Skip to main content

Allow us to visit India: U.S. panel on religious freedom

The chair of a high-profile Congressional commission on religious freedom has asked the Indian government to reconsider its view to withhold permission for the commission members to visit the country to assess the state of religious tolerance.
In an interview with The Hindu, Katrina Lantos-Swett, Chairperson of the U.S. Congress-established Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), said, “I would also say that we would really welcome the opportunity to travel to India and we’ve been saddened that until now India has not been yet ready to welcome a USCIRF delegation to come for a visit.”

Under her leadership and Congressional mandate, USCIRF continues to produce an annual report on the state of religious freedom worldwide, which in years past had designated India as a “Tier II” or “watch-list” country.
Dr. Lantos-Swett’s comments are significant in the context of two recent occasions on which U.S. President Barack Obama has remarked upon the dangers of religious intolerance for India, a view that Mr. Modi appeared to cognise in February, when he condemned of religious-based violent acts in the country.
On those remarks by Mr. Obama, Dr. Lantos-Swett appeared to differ from State Department officials, who suggested that the President did not specifically intend to critique India’s religious tolerance and that it was a general observation.
The Commissioner said that she did not believe that the recent meetings between Mr. Obama and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi were any indication that U.S. concerns as a country regarding religious freedom issues in India have gone away, rather that the White House aspired to being able to “speak out about concerns that exist with respect to the robust protection of religious freedom” in India, even as the bilateral rapprochement deepens simultaneously.
She also addressed the question of what the U.S. administration’s view on the role of Mr. Modi in improving religious tolerance in India was, and whether Washington’s view had changed on the allegations linking Mr. Modi to the 2002 anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat.
Speaking on behalf of USCIRF she said, “We believe, and many other continue to believe, that not all the questions have been fully answered about the tragic events that happened in Gujarat. There are people in India who continue to believe that there remain unanswered questions. There may also be some cases that are continuing to work their way through the legal process.”
Dr. Lantos-Swett added, “Success has a way of shifting the gaze and re-focusing people’s attention elsewhere… [but] the arc of justice is long,” and that the right of victims to compensation as well as the assigning of responsibility for violence will not “evaporate simply as a result of Mr. Modi’s election.”
The Commissioner also underscored the U.S.’ concerns regarding continuing violations of religious freedom rights of minorities in India, including attacks on churches in New Delhi, reports that “Hindu nationalists forced some Christians and Muslims to convert,” and the police detention of activists, including John Dayal, who were protesting the church attacks

Popular posts from this blog

NGT terminates chairmen of pollution control boards in 10 states (downtoearth,)

Cracking the whip on 10 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for ad-hoc appointments, the National Green Tribunal has ordered the termination of Chairpersons of these regulatory authorities. The concerned states are Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telangana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur. The order was given last week by the principal bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice Swatanter Kumar. The recent order of June 8, 2017, comes as a follow-up to an NGT judgment given in August 2016. In that judgment, the NGT had issued directions on appointments of Chairmen and Member Secretaries of the SPCBs, emphasising on crucial roles they have in pollution control and abatement. It then specified required qualifications as well as tenure of the authorities. States were required to act on the orders within three months and frame Rules for appointment [See Box: Highlights of the NGT judgment of 2016 on criteria for SPCB chairperson appointment]. Having

High dose of Vitamin C and B3 can kill colon cancer cells: study (downtoearth)

In a first, a team of researchers has found that high doses of Vitamin C and niacin or Vitamin B3 can kill cancer stem cells. A study published in Cell Biology International showed the opposing effects of low and high dose of vitamin C and vitamin B3 on colon cancer stem cells. Led by Bipasha Bose and Sudheer Shenoy, the team found that while low doses (5-25 micromolar) of Vitamin C and B3 proliferate colon cancer stem cells, high doses (100 to 1,000 micromolar) killed cancer stem cells. Such high doses of vitamins can only be achieved through intravenous injections in colon cancer patients. The third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, colon cancer can be prevented by an intake of dietary fibre and lifestyle changes. While the next step of the researchers is to delineate the mechanisms involved in such opposing effects, they also hope to establish a therapeutic dose of Vitamin C and B3 for colon cancer stem cell therapy. “If the therapeutic dose gets validated under in vivo

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”. The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya. It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach i