# India Suggests US Set Up National Human Rights Commission



## gemini90 (May 12, 2015)

Finally giving it back to the self proclaimed moral leader of the world. Mature criticism at the right forum .

India Suggests US Set Up National Human Rights Commission | The Wire



> In response to a presentation made by the United States at the UN, India has welcomed the *“openness of the US delegation in accepting areas of continuing concern such as racial bias in the criminal justice system; incidents of bias-motivated crimes including ‘those committed against Hindus and Sikhs'; and need for improved safety and living conditions at confinement facilities.”*
> 
> Addressing the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on Tuesday during the Universal Periodic Review in which the human rights record of all countries is discussed, India’s ambassador, Ajit Kumar, *also said the disproportionate use of force by law enforcement agencies in the US and deficiencies in their procedures “are areas of concern”.*
> 
> ...




India points out areas of 'concern' in US' rights record | Zee News



> India made a few recommendations, including that the US "may consider establishing a national human rights institution".
> 
> "We encourage the US Government to take adequate steps towards gender parity at workplace, protect women from all forms of violence and enhance opportunities in education and health for children from ethnic minorities."
> 
> ...



This is in return for the unwanted advice by Obama during Republic Day celebrations as well as this:

Both German and US ambassadors are interfering in matters they have no locus standi. They represent the interests of their gov. alone and have no stake in NGO issue unless the latter indeed are the non official arms of their gov's. Sponsoring NGOs gives the western countries vast infrastructure into the country to overlay any kind of mischievous acts without putting the foot in the country. 

Anti-NGO action could have "chilling effect" on civil society: US Ambassador - The Hindu

German Ambassador to India Urges Support of International NGOs


The global narrative is clear - Religious conversion is not a bad thing. It is an expression of the freedoms we earned by being part of a democracy. Anyone who blocks religious conversion is undemocratic. 

The global narrative has to change to - Religious conversion destroys cultures and diversity. It is cultural rape. Hinduism et. al. are the real minority religions in the world and they are endangered by a rampant virus. It is our duty as the human race to preserve these religions. 

Until the latter is the globally acceptable narrative, no one can step up and utter a word about conversion.

But as it goes, from wiki



> Article 7 of a 1994 draft of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples uses the phrase "cultural genocide" but does not define what it means.[8] The complete article reads as follows:
> 
> Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right not to be subjected to ethnocide and cultural genocide, including prevention of and redress for:
> (a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
> ...



Cultural genocide has not been accepted as a term by UNO due to pressure of western countries. The same is the case in form of ICC -International Criminal Court which is not part of UN unlike International Court of Justice. Nor is it similar to Interpol in coverage.



> The ICC has the jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The ICC is intended to complement existing national judicial systems and it may therefore only exercise its jurisdiction when certain conditions are met, such as when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals or when the United Nations Security Council or individual states refer investigations to the Court.



That's the story on the surface. The ICC is really meant to serve one primary purpose: circumvent African and Asian efforts to seek restitution for colonial plunder. By controlling the arms of prosecution, the Europeans ensure they don't face the consequences of their actions. Asians did not sign the treaty but Africans fell for it.


----------



## GhorMaanas (May 13, 2015)

so the US has no NHRC kind-of body? hmmmm.....

done tactfully by the Govt.! on a more positive note, if such reviews and discussions (on not only human rights issues but many others too; would like to see animal rights discussed as well sometime  ) could be done mutually for each other at international forums, then too good; esp. if that involves the self-appointed chaudhary of the world for whom UN has a soft spot or rather the UN is its own extension. won't comment on the NGO thing, except that the knee-jerk responses are hilarious and laughable, amply & evidently telling 'chor ki daadhi mein tinaka'!


----------



## Ironman (May 27, 2015)

The US has not NHR Organization ?

So All is a part of CIA Conspiracy !


----------

