HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN POK. Motion tabled in UK parliament

Discussion in 'Subcontinent & Central Asia' started by Mikesingh, Sep 17, 2015.

  1. Mikesingh

    Mikesingh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,061
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    Motion tabled in UK parliament



    HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN PAKISTAN OCCUPIED KASHMIR

    That this House condemns all systematic human rights violations committed in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir; calls on the Government to demand from the Pakistani government a guarantee that state-sponsored cross-border terrorism will cease immediately; further calls on the Government to encourage the Pakistani government to withdraw to the pre-October 1947 border without any delay or pre-conditions; and calls on the Government to note that it is the 25th anniversary year of the attack by cross-border Islamic militants on the population of Jammu and Kashmir to commit acts of genocide.


    Moral victory: Motion tabled in UK parliament on PoK human rights violations

    London, Sep 17: In what could be considered as a moral victory for India, a motion has been tabled in the United Kingdom Parliament urging Pakistan to withdraw to the pre-October 1947 border without any delay or pre-conditions.

    The Early Day Motion (EDM) 393 sponsored by Bob Blackman of the Conservative Party condemned all systematic human rights violations committed in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. UK Parliament UK Parliament The Early Day Motion 393 tabled in the UK Parliament also demands from Pakistan a guarantee that state-sponsored cross-border terrorism will cease immediately.

    What the EDM states? “That this House condemns all systematic human rights violations committed in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir; calls on the Government to demand from the Pakistani government a guarantee that state-sponsored cross-border terrorism will cease immediately; further calls on the Government to encourage the Pakistani government to withdraw to the pre-October 1947 border without any delay or pre-conditions; and calls on the Government to note that it is the 25th anniversary year of the attack by cross-border Islamic militants on the population of Jammu and Kashmir to commit acts of genocide.”

    The motion sponsored by Bob Blackman had nine signatories. They include Jeremy Corbyn (Labour Party), Chris Law (Scottish National Party), Rachael Maskell (Labour Party), Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party), Virendra Sharma (Labour Party), Paula Sherriff (Labour Party), David Simpson (Democratic Unionist Party) and Christopher Stephens (Scottish Nationalist Party).

    Motion on displacement of Kashmiri Pandits:

    In the month of January 2015 the first ever motion to commemorate the displacement of Kashmiri Pandits from Jammu and Kashmir 25 years ago was tabled in the British Parliament. The motion sponsored once again by Bob Blackman read, "This House commemorates with deep sadness the 25th anniversary of the attack in January 1990 by cross-border Islamic militants on the population of Jammu and Kashmir; expresses its condolences to the families and friends of all those who were killed, raped and injured in this massacre.” Further it was also condemned the desecration of the holiest sites in Jammu and Kashmir and expressed its concern that the Kashmiris who fled to save life and limb have still not secured justice for the atrocities committed against them.

    The Bob Blackman debate:

    Bob Blackman who has sponsored these motions has debated the issue of Kashmir extensively in favour of India. In one of the debates on the anniversary of 9/11, he had said, “every day in Kashmir, along the line of control, state-sponsored terrorists from Pakistan infiltrate Jammu and Kashmir and cause atrocities. We must mark that, and say that the Pakistani Government clearly cannot be trusted to do what they should and stop that terrorism against the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

    Underground tunnels have recently been discovered, which promote the infiltration, and there has clearly been assistance from the Pakistani forces that occupy part of Kashmir.”


    He further stated that, “the United Kingdom had the role of partitioning India and Pakistan, and the partition that was created was never going to last. The concept of East Pakistan and West Pakistan as one country separated by India was never going to stand the test of time. Clearly, it did not, and Bangladesh came from that.

    Equally, the Maharaja decided to cede the territory to India. The Pakistani Government and forces refused to accept that decision and invaded. It was at the behest of the Maharaja that the Indian army moved in to try to wrest control back, according to the original purpose. That was in 1947. Therefore, we can say that the continued conflict of the past 70 years is terrible, but that it is clear where responsibility for it lies. We must place it fairly and squarely with the Pakistanis and their successive Governments.”

    The plight of Hindu Pandits:

    Blackman further debated that, “ the Hindu Pandits were forced out in a process of ethnic cleansing. The reports that I hear give a figure of 700,000 of them still living in refugee camps having been forced out. It would be ridiculous to reward those who engaged in ethnic cleansing. There are humanitarian matters in the conflict that need to be concluded. The victims are the Pandits who were forced out of their homes and the women who were forced at the point of a gun to convert from Hinduism to Islam, and were left to suffer.” “It is now some 25 years since the worst atrocities in the Kashmir valley, when Hindus were driven out by the Islamic fundamentalists.

    We should be on the side of the people who suffered and make sure that the people who are in exile have the right to return to the homes that they occupied for centuries.”

    Read more at: http://www.oneindia.com/new-delhi/m...t-on-pok-human-rights-violations-1871794.html

    But in contrast, we have the great senators of the US of A as well as the President of the world's only super power molly coddling the Pakistanis by contentiously providing military aid worth billions of dollars under the 'Coalition Support Funds' in spite of the fact that they are being taken for a ride. It is a typical case of the tail wagging the dog. The US must stop all aid to Pakistan and instead include it under the list of countries sponsoring terrorism as state policy.
     
    A chauhan, LalTopi, Abhijat and 2 others like this.
  2.  
  3. sorcerer

    sorcerer Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2013
    Messages:
    6,203
    Likes Received:
    5,109
    Location:
    India



    OMG!!! SANE VOICE FROM UK?:confused1: Or Is it Just a Burp!!!
    What the heck do they actually want?

    Lets see the followup on this one by UK in dealing with pak.
     
    LalTopi likes this.
  4. Mikesingh

    Mikesingh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,061
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    I have this lurking suspicion that these burps are coming thick and fast from the British Parliament due to PM Modi's impending visit to the UK!! [​IMG]
     
  5. LalTopi

    LalTopi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    582
    Likes Received:
    299
    But strangely it's coming from the opposition Labour Party, and indeed the new left wing leader Jeremy Corbyn. I am amazed. Labour has traditionally been quite pro pakistani Moslem immigrant, especially due to the vote banks in the north of England. I wonder what is going on.
     
  6. ezsasa

    ezsasa Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    3,019
    Location:
    Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India
    Let's not make this a huge thing, if a motion garners enough votes UK Parliament might even pass a resolution against. Modi or our J&K. They also have vote bank policy just like us, they also have sufficient paki sympathisers in their parliament.
     
  7. DingDong

    DingDong Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2014
    Messages:
    2,223
    Likes Received:
    3,653
    Location:
    Delhi
    This is an indicator of new geopolitical alignment taking shape. India is moving towards the US-camp and Pakistan will move into China-Russia camp. UK is doing what it's master has asked it do. UK has complied being a "good boy".
     
  8. ezsasa

    ezsasa Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    3,019
    Location:
    Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India
    Check the debate today on NDTV with Asma Jehangir(paki human rights activist), one of the persons who initiated the motion on POK at UK Parliament. I don't believe in co-incidence that she is in india the same week such a motion gets passed in UK she lands up in india.
     
  9. Mikesingh

    Mikesingh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,061
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    I saw it and was quite disappointed with her. She said that the Hurriyat represents the people of Kashmir and that they should be on board! Jeeeez!

    Now that was pretty lame seeing that the Hurriyat has a following of less than a couple of thousand in a population of 11 million in J&K. You can work out the percentage! She's seems to be far removed from reality.
     
  10. ezsasa

    ezsasa Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    3,019
    Location:
    Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India
    Hence my argument before that, that this POK resolution is aimed at benefitting somebody but not necessarily India. Let's not get overboard in supporting this motion at UK parliament.
     
    Abhijat likes this.
  11. LalTopi

    LalTopi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    582
    Likes Received:
    299
    I take your point that all roads that lefty liberal UK takes will eventually lead to criticism of India. however the motion calling for withdrawal to pre October 1947 is quite unusual. Also recognition of the rights of the pundits makes a change. My guess is that they support the independence for the whole of Kashmir.
     
  12. Mikesingh

    Mikesingh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,061
    Likes Received:
    1,331
    This is according to the Security Council Resolutions on Kashmir.

    The preamble to the Resolution is the crux of the issue. However before I do that, I would like to mention that Resolution 47 was passed by the United Nations Security Council under chapter VI of UN Charter. Resolutions passed under Chapter VI of UN charter are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to the resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

    Now for relevant extracts the resolution itself:

    RESOLUTION 47 (1948) ON THE INDIA-PAKISTAN QUESTION SUBMITTED JOINTLY BY THE REPRESENTATIVES FOR BELGIUM, CANADA, CHINA, COLUMBIA, THE UNITED KINGDOM AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ADOPTED BY THE SECURITY COUNCIL AT ITS 286TH MEETING HELD ON 21 APRIL, 1948. (DOCUMENT NO. S/726, DATED THE 21ST APRIL, 1948).

    Noting with satisfaction that both India and Pakistan desire that the question of the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan would be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite.

    Recommends to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following measures as those which in the opinion of the Council and appropriate to bring about a cessation of the fighting and to create proper conditions for a free and impartial plebiscite to decide whether the State of Jammu and Kashmir is to accede to India or Pakistan.[/quote]


    A - RESTORATION OF PEACE AND ORDER

    The Government of Pakistan should undertake:

    To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State.


    Firstly, Pakistan has yet to comply with their part of the resolution, ie, to withdraw tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes of fighting. Failure to withdraw their troops resulted in the inability of India to put into effect their part of the undertaking.

    Secondly, these Resolutions are under Chapter VI and therefore non enforceable. Why did Pakistan agree to this? Why did they not insist on including it under Chapter VII which is enforceable?

    Thirdly, there is nothing in this Resolution that mentions the so called ‘third option’ which is independence to the entire J&K that Pakistan is now pushing in what they say is ‘In accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiri people’.
     

Share This Page