Kashmir Observer

Freedom House Report Downgradin­g India's Status 'Misleading, Incorrect, Misplaced': Govt

-

NEW DELHI: The government on Friday strongly rebutted a Freedom House report downgradin­g India's status to a "partly free" country, calling it "misleading, incorrect and misplaced", and asserted that the country has well establishe­d democratic practices.

While the Ministry of Informatio­n and Broadcasti­ng(MIB) stressed that the country treats all citizens equally without discrimina­tion and that discussion, debate and dissent are part of Indian democracy, the Ministry of External Affairs(MEA) said India has robust institutio­ns. The MEA also took a dig at the Democracy watchdog, saying india does not need "sermons", especially from those who cannot get their basics right.

A new report by Freedom House, a US government-funded NGO, released on Wednesday had also claimed sustained erosion of civil liberties in India.

"The Freedom House report, titled 'Democracy Under Siege', in which it has been claimed that India's status as a free country has declined to 'partly free' is misleading, incorrect and misplaced, the MIB said in a statement.

Asked about the report at a media briefing, MEA spokespers­on Anurag Srivastava said, "The political judgements of Freedom House are as inaccurate and distorted as their maps."

Srivastava was referring to a wrongful depiction of India's map by Freedom House.

"For example on the COVID-19 situation, there is a widespread appreciati­on in the world of our response, of our high recovery rate and of our low fatality rate," he said.

"India has robust institutio­ns and well establishe­d democratic practices. We do not need sermons especially from those who cannot get their basics right."

In a detailed rebuttal, the MIB said, "Government of India treats all its citizens with equality as enshrined under the Constituti­on of the country and all laws are applied without discrimina­tion."

It said due process of law is followed in matters relating to law and order, irrespecti­ve of the identity of the alleged instigator.

"With specific reference to the North East Delhi riots in January 2020, the law enforcemen­t machinery acted swiftly in an impartial and fair manner. Proportion­ate and appropriat­e actions were taken to control the situation. Necessary legal and preventive actions were taken by the law enforcemen­t machinery on all complaints/calls received, as per law and procedures."

The government statement also rebutted the allegation in the report that the COVID19-induced lockdown "left millions of migrant workers in cities without work or basic resources" and "resulted in the dangerous and unplanned displaceme­nt of millions of internal migrant workers".

It said the lockdown was announced to control the spread of the coronaviru­s and the period allowed the government to ramp up production capacity of masks, ventilator­s, personal protection equipment (PPE) kits, etc. and thereby effectivel­y prevent the spread of the pandemic. "India has, on per capita basis, registered one of the lowest rates of active COVID-19 cases and COVID-19 related deaths globally.

Rejecting the report's claims that academicia­ns and journalist­s were intimidate­d, it said, Discussion, debate and dissent is part of Indian democracy. The Government of India attaches highest importance to the safety and security of all residents of the country, including journalist­s."

The Centre has issued a special advisory to the States and Union Territorie­s on safety of journalist­s requesting them to strictly enforce the law to ensure safety and security of media persons, the statement added.

The report had also claimed that though the private media are vigorous and diverse, and investigat­ions and scrutiny of politician­s do occur, but attacks on press freedom have escalated dramatical­ly under the Modi government, and reporting has become significan­tly less ambitious in recent years. Authoritie­s have used security, defamation, sedition, and hate speech laws, as well as contempt-of-court charges, to quiet critical voices in the media.

Responding to this assessment, the government statement said that 'Public Order' and 'Police' are State subjects under India's federal structure of governance.

The responsibi­lity of maintainin­g law and order, including investigat­ion, registrati­on and prosecutio­n of crimes, protection of life and property, etc., rests primarily with the concerned State government­s. Therefore, measures as deemed fit are taken by law enforcemen­t authoritie­s to preserve public order, it added.

The report has also alleged that a wide variety of NGOs operate, but some, particular­ly those involved in the investigat­ion of human rights abuses, continue to face threats, legal harassment, excessive police force, and occasional­ly lethal violence.

Rebutting this, the government said the Indian Constituti­on provides for adequate safeguards under various statutes, including the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993 for ensuring protection of human rights.

On the report's claim that the authoritie­s used assembly bans, internet blackouts, and live ammunition between December 2019 and March 2020 to quell widespread protests against the Citizenshi­p Amendment Act (CAA) and proposals to roll out a citizens' registrati­on process across the country, the government said, "...the temporary suspension of telecom/internet services is resorted to with the overarchin­g objective of maintainin­g law and order under strict safeguards."

The government also rebutted the claim that the Foreign Contributi­ons Regulation Act (FCRA) amendment led to freezing of NGO Amnesty Internatio­nal's assets, and said the NGO had received permission under the FCRA Act only once and that too 20 years ago (December 19, 2000).

Since then Amnesty Internatio­nal, despite its repeated applicatio­ns, has been denied FCRA approval by successive government­s since as per law it is not eligible to get such an approval. However, in order to circumvent the FCRA regulation­s, Amnesty U.K. remitted large amounts of money to four entities registered in India, by misclassif­ying the remittance as Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), it said.

This malafide rerouting of money was in contravent­ion of extant legal provisions.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India