By Ansh Singh Luthra The debate on euthanasia is not new in India however, the society as well the judiciary is not ready to accept it as morally or legally right. This article looks into the practice of Thalaikuthal, a sort of masked euthanasia practiced in Tamil Nadu and the legality of the same. By Kevin Joseph and Alisha Mehra
Kurdish militia in Syria and Sunni Extremists in Iraq have allegedly violated the ban on use of child soldiers in armed conflict. The militia has been the main force for combating the Islamic State group within the country. The U.S. led coalition allegedly fund training camps that aggressively recruit children as executioners, suicide bombers etc. Interestingly no UN convention bans giving military training to minors. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has an Optional Protocol to the Children's Rights Convention on Children and Armed Conflict that simply limits children under the age of 18 to be recruited to armed groups. The article seeks to discuss the implication of the absence of a convention prohibiting the training of minors on the liability of the coalition states. By Sakshi Soreng and Mudit Nigam
South Sudan gained independence from Sudan in July 2011. A 2005 peace deal that ended Africa's longest-running civil war was responsible for this. The newly independent state plunged into crisis in December 2013 amid a power struggle between the president and his deputy whom he had sacked. Fighting between government troops and rebel factions erupted, and within weeks the conflict had killed thousands and prompted more than 800,000 to flee their homes. The dispute is rooted within a number of issues including border disputes, oil production, farm land, and cattle herding grounds between various ethnic groups. The civil war is an ongoing concern as it still continues after over a year and a half. This article attempts to look into the degradation of women during civil wars and the laws available to protect them. By Aishawarya Nair and Surbhi Sharma
With a 5-4 split verdict, the US Supreme Court ruled in favour of same-sex marriage on the 26th of June 2015.The case, Obergefell v. Hodges, was brought to court by a total of thirty petitioners (fourteen couples and two widowers) after drawn-out proceedings within their respective states regarding the legal validity of same-sex marriages. Although the District Courts in each of the concerned states (Kentucky, Tennessee, Michigan and Ohio) pronounced rulings in their favour, these decisions were collectively appealed against and reversed at the Sixth Circuit Court by the respondents: state officials responsible for enforcing laws that invalidated same-sex marriages in said states. This case represented a combined appeal by all the petitioners against the decision of the Sixth Circuit Bench;the petitioners sought a writ of certiorari to quash the decision of the Sixth Circuit. By Christina Shaju and Sahil Mishra
This article addresses the developments surrounding the continued detention and treatment of detainees by the U.S.A. at Guantanamo Naval Base which has been under constant scrutiny for violating several International conventions and human rights standards including those established by the Nuremberg trials and the spirit of the Geneva Conventions. There is a serious debate as to the legality of the detention. The USA has classified these men as ‘unlawful combatants’, who are not subject to the Geneva Convention of 1949, which regulates the treatment of detainees in an armed conflict. The article also reviews the legal issues concerning the Gitmo detainees which are mostly related to the petitions of habeas corpus. Numerous cases have been decided in favour of the detainees , giving them the right to challenge their detention a court. Consideration is given as to whether the measures taken until now are sufficient for the protection of their human rights. The article further considers the challenges facing the closing of the facility since the executive order for the same was passed in 2009. By Geetanjali Kamat and Niharika Shukla
The Myanmar government, along with its civil population, has openly declared the Rohingya Muslims to be immigrants from Bangladesh and the former has unequivocally been held responsible for committing various crimes against humanity. The discrimination which is clearly embodied in the 1982 Citizenship law of Myanmar explicitly denies citizenship to Rohingya Muslims on grounds of ethnicity, permitting citizenship only in the presence of conclusive evidence to prove that their ancestors had settled in Myanmar (erstwhile Burma) before achieving independence in the year 1948. The acts of forcible displacement, violence and other atrocities committed against the Rohingya Muslims, who continue to be stateless, have either actively or passively been advocated by the State itself. In the midst of facing violence and abusive acts, the displaced Rohingya have never been consulted on their right to return to their original towns and villages. When the law of the land itself has expressly sponsored discrimination on grounds of ethnicity, there is a lack of accountability to redress the grievances of the Rohingya community. This article seeks to analyze the humanitarian crisis faced by the Rohingya Muslims in Burma, based upon a critical evaluation of the report by Human Rights Watch titled ‘All You Can Do is Pray: Crimes Against Humanity and Ethnic Cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in Burma’s Arakan State’. |
About वाणी“To deny one their human rights is to challenge their very existence.” - Nelson Mandela Archives
March 2016
|