Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen MP Asaduddin Owaisi speech in Parliament on Human Rights Bill.
At the outset, I stand to support the Bill. I have a few points and I would like the honble. Minister to clarify those.
The first point is, in July 2006 a Conference took place in Bhopal wherein all the State Human Rights Commissions assembled. Particularly in relation to this Bill, all of them were unanimous that when it comes to the Chairman of the Commission, he has to be a retired Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or of the High Court.
The second point is that they were of the opinion that what this Bill does is that it reduces the number from five to three wherein a District Magistrate is being denied the right to become a member of the State Human Rights Commission. I would like to know from the hon. Minister whether he is going to give any weightage or consideration to the State Human Rights Conference which took place in July in Bhopal.
As far as the National Human Rights Act is concerned, the biggest human rights violation that takes place is in relation to child labour. Now as far as this Act is concerned, it relates only to public servants. Will the hon. Minister or this Government consider bringing in such a legislation or amending this particular Act wherein the NHRC can go into the violations in relation to child labour also? Many reports have come out in this regard. Various international organisations have submitted reports in recent days wherein it has been shown that the highest number of child labour is there in our country. It is very important and I hope the hon. Minister will respond to.
The third point is in relation to having ex-officio members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Commission. Unfortunately, the National Minorities Commission has not been mentioned. Will the Minister agree to it?
Fourthly, as far as the recommendatory nature of compensation is concerned, I can understand about the problems of giving an interim order because you cannot have what is called in legal terminology, the dual remedy and dual damages in the same court of action. But as far as compensation is concerned, you make it mandatory. What is the point when NHRC or SHRC comes to a conclusion that the rights of ‘x’ or ‘y’ or ‘z’ have been violated and he deserves a compensation but the compensation is not given. The compensation does not bring back ones self esteem or integrity. But at the same time it goes a long way in sending a strong message to the violators of human rights. So, at least make the compensation aspect mandatory.
Fifthly, I would like to know from the hon. Minister when it comes to the removal section what is the difference between a person of unsound mind and infirmity of mind. Though I am not very good in my English but I really do not see any difference between infirmity of mind and an unsound mind.
Will the hon. Minister be kind enough to enlighten all of us why is it that various State Governments have established the State Human Rights Commissions, but the Gujarat State has not yet established a Human Rights Commission? What steps is the Central Government going to take to ensure that the Gujarat State establishes a Human Rights Commission? When you talk about transparency and that everybody is equal before law, unfortunately, the State Human Rights Commission is not working in Gujarat?
Finally, taking from what the hon. Member from Shiv Sena has said, what happened in Mumbai is condemnable but what is happening now is also condemnable. There are many people from Muslim community who are being kept in illegal confinement in Mumbai from 25 days or 30 days or 40 days. They are not being released. The State Government says that they are being released but there is a difference between the Maharashtra Government releasing people and Tripura Government releasing people. When the Government of Tripura arrested six to seven Muslims, they apologized publicly that they are sorry that they arrested wrong people. But what is happening in Maharashtra? Illegal confinement is taking place. Yesterday, we had brought this to the notice of the hon. Prime Minister also. A 68 year old man was kept in illegal confinement for 20 days. He was stripped. His daughter-in-law was forced to take off her burkha and she was threatened that if she does accept a particular crime in regard to Mumbai blasts, then she would also be stripped. So, these are very important things. As has been said just now by my senior colleague, unless and until you give teeth to NHRC, all our exercise will be of no use.
With these comments, I thank you for giving me this opportunity and I support this Bill.
1 comment:
Majlis Ittehadul Muslimeen MP Asaduddin Owaisi speech in Parliament on Human Rights Bill.
At the outset, I stand to support the Bill. I have a few points and I would like the honble. Minister to clarify those.
The first point is, in July 2006 a Conference took place in Bhopal wherein all the State Human Rights Commissions assembled. Particularly in relation to this Bill, all of them were unanimous that when it comes to the Chairman of the Commission, he has to be a retired Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or of the High Court.
The second point is that they were of the opinion that what this Bill does is that it reduces the number from five to three wherein a District Magistrate is being denied the right to become a member of the State Human Rights Commission. I would like to know from the hon. Minister whether he is going to give any weightage or consideration to the State Human Rights Conference which took place in July in Bhopal.
As far as the National Human Rights Act is concerned, the biggest human rights violation that takes place is in relation to child labour. Now as far as this Act is concerned, it relates only to public servants. Will the hon. Minister or this Government consider bringing in such a legislation or amending this particular Act wherein the NHRC can go into the violations in relation to child labour also? Many reports have come out in this regard. Various international organisations have submitted reports in recent days wherein it has been shown that the highest number of child labour is there in our country. It is very important and I hope the hon. Minister will respond to.
The third point is in relation to having ex-officio members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Commission. Unfortunately, the National Minorities Commission has not been mentioned. Will the Minister agree to it?
Fourthly, as far as the recommendatory nature of compensation is concerned, I can understand about the problems of giving an interim order because you cannot have what is called in legal terminology, the dual remedy and dual damages in the same court of action. But as far as compensation is concerned, you make it mandatory. What is the point when NHRC or SHRC comes to a conclusion that the rights of ‘x’ or ‘y’ or ‘z’ have been violated and he deserves a compensation but the compensation is not given. The compensation does not bring back ones self esteem or integrity. But at the same time it goes a long way in sending a strong message to the violators of human rights. So, at least make the compensation aspect mandatory.
Fifthly, I would like to know from the hon. Minister when it comes to the removal section what is the difference between a person of unsound mind and infirmity of mind. Though I am not very good in my English but I really do not see any difference between infirmity of mind and an unsound mind.
Will the hon. Minister be kind enough to enlighten all of us why is it that various State Governments have established the State Human Rights Commissions, but the Gujarat State has not yet established a Human Rights Commission? What steps is the Central Government going to take to ensure that the Gujarat State establishes a Human Rights Commission? When you talk about transparency and that everybody is equal before law, unfortunately, the State Human Rights Commission is not working in Gujarat?
Finally, taking from what the hon. Member from Shiv Sena has said, what happened in Mumbai is condemnable but what is happening now is also condemnable. There are many people from Muslim community who are being kept in illegal confinement in Mumbai from 25 days or 30 days or 40 days. They are not being released. The State Government says that they are being released but there is a difference between the Maharashtra Government releasing people and Tripura Government releasing people. When the Government of Tripura arrested six to seven Muslims, they apologized publicly that they are sorry that they arrested wrong people. But what is happening in Maharashtra? Illegal confinement is taking place. Yesterday, we had brought this to the notice of the hon. Prime Minister also. A 68 year old man was kept in illegal confinement for 20 days. He was stripped. His daughter-in-law was forced to take off her burkha and she was threatened that if she does accept a particular crime in regard to Mumbai blasts, then she would also be stripped. So, these are very important things. As has been said just now by my senior colleague, unless and until you give teeth to NHRC, all our exercise will be of no use.
With these comments, I thank you for giving me this opportunity and I support this Bill.
Post a Comment