The two judges in this case that ruled in favor of extending the stay said that their decision was justified by "the public interest in ensuring orderly change of this magnitude in the military -- if that is what is to happen." Justice Department lawyers were hoping for the stay so that the DADT repeal wouldn't go into effect immediately. They want to make sure the military has time to prepare for this. They don't think DADT should be lifted until the military completes their study of the changes that would be needed before the repeal could happen (the study is due December 1). The Obama administration is also hoping that Congress will be the ones to repeal DADT (not really looking good at this point...). The lawyer for the Log Cabin Republicans (the ones against DADT) said that he might ask the U.S. Supreme Court to lift the stay (I'm not holding my breath on that one). (Full Story)
A complaint was filed in an Indian court that sought prosecution of the author Arundhati Roy on charges of sedition for alleged anti-India comments. She had said at a seminar that she supports Kashmir independence and that "Kashmir was never an integral part of India. It is a historical fact. Even the Indian government has accepted this." [Background: Kashmir is a very contested region, and it has been fought over by Pakistan and India since 1947. Kashmir was once an independent state. It came under British colonial rule in 1846, and the Dogras (a mostly Hindu ethnic group) were put in charge as the new leaders of Kashmir (i.e, the new leaders were Hindu). British colonial rule in the area ended in 1947 and this is when Kashmir's Hindu ruler decided that Kashmir, which has a Muslim majority, should join the newly-independent India, instead of the newly-created/independent Pakistan (these states become independent after British colonial rule ended). So, pretty much, this conflict is an example of British colonialism fucking things up. The region is currently divided among three countries -- India controls the central and southern parts, Pakistan controls the northwest part, and China controls the northeastern part. However, these borders are still disputed and neither Pakistan nor India recognizes the areas claimed by the other. This has resulted in wars over the territory. Kashmir has become one of the most militarized places in the world and more then 70,000 people have died in the conflict over Kashmir. Some people believe that India has the right to Kashmir, some believe Pakistan has the right to Kashmir, and some believe that Kashmir should be its own independent state. Arundhati Roy is for Kashmir independence].
Roy does not regret the comments she made at the seminar. She wrote in a statement, "I said what millions of people here say every day. I said what I as well as other commentators have written and said for years. Anybody who cares to read the transcripts of my speeches will see that they were fundamentally a call for justice." In her statement she also criticized the efforts to silence her. She wrote, "Pity the nation that has to silence its writers for speaking their minds. Pity the nation that needs to jail those who ask for justice while communal killers, mass murderers, corporate scamsters, looters, rapists, and those who prey on the poorest of the poor, roam free."
Approximately 100 right-wing activists gathered outside Roy's house Sunday to protest. And dozens vandalized Roy's house. Roy was not home at the time and activists were prevented from going inside her home. TV crews were present and apparently were tipped off about the protest. This led to Roy criticizing the media, "What is the nature of the agreement between these sections of the media and mobs and criminals in search of spectacle? Does the media, which positions itself at the 'scene' in advance, have a guarantee that the attacks and demonstrations will be non-violent? What happens if there is a criminal trespass or even something worse? Does the media then become accessory to the crime? This question is important given that some TV channels and newspapers are in the process of brazenly inciting mob anger against me. In the race for sensationalism, the line between between reporting news and manufacturing news is becoming blurred." Very well-said.
Police had been given the go-ahead to arrest the author, but it would have been difficult to convict her. If a sedition charge was brought against Roy, it would have to be proven, according to the law set out by the Supreme Court, that her speeches on Kashmir were an "incitement to public disorder or the use of violence." She cannot be charged with sedition simply for inciting feelings of anger against the government and their stance on Kashmir. The law ministry took advice on the issue, but ultimately the government decided not to proceed with charges against Roy. I'm glad they didn't. I'm sure they realized that proceeding with charges would have brought negative attention to India and most likely international condemnation. (Full Story)(Full Story)
No comments:
Post a Comment