Split verdict: Why it leaves me, a Left-Liberal, at odds with me, a Progressive Muslim
Why it leaves me, a Left-Liberal, at odds with me, a Progressive Muslim Javed Anand https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/supreme-court-verdict-on-hijab-split-wide-open-8207010/
Justice Dhulia noted the main thrust of his judgment was that the entire concept of essential religious practice was not essential to the dispute. The high court took a wrong path. According to him, it is ultimately a matter of choice and Articles 14 and 19. “The foremost question in my mind was the education of the girl child. Are we making her life any better?” He also held the view that the judgment in the Bijoe Emmanuel case “squarely covers the issue”. This refers to the 1986 ruling of the apex court that upheld the fundamental right of three school-going children from the Jehovah’s Witness sect to stand respectfully but not join others in singing the national anthem during the school assembly as it conflicted with the tenets of their faith. ..
The Liberal Me has no doubt that Justice Dhulia’s views are in consonance with constitutional values. But the Progressive Muslim Me fears that were a larger bench to subsequently rule accordingly, it would effectively strengthen the regressive sections among Indian Muslims...As is public knowledge, cutting across sectarian divides — Sunni, Shia, Barelvi, Deobandi, Wahhabi, Salafi, Maududian — virtually the entire Muslim clergy in India is of the view that hijab (niqab, burqa) is mandatory in Islam. The abstract principle of a woman’s freedom to choose, I fear, will feed into the it-is-mandatory argument; act as convenient cover for Islam’s patriarchs to keep, even push, women behind the veil...
Two, do Muslim girls studying in Muslim-run schools, 3-year-olds included, have the right to choose or they simply must conform?
In the event that the March order of the Karnataka High Court is struck down by a larger bench of the Supreme Court in the coming period, we might ponder on what students committed to Hindutva politics will make of the right to choose verdict. Classrooms becoming the new arena for competitive communalism? Muslim girls in hijab, Hindu boys in saffron scarves? Diversity, anyone?
Hijab Judgment of Supreme Court | सर्वोच्च न्यायालय का हिजाब पर फ़ैसला | Faizan Mustafa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83qGIZE0z70
Oct 14, 2022 Some comments on Youtube: Matir Manush We thank Dr. Faizan Mustafa as usual for his dedication to explain the matter of law to us with commitment and devotion. Justice Gupta expressed his opinion on the practice of Hijab with sincere reasoning. But we believe he failed to realize a simple matter.
Wearing Hijab is not harming or hurting anybody. It is not even disrupting the uniformity in the education places. But banning hijab is surely damaging one's freedom of personal choice. Banning hijab is shattering one's dream of education.
..justice Dhulia's verdict protect the integrity of our constitution. His judgement promotes the right of education of the girls. In other words the judgement of justice Dhulia is helping our girls to acquire knowledge which is very important for the nation. Our girls are a vulnerable group of people in the country. The judicial system should not and must not increase their vulnerability.
Rohit gupta New doctrines are laid down like trust doctrine, cross obligations and tolerance, laying down new dimensions of constitutional interpretation.
The question is of acoustomed to other way of living and there are countries, who have no school dress
Yazdy Palia I disagree with the line of reasoning. In their enthusiasm, the petitioner, the respondent and the judges, have not realised, that, the only issue in this case is
1. Does an institution, in India, has the right to frame their own rules?
2. Do the students and their supporters, have the right to impose their will on the institution created by individuals to educate children? It appears that all the three are competing with each other to violate fundamental rights.
'Right to Work: Feasible and Indispensable for India to be a truly Civilized and Democratic Nation'
India needs Rs 13.52 lakh cr annual investment to create full employment: Study https://www.businesstoday.in/jobs/story/india-needs-rs-1352-lakh-cr-annual-investment-to-create-full-employment-study-349576-2022-10-11
creating employment for 21.8 crore people needs investment of Rs 13.52 lakh crore per annum or 5 per of the GDP (gross domestic product). Increasing employment will result in greater production as well as demand, it suggested.
Shortage of resources for achieving full employment is an invalid argument since it can be self-financing, the report said, adding that this runs counter to the elite perception that full employment would be a negative sum game for them.
New technology being evolved in the advanced countries is appropriate for their needs but not necessarily good for a developing country like India, the report noted.
Higher technology is supposed to lead to higher profitability of a company. But it also lowers the employment potential. So, those who import technology and reduce employment need to pay a tax which could be used to finance employment, it suggested.
Executive Summary of Employment Report: 'Right to Work: Feasible and Indispensable for India to be a truly Civilized and Democratic Nation' https://1drv.ms/b/s!AiXYIRE1zsiagYVSHaDvaz5Tz0UfAA?e=1BmRrq
‘Uncertain Justice: A Citizens Committee Report on the North East Delhi Violence 2020’,
Former Judges Release Report Criticising Govt, Media, Police Role In Delhi Riots Fatima Khan 08 Oct 2022 https://www.thequint.com/amp/story/news/india/former-judges-release-report-criticising-government-media-police-role-in-delhi-riots
The committee, headed by former Supreme Court judge, Justice (retired) Madan Lokur, has expressed grave concerns.
- Delhi police “failed to take any preventive or punitive measures to tackle the polarized atmosphere building up
- besides failing to prevent violence in many cases, the Delhi police also showed "complicity of varying degrees in the violence" in other instances.
- the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) must be held responsible for inadequate police response and deployment.
- specific news channels (Republic and Times Now (English), Aaj Tak, Zee News, India TV, Republic Bharat (Hindi). ) played “a key role in propagating hateful narratives
- BJP focused its 2020 Delhi election campaign on the anti-CAA protests, “within a divisive narrative framing the anti-CAA protests as anti-national and violent.”
- The Election Commission stopped short of ordering registration of FIRs against these political leaders for hate speech. With the Commission failing to initiate criminal prosecution, the malaise of hate speech infusing electoral campaigning is likely to spread further
The Logical Indian Crew 'Institutional Failure': Citizens Committee Report Blames Govt, Police & Media For Delhi Riots 2020 https://thelogicalindian.com/trending/citizens-committee-report-blames-government-police-and-media-for-delhi-riots-2020-37913
Report chronicles ‘failures’ by Delhi Police, state govt, MHA in dealing with Northeast Delhi riots https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/report-chronicles-failures-by-delhi-police-state-govt-mha-in-dealing-with-northeast-delhi-riots-8196683/
In addition to Justice Lokur, the ‘committee’ comprised former Chief Justice of the Madras and Delhi High Courts A P Shah; former judge of the Delhi High Court R S Sodhi; former judge of the Patna High Court Anjana Prakash; and former Home Secretary G K Pillai.
Delhi riots: Centre’s response to violence was wholly inadequate, says citizens’ committee https://scroll.in/latest/1034499/delhi-riots-centres-response-to-violence-was-wholly-inadequate-says-citizens-committee The Union home ministry failed to take effective steps to control communal violence although it controls the Delhi Police, the panel said.
Full report: download from the leaflet: https://theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/uncertain-justice-citizens-committee-report-on-north-east-delhi-violence-2020.pdf
Page 23 of 51