THURSDAY FEBRUARY 2, 2017 • T H I S D AY
47
INTERNATIONAL
email:foreigndesk@thisdaylive.com
Pakistan Army Asks Nigeria for Support on Indian Occupied Kashmir Accuses Indian army of killing over 94,504 innocent people Iyobosa Uwugiaren in Islamabad The Pakistan Army has requested for Nigerian government’s support, as ‘’a strong African voice in the United Nations’’, to help put pressure on the UN Security Council to compel the Indian government to accept the final disposition of State of Jammu and Kashmir----in accordance with the will of the people for self-determination through a fair and impartial plebiscite under the supervision of the United Nations. The Commander, the 652 Mujahid Battalion (Mountain Tigers) of the Pakistan Army, Brigadier-General M Akhtar, stated this in Chakothi-Uri, Xing Point, 200 metres away from the disputed Indian Occupied Kashmir, on Wednesday while briefing THISDAY on the current situation in the disputed territory. The Pakistan Army Chief said that the United Nations Security Council had passed several resolutions for the final disposition of State of Jammu and Kashmir in accordance with the will of the people through a fair and impartial plebiscite to be conducted under the auspices of the United Nations. The resolutions, according to him, dated August 13, 1948 and January 5, 1949 were passed by the UN Commission for India and Pakistan, which he said constitute as international agreement for binding force. He added that while Indian has continued to defy the implementation of the UN resolution, the Pakistan had consistently
demanded for their implementation in letter and spirit. General Akhtar said that the actions of the Indian Army---while resisting the UN resolutions, had led to many heinous crimes in the occupied Kashmir since 1989: the killing of 94, 504; custodial killing of 7,062; illegal arrest and detention of 136, 434; rape of 10, 433 women, while 106, 586 houses and shops were said to have been destroyed. ‘’Human rights violations in Indian occupied Jammu Kashmir are systematic, deliberate, and officially sanctioned. India has never prosecuted even one of its 700,000 military and paramilitary personnel there for human right abuses’’, the Army Chief stated. ‘’And its law grants legal immunity for any actions aimed at suppressing Kashmiri dissent or support for self-determination. Information compiled by various human rights organisations establishes that a massive complain of brutal oppression has been launched by the Indian army since January 1989. Various estimates are given of the death toll of civilians so far.’’ He said that Owen Bennett Jones, a Journalist associated with BBC News in his report, titled Three Surprises from a visit to Kashmir’’ writes that although all the numbers relating to Kashmir were keenly disputed it was probably fair to say that as many as 100,000 people have been killed in the struggle between Kashmiris and the Indian state. ‘’Countless individuals have been maimed and thousands of
African Union Backs Mass Withdrawal from ICC The African Union has called for the mass withdrawal of member states from the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, the resolution is non-binding, with Nigeria and Senegal opposing a withdrawal. South Africa and Burundi have already decided to withdraw, accusing the ICC of undermining their sovereignty and unfairly targeting Africans. The ICC denies the allegation, insisting it is pursuing justice for victims of war crimes in Africa. The AU took the decision on Tuesday following a divisive debate at its annual heads of state of summit in Addis Ababa. Part of the resolution also said the AU would hold talks with the UN Security Council to push for the ICC to be reformed. After being discussed in several previous summits, this was a huge announcement showing how frustrated the AU was with the international court. But the debate itself showed how divisive the whole issue is. The resolution isn’t as strong as many who are opposed to the court would have liked. It only calls on countries to consider how to implement the decision
but does not bind them to it. It’s a victory for human rights activists who insist the court still has a very important role to play in the continent where many countries have weak judicial systems. The resolution also calls for African countries to continue pushing for reforms of the court - another clear indication that ditching the court en masse isn’t such a popular decision. The likes of South Africa and Kenya, which have pushed for withdrawing, will be disappointed that the discussions about completely severing ties with the ICC will have to wait another six months for the next summit. Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted by the court on charges of genocide in Darfur, was at the summit. In 2015, a South African court criticised President Jacob Zuma’s government for failing to arrest Mr Bashir when he attended an AU meeting in the main city, Johannesburg. The government later announced that it was withdrawing from the ICC because it did not want to execute arrest warrants which would lead to “regime change”.
women molested and assaulted. Not a word of condemnation has been uttered at the United Nations; not even a call on India to cease and desist from committing its atrocities”, he added. The Army General further stated that reports on the culture of impunity in Indian Occupied Kashmir, which have been released from time to time by different human rights groups---highlighting human rights abuses, exposed the volumes of human rights violations in Indian occupied Kashmir and the culture of impunity enjoyed by the Indian army and paramilitary forces. General Akhtar added, ‘’Torture in Indian occupied Kashmir is not new. Indian army and Para-military forces continue to
employ third degree torture on the Kashmirs.’’ He accused the Indian Army of using the ‘deadly’ Pump Action Shotgun or Pellet Gun against innocent people of Kashmir, saying several youths had got injured in south Kashmir’s Shopian town, with many of them even losing vision. Narrating what he described as ‘’heinous Indian State terrorism in occupied Kashmir’’, the Pakistan Army General added that Kashmir has become a laboratory for Indian establishment to hone and improvise its Arsenals when unarmed Kashmiries surge on roads demanding nothing but their inalienable right to selfdetermination. He revealed that a recent study
conducted at the Sheri Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences (SKIMS) shown that pellet guns caused death of many persons and injuries, while several others also lost their eyesight. He further stated, ‘’Government is duty bound under law to protect the lives of people and in no case they can approve such measures which would jeopardize the live of common people in the name of maintaining law and order. So law enforcement agencies should stop using this highly damage causing weapon. ‘’Innocent killings and other such incidents reinforce the already present political alienation among people of Indian occupied Jammu Kashmir. Continued human rights violations, as always witnessed,
plunge the Kashmir in further political and economic turmoil- the following curfews, protests and spate of disturbance do not help in conflict resolution.’’ General Ahktar who appealed to the UN to act quickly on the disputed territory said that the economic impact of the Indian’s culture of impunity is tremendous - denting economic activities, stalling development works and aggravating poverty. ‘’The cycle of killings, impunity, destabilization and further killings has to stop somewhere. Failure to appreciate the perils of impunity could throw the state back to a kind of situation that would not help durable peace and stability in the region.’’
United States Supreme Court building
Supreme Court Choice Neil Gorsuch Draws Democrat Opposition Leading Democrats have come out in staunch opposition to Donald Trump’s nomination of Neil Gorsuch for the vacant position on the Supreme Court. President Trump named the Colorado appeals court judge on Tuesday to replace the late Antonin Scalia. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said he had “very serious doubts” about Judge Gorsuch’s nomination. Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren accused the nominee of siding with large companies over American workers. Two of Judge Gorsuch’s most high-profile appeals court rulings saw him side with business owners who objected on religious grounds to funding birth control via staff insurance plans. If confirmed by the Senate, Judge Gorsuch, 49, would restore the court’s conservative 5-4 majority, lost when Justice Scalia died.
The court has the final legal word on many of the most sensitive US issues, including abortion, gender rights and gun control. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi called Mr Trump’s nominee “a very hostile appointment” and “a very bad decision, well outside the mainstream of American legal thought”. Former Democrat presidential contender Bernie Sanders said Judge Gorsuch “must explain his hostility to women’s rights, support of corporations over workers and opposition to campaign finance reform”. Can Democrats block the nomination? Republicans would cry foul over a concerted effort to block Judge Gorsuch’s confirmation, but it was the Republicans who blocked Barack Obama’s nomination for the seat until Mr Obama left office. Justice Scalia’s seat became available 10 months before the
end of Mr Obama’s presidency, but Republicans refused even to debate his pick of Judge Merrick Garland, claiming it was too close to an election. There is no law that says a Supreme Court justice cannot be nominated by a president close to the end of his or her term in office. Even if Judge Gorsuch makes it through the Senate Judiciary Committee, he will face challenges when the entire chamber convenes for a final vote. Democrats may seek to prevent that second vote by prolonging, or filibustering, the debate. In that case, the nomination would need 60 votes rather than a simple majority. With Republicans only holding 52 Senate seats, they may have to change Senate rules in order to approve Mr Trump’s nominee
Where does Judge Gorsuch stand on key issues? Abortion: He has not spoken out about Roe v Wade, the case which legalised abortion nationwide in 1973, making it difficult to pin down where he stands on the issue. Birth control: Judge Gorsuch has supported religious institutions which objected to requirements for employers to provide access to contraception. In one of his most high-profile cases, he defended the religious owners of retailer Hobby Lobby who refused to fund birth control via staff health insurance. Gun rights: He hasn’t ruled directly on firearms restrictions, but is thought to be generally pro-second amendment. He once wrote in a legal opinion that a citizen’s right to bear arms “must not be infringed lightly”. Euthanasia: He has been vocal about assisted dying, writing a book in 2009 which opposed legalisation.