US court summons Congress party on 1984 riots case

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Sir, there were many kings who were not amenable to the Mughals; during the martyrdom of the Sahibzadas, Nawab Sher Mohammad Khan of Malerkotla being a famous opposer of the Mughals at that point. Yet, the times than were different and the Sikhs got justice by the sword. Sirhind was burned down to the ground, Zain Khan was killed, the Sivalik Hill Rajas were defeated and made vassals of the Punjab, and the Durranis too were kicked out and their lands taken over. I don't think that type of justice is anything to wish for in the context of India and Sikhs have already rejected the bloody insurgency which sprung up after Operation Bluestar. The fight for justice this time around is different and the Sikhs who have taken this to US courts are US citizens and they are fighting the only way they can. Through the judicial system.
I understand the anguish of the Sikhs.

It is justified.

Yet, I, as an Indian, will not bow down to a foreign power to dictate terms and I am sure no Sikh would either.

Therefore, the issue should be in the International Court of Justice and not the US or any other court.

Will the US allow any of its people to be tried by another country?

No.

Check the Davis case where he is indeed a murderer in any court!

The don't even recognise the International Court of Justice.

Why must India recognise the US courts?

At this rate, then Medha Patkars, Arundhuti Roys will also be justified to take issues to the US courts. And why not? Geelani also would go to the US courts.

If that becomes a precedence, should we not become another state of the US and done with it?
 
Last edited:

Tronic

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,915
Likes
1,282
Sir, the Sikhs who have sued are US citizens; US is not a foreign power to them, but their own country, from whom they have asked for justice for crimes which happened to them in the past. As said before, the US will not dictate terms to India, but it has all the right to listen to its citizens and pass judgement regarding its citizens on its own soil and enforce that judgement on its own soil. India is a sovereign country, therefore, no one will be arriving in India to dictate to its parties to clean up, that is entirely their own choice how long, if ever, they want to come out clean; but the US, as a sovereign country, has the right to enforce its laws upon any person or parties which traverse their lands.
 

Oracle

New Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,120
Likes
1,566
Does not the atomic bombings of Japan in WWII, raise even an iota of shame within US' political circles?

Now, keep sucking your thumbs US of A!

Just so we're clear, it's a US court summoning Congress Party because some 1984 survivor Sikh US citizens sued it. It's not that US is trying to play watchdog here.
Just the way US stays out of Kashmir, US should stay away from meddling in Indian affairs. We are a Sovereign Republic and not a failed client state like Pakistan.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
^^ Excellent post Oracle.

The self righteous US courts should look within.
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
9,080
Likes
40,077
Country flag
Just the way US stays out of Kashmir, US should stay away from meddling in Indian affairs. We are a Sovereign Republic and not a failed client state like Pakistan.
Which it is not. You've not been following the story at all. US is seeking justice to US citizens who were victims of 1984 anti-Sikh riots. When found guilty, INC's assets in US territory stand to be frozen, not in India. US' judgment on the riots will be independent, and have no bearing on Congress party in India.
 

Oracle

New Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,120
Likes
1,566
Which it is not. You've not been following the story at all. US is seeking justice to US citizens who were victims of 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
US citizens? I thought people who migrated to US after the riots and have become US citizens. The question is can US afford that? I guess NOT!

When found guilty, INC's assets in US territory stand to be frozen, not in India. US' judgment on the riots will be independent, and have no bearing on Congress party in India.
Some cleanup is needed. Let US freeze those money. Most of them are black money anyways.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Which it is not. You've not been following the story at all. US is seeking justice to US citizens who were victims of 1984 anti-Sikh riots. When found guilty, INC's assets in US territory stand to be frozen, not in India. US' judgment on the riots will be independent, and have no bearing on Congress party in India.
You made a valid point Tarun. Yes, perhaps from that point of view, US is not obligated for whatever it did to Japanese citizens. However, there exists a quid pro quo. Here's why:

US actions, especially that of the CIA, resulted in the creation of the Mujahideen and associated infrastructure. The aim was to fight the USSR and DRA armies in Afghanistan. Post 1989, all these were diverted towards Kashmir. CIA monies, CIA funded infrastructure and CIA funded weapons were used to that effect. Hence, Indian courts can also summon CIA and/or US government for charges of financing, supporting and abetting terrorism which would be seeking justice for Indian citizen victims. Least said about Nixon's support for genocide of 3 million people in East Pakistan (many victims later acquired India citizenship and I think it runs into more than a million). I can bet my money that the US government will not deem itself, and its agencies subject to whatsoever any Indian court instructs. The same applies here. India is under no obligation to abide by whatever US says.

If they can get their hands on properties own by any Indian Party in the US, the same rule can be applied to US government owned properties in India as well.

Let the US go ahead with any possible freezing of assets and strain our relations. We can reciprocate. The only requirement here is that the India executive and judiciary will have to grow some guts.
 
Last edited:

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
9,080
Likes
40,077
Country flag
US citizens? I thought people who migrated to US after the riots and have become US citizens. The question is can US afford that? I guess NOT!
Yes, "people who migrated to US after the riots and have become US citizens" are US citizens, and are equally entitled to the country's judiciary. Diplomatic affordability is a non-issue. US courts could go to lengths, to almost sabotage their precarious relations with Pakistan over the summons given to ISI chief by US courts.

Some cleanup is needed. Let US freeze those money. Most of them are black money anyways.
So be it. Even if US doesn't take stern action on INC, even if the courts there come to the conclusion that INC was behind the riots, that itself is enough to taint the UPA regime among foreign investors. We can hope that that doesn't happen.
 

Oracle

New Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,120
Likes
1,566
You made a valid point Tarun. Yes, perhaps from that point of view, US is not obligated for whatever it did to Japanese citizens. However, there exists a quid pro quo. Here's why:

US actions, especially that of the CIA, resulted in the creation of the Mujahideen and associated infrastructure. The aim was to fight the USSR and DRA armies in Afghanistan. Post 1989, all these were diverted towards Kashmir. CIA monies, CIA funded infrastructure and CIA funded weapons were used to that effect. Hence, Indian courts can also summon CIA and/or US government for charges of financing, supporting and abetting terrorism which would be seeking justice for Indian citizen victims. Least said about Nixon's support for genocide of 3 million people in East Pakistan. I can bet my money that the US government will not deem itself, and its agencies subject to whatsoever any Indian court instructs. The same applies here. India is under no obligation to abide by whatever US says.

If they can get their hands on properties own by any Indian Party in the US, the same rule can be applied to US government owned properties in India as well.

Let the US go ahead with any possible freezing of assets and strain our relations. We can reciprocate. The only requirement here is that the India executive and judiciary will have to grow some guts.
Good one. I was about to post on the same lines. Btw, Supreme Court is kicking a$$e$!
 

Oracle

New Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,120
Likes
1,566
OK guys, mark my words, nothing's gonna happen from the US. It's all hullaballoo! They need us & we need them.
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
9,080
Likes
40,077
Country flag
You made a valid point Tarun. Yes, perhaps from that point of view, US is not obligated for whatever it did to Japanese citizens. However, there exists a quid pro quo. Here's why:

US actions, especially that of the CIA, resulted in the creation of the Mujahideen and associated infrastructure. The aim was to fight the USSR and DRA armies in Afghanistan. Post 1989, all these were diverted towards Kashmir. CIA monies, CIA funded infrastructure and CIA funded weapons were used to that effect. Hence, Indian courts can also summon CIA and/or US government for charges of financing, supporting and abetting terrorism which would be seeking justice for Indian citizen victims. Least said about Nixon's support for genocide of 3 million people in East Pakistan. I can bet my money that the US government will not deem itself, and its agencies subject to whatsoever any Indian court instructs. The same applies here. India is under no obligation to abide by whatever US says.
That has strayed too far off from the topic. It's not that the Supreme Court of US is behind nuking Japan. The Judiciary's job is to dispense justice to the country's citizens to the extant possible. The Judiciary isn't kept in the loop with foreign policy. Its job is to make use of whatever available international treaties/laws to back its citizens when there's an international case such as this.

If they can get their hands on properties own by any Indian Party in the US, the same rule can be applied to US government owned properties in India as well.
They do, and I never refuted that.

Let the US go ahead with any possible freezing of assets and strain our relations. We can reciprocate. The only requirement here is that the India executive and judiciary will have to grow some guts.
We can reciprocate. It's up to Government of India and Congress to decide if retaliating for its frozen assets in the US is worth destabilizing the healthy FDI inflows from US.
 

Oracle

New Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,120
Likes
1,566
Your points are very valid Tarun. However, I do not see anything coming out from the US. Every day we seem to be getting an inch closer to the US camp.
 

Tronic

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,915
Likes
1,282
Your points are very valid Tarun. However, I do not see anything coming out from the US. Every day we seem to be getting an inch closer to the US camp.
True, as I said earlier, there are probably going to be back channel protests coming from the Congress.

Also, from my sources here in Toronto, I have been able to gather that another petition to the courts will be launched in Canada on the basis of the mass grave discovered in Harayana. The lawyers in the US who are handling this case are also the ones assisting in the set up of the Canadian case. Earlier, the Canadian government had dismissed the case saying that they did not believe that there was a mass genocide willingly carried out by the state authorities. The new case will revolve around the presentation of the Harayana mass grave discovery to further the case. We'll get to hear about it once it hits the courts in a few months.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top