According to 2020 World Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters without Borders, Pakistan ranks 145 out of 180 countries as against the ranking of 142 in 2019. The rank is constantly increasing …. Writes Dr Badusha Ahmed Khan
Pakistan Resolution was a precursor to the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan and the essential freedoms mentioned in the Resolution have been translated into the Constitution. Article 19 of the Constitution provides the right to freedom of speech and expression and the protection of that right. Using the freedom movement and Pakistan resolution in 1940 at Lahore, the Constitution of Pakistan was framed and the Article 19 also guarantees freedom of press and media, one of the important pillars of Democracy.
Though this Article guarantees Freedom of Press in Pakistan, the Government of Pakistan, virtually run by Pakistan Army since Pakistan came in to being, thinks otherwise. This can be illustrated through the number of killings and abduction of Journalists in Pakistan.
According to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), Brussels, at least 138 journalists have been killed in Pakistan since 1990 till 2020. If one goes back further, many journalists have been killed and abducted since creation of Pakistan on August 14, 1947.
According to 2020 World Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters without Borders, Pakistan ranks 145 out of 180 countries as against the ranking of 142 in 2019. The rank is constantly increasing.
In a recent incident on 18 March, 2021, a 31-year-old Hindu journalist, Ajay Lalwani, was shot dead by some unidentified assailants while getting a haircut at a barbershop in Sindh province for exposing Muslim Clerics involved in conversion of Hindu girls.
In 2020, four Pakistani journalists — Aziz Menon, Javedullah Khan, Anwar Jan, Shaheena Shaheen were killed.
Shaheena Shaheen – A journalist, an artist, always struggling for women’s rights and empowerment, was shot dead in Turbat, Balochistan on 5th September, 2020.
Anwar Jan was shot dead by two gunmen on the evening of 23 July, 2020 while he was returning in his motorbike to his hometown at Barkhan. Anwar was working for the daily newspaper, Naveed-e-Pakistan and used to post regularly about corruption on social media.
Javedullah Khan was the bureau chief of Islamabad-based Urdu-language daily, Ausaf in Swat. Some unidentified assailants opened fire on his vehicle on 25th Feb, 2020, leaving him seriously wounded. He was rushed to a hospital where he died during treatment.
Aziz Menon, who worked for the privately-owned Sindhi TV Channel, KTN News and the Sindhi-language Daily Kawish newspaper, was found strangled to death in an irrigation ditch on 16 Feb 2020 near the town of Mehrabpur in the Naushahro Feroze District of Sindh province.
Though a number of journalists are being killed in Pakistan on a regular basis, no human rights organizations or Human Rights activists are ready to cover this issue. Hamid Mir, a famous Pakistani journalist, columnist and an author who currently hosts the political talk show Capital Talk on Geo News, was attacked on April 19, 2014 by the Pakistani intelligence because he had expressed concerns about the deteriorating climate for press freedom in Pakistan. However, he had survived and the Geo TV, blamed Lt Gen Zaheer-ul-Islam, the then ISI Chief as an accused and flashed his picture in the Television. . The ISI became furious and declared that GEO TV should be shut down for bringing a national institution into disrepute.
This kind of behavior is not just with Journalists but with everyone who tries to speak against highhandedness of Pakistan Army and the other security agencies of Pakistan. Malala Yousafzai and Gulalai Ismail are the clear examples of it. The military has quietly, but effectively, set restrictions on reporting: from barring access to regions including Baluchistan where there is armed separatism and religious extremism, to encouraging self-censorship through direct and indirect methods of intimidation, including calling editors to complain about coverage and even allegedly instigating violence against reporters.
The military has clashed with Pakistan’s elected government, which tried and ultimately failed to assert civilian control. Journalists find themselves in the middle of this battle, struggling to report while staying out of trouble. Issues including religion, land disputes, militants, and the economy can all spark retaliation—and laws such as the Pakistan Protection Ordinance, a counter terrorism law that allows people to be detained without charge for 90 days, are used to retaliate against critical reporting. Female journalists must navigate additional pressures when reporting in religiously conservative areas, such as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or rural districts. Sometimes, even the briefest lapse in security can expose a journalist to near-fatal consequences.
Pakistan’s constitution guarantees freedom of the press and access to information, and the country has a large and robust media industry, including extensive privately held broadcast news. And yet, true press freedom is elusive. While the military is not solely responsible for the pressures facing the media, its hands can be found almost everywhere. That is why, the Media personnel in Pakistan, except a few, are always concerned about their safety if they report anything against the Government or the Army. The underlying reason for caution is often fear of retaliation as the military exerts control and seeks to retain its influence and position under civilian rule. Consequences are harsh for journalists who attempt to push back.
In many parts of Pakistan, both sides have managed to create an atmosphere of fear that is preventing free thinking and honest and objective reporting … That atmosphere of fear has increased over a period of time, and when reports come about abduction or attempted abduction of a free-thinking journalist in Islamabad or Karachi or elsewhere, it solidifies this whole notion that journalists remain under threat. A number of editors at newspapers and broadcast media also described a step-up in phone calls from the military advising or complaining about coverage, although they often declined to talk about it openly.
Pakistani media consumers aren’t getting a full or accurate picture of critical issues facing the country. This is no accident. The military and other powerful institutions have established lines of control to stifle the press, by promoting people and issues considered favorable, and limiting the dissemination of content found objectionable.
This is the tragedy of a so called democratic country which is yet to find out the real democratic system.
The international community is now aware about Turkey and its notorious army’s role in the Armenian genocide. But, how can they ignore the killing of 300,000 unarmed civilians during the liberation war in Bangladesh. Do we have right to seek justice and heal our buried wounds? .…. A special report Farzana Mahmood (Barrister-at-Law), Advocate, Supreme Court of Bangladesh, Human rights activist and Researcher
The brutal killings of 30,00,000 unarmed and innocent civilians during the 1971 liberation war by the Pakistani army and their local collaborators in Bangladesh with the intention of exterminating the Bengalis as well as the religious minorities, specifically the Hindus, falls within the ambit of crimes of genocide under the Genocide Convention of 1949.
With the aim to change the race of the Bengalis, rape was carried out in a systematic way against 2,00,000 women of Bangladesh by the Pakistani army1. The widespread atrocities, degrading, and inhuman treatment and rape committed by the Pakistani forces can be identified as crimes against humanity. Though the Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report of Pakistan concealed data about the immensity of the atrocities, it admitted that approximately 26,000 innocent Bengalis had been killed by the Pakistani army.
After the victory of Bangladesh when Pakistani army surrendered nearly 93,000 Pakistani civilians and army officers were taken to Indian custody as Prisoners of War (POWs) while more than 1,20,000 Bengalis were trapped in West Pakistan. The United Nations Security Council passed a resolution on December 21, 1971 asking the countries involved in War to observe the Geneva Convention and not to attach any conditions to the repatriation of the POWs.
Immediately after his return in Bangladesh from the Pakistani jail, the Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman initiated the formal process of war crimes trial. While Bangabandhu lead Awami League Government had identified 195 Pakistan army personnel as Pakistani POWs for trail, Pakistan Government seized 203 Bengalis in Pakistan as hostage. In April 1973, Pakistan issued a statement saying, “Pakistani Government rejects the right of the authorities in Dhaka to try any among the prisoners of war on criminal charges, because the alleged criminal acts were committed in a part of Pakistan by citizens of Pakistan. But Pakistan expresses its readiness to constitute a judicial tribunal of such character and composition as will inspire international confidence to try the persons charged with offenses”.
The Hamoodur Rahman Commission report recommended to take effective action to punish those POWs in Pakistan who were responsible for committing the alleged atrocities in East Pakistan. While Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto announced that if Bangladesh carries out the trial, Pakistan would also hold similar tribunals against the Bangladeshi army officers who were serving in West Pakistan. In an interview on May 27, 1973, Bhutto also said: “Public opinion will demand trials of Bangladeshis here. We know that the Bengalis passed on information during the war. There will be specific charges. How many will be tried, I cannot say.” In such a tense situation, the concern over the lives of the Bengalis trapped in Pakistan and regional peace became serious issues, which were under clear threat.
Moreover, Bangladesh needed global recognition as an independent state and access to the United Nations. Pakistan continued its lobby not to let that happen and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto insisted that Pakistan would accept Bangladesh as a separate state if the Pakistani POWs were released. Bangabandhu was determined to try the Pakistani POWs for the atrocities and genocide committed against the Bengalis, but in this endeavour he did not get support from any corner. As a party to the Geneva Convention India was obliged to promptly start the repatriation of the Pakistanis and could not lawfully transfer the hostage Pakistani POWs to Bangladesh’s custody.
The Simla Agreement signed between India and Pakistan in July 1972 allowed the simultaneous release of most of the Bengalis and Pakistanis held in Pakistan and India respectively. Pakistan and India agreed that the issue of 195 Pakistani POWs would be settled between Bangladesh and Pakistan. Eventually, Bangladesh accepted Pakistan’s proposal to withdrew the demand for trying the Pakistani POWs in Dhaka- fearing for the life of the Bengalis trapped in Pakistan, regional peace and to gain the much-needed international recognition and access to the United Nations. The listed POWs were repatriated to Pakistan after an Agreement was signed between India-Pakistan-Bangladesh in Delhi, in April 1974. The 195 Pakistani POWs though repatriated were not freed from criminal charges. Also, Bangladesh expected that Pakistan would hold the trials of the Pakistani POWs as promised by the Pakistan Government, but this never happened.
After 38 years of Independence in 2009 the Awami League Government established a tribunal named International Crimes Tribunals, Bangladesh under the International Crimes Tribunals Act (ICT), 1973 to try and punish both the local and principal Pakistani perpetrators who committed crimes against humanity and genocide against the Bengalis. The trail of the local perpetrators started in 2012, few notorious war criminals have been punished and the trials of the rest of the offenders are continuing. On many occasions the Awami League Government has expressed sincere desire to try and punish those 195 Pakistani POWs as principal perpetrators of the 1971 genocide.
This desire became a concern for the Pakistani Government and they have referred the 1974 trilateral Agreement to negate the claims of Bangladesh on the trail issue of the Pakistani POWs. The Bangladesh Government contends that the clemency mentioned in the trilateral Agreement never implied that the masterminds and principal perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide would continue to enjoy impunity. This assertion is implicit in the policies taken by the Awami League Government during the early years of independence. Bangladesh Collaborators (Special Tribunals) Order, 1972 and ICT Act 1973 were promulgated to try and punish the perpetrators of 1971 war. The 1972 Constitution of Bangladesh contained provision that barred from holding office by anyone convicted by the collaborators tribunal, which was later deleted from the Constitution by Major Ziaur Rahman.
Moreover, the Constitution also banned those religious political parties whose leaders were involved in the war crimes and genocide. In November 1973, the Awami League Government with the hope to unify the country and maintain internal peace granted a general amnesty for the war criminals except those accused of murder, arson, rape and genocide. Even until the end of 1975, a large number of Bangladeshi war criminals were captivated in different jails of Bangladesh for trials, who were released after the brutal murder of Bangabandhu.
The ICT Act 1973 was enacted with the aim to detain, prosecute and punish the perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and other related crimes punishable under international laws. Section 3 of the ICT Act unambiguously states that any tribunal established under this Act shall have power to try and punish any person accused of war crimes committed in the territory of Bangladesh regardless of their nationality. Bangabandhu declared the independence of Bangladesh in the early morning of 26th March, 1971 and the Pakistani army started committing genocide and war crimes since 25th March midnight which continued till 15th of December, 1971. Therefore, the war crimes were committed in the territory of independent Bangladesh and Bangladesh has every right to try the Pakistani POWs. Under the Act the tribunal has jurisdiction to try a group of individuals, or member of armed, defence, or auxiliary forces, irrespective of his nationality, who has committed genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes or other related crimes under international law in the territory of Bangladesh. The provisions of the ICT Act clearly mandate the trial of the 195 Pakistani POWs, for committing war crimes and genocide, and the Pakistani political leaders and policy makers who ordered them to commit such crimes.
It is worth mentioning that for the validity of the 1974 trilateral Agreement it must be ratified by the parties concerned. Article 145A of the Constitution of Bangladesh requires that all international treaties to be submitted to the president who will place them before the Parliament for ratification. Till today, Bangladesh has not ratified the trilateral Agreement of 1974, hence the Agreement is not legally binding on Bangladesh and there is no obstacle to try the 195 Pakistani POWs.
The customary international laws also provide ample opportunity for Bangladesh to try the Pakistani POWs. The Hague Convention 1907, Genocide Convention 1948, Geneva Conventions 1949 and their protocols 1977, defines genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity and makes them punishable offence. Article 4 of the Genocide Convention 1948 articulates that persons committing genocide shall be punished whether they are constitutionally recognizable rulers, public officials or individuals.
The report of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2009 titled “International Law and United Nations Policy on Amnesty” clearly stipulated that under various sources of international law and United Nations international policy, amnesties are not permissible if they prevent prosecution of individuals who may be criminally responsible for war crimes and genocide. Under the Geneva Convention, state parties have right to try and punish the war criminals for genocide and crime against humanity and amnesties that prevent the prosecution of such offences are inconsistent with the state’s obligations. Countries which have signed and ratified the Geneva Convention and the Protocols are obliged to find out war criminals and try them. As per customary international laws, atrocities or acts of criminal violence amount to the breach of a peremptory norm of international laws. Article 53 and 64 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 stipulate that treaties in conflict with the peremptory norms of international law (either existing or emerging) are void and terminated. Article 71 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, releases the parties to a treaty void under Articles 53 and 64 from any obligation to perform the treaty.
Memorial of clay of refugees of the Bangladesh genocide.(WIKIPEDIA)
The 1974 tripartite Agreement was an executive act and it can not create any bar to prosecute member of auxiliary force or an individual or member of a group for committing war crimes, since by giving immunity to the offenders of genocide and war crimes the Agreement is in breach of customary international laws. Therefore, the 1974 trilateral Agreement can not set aside the norms of the customary international laws by prohibiting the trail of genocide and war time atrocities committed in Bangladesh. The 1974 Agreement is void to the extent it is inconsistent with the peremptory norms of general international law. Hence, under the 1974 Agreement Bangladesh is not bound to perform the obligations pertaining the prohibition of trials of the Pakistani war criminals. Bangladesh can procced with the trial of the Pakistani POWs anytime because criminal trials are not barred by any time limitation. If Nazis could be tried after 70 years of committing war crimes then a similar trial of the war criminals of Pakistani army and politicians can be started as well.
In one occasion while talking about the liberation war of Bangladesh Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto himself admitted the atrocities of the Pakistani army by saying- “The world saw what they were doing. They witnessed their cruelty’’. The gravity and extent of the war crimes committed by the Pakistani army in 1971 against the innocent people left a deep scar in the hearts and psyche of the millions of Bengalis. The pain that my mother has been bearing since 1971 after the brutal killing of my grandfather by the Pakistani army is an example among thousands of such wounded hearts. Through the trials of the notorious local war criminals the buried wounds of millions of hearts have healed to a great extent. But the impunity of the Pakistani POWs and unapologistic behaviour of the Pakistani authorities remind us that until the last offender of 1971 war crimes is tried and punished the wounds and trauma of the Bengalis would remain open for further damage. The buried wounds of the victims of war crimes and their families can be healed with pride if we can secure justice for the 1971 genocide and war crimes.
In March 2017, the Law Minister Anisul Haq stated that Bangladesh will approach the International Court of Justice to try the 195 Pakistani POWs. This commitment of the Government generates hope for us. This year we when are observing the golden jubilee of Bangladesh’s independence, it is imperative that we seek justice and compensation for the genocide and crime against humanity committed by the Pakistani forces to make our freedom meaningful. It is high time for us to build a national consensus for initiating the trial process of the Pakistani POWs. Ensuring trial, compensation and apology for the heinous war crimes committed by the Pakistani forces would secure our pride and self-esteem.
(Farzana Mahmood (Barrister-at-Law) is an advocate at Supreme Court of Bangladesh and a prominent human rights activist)
The two leaders likely to discuss climate change, the Covid-19 pandemic, issues related to China and North Korea and cooperation toward a free and open Indo-Pacific region on April 16…reports Asian Lite News
Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga will hold face-to-face talks with US President Joe Biden in Washington on April 16, the Tokyo government said on Friday.
Suga will become the first foreign leader to meet Biden in person after he took office on January 20, dpa news agency quoted Japanese government spokesman Katsunobu Kato as saying at a briefing here.
It shows “the strong ties of the Japan-US alliance and America’s commitment to the Indo-Pacific region”, Kato said.
The two leaders are expected to discuss climate change, the Covid-19 pandemic, issues related to China and North Korea and cooperation toward a free and open Indo-Pacific region, he said.
The two leaders’ summit meeting will take place amid heightened tensions as China’s activities in East China and South China seas.
Chinese coastguard vessels frequently approach a group of uninhabited islets in the East China Sea, a source of diplomatic tension between Beijing and Tokyo.
The Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands are also claimed by China and Taiwan, where they are called Diaoyu and Tiaoyutai respectively.
The meeting was originally planned in the first half of this month and it has been pushed back to April 16, Kato said.
The two-week ban will come into effect on Saturday and last until April 18….reports Asian Lite News
Bangladesh has imposed a temporary ban on travellers from Europe and 12 other countries after reporting a surge in coronavirus infections.
The two-week ban will come into effect on Saturday and last until April 18, dpa news agency reported on Friday citing a statement from the Civil Aviation Authority of Bangladesh (CAAB) as saying.
CAAB said air passengers from the UK, where infection rates are generally lower than on mainland Europe, would still be allowed to enter the country.
Along with European nations, Argentina, Bahrain, Brazil, Chile, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Peru, Qatar, South Africa, Turkey, and Uruguay are also among the banned nations.
Airlines operating scheduled passenger flights from all those countries will be allowed to carry only transit passengers.
Passengers from other countries must still adhere to a 14-day home quarantine.
Bangladesh has so far reported 611,295 coronavirus cases, with 9,046 deaths since the South Asian country registered the first cases in March 2020.
With many flouting the current health guidelines, the government on Tuesday issued a new set of rules, including the mandatory use of face masks and limiting passengers on local transport.
The country reported a single-day record number of infections, 5,358, on Wednesday.
On Wednesday,Afghanistan logged seven deaths in separate targeted killings across the country…reports Asian Lite News
About 60 people lost their lives and many others wounded in targeted attacks across Afghanistan in March, according to official figures released on Thursday.
On a single day on Wednesday, seven people were killed in separate targeted killings across the country, according to the figures published by Xinhua news agency.
The increased targeted attacks in recent months have caused concern among the ordinary people, particularly government employees and members of security forces.
On Tuesday, three female health workers were shot dead as gunmen opened fire on a polio vaccination team in Jalalabad, capital of Nangarhar province.
On March 21, Zubair Lalandari, a senior official of office of the Afghan Vice President Amrullah Saleh, and four of his family members were killed in a bomb attack on the outskirts of Kabul.
No groups or individuals have claimed responsibility for nearly all of the recent targeted attacks.
However, Afghan officials accuse the Taliban militant group for the attacks.
On March 17, the personnel of National Directorate of Security (NDS), the country’s national intelligence agency, arrested a 12-member terrorist group in Lashkar Gah, who were involved in a string of targeted killings and bomb attacks in Helmand.
About 60 people were killed and many others wounded in targeted killings across the insurgency-hit country in February.
Jerusalem, Sept. 13, 2020 (Xinhua) -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gives a briefing on COVID-19 pandemic in Israel at his office in Jerusalem, on Sept. 13, 2020. Israel will reimpose a nationwide lockdown for three weeks, beginning on Friday, to slow a rapid resurgence of coronavirus infections, the government decided on Sunday. (Yoav Dudkevitch/JINI via Xinhua/IANS)
Netanyahu urged Naftali Bennett, leader of the far-right pro-settler Yamina party, and Gideon Sa’ar, leader of the right-wing New Hope party, to help him put together a coalition…reports Asian Lite News
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called on his right-wing rivals to join forces to form a right-wing government coalition under his leadership.
In his first remarks since the March 23 inconclusive elections, Netanyahu on Wednesday urged Naftali Bennett, leader of the far-right pro-settler Yamina party, and Gideon Sa’ar, leader of the right-wing New Hope party, to help him put together a coalition, reports Xinhua news agency.
“It is time to put our differences behind us,” he said in a televised statement.
According to Netanyahu, together with allied parties and Yamina and New Hope, he could form a coalition of 65 members and gain a firm majority in the 120-member Parliament.
Naftali Bennett(Twitter)
“Let’s form a stable right-wing government that would last for years,” the long-time leader said.
Sa’ar however, has rejected Netanyahu’s call.
The New Hope’s main campaign promise was to replace Netanyahu.
On Wednesday night, Sa’ar repeated his promise and said he will not join a government with Netanyahu as Prime Minister.
Earlier on Wednesday, President Reuven Rivlin called for “unusual collaboration” in forming a new government to solve the country’s lingering political stalemate.
The elections on March 23, Israel’s fourth in two years, ended once again with no clear winner.
The refugeesfrom the Jhapa district were inocluated as part of the second phase of that rollout…reports Asian Lite News
Nepal has become the first country in the Asia-Pacific region to provide Covid-19 jabs to refugees through its national vaccination rollout.
According to the UN refugee agency in Kathmandu, Nepal started to inoculate the Covid vaccine to the Bhutanese refugees living in eastern part of the country from March 7.
The refugees at the settlement in the Jhapa district were vaccinated as part of the second phase of that rollout, which started on 7 March and targets people over the age of 65.
Nepal started receiving Bhutanese refugees mostly Nepali speaking Bhutanese from the 1990s and over 100,800 have crossed the border via India and started seeking asylum in eastern Nepal. After Bhutan refused to take them back, the UN refugee agency and some western countries started taking them under the third country settlement programme.
Under this plan that started from 2007, 100,000 Bhutanese refugees have resettled in various western counties like the USA, Australia, Canada and others and now, there are around 18,000 refugees living in Nepal. Now they have stopped taking the Bhutanese refugees as resettlement reaches its end in 2016.
The country kicked off its vaccination campaign on 27 January after the Indian government donated one million doses of Covishield, the India-produced version of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. In the first phase, frontline health workers, sanitation workers, hygiene workers and security officials were vaccinated.
Local authorities, refugee leaders and security officials set up a temporary vaccination centre at the refugee settlement and as of 24 March, some 668 refugees above the age of 65 had received vaccinations against the virus across the country, according to the UN agency for refugees.
More refugees will be enrolled in the vaccination programme as the government receives additional supplies of vaccines, the agency said in a statement.
Nepal hosts nearly mostly Tibetans and Bhutanese refugees with arrival date in 1959 and in the early 1990s respectively.
Since the onset of the pandemic, UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency has been working closely with other UN agencies and government authorities to advocate for the inclusion of refugees in Covid-19 preparedness and response plans.
“The Government of Nepal has shown exemplary leadership for public health responses by including refugees in the national vaccination plans and rollout,” said Carolin Spannuth Verma, UNHCR’s Representative in Nepal.
To date, Nepal has reported 276,750 confirmed Covid cases and 3,027 deaths.
“The risk of Covid-19 is the same for all. It doesn’t matter if you are a refugee or not,” said Shrawan Kumar Timilsina, the Chief District Officer of Jhapa, in eastern Nepal where the country’s two refugee settlements are located. “Protecting the life of all people is our priority.”
Bhakti Prasad Baral, 83, fled Bhutan in 1992 and is now living in Beldangi settlement in Jhapa. He said that he felt “lucky” to get the vaccine.
“It was really difficult to endure what was going on because of the virus,” said the octogenarian, who works as a Hindu priest in his community. “I have no words to thank the Government of Nepal for paying attention to older persons like us.”
US authorities directed “voluntary departure” of non-emergency government employees and their families on February 14…reports Asian Lite News
The US has advised its citizens not to go to Myanmar and raised its travel advisory for the country to level 4 amid a deteriorating situation.
In an advisory on Tuesday, the US Department of State said it had ordered all non-emergency government employees and their family members to leave the South-East Asian country “due to Covid-19 as well as areas of civil unrest and armed violence”, DPA news agency reported.
The department had authorized the “voluntary departure” of non-emergency government employees and their families on February 14.
“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a Level 4 Travel Health Notice for Burma due to COVID-19,” the advisory said.
“The Burmese military has detained and deposed elected government officials. Protests and demonstrations against military rule have occurred and are expected to continue.”
Death toll in Myanmar’s anti-coup protests tops 500
The advisory also listed areas in the country subject to “heightened civil unrest” and “armed violence” in different degrees and warned that the US government has “limited ability to provide emergency services” to citizens in certain areas.
At least 500 pro-democracy protesters have been killed since Myanmar’s February 1 military coup, a monitoring group said on Tuesday.
The Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP) puts the nationwide death toll at 510, after another 14 people lost their lives at the hands of security forces on Monday.
Myanmar’s military seized control of the country after an election which Aung San Suu Kyi’s ruling party won by a landslide.
Myanmar joins warring countries such as Somalia and Syria in the level 4 category.
Minister of External Affairs Dr S. Jaishankar said: “For a durable peace in Afghanistan, what we need is a genuine ‘double peace’, that is, peace within Afghanistan and peace around Afghanistan,” reports India Daily Newsdesk.
India on Tuesday said that it supports a regional process convened under the aegis of the United Nations for permanent peace in Afghanistan.
A statement by External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar at the 9th Ministerial Conference of Heart of Asia – Istanbul Process (HoA-IP) on Afghanistan in Dushanbe, said: “We support a regional process to be convened under the aegis of the United Nations. UN stewardship would help to take into account all relevant UN resolutions and improve the odds for a lasting outcome.”
Pakistan has been for long involved in negotiations among the US, Taliban and Afghan government, Russia, China and Iran over Afghanistan. Though Jaishankar did not explicitly mention Pakistan or any other member of Asia, he was referring to the broad dialogue among all the key players in the region.
The term ‘Heart of Asia’ should not be taken lightly, he said, adding that for what happens in Afghanistan will surely affect the larger region. “A stable, sovereign and peaceful Afghanistan is truly the basis for peace and progress in our region. Ensuring that it is free of terrorism, violent extremism and drug and criminal syndicates is, therefore, a collective imperative.”
However, the situation in Afghanistan continues to be grave. Violence and bloodshed are daily realities and the conflict itself has shown little sign of abatement. The last few months have witnessed an escalation in targeted killings of civil society. 2020 marked a 45 percent increase in civilian casualties in Afghanistan over 2019. The involvement of foreign fighters in Afghanistan has continued. Jaishankar said that ‘Heart of Asia’ members and supporting countries should, therefore, make it a priority to press for an immediate reduction in violence leading to a permanent and comprehensive ceasefire.
Afghanistan’s Abdullah Abdullah meets Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi iin New Delhi.
“For a durable peace in Afghanistan, what we need is a genuine ‘double peace’, that is, peace within Afghanistan and peace around Afghanistan. It requires harmonising the interests of all, both within and around that country. India has been supportive of all the efforts being made to accelerate the dialogue between the Afghan government and the Taliban, including intra-Afghan negotiations,” he said.
If the peace process is to be successful, he said, then it is necessary to ensure that the negotiating parties continue to engage in good faith, with a serious commitment towards reaching a political solution. India welcomes any move towards a genuine political settlement and a comprehensive and permanent ceasefire in Afghanistan.
India, he said, remains committed to steadfastly supporting Afghanistan during this transition. Our development partnership of USD 3 billion, including more than 550 Community Development Projects covering all 34 provinces, is aimed at making Afghanistan a self-sustaining nation. The promise of more drinking water to Kabul is the latest in that list.
As the lead country on Trade, Commerce and Investment CBMs under the HoA-IP, India will continue to work on improving Afghanistan’s connectivity with the outside world. Projects like the Chahhabar Port in Iran and the dedicated Air Freight Corridor between the cities of India and Afghanistan are part of our efforts, he said.
Biden has nominated Rupa Ranga Puttagunta to be a judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, which is a local court for Washington…reports Asian Lite News
US President Joe Biden has nominated an Indian American to be a judge in the local court system of the nation’s capital after having withdrawn another’s nomination made by his predecessor Donald Trump.
The White House announced on Tuesday that Biden was nominating Rupa Ranga Puttagunta to be a judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, which is a local court for Washington.
Last month, he withdrew the nomination of Vijay Shankar to a higher local court, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, that Trump had made as one of a spate of last-minute appointments in January before his term was to end.
Shankar needed the Senate confirmation for his appointment, which he could not get with the Democrats getting control of it.
Puttagunta is now an administrative judge for the District of Columbia Rental Housing Commission dealing with landlord-tenant issues and rental housing regulations.
She had earlier represented the poor in criminal cases and worked with victims of domestic abuse, according to the White House.
Nominating judges who reflect America is a top priority. That’s why today I announced 11 nominees — the earliest any administration has announced this many judges in modern history. They represent the best of the legal profession and the diversity that makes our nation strong. pic.twitter.com/Zr7ywGpRLe
Meanwhile, Biden has appointed a Pakistani American, Zahid N. Quraishi, to be a federal judge.
He would become the nation’s first Muslim federal judge if confirmed by the Senate.
Another Muslim, Abid Qureshi, was nominated by former President Barack Obama in 2016 to be a federal judge but the Senate did not act on his nomination before Trump took office and it lapsed.
The federal judgeship would be an elevation for Quraishi who is now a federal magistrate judge in New Jersey.
Magistrate judges are appointed by the federal judges to assist them on matters like first appearances by the accused in criminal cases and setting bail. Unlike federal judges, they are not nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate and, therefore, do not issue judgments or hear cases.
Quraishi is a former US Army captain who ad served in Iraq and has also worked as an assistant chief counsel in the Department of Homeland Security and as an assistant federal prosecutor.
Former US President Donald Trump(IANS)
The South Asian Bar Association welcomed their nominations, tweeting, “We are proud to see Judges Rupa Ranga Puttagunta and Zahid Quraishi on the list” of Biden’s judicial nominees.
The White House said that the nominations announced on Tuesday reflect Biden’s “intent to nominate highly-qualified candidates to federal courts that reflect his deeply-held conviction that the federal bench should reflect the full diversity of the American people — both in background and in professional experience.”
Biden, who has said that he would nominate an African America woman to the Supreme Court, named Ketanji Brown Jackson to be a judge on the Federal Appeals Circuit Court in Washington, which is considered the most important after the Supreme Court.
If she is confirmed, it would put her on a fast track to become the nation’s first African American woman on the Supreme Court if a vacancy occurs during Biden’s term.
Brown Jackson replaces Merrick Garland, who was Obama’s unsuccessful nominee for the Supreme Court and is now the attorney-general in the Biden administration.
Trump’s nomination of Shankar was not meant to be taken seriously as he had lost the election and was an attempt at asserting himself in the last days in office.
