Better than the GOI's silence on Navi Pillay's Nobel Peace Prize is
@KanwalSibal attempt to offer an explanation and I applaud him for that.
At the heart of his objection to Navi Pillay's Nobel is his suggestion that she "has a long record of targeting India". This is what he writes:
"She has attacked India on Kashmir and mass graves and disappearances, on AFSPA, on Sexual Violence and New Delhi gang rape(2012), calling for substantial legal and systemic reforms to tackle widespread sexual violence, and Caste and Gender Discrimination (2014)."
Let's break it down.
1. Kashmir mass graves.
This is what a UN press release in Oct 2012 (
news.un.org/en/story/2012/10…) said when Pillay was head of the UNHRC:
"The human rights of people living in areas that are the subject of unresolved territorial disputes are also often neglected, she noted, adding that one such example is Jammu and Kashmir in India, where the discovery of 2,730 bodies in unmarked mass graves was confirmed in a 2011 report by the Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission.
“I urge the Indian authorities to fully investigate past killings and disappearances and bring the perpetrators to justice, as well as to ensure protection of witnesses and families of the missing and provide them with redress,” the High Commissioner stated. “These will be critical steps in the ongoing effort to build confidence with the aim of promoting lasting peace and stability in the region.”"
Here, Pillay does nothing more than cite the finding on mass graves of an OFFICIAL INDIAN BODY, the J&K SHRC and urges India to fully investigate. Here is the JK SHRC report (
kljp.org/articles/shrc-on-un…). After 2019 the commission was disbanded and it no longer has a website! How is that 'targeting India'?
2. Call to repeal AFSPA. Navi Pillay made this call in 2009. Two years later, another Pillai, Gopal Pillai, former Union Home Secretary, said the same thing. (
nagalimvoice.com/news/gk-pil…). Whether you agree or disagree, the call to repeal AFSPA has many, many backers within India and abroad and this position cannot be dismissed as 'anti-India'. The government is free to disregrard these calls, if it wishes.
3. "She has attacked India on ... Sexual Violence and New Delhi gang rape(2012), calling for substantial legal and systemic reforms to tackle widespread sexual violence"
Yikes. Navi Pillay echoed what Indians were saying on the street and whose views Parliament duly took note of by passing a new law that embodied substantial legal and systemic reforms to tackle widespread sexual violence.
4. "She has attacked India on ... Caste and Gender Discrimination (2014)".
Double yikes! He gives the date for 2014 when Navi Pilay made (as far as I can tell) brief and unobjectionable remarks in response to the murder of two Maurya girls in UP, but I found a more complete statement from 2013 which cannot be accused of 'targeting India'. (
idsn.org/wp-content/uploads/…). She actually said this, which should please Mr Kanwal Sibal: "India also has far-reaching constitutional guarantees and laws which prohibit castebased discrimination. Most recently, the Union Cabinet in India has cleared the new legislation on manual scavenging, proposing stiff penalties against any public authority or private individual who uses or promotes this heinous practice. With an estimated 90% of Dalit women among manual scavengers in India, the adoption of this law will represent a key step forward in protecting and promoting the rights of Dalit women and it will represent a good practice for other countries where manual scavenging continues to be practiced."
Net-net, the evidence offered to justify India not welcoming Navi Pillay's Nobel Peace Prize is unconvincing.
Please revise and resubmit.
Astonishing post.
Wants India to congratulate someone who has a long record of targeting India.
Navi Pillay has regularly criticised India on human rights during her tenure as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (2008–2014)
She has attacked India on Kashmir and mass graves and disappearances, on AFSPA, on Sexual Violence and New Delhi gang rape(2012), calling for substantial legal and systemic reforms to tackle widespread sexual violence, and Caste and Gender Discrimination (2014)
Throughout her tenure, she has has had policy frictions with India on human rights issues.
India has officially responded to her attacks.
She has also been a judge of the ICC which India does not recognise..
What is the case for congratulating her?
Simply because she is of Indian origin?