Monday, September 30, 2019
Childhoods lost in a troubled paradise
Kashmir’s children grow up traumatised by conflict and live in perpetual fear of being picked up by the state
Every third child in Shopian district, Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), has a clinically diagnosable mental disorder, said a survey published in the Community Mental Health Journal earlier this year. Around 1.8 million adults in Kashmir Valley — 45% of its population — showed symptoms of mental illness in 2015, according to Doctors Without Borders. Thus, even prior to the incidents of August 5, the disastrous results of a history of violence, illegal detentions and torture in the Valley were visible on the region’s children.
The horror has since continued and got magnified, as chronicled in many reports. Media has reported illegal detention of scores of children, many of them whisked away at midnight by law enforcement officers with no record of their arrests, making it difficult to trace them. A report by economist Jean Dreze in August detailed illegal detention and torture of boys. A recent report by the Indian Federation of Indian Women and other organisations gave a first-hand account of the haunting spectre of mothers standing at their doorsteps in the desperate hope of their children’s return, not knowing where they are. These disappearances are in clear breach of the Supreme Court’s directions in the D.K. Basu case, where the court said that the next of kin have to be informed of every such arrest and the reasons thereof.
Pawns in a political game
Kashmir’s children have become pawns in a political game where the government wants to punish those protesting against its authority. Between 1990 and 2005, a total of 46 schools were occupied by the armed forces and more than 400 schools gutted between 1990 and 2005, according to a 2006 report of the Public Commission on Human Rights. Such destruction of educational infrastructure, in addition to the unlawful detentions, leaves a lifelong impact on children, perpetuating a cycle of trauma, fear and bitterness.
A report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights earlier this year found that children in Kashmir, many of whose ages were wrongly recorded, were being detained and mistreated for several days in police lock-up, without any charge, mostly under the Public Safety Act (PSA), which allows preventive detention for up to two years without any trial. The report found that the Armed Forces Special Powers Act remained a key obstacle to accountability.
In 2018, the Jammu & Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS) found through Right to Information applications that hundreds of children had been detained under the PSA between 1990 and 2013. In many of these cases, the police/magistrates had no procedure to verify the age of the detainees and minors were kept in custody along with adult criminals and released only after judicial intervention. About 80% of these detentions were held illegal by courts.
Such treatment of children is undoubtedly in violation of multiple laws and conventions. To begin with, all of them violate Article 14(4) of the International Convention on Civil & Political rights which states that “all proceedings against juveniles shall take into account their age and the desirability of promoting their rehabilitation.” The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by India, provides that the arrest/detention of a child shall be in conformity with the law and used only as a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period. The guidelines of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights clearly state that a blanket characterisation of adolescent boys as security threats during civil unrest should be avoided and authorities should investigate and take action against personnel involved in arbitrary detentions, mistreatment or torture of children.
A sledgehammer treatment
In 2003, the Madras High Court in Prabhakaran v. State of Tamil Nadu held that the Juvenile Justice Act is a comprehensive law and overrides preventive detention laws enacted for national security. Earlier, in 1982, the Supreme Court had in the Jaya Mala case condemned the preventive detention of a student and observed that young people, even if their acts are misguided, cannot be punished with a sledgehammer.
However, none of these laws and directives seem to be followed in Kashmir. Parents are now too scared to send their children to school, lest they be picked up by authorities or get caught in a crossfire. When such disappearances take place in a conflict-torn region, who does the aggrieved party complain to? Courts seem to be the only forums offering some promise of redressal. However, state actions since August 5, when J&K’s special status was abrogated, have taken away even this limited option from Kashmiris. Following the arrest of presidents of the J&K High Court and District Bar Associations and senior lawyers under PSA, most of Kashmir’s 1,050 lawyers have been on strike. Over 200 habeas corpus petitions have been filed till now. However, since most post offices are closed, lawyers are unable to serve notices on the respondents.
On August 5, all 31 cases shown in the ‘orders list’ of the Srinagar Bench of the J&K High Court were adjourned “due to restrictions on movement of traffic” as advocates could not be present. Weeks later, on September 24, out of the 78 uploaded cases, advocates were present for both parties in just 11, none appeared in nine cases, petitioner’s counsel alone in nine cases and only the government counsel in 47 cases.
Anticipating such contingencies, our Constitution provided for the protection of the citizens’ fundamental rights by empowering them to approach the Supreme Court directly in case the rights were violated. The right to constitutional remedies is by itself a fundamental right. Quite conscious of its obligations to protect the right to life of Kashmiris, the apex court has thus taken upon itself the task of inquiring into the allegations of state violence against children.
The observations made by the Inter American Court of Human Rights had observed in a 2005 case, concerning Colombia’s Mapiripán Massacre, are instructive here: “One does not combat terror with terror, but rather within the framework of the law. Those who resort to the use of brute force brutalise themselves, creating a spiral of widespread violence that ends up turning the innocent, including children, into victims.”
Noting that the terror sown among the surviving inhabitants caused their forced displacement, the court observed that the omissions, tolerance and collaboration by the state and the general population amounted to aggravated human rights violations in the name of ‘war on terror’.
Caged and disturbed
Children in Kashmir grow up caged and under the shadow of a gun. As the parents of many of them go missing, they are also forced to assume the responsibility of caregivers for their siblings. The strain on social structures due to the loss of family environment, safe spaces and education and health facilities severely traumatises many of them and snatches their childhood away. Gowhar Geelani, in his recent book Kashmir Rage and Reason says children in Kashmir learn terms like “custody killing”; “catch and kill”; “torture”; “interrogation”; “detention”; and “disappearance” — internalising a vocabulary they should not be privy to otherwise.
What kind of world can such children look forward to if they have to live in constant fear of being picked up for an unknown crime and taken to an unknown destination? Surely, this is not the firdous (heaven) on earth that many visualise Kashmir to be?
No curbs on democratic rights on the promise of development can justify inhumane treatment of children. We need to speak out for the children of Kashmir or we will also be complicit in the ‘aggravated crime’ by the state apparatus. The preventive arrests should be stopped lest the children of Kashmir go missing forever.
R. Vaigai, Anna Mathew and Devika S. are advocates at Madras High Court
Source: The Hindu, 27/09/2019
Go Back to the Source
The festival of Navratri is a time for self-referral and getting back to the Source. During this time of transformation, nature sheds the old and gets rejuvenated. Creation is cyclical, not linear; everything is recycled by nature. The human mind, however, lags behind in this routine cycle of creation. The Mother Divine is recognised not just as buddhi, intellect, but also bhranti, confusion; she is not just Lakshmi, abundance, she is also kshudha, hunger, and trishna, thirst. Realising this aspect of the Mother Divine in entire creation, leads one to a deep state of samadhi. Through wisdom, devotion and nishkama karma, one can attain advaita siddhi, or perfection, in the non-dual consciousness. The inward journey nullifies our negative karmas. Navratri is a celebration of prana, the spirit, which alone can destroy mahishasura, inertia, shumbha-nishumbha, pride and shame, and madhu-kaitabha, extreme forms of craving and aversion. They are complete opposites, yet complementary. Inertia, deeply ingrained negativities and obsessions — the raktabeejasura — chanda-munda, unreasonable logic, and dhoomralochan, blurred vision, can be overcome only by raising the level of prana and shakti, the lifeforce energy. The seeker gets back to the true Source through fasting, prayer, silence and meditation. Night is also called ratri because it brings rejuvenation. While fasting detoxifies the body, silence purifies the speech and brings rest to the chattering mind, and meditation takes one deep into one’s own being.
Source: Economic Times, 30/09/2019
Friday, September 27, 2019
Journal of Education For Sustainable Development: Table of Contents
Volume 13 Issue 1, March 2019
Education: Student Reflections on Anthropocentrism–Ecocentrism Continuum and Justice  | |
 |
First Published June 28, 2019; pp. 24–44
| |
|
First Published April 25, 2019; pp. 45–66
| |
|
First Published June 28, 2019; pp. 67–91
| |
|
First Published June 6, 2019; pp. 92–101
| |
|
| |
Reviews and Resources
|
First Published June 28, 2019; pp. 123–124
| |
It is time to think about protecting the newspaper. Democracy is at stake | Anaylsis
The future of news hinges on the interplay of the Press and online aggregators, and survival of the offline Press
Until a few decades ago, the newspaper was not just a source of news for people. It was a medium where community exchanges were facilitated, marriages were announced, wars were declared, and births and deaths were recorded. Triumphs and tragedies of the day were communicated in equal measure. It was, most importantly, a piece of paper which could unite strangers.
Today, while newspapers continue to play an important role in society, online aggregators are rapidly changing the way people consume news. Access to news is now quick, efficient, and often, personalised. Above all, it is widely considered free. While this evolution has benefited readers in the short-term, it poses several challenges to the future of news itself — which hinges upon the relationship between the Press and online aggregators, and the survival of offline Press itself.
The business model of news aggregation has meant the slow death of the newspaper. Entailed within it is the decline of hard-nosed journalism and fearless content generation that has, for over a century, been the credo of the newspaper industry. It is feared that the diversion of readership to news aggregator websites has resulted in revenue losses for media houses, even the ones with a significant online presence.
Statistics from the United States indicate that print advertising revenue has fallen from $65 billion in 2000 to approximately $19 billion in 2016 (Source: NAA/NMA). Further, employment in print media houses has fallen by about 40% in the past decade. In India, while readership of national and local newspapers has witnessed an overall rise, the slow decline of vernacular news dailies, and loss of print advertisement revenue, is not accounted for.
Policymakers across the world are presented with a significant concern — ensuring that newspapers, and traditional and authentic modes of news collection, are not threatened. So far, solutions have taken the form of amendments to existing copyright laws or extending competition law protections to the Press.
For instance, Article 15 of the latest European Union Copyright Directive protects Press publications from unauthorised use by online platforms. The right granted to publishers shall expire after two years. This will ensure that the Press gets statutory protection for the content published by it. However, many fear that negotiating licenses, particularly with news aggregator giants, will be cumbersome for the Press. This move has initiated a robust debate on harmonising interests of the Press and online aggregators.
In the US, the Journalism Competition and Preservation Bill, 2019, seeks to provide a temporary antitrust exemption to print and online press to collectively negotiate distribution of their content by news aggregators. This will help newspapers get a better bargain for protection of news published by them. However, the intended impact of such a proposal to protect newspapers’ 20th century business model in a 21st century industry is yet to be examined.
There is a definite need to begin thinking about protecting the newspaper in India. Aggregators like Google News and Inshorts usually credit the original source, provide hyperlinks, and only provide short excerpts/headlines of content on their feed. Users can then access the original story on the source website. In this context, whether aggregation itself amounts to free-riding, misappropriation or a copyright violation remains contentious, as witnessed through litigation in other countries.
At present, there is little empirical evidence to accurately indicate revenue losses, declining readership, and access benefits. While on the one hand, aggregation websites appear to promote wider access to news content online, many newspapers are becoming financially unviable. Courts are yet to exhaustively examine the application of traditional legal principles to the act of news aggregation.
Any policy intervention in this regard must be adequately backed by evidence, and should ensure that platform growth is harmonised with the interests of media houses, both online and offline.
Making social media platforms publishers accountable, by changing the intermediary liability regime, may be one option that is being discussed. But the real question is much wider — democracy needs fair balance between content generators and content aggregators. Unreasonable restrictions on either will be detrimental to the future of news and access to information.
Arghya Sengupta is research director, and Akriti Gaur is senior resident fellow, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy
The views expressed are personal
Source: Hindustan Times, 27/09/2019
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)