lokpal may, by writing under his hand addressed to the

President, resign his office;

(b) the Chairperson or member may be removed from office in the manner provided in

this Act.

(2) There shall be paid to the Chairperson and each member every month a salary equal to that of the

Chief Justice of India and that of the judge of the Supreme Court respectively;

(3) The allowances and pension payable to and other conditions of service of the Chairperson or a

member shall be such as may be prescribed;

Provided that the allowances and pension payable to and other conditions of service of the

Chairperson or members shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment.

(4) The administrative expenses of the office of the Lokpal including all salaries, allowances and pensions

payable to or in respect of persons serving in that office, shall be charged on the Consolidated Fund of

India.

(5) There shall be a separate fund by the name of “Lokpal fund” in which penalties/fines imposed by the

Lokpal shall be deposited and in which 10% of the loss of Public Money detected/prevented on account

of investigations by Lokpal shall also be deposited by the Government. Disposal of such fund shall be

completely at the discretion of the Lokpal and such fund shall be used only for

enhancement/upgradation/extension of the infrastructure of Lokpal.

(6) The Chairperson or members shall not be eligible for appointment on any position in Government of

India or Government of any state or for fighting elections, if he has ever held the position of the

Chairperson or a member for any period.

Provided however that a member or Chairperson may be reappointed for one more term or a member

may be appointed as the Chairperson, however, that any person shall not serve for more than a total of

two terms.

6. Appointment of the Chairperson and members:

1. The Chairperson and members shall be appointed by the President on the recommendation of a

selection committee.

2. Following persons shall not be eligible to become Chairman or Member in Lokpal:

(a) Any person who was ever chargesheeted for any offence under IPC or PC Act or was ever

penalized under CCS Conduct Rules.

(b) Any person who is less than 40 years in age.

3. At least four members of Lokpal shall have legal background.

4. The members and Chairperson should have unimpeachable integrity and should have

demonstrated their resolve and efforts to fight against corruption in the past.

5. A selection committee consisting of the following shall be set up:

a. The Chairpersons of both Houses of Parliament

b. Two senior most judges of Supreme Court

c. Two senior most Chief Justices of High Courts.

d. All Nobel Laureates of Indian Origin

e. Chairperson of National Human Rights Commission

f. Last two Magsaysay Award winners of Indian origin

g. Comptroller and Auditor General of India

h. Chief Election Commissioner

i. Bharat Ratna Award winners

j. After the first set of selection process, the outgoing members and Chairperson of

Lokpal.

6. The seniormost judge of Supreme Court shall act as the Chairperson of the selection committee.

7. The following selection process shall be followed:

a. Recommendations shall be invited through open advertisements in prescribed format.

b. Each person recommending shall be expected to justify the selection of his candidate

giving examples from the past achievements of the candidate.

c. The list of candidates along with their recommendations received in the format

mentioned above shall be displayed on a website.

d. Each member of the selection committee, on the basis of the above material, shall

recommend such number of names as there are vacancies.

e. A priority list shall be prepared with the candidate receiving recommendations from

maximum number of members of selection committee at the top. The candidates

recommended by same number of members shall be treated at par.

f. This priority list shall be displayed on the website.

g. Around three times the names as there are vacancies, shall be shortlisted from the top.

h. Public feedback shall be invited on the shortlisted names by putting these names on the

website.

i. The selection committee may decide to use any means to collect more information

about the background and past achievements of the shortlisted candidates.

j. Selection committee shall invite shortlisted candidates for discussions, video recordings

of which shall be made public.

k. All the material obtained so far about the candidates shall be made available to each

member of the selection committee in advance. The members shall make their own

assessment of each candidate.

l. The selection committee shall meet and discuss the material so received about each

candidate. The final selections for the Chairperson and members shall be made

preferably through consensus.

Provided that if three or more members, for reasons to be recorded in writing, object to

the selection of any member, he shall not be selected.

m. All meetings of selection committee shall be video recorded and shall be made public.

8. The Prime Minister shall recommend the names finalized by the selection committee to the

President immediately, who shall order such appointments within a month of receipt of the

same.

9. If any of the members of the selection committee retires while a selection process is going on,

that member will continue on the selection committee till the end of that process.

7. Removal of Chairperson or members-

(1) The Chairperson or any member shall not be removed from his office except by an order of the

President.

(2) They can be removed on one or more of the following grounds:

a. Proved misbehavior

b. Professional or physical incapacity

c. If he is adjudged to be insolvent

d. Has been charged of an offence which involves moral turpitude

e. If he engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties of his

office

f. Has acquired such financial interests or other interests which are likely to affect

prejudicially his functions as member or Chairperson.

g. If he is guided by considerations extraneous to the merits of the case either to favor

someone or to implicate someone through any act of omission or commission.

h. If any member or Chairperson tries to or actually unduly influences any government

functionary.

i. If he commits any act of omission or commission which is punishable under Prevention

of Corruption Act or is a misconduct.

j. If a member or the Chairperson in any way, concerned or interested in any contract or

agreement made by or on behalf of the Government of India or participates in any way

in the profit thereof or in any benefit or emolument arising there from otherwise than

as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company, he

shall be deemed to be guilty of misbehavior.

(3) The following process shall be followed for the removal of any member or Chairperson:

(a) Any person may move an application/petition before the Supreme Court seeking removal of

one or more of the members of Chairperson of Lokpal alleging one or more of the grounds for removal

and providing evidence for the same.

(b) Supreme Court will hear the matter by a bench of three or more Judges on receipt of such

petition and may take one or more of the following steps:

(i) order an investigation to be done by a Special Investigation Team appointed by the

Supreme Court if a prima facie case is made out and if the matter cannot be judged based on

affidavits of the parties. The Special Investigation Team shall submit its report within three

months.

(ii) Pending investigations under sub-clause (i) by Special Investigation Team, the

Supreme Court may decide to order withdrawal of part or complete work from that member.

(iii) dismiss the petition if no case is made out

(iv) if the grounds are proved, recommend to the President for removal of the said

member or Chairperson

(v) direct registration and investigation of cases with appropriate agencies if there is

prima facie case of commission of an offence punishable under Prevention of Corruption

Act.

Supreme Court.

Provided that if there are any proceedings going on against any judge in Lokpal, he shall not

be a part of either the panel or the bench.

(d) The Supreme Court shall not dismiss such petitions in liminae.

(e) If the Supreme Court concludes that the petition has been made with mischievous or

malafide motives, the Court may order imposition of fine or imprisonment upto one year

against the complainant.

(f) On receipt of a recommendation from the Supreme Court under this section, the Prime

Minister shall recommend it to the President immediately and the President shall order

removal of said members within a month of receipt of the same.

Powers and Functions of Lokpal

8. Functions of Lokpal: (1) Lokpal shall be responsible for receiving:

(a) Complaints where there are allegations of such acts of omission or commission which are

punishable under Prevention of Corruption Act

(b) Complaints where there are allegations of misconduct by a government servant

(d) Complaints from whistleblowers

(2) Lokpal, after getting such enquiries and investigations done as it deems fit, may take one or more of

the following actions:

a. Close the case if prima facie, the complaint is not made out or

b. Initiate prosecution against public servants as well as those private entities which

are party to the act

c. Order imposition of appropriate penalties under CCS Conduct Rules

Provided that if an officer is finally convicted under Prevention of Corruption

Act, major penalty of dismissal shall be imposed on such government servant.

d. Order cancellation or modification of a license or lease or permission or contract or

agreement, which was the subject matter of investigation.

e. Blacklist the concerned firm or company or contractor or any other entity involved

in that act of corruption.

f. Issue appropriate directions to appropriate authorities for redressal of grievance in

such time and in such manner as is specified in the order.

g. Invoke its powers under this Act if its orders are not duly complied with and ensure

due compliance of its orders.

h. Take necessary action to provide protection to a whistleblower as per various

provisions of this Act.

(3) Suo moto initiate appropriate action under this Act if any case, of the nature mentioned in clauses

(1), (2), (3) or (4), comes to the knowledge of the Lokpal from any source.

(4) Issue such directions, as are necessary, from time to time, to appropriate authorities so as to make

such changes in their work practices, administration or other systems so as to reduce the scope and

possibility for corruption, misconduct and public grievances.

(5) Lokpal shall be deemed to be “Disciplinary authority” or “appointing authority” for the purpose of

imposing penalties under CCS Conduct Rules.

(6) Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act shall be deleted.

(7) Section 197 of CrPC shall not apply to any proceedings under this Act. All permissions, which need to

be sought for initiating investigations or for initiating prosecutions under any Act shall be deemed to

have been granted once Lokpal grants such permissions.

9. Issue of Search Warrant, etc.- (1) Where, in consequence of information in his possession, the Lokpal

(a) has reason to believe that any person. –

(i) to whom a summon or notice under this Act, has, been or might be issued,

will not or would not produce or cause to be produced any property, document

or thing which will be necessary or useful for or relevant to any inquiry or other

proceeding to be conducted by him;

(ii) is in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or

thing and such money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing

represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been

disclosed to the authorities for the purpose of any law or rule in force which

requires such disclosure to be made; or

(b) considers that the purposes of any inquiry or other proceedings to be conducted by him will

be served by a general search or inspection,

he may by a search warrant authorize any Police officer not below the rank of an Inspector of Police to

conduct a search or carry out an inspection in accordance therewith and in particular to, -

(i) enter and search any building or place where he has reason to suspect that such property,

document, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing is kept;

(ii) search any person who is reasonably suspected of concealing about his person any article

for which search should be made;

(iii) break open the lock of any door, box, locker safe, almirah or other receptacle for

exercising the powers conferred by sub-clause (i) where the keys thereof are not available.

Seize any such property, document, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing

found as a result of such search;

(iv) place marks of identification on any property or document or make or cause to be made;

extracts or copies therefrom; or

(v) make a note or an inventory of any such property, document, money, bullion, Jewellery or

Honor Civil Rights of Indians

2012-01-20T22:43:00.001-08:00

S.O.S e - Voice For Justice - e-news weekly
Spreading the light of humanity & freedom

Editor: Nagaraja.M.R.. Vol.08..Issue.04........28/01/2012

“There is a higher court than the court of justice and that is the court of conscience It supercedes all other courts. ”
- Mahatma Gandhi

Editorial : Honor Civil Rights of Citizens of India

The indian public servants must learn to respect Fundamental rights , Human Rights of Indian Citizens. They must allow the citizens to perform their fundamental duties without hindrance.

Preamble to the Constitution of India

“ WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:

JUSTICE, social, economic and political;

LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;

EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;

and to promote among them all

FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;

IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.”

Fundamental Rights of Citizens of India

Main article: Fundamental Rights in India

The Fundamental Rights, embodied in Part III of the Constitution, guarantee civil rights to all Indians, and prevent the State from encroaching on individual liberty while simultaneously placing upon it an obligation to protect the citizens' rights from encroachment by society.^[19] Seven fundamental rights were originally provided by the Constitution – right to equality, right to freedom, right against exploitation, right to freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights, right to property and right to constitutional remedies.^[20] However, the right to property was removed from Part III of the Constitution by the 44th Amendment in 1978.^[21]^{[note 2]}

The Fundamental Rights are not absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions as necessary for the protection of public interest.^[24] In the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case in 1973,^{[note 4]} the Supreme Court, overruling a previous decision of 1967, held that the Fundamental Rights could be amended, subject to judicial review in case such an amendment violated the basic structure of the Constitution.^[28] The Fundamental Rights can be enhanced, removed or otherwise altered through a constitutional amendment, passed by a two-thirds majority of each House of Parliament.^[29] The imposition of a state of emergency may lead to a temporary suspension any of the Fundamental Rights, excluding Articles 20 and 21, by order of the President.^[30] The President may, by order, suspend the right to constitutional remedies as well, thereby barring citizens from approaching the Supreme Court for the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights, except Articles 20 and 21, during the period of the emergency.^[31] Parliament may also restrict the application of the Fundamental Rights to members of the Indian Armed Forces and the police, in order to ensure proper discharge of their duties and the maintenance of discipline, by a law made under Article 33.^[32]

Fundamental Duties of Citizens of India

The Fundamental Duties of citizens were added to the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, upon the recommendations of the Swaran Singh Committee that was constituted by the government earlier that year. Originally ten in number, the Fundamental Duties were increased to eleven by the 86th Amendment in 2002, which added a duty on every parent or guardian to ensure that their child or ward was provided opportunities for education between the ages of six and fourteen years. The other Fundamental Duties obligate all citizens to respect the national symbols of India, including the Constitution, to cherish its heritage, preserve its composite culture and assist in its defense. They also obligate all Indians to promote the spirit of common brotherhood, protect the environment and public property, develop scientific temper, abjure violence, and strive towards excellence in all spheres of life. Citizens are morally obligated by the Constitution to perform these duties. However, like the Directive Principles, these are non-justifiable, without any legal sanction in case of their violation or non-compliance., Indian History, World Developments and Civics, p. There is reference to such duties in international instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Article 51A brings the Indian Constitution into conformity with these treaties.

INDIA: Human rights without justice a utopia

A Submission by the Asian Legal Resource Centre on the Universal Periodic Review (Second Cycle) of India

1. Background:

1.1 The first Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of India was on 10 April 2008. The Working Group of the Human Rights Council on the UPR has prepared the conclusions and recommendations made by the delegations that participated in the interactive dialogue on the UPR of India.ⁱ The Government of India after examining the recommendations responded to the recommendations on 25 August 2008.ⁱⁱ

1.2 Protection, promotion and fulfilment or human rights requires an effective architecture of justice delivery. The interactive dialogue in 2008 demonstrated the lack of understanding and focus of this fundamental, thereby missing out vital issues in India like (i) decades long court delays in adjudication; (ii) lack of competence and independence of the country's prosecution and law-enforcement agencies; and (iii) widespread and omnipresent corruption that prevents the reach of government welfare programs to the poor.

1.3 Though some of the stakeholders' reports, including the one submitted by the ALRC highlighted these aspects; it was not a point of discussion during the interactive dialogue. This lack of focused engagement on some of the vital issues that adversely affects human rights in India is reflected in the concluding recommendations, thereby rendering nine out of 18 recommendations, broad and general, which even if complied would not have a direct, immediate and positive impact upon the lives of the people in the country.

1.4 The concluding recommendationsⁱⁱⁱ on India could be summarised into four main limbs:

i. Curb entrenched practice of torture by an effective domestic mechanism;

ii. Take effective actions to prevent all forms of discrimination, including those based on caste, gender or against the minorities;

iii. Ensure that development priorities respect the needs of the extremely poor and marginalised, in particular children and take affirmative actions to prevent distress migration of the rural poor;

iv. An overall improvement in the architecture of justice delivery.

1.5 The government's response to the Council to the recommendations was mixed as expected of concurrence and denial. The domestic implementation of the recommendations has been almost absent, or at the most, half-hearted. This submission attempts to assess the compliance of India of the four main limbs of the recommendations from the first review and to once again suggest issues that should be seriously considered during the second cycle of the UPR of India.

2. On torture:

2.1 India has not ratified CAT. There has been no serious debate within the Indian parliament concerning ratification, an essential requirement in a dualist system that practices parliamentary democracy. This is despite promises, by none other than the Prime Minister, that the country would ratify the convention, as early as 2009.^iv

2.2 India has not moved forward since then on the issue other than the introduction of a Bill in the parliament, the Prevention of Torture Bill 2010.^v The Lok Sabha passed the Bill on 6 May 2010. The Rajya Sabha, constituted a Parliamentary Select Committee to review the Bill. The Committee suggested wide-ranging changes to the Bill.^vi The Bill is now with the government and nothing is heard about it since then.

2.3 It is expected that the government would highlight the Bill as an important and vital step forward towards the ratification of CAT and the criminalisation of torture in India. However, the ALRC, like the Parliamentary Select Committee, is of the opinion that the proposed law is eyewash. The law requires substantial revision, including its definition of 'torture', which currently fails to meet the definitional standard prescribed in the CAT. The proposed law limits the operation of the definition to "causing grievous hurt" or "danger to life, limb or health (mental or physical)".

2.4 An action against torture will require prior sanction from the government as per Section 6 of the Bill. The rider in Section 6 is a limiting clause that could delay or even deny prosecutions. The bill also enforces a period of limitation of six months for filing a complaint vide Section 5.^vii

2.5 In the meanwhile the practice of torture continues unabated, and is widespread in India. The ALRC has documented more than three hundred cases of torture from India during the period 2008-11. Torture happens in all forms of custody - judicial, police, military and inside prisons. The number of successful prosecution is extremely low, estimated to be one case for every 125 cases.

2.6 Rampant use of torture and the lack of prosecution demoralises the law enforcement officers. It creates a culture of fear and discourages victims from filing complaints. There is no government agency in India that specialises in providing psychological assistance to victims of torture. There is no independent agency to investigate complaints of torture either.

2.7 The use of torture as a common tool for criminal investigation has a direct bearing upon maintaining law and order and upon criminal trials. The use of enforced confessions as the primary tool for criminal investigation is one of the reasons for the mere 4% rate of conviction since the past two decades.

2.8 Law-enforcement agencies are neither capable nor equipped to deal with the increasing and diverse security threats the country face. This is reflected in their operative legal framework. The Indian Police Act, 1861 is the product of the colonial rule that fits the requirements of a police force essential to run a colony.

2.9 India's police today is unfit to serve a democracy. The police are under resourced; lacks training and is unfit to operate in a democratic state. The government conceive the law enforcement agencies as rule enforcers and not as a public service. In international fora the government maintains the position that since the country's judiciary is largely independent, corrective measures could be taken through the courts to address the problems in policing and that it serves as a strong deterrent against torture.

2.10 The D.K. Basu judgment quoted by the government during the first session is an example.^viii But the ALRC wishes to reiterate that all the cases documented by the ALRC since the D.K. Basu judgment, some 790 cases of torture, violates the dictum in the case. Yet, NOT a single police officer or a state government has been held on contempt by the court. On a similar vein, the Police Complaints Authority to be constituted by virtue of yet another judgment, the Prakash Singh case, is not constituted in most states so far.^ix

2.11 It is therefore expected that during the UPR, the interactive dialogue would focus among other issues, requesting the government of India to reform the operative framework of its law enforcement agencies. Towards this end, it is not enough that the agencies provided with adequate physical and financial operative resources, but further, torture has to be criminalised and an independent agency that is not associated with the police, should be constituted in every state of India to accept and investigate complaints of torture.

3. On caste-based discrimination

3.1 Caste-based discrimination is the Indian variant of apartheid and continues unabated in India.^x The stoning to death of 22-year-old Swapna, and her husband, 28-year-old Sunkari Sriniwas on 23 May 2010 by Swapna's family near Krishnajiwadi village, Nizamabad, Andhra Pradesh state is one more proof to the stark reality of the continuing practice of caste-based discrimination and caste prejudices in India. Swapna belongs to a Hindu dominant caste family. Her parents and relatives were opposed to Swapna's marriage with Sriniwas, a Dalit.

3.2 While India has been defiant and opposed to national and international criticism on everything related to caste-based discrimination, it has refused to show similar sensitivity in dealing with the issue at the domestic level. Though the country had enacted laws to counter caste-based discrimination, of which some are currently under review, like the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; it is a reality, the implementation of these legislations are half hearted and often left at the mercy of caste-prejudiced law enforcement officers.

3.3 Though India boasts about some of its senior bureaucrats, a former President, Chief Ministers and judges, including the former Chief Justice, as members of the Dalit community, in reality, the effect has been only symbolic. The ordinary Dalit continues to face discrimination and social stigmatisation throughout the country. The fact that the parents of a woman went to the extent of stoning their own daughter to death for marrying an untouchable Dalit, underlines the fact that mere legislations will not end caste-based discrimination. The incident also is the grim reminder to the fact that caste prejudice is deep-rooted in India. To deal with such a deep-rooted violence mere law making is not enough.

3.4 A legal text is only the mere codification of certain principles, norms and rules. In punitive jurisprudence, a law could also be a deterrent against a crime. But the deterrence factor of the crime, in this case, caste-based discrimination as referred to in the Act, depends upon the effectiveness in the execution of the law. This is where India and its entire justice institutions and policies have failed.

3.5 The ALRC has documented cases over the past three years, where atrocities committed against the Dalits were refused to be registered as crimes at police stations. This is also reflected in the low number of cases registered across India for offenses punishable under the SC & ST Act.^xi The general failure of the law-enforcement mechanism in the country coupled with the caste prejudice of the officer who runs the system poses a double walled challenge to a complainant who would want to register and investigate his complaint and prosecute a person who has committed a crime that is covered under the Act.

3.6 In addition to the lack of willingness of the government to root out caste prejudice is the omnipresence of the caste-prejudiced mind in government policies. One example is the continuing practice of manual scavenging. In spite of a dozen laws preventing manual scavenging the practice continues in India due to more than one reason, of which an important one is the lack of adequate sanitary facilities in most parts of the country. Investment in proper sanitation facilities is a factor overlooked even in the national capital, New Delhi.

3.7 The ALRC expects that the government of India will be encouraged in the UPR to take affirmative actions, beyond legislations, like implementing mandatory requirements of acceptance of complaints, prompt investigations and fast prosecutions of crimes committed against the oppressed castes (Dalits).

4. Need for an all-inclusive policy of development

4.1 The Republic of Korea engaged India during the 2008 UPR upon India's policies on development. Today unfortunately a South Korean registered entity, the POSCO (formerly Pohang Iron and Steel Company), accounts to the single largest destruction of natural environment and displacement by a foreign direct investment led industrial project in India. The project negates all premises of sustainable development, respect to the rights of indigenous communities and enforces distress migration and violates the guarantees of the acclaimed The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.

4.2 The ALRC has reported cases where the POSCO itself has been allegedly employing criminals to silence anti-POSCO movements. Human rights activists who oppose break-neck-speed development are accused by the state government as anti-state forces or Naxalites or Maoists and are arrested and detained indefinitely. This is a pattern observed throughout the country.

4.3 It is from states, like Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal that large numbers of people migrate to other parts of the country, in search for job and livelihood. A substantial number of them end up being exploited and work as bonded labourers. Of the worst affected are women and children.

4.4 When the representatives of the ALRC met Justice Ms. Sheela Khanna, the Chairperson of Madhya Pradesh State Commission for Protection of Child Rights to seek intervention on this scenario as well as to address child malnutrition that is rampant among the children of the tribal community in the state, the Chairperson opined that those children brought to the Nutrition Rehabilitation Centres should be asked to produce their horoscope and if they are found to become worthy citizens of the state by a Brahmin priest reading their horoscope, then only state resources should be spent to recover their life.^xii

4.5 Development is essential for any country to progress. What is required however is to bring transparency, accountability and public audit into development schemes that the private and public sector are competing to implement in India. Even before conceiving a project, it must be mandatory to conduct a public audit of the project proposal. It is built into a reasonable extent in the local self-governance framework in India. However, corruption has so far prevented this proviso from being properly implemented.

4.6 The ALRC expects that the second cycle of the UPR would be an opportunity where India is urged to bring functioning, transparent mechanisms to prevent widespread corruption in India, which is the singular factor that denies benefits of development and government welfare schemes to the rural poor. Instead of stifling whistleblowers like those who use the Right to Information Act, 2005 - which is a widespread pattern in India - the country should provide a safety mechanism to protect them.

5. On justice architecture and draconian legislations like the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958

5.1 The Prime Minister of India, addressing the sixth annual convention of Information Commissioners in New Delhi said that the government would be critically reviewing the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) so that the legislation does not "affect the deliberative process in the government". In his speech delivered on 14 October 2011, addressing the conference the Prime Minister indicated some areas where the law should be recalibrated according to the government, so that genuine public interests could be upheld. The Prime Minister also emphasised the need to protect RTI activists as they are often subjected to extreme forms of threats.^xiii The risk is higher in states where the AFSPA is enforced.

5.2 The AHRC congratulates the government for its openness to acknowledge that improvement in administration - translate into governance - and prevention of corruption can only be realised through legal and administrative reforms aided by technology. However, such reforms to materialise, drastic reforms of the justice-rendering framework is required.

5.3 The most important of all is the drastic change that need to be brought into the functioning of the courts. The country's judiciary will take at least 365 years to complete the present backlog of cases. The present Chief Justice of India, Justice Mr H S Kapadia has reaffirmed this, stated by twenty-two of his predecessors, in May 2010. Yet, neither the judiciary, nor the government has made it a realistic priority to address the backlog of cases. In essence, the judiciary is incapable of delivering justice.

5.4 When the investigative limb of the state suffers from low morale, inefficiency and the lack of public appreciation and the adjudicative limb suffers from enormous amounts of delay and incapacitated to deal with the sheer volume of work; chaos, confusion and inefficiency is a natural consequence. Translating this into the context of maintaining the rule of law implies that injustice is the norm and justice an exception in the society. Drastic measures are required to bring an end to this 'organised lawlessness'. The resultant environment is exploited not only by armed secessionist forces that operate in India, but also by the law-enforcement agencies that enjoy impunity.

5.5 Where the government feels that its writ is threatened and the integrity of the state challenged, a draconian legislation like the AFSPA is not an answer. The AFSPA is synonymous with injustice, discrimination and impunity. The law has attracted, repeatedly, wide-ranging criticisms from jurists, human rights activists, and even politicians within India and abroad.^xiv

5.6 The ALRC has documented more than two hundred cases, over the past eight years, where the state agencies operating under the statutory impunity provided by the Act has committed serious human rights violations in states like Manipur.^xv So far not a single military or police officer has been prosecuted for the human rights abuses they have committed under the cover of impunity provided by this law.

5.7 A discussion on the fundamental that for a country to protect the principles of the rule of law requires functioning justice institutions, that could accept and investigate complaints and deliver justice is absent in India. However, India today is at a crossroad. Should India fail in nurturing human rights and democratic values, it can adversely impact the region and can have global consequences.

5.8 The ALRC expects that the second UPR on India will be an opportunity to encourage the government to redefine its restructuring priorities so that reforming justice institutions would be the priority for the government, thereby doing justice to its voluntary pledge the country has made to its people and to the international community.

28 November 2011
ALRC
Hong Kong

INDIA – UPR Submission

In its submission for its first Universal Periodic Review in April 2008, India said that its “approach towards protection and promotion of human rights has been characterized by a holistic, multi-pronged effort.” It cited the Indian constitution and numerous government policies to demonstrate its commitment to the protection of rights.

However, India is yet to introduce adequate laws and properly implement existing policies to protect marginalized communities, particularly Dalits, tribal groups, religious minorities, women, and children.There is an urgent need for the state to addresshuman rights violations, including all forms of sexual assault against women,communal violence, enforced disappearances in conflict areas, extrajudicial killings, the persistent use of torture, and increasing attacks against human rights defenders. Tying many of these issues together is the widespread lack of accountability for human rights abuses, and the corresponding problems of access to justice and adequate compensation.

Impunity for serious human rights violations

The government of India has not implemented its UPR Recommendation 1 to expedite theratification of the Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol.The Prevention of Torture Bill is still at a draft stage. India also failed to implement UPR recommendation 12 to ratify the Convention against Enforced Disappearance. Human Rights Watch has long documented a pattern of impunity, often permitted under Indian law. Since the first UPR, Human Rights Watch has documented an ongoing failure to prosecute those responsible for past human rights violations, such as during counter-insurgency operations in Punjab from 1985-1996, as well as continuing violations in conflict areas such as Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur, and Assam. There have been allegations of violations during security operations that began in 2009 against Maoist insurgents operating in central and eastern India. Abuses include arbitrary arrests and detention, torture, extrajudicial killings, and the harassment of civilians caught in the conflict.

A series of Indian laws also make it difficult or impossible to prosecute state officials and agents implicated in abuses. In particular, police and paramilitary forces are protected under section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which provides that no court will recognize any offense alleged to have been committed by a public servant in the discharge of an official duty without the express approval of the central or state government. Military personnel are provided with additional immunity when they are deployed in areas of internal conflict under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Permission to prosecute is rarely granted, even when an investigation shows strong evidence of human rights violations.

With legal cover provided to police and armed forces, abuses such as extrajudicial killings occur often during counter-insurgency operations, for which the Supreme Court expressed its concern in January 2011.However, in most cases the police or army's explanation of an "armed encounter" goes uninvestigated, although many officials privately admit to Human Rights Watch that extrajudicial executions are widespread. The failure to implement police reform has created an overworked and undertrained force that often resorts to torture to gather evidence, and uses extrajudicial killings when it cannot secure convictions. Without proper accountability mechanisms, these violations have become the norm.

Although the Indian government claims that it has internal systems of inquiry and punishment to tackle violations by security forces, details of any prosecutions or convictions through such measures are seldom available. Using the Right to Information Act, Kashmiri activists discovered in September 2011 that in 50 cases where the government sought permission to prosecute, 26 were refused, while a response is awaited in 16 others.

Due to interventions by the Supreme Court, some arrests have been made in relation to the attacks on Muslims in Gujarat in 2002. In November 2011, thirty-one people were convicted for the killing of 33 people, most of them women and children, in the village of Sardarpura in Gujarat’s Mehsana district in March 2002. This was one of the nine cases investigated and prosecuted under Supreme Court supervision after it became evident that the Gujarat police had shown no real inclination to investigate and file charges against the perpetrators.

Government of India’s Actions to Address Impunity

Various inquiries have been set up to address issues of impunity and accountability, particularly in areas of armed conflict. However, the findings of such committees are often not publicly disclosed and are routinely ignored. For instance, a 2004 committee appointed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh following protests in Manipur has recommended the repeal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. Although the report was leaked, it is yet to be officially accepted or acted upon.

Kashmiri political leaders have also repeatedly called for repeal of AFSPA. In August 2011, an official inquiry by the State Human Rights Commission in Jammu and Kashmir confirmed allegations by human rights groups that victims of enforced disappearances may have been buried in unmarked graves. The government had claimed that the graves contained only the remains of unidentified Pakistani militants. The commission recommended forensic tests for proper identification, but a proper investigation will require the cooperation of the army and paramilitary units that were involved in these operations.

The Indian government is yet to enact the Prevention of Torture bill, which was introduced to ratify the Convention against Torture. The draft bill falls short of international standards by permitting certain officials immunity from prosecution, not giving victims adequate time to file complaints, and not ensuring that all forms of inhuman and degrading treatment are under the purview of the law. A parliamentary committee has reviewed the bill and submitted its recommendations to the cabinet.

In recent years, the political leadership of India, including the prime minister, has repeatedly said that there will be “zero tolerance” of human rights abuses. In a positive step to end the profiling of Muslims as terrorism suspects, the political leadership has repeatedly emphasized that targeting on religious grounds is wrong. There have been fresh investigations into terror attacks that were previously attributed to Muslim groups, where members of the majority Hindu community have been arrested and prosecuted.

The government has committed to enacting the Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) bill, which is intended to prevent and control communal violence, ensure speedy investigation and trials, and provide prompt rehabilitation of victims.

While civil society welcomed the openness and collaboration demonstrated by the governmentduring the visit of the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders in January 2011, it also notedthat some crucial mandate holders such as the rapporteurs on torture, extrajudicial, summary or arbitraryexecutions, children, racial discrimination, or the Working Group on arbitrary detention have madenumerous requests for country visits and have not yet received a response.

State Institutions to Promote and Protect Human Rights

India boasts of its independent judiciary, which has a strong voice in protecting human rights. However, lower courts tend to support the authorities in accepting questionable charges in terror-related cases. Judicial delays due to overload mean that the appeals process can linger while a person remains in custody. Human Rights Watch considers that the implementation of UPR Recommendations 3 and 4 requires further efforts.

The government of India refers to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) as its symbol of commitment to the protection of human rights. In its 2008 submission to the UPR, the government described the independence of the NHRC as at a par with the Supreme Court of India. However, the NHRC has very limited capacity to independently investigate allegations of abuse, and relies on relevant government departments to provide information. It uses police investigators to investigate allegations against the police. The NHRC is prohibited by law from investigating violations by the armed forces under section 19 of the Human Rights Protection Act. It can only seek a report from the central government and make recommendations. Since such reports are sought from the very agency accused of the violation, they rarely uncover abuses. The NHRC remains largely inaccessible to the poor, its inquiry procedures cumbersome, and often those who testify against state officials are not adequately protected against retribution.

In 2008 the government also claimed that there were a number of state human rights commissions that protected rights. However, in reality almost all state commissions are inadequately staffed, with almost no capacity or political will to conduct independent investigations.

The government also referred to other national commissions created to protect the rights of women, religious minorities, Dalits and tribal communities, and children. However, members and chairpersons of these commissions are political appointees and this is often reflected in their functioning, with some more effective than others.

Protection of Women

Gender training for the lower and higher judiciary is ongoing but remains inadequate. For example, in rape trials, many lower criminal courts and appellate courts have for decades reinforceddamagingsocial stereotypes against victims by describing them as “habituated to sex” based on archaic and degrading medical examinations such as the “two-finger test.” In some cases the fact that they are identified as “habituated to sex” has resulted in the courts discrediting victims’ testimony, affecting the outcome of the trial.

The NHRC has the power to take action on its own (suomoto) of reports to investigatehuman rights violations. But the commission has failed to use this power effectively. For example, the Indian government’s maternal healthcare program is administered in a blatantly discriminatory manner in many parts of the country, with no action from the NHRC. In many states, the Indian government’s flagship JananiSurakshaYojana (Safe Motherhood Program) provides cash assistance for poor pregnant women to give birth in health facilities, only up to two live births, and limits such assistance to mothers above age 18, completely excluding young mothers and mothers with more than two children, even though they face considerably higher health risks during pregnancy.

Access to Palliative Care

In 2009, a Human Rights Watch study found that hundreds of thousands of patients with cancer and other serious health conditions in India unnecessarily suffer from severe pain every year because they cannot get access to effective, safe, and inexpensive medications that could relieve their suffering.

Although about 70 percent of cancer patients in India are diagnosed when their cancer is advanced and they are unlikely to still respond to curative treatment, more than half of India’s regional cancer centers (which receive government support) do not offer palliative care or effective treatment for moderate to severe pain.

The central government recommended in 1998 that all states and union territories simplify regulations around access to morphine, an essential medication for treatment of moderate to severe pain, but only 14 states and territories have done so to date. All others maintain highly restrictive regulations that interfere with proper medical practice.

Attacks on Education

In investigations carried out between 2008- 2010, Human Rights Watch documented that the education of tens of thousands of India’s most disadvantaged and marginalized children is being disrupted by the ongoing conflict between Maoist (“Naxalite”) insurgents and police and other security forces. The Maoists have targeted and bombed government schools. In 2009, at least 36 schools in Jharkhand state and 23 schools in Bihar state were attacked. The government’s failure to repair the bombed schools promptly prolongs the negative impact of these attacks on children’s education.

Meanwhile, security forces continue to occupy government school buildings as bases for their anti-insurgency operations, sometimes only for a few days but often for periods lasting months or years. In 2010, at least the following number of schools had long-term occupations from security forces: 30 in Bihar, 31 in Chhattisgarh, 20 in Jharkhand, 16 in Tripura, and an unknown number in Assam.

Both the Maoist attacks and the government occupation and use of schools place students at unnecessary risk and interfere with the right to education.

Recommendations to be made to the Indian government:

On addressing impunity, India should:

Repeal all legal provisions providing effective immunity to government officials such as section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Repeal the Armed Forces Special Powers Act.
Vigorously investigate and prosecute officials who order, commit, or tolerate human rights violations, including torture, custodial killings, faked armed encounter killings, and enforced disappearances.
Ensure in drafting the Prevention of Torture Bill that no immunity from prosecution is provided, that adequate time is given for victims to be able file complaints, and to ensure that all forms of inhuman and degrading treatment are also brought under the purview of the law.
Engage in immediate efforts at police reform and establish transparent accountability mechanisms.
Ensure prompt prosecutions in case of communal violence and enact a strong law to protect against such acts.

On institutions to promote and protect human rights, India should:

Ensure all individuals have equal access to justice and right to remedies, and examine and remedy the shortcomings in the effectiveness of existing justice mechanisms.
Amend the Human Rights Protection Act to allow the National Human Rights Commission to independently investigate allegations of abuse by members of the armed forces.
Empower the NHRC, the state human rights commissions and other national commissions to function independently, infull autonomy, and to have the capacity for independent investigations.
Provide victims and their beneficiaries with reparations through a prompt and effective procedure that redresses the entire scope of the violations.
Ensure that the NHRC and other national and state commissions are more responsive to civil society complaints and interventions.
Provide comprehensive human rights education and training at all levels of governmentand across sectors, and the armed forces.

On women’s rights, India should:

Enact a comprehensive law against all forms of sexual assault against women and children and provide reproductive and mental health services to survivors of sexual assault.
Ensure that maternal health care programs do not discriminate against women with more than two children or mothers under the age of 18.

On discrimination and protecting vulnerable populations, India should:

Provide disaggregated data and status information on all vulnerablegroups including minorities, indigenous people, Dalits, people with disabilities, LGBT people, migrants, and internally displaced persons.
Enact rehabilitation laws to ensure the protection of communities displaced by development, infrastructure, or mining projects.

On access to palliative care, India should:

Take immediate steps to ensure that all regional cancer centers offer palliative care services.
Take immediate steps to ensure all states and territories implement simplified morphine regulations.

On human rights treaties and UN special procedures, India should:

Promptly ratify the Convention against Enforced Disappearance.
Issue a standing invitation to UN special procedures to conduct country visits to India and respond positively to the nine special procedures that have made requests for country visits.
Facilitate, as a matter of priority, the visits to India of the Special Rapporteur on torture, the Working Group on arbitrary detention, and the Working Group on enforced or involuntary disappearances.

On attacks on education facilities, India should:

Comply with court orders that all security forces vacate all educational institutions and school buildings, and ensure that the security forces do not unlawfully occupy such institutions in the future.
Cooperate with states affected by Maoist attacks to prepare rapid advance systems, so that when Maoist attacks on schools occur, schools are quickly repaired or rebuilt, and destroyed educational material replaced, so that children can return to school as soon as safely possible. During reconstruction, students should receive their education in an alternative locale.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,
Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,
Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

^ Top

Article 1.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

^ Top

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

^ Top

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

^ Top

Article 4.

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

^ Top

Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

^ Top

Article 6.

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

^ Top

Article 7.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

^ Top

Article 8.

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

^ Top

Article 9.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

^ Top

Article 10.

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

^ Top

Article 11.

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

^ Top

Article 12.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

^ Top

Article 13.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

^ Top

Article 14.

(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

^ Top

Article 15.

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

^ Top

Article 16.

(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

^ Top

Article 17.

(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

^ Top

Article 18.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

^ Top

Article 19.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

^ Top

Article 20.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

^ Top

Article 21.

(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

^ Top

Article 22.

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

^ Top

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

^ Top

Article 24.

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

^ Top

Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

^ Top

Article 26.

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

^ Top

Article 27.

(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

^ Top

Article 28.

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

^ Top

Article 29.

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

^ Top

Article 30.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

……………………..DECLARATION………………………

Name : ...........................NAGARAJA.M.R.

Address : ...................LIG-2 / 761 , HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP
WATER WORKS OFFICE , LAKSHMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL , MYSORE - 570017 INDIA

Professional / Trade Title :  S.O.S - e – Voice For Justice

Periodicity : WEEKLY

Circulation : FOR FREE DISTRIBUTION ON WEB

Donations : NOT ACCEPTED.  Self financing . Never accepted any donations , subscriptions either for ourselves or on behalf of other organizations / individuals .

Monetary gains : nil , never made any monetary gain by way of advertisements on my websites or web news paper or otherwise.

Owner/editor/printer/publisher : NAGARAJA.M.R.

Nationality : INDIAN

Body Donation : Physical Body of Nagaraja M R , Editor , S.O.S- e – clarion of Dalit &  S.O.S-e-Voice for Justice is donated  to JSS Medical College , Mysore ( Donation No. 167 dated 22 / 10 / 2003 ) , In case of either Unnatural death or Natural Death at the hands of criminal nexus , my body must be  handed over to JSS Medical College , Mysore for the study purposes of  medical students.

Eye Donation : Both EYES  of Nagaraja M R , Editor , S.O.S- e – clarion of Dalit &  S.O.S-e-Voice for Justice are donated  to Mysore Eye Bank , Mysore , In case of either Unnatural death or Natural Death at the hands of criminal nexus , my  eyes  must be  handed over to  Mysore Eye Bank  , Mysore  WITHIN 6 Hours  for immediate eye transplantation to the needy.

Home page :

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw ,
http://groups.google.co.in/group/hrwepaper/ ,
http://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice/ ,
http://evoiceofhumanrightswatch.wordpress.com/ ,http://indiapolicelaw.blogspot.com/ ,
, http://naghrw.tripod.com/evoice/ , http://e-voiceofhumanrightswatch.blogspot.com ,

Contact : naghrw@yahoo.com , nag...@hotmail.com ,

UID Aadhaar No : 5703 5339 3479

Cell : 91 9341820313

I ,NAGARAJA.M.R. hereby do declare that information given above are true to the best of my knowledge & belief. If i am repeatedly called to police station or else where for the sake of investigations , the losses i do incurr as a result like loss of wages , transportation , job , etc must be borne by the government. prevoiusly the police / IB personnel repeatedly called me the complainant (sufferer of injustices) to police station for questioning , but never called the guilty culprits even once to police station for questioning , as the culprits are high & mighty . this type of one sided questioning must not be done by police or investigating agencies . if anything untoward happens to me or to my family members like loss of job , meeting with hit & run accidents , loss of lives , death due to improper medical care , etc , the jurisdictional police together with above mentioned accussed public servants will be responsible for it. Even if criminal nexus levels fake charges ,  police file fake cases against me or my dependents  to silence me , this complaint is & will be effective.

If I or my family members or my dependents are denied our fundamental rights , human rights , denied proper medical care for ourselves , If anything untoward happens to me or to my dependents   or to my family members    - In such case Chief Justice of  India together with the jurisdictional  revenue & police officials will be responsible for it , in such case the government of india  is liable to pay Rs. one crore as compensation to survivors of my family. if my whole family is eliminated by the criminal nexus ,then that compensation money must be donated to Indian Army Welfare Fund. Afterwards , the money must be recovered by GOI as land arrears from the salary , pension , property , etc of guilty police officials , Judges , public servants & Constitutional fuctionaries.

date :  21.01.2012…………………………..your's sincerely,

place : India…………………………………Nagaraja.M.R.

Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJA.M.R. @ #LIG-2 / 761,HUDCO FIRST STAGE ,OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL ,MYSORE - 570017INDIA… cell :09341820313

home page : home page : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw , http://groups.google.co.in/group/hrwepaper / , http://sites.google.com/site/sosevoiceforjustice / , http://evoiceofhumanrightswatch.wordpress.com / , http://indiapolicelaw.blogspot.com / , http://naghrw.tripod.com/evoice/ ,

http://e-voiceofhumanrightswatch.blogspot.com ,

Contact : naghrw@yahoo.com , nagarajhrw@hotmail.com