The Rights of Man and the Citizen
India is in turmoil there is spiraling internal violence and violation of human rights and civil liberties in many parts of the country. The most Serious crisis is simmering in Punjab where the Sikhs, constituting about 2 percent of the Indian population live There have been instances like the gouging of the eyes of convicted prisoners by the police in the eastern state of Bihar, fake encounters between the state law enforcing agencies and Innocent victims in many states as reported by Amnesty International, and mindless killing of the hapless untouchables and other minorities like the Christians, Muslims and Sikhs. To stop this mayhem there is an urgent need on the part of the citizenry at large to take cognizance of and protest against these violations. Furthermore, democratic governments, their legislative bodies, the UNO, Amnesty International and other similar organizations can serve the ennobling ideal of freedom, liberty and equality by using their influence on the Government of India for an end to the violation of human rights and civil liberties
The most remarkable outcome of the American and French revolution was the declaration of the rights of man and the citizen. Century and half later these rights were formally adopted by the United Nations known as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The United Nations General Assembly in 1948 adopted unanimously a lengthy catalogue of rights. Freedom of thought, expression and association (art. 18-20), right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representative government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representative (art 21), the right to fair treatment under the legal system (art 22). The United Nations also adopted the Genocide Convention in 1948, the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The United States Congress International Affairs Subcommittee on International Organizations and Movements in 1974 after examining the role of human rights in the context of US foreign policy concluded that “Protection of human rights 1s essentially the responsibility of each government with respect to its own citizens, however, when a government is itself the perpetrator of the violations, the victim has no recourse but to seek redress from outside his national boundaries.” Congress took an active and enthusiastic role by enacting new laws, making the relationships between rights and foreign policy explicit in their efforts to improve respect for rights abroad 2 under these legislations certain trade, assistance and diplomatic benefits now hinge on the way a recipient country treats its own citizens
Society has to maintain eternal vigil against deviant behavior of governments where discriminatory and unjust policies replace ethical and juridical norms. What makes this task difficult is the seemingly justifiable rationale projected in Goeblesian manner by the offending government backed by Its state controlled radio-TV media and considerable budgetary resources Rarely do governments violate human rights out of ignorance or as whim, rather, the violation of rights 1s often an act of desperation, perceived as necessary to maintain power and authority Thus, in the process of orchestrating relations with a government that violates human rights, it is necessary to take into account the reasons for the violation in the affected country, the possibilities of change motivated by international pressure, and the combination of domestic factors that led to the violation of rights in the first place 3
OPERATION BLUESTAR
Background
The lingering crisis in Punjab was dramatically highlighted with the culmination of the violent events since June 1984 The tragic and considerable loss of life and property at all levels demonstrated the potent undercurrents of the crisis. The human bonds of which all societies are made are easily damaged but they are not easily healed. Recent events in Punjab and other states of India relating to Sikhs have caused a sense of continuing bewilderment to freedom-loving people of America. Could the land of Gautama Buddha, of Mahatma Gandhi’s non-violence, not adopt a less violent policy than the launching of a full-fledged, tank-helicopter-artillery led military attack on Sikh religion’s holiest shrine to resolve what essentially a political, economic and cultural issue was?
Full details of the enormity and range of the tragedy that struck the hapless minority community may have gone unrecorded but for the alacrity of some distinguished social workers, retired government officials, scholars and journalists. Upon Indian Government’s refusal to order a
____________________________________________________________________________________________
* After six months of procrastination the Indian Government in early April 1985, conceded the demand to hold an enquiry into the violence against Sikh lives and property. Some critics fear that the intervening period was used to eliminate or neutralize much of the incriminating evidence against the ruling party Congress (I), police officials and administration
