Self-determination for Kashmiris: Pakistan to sign Civil Rights Covenant despite Indi

[Neo]

Self-determination for Kashmiris: Pakistan to sign Civil Rights Covenant despite Indian reservation ​

ISLAMABAD (January 27 2008): The Ministry of Foreign Affairs will be signing the 'International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights' (ICCPR) of the United Nations despite the fact that India has not accepted the right of self-determination of Kashmiris while ratifying the covenant, official sources told Business Recorder.

The ICCPR was adopted by the United Nations Assembly in December 1966 and came into force on March 23, 1976. Currently, 160 countries are signatories, and 67 are party to the covenant.

Pakistan had committed to sign the ICCPR at the time of its election to the newly established Human Rights Council (HRC) in April 2006. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, such an announcement was required under election rules of the Council and consistent with the commitment, inter-ministerial consultations were initiated and NoCs of all the stakeholders were obtained to sign the ICCPR.

While ratifying the ICCPR, India had declared the following reservations with regard to the right of self-determination: "With reference to Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 1 of the ICCPR, India declares that the words 'right of self-determination' appearing in this article apply only to the peoples under foreign domination and that these words do not apply to sovereign independent States or to a section of a people or nation which is the essence of national integrity".

However, Pakistan has decided to submit following objection to the Indian reservation: "Pakistan objects to the declaration made by India in respect of Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 1 of ICCPR".

Pakistan is of the view that right of self-determination, as enshrined in the chapter of the UN and as embodied in the covenant, applies to all people under foreign occupation and alien domination, sources said.

"Pakistan cannot consider as valid any interpretation of the right of self-determination which is contrary to the clear language of the provisions in question. Moreover, the said reservation is incompatible with the object and purpose of the covenants between Pakistan and India without the latter benefiting from its reservations," Foreign Ministry in its objections to be submitted to the UN said, sources added.

They said that Pakistan would submit additional reservation, as a statement, saying that Islamabad "reserves the right to attach appropriate reservations, make declarations and state its understanding in respect of various provisions of the covenant at the time of ratification's".

The issue had been placed before the caretaker Cabinet in its meeting on January 22, which gave the go-ahead signal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Giving justification of signing the pact, Foreign Ministry briefed the Cabinet that HRC's upcoming review of implementation of voluntary commitments made by member countries in January 2008, ratification of ICCPR had gained further importance.

"Non-compliance of voluntary declaration, besides having an impact on our bid for re-election to the HRC for 2008-2011 term will also project Pakistan in a negative list. It is, thus, not in our interest to further delay the decision," Foreign Ministry said in its briefing.

Sources said that Foreign Ministry told the Cabinet that Pakistan was often a target of criticism for violation of human rights standards at various international fora and in numerous reports of western NGOs.

The Ministry expressed fear that Pakistan's non-adherence to ICCPR had been cited as an example in such criticism. Besides, UN High Commissioner on Human Rights (UNHCHR) has frequently urged Pakistan to sign the covenant.

Pakistan's third-generation agreement with the European Union (EU) also contains a clause in respect of human rights, which was quoted by the EU interlocutors to press the case for Pakistan's accession to the various human rights conventions, sources added.

Business Recorder [Pakistan's First Financial Daily]

 

[roadrunner]

While ratifying the ICCPR, India had declared the following reservations with regard to the right of self-determination: "With reference to Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 1 of the ICCPR, India declares that the words 'right of self-determination' appearing in this article apply only to the peoples under foreign domination and that these words do not apply to sovereign independent States or to a section of a people or nation which is the essence of national integrity".

LOL! The Kashmiris ARE under foreign domination..INDIAN domination. The suggestion that Kashmiris are similar in any way to Indian people past Himachal Pradesh is nonsense. They are physically and genetically more similar to Pakistanis.

Not sure how Kashmir is of "essence to the national integrity" either.

It's quite amusing the way that self-determination had been given to all the corners of the subcontinent, but India is denying the Kashmiris it, and then signing treaties calling for the "right of self-determination" of people. Hypocrisy!

Pakistan should pressure them on this point.

 

[abhy]

"Pakistan is of the view that right of self-determination, as enshrined in the chapter of the UN and as embodied in the covenant, applies to all people under foreign occupation and alien domination, sources said."

Thus the ICCPR is not valid in regards to Kashmir. Jammu&Kashmir is an integral and inalienable part of the republic of India and its citizens are Indian citizens. That is the stated official policy of the Indian Government and no amount of cherry picking to prove this or that is going to change it. So this debate is very much a non-starter.

Thanks

 

[roadrunner]

"Pakistan is of the view that right of self-determination, as enshrined in the chapter of the UN and as embodied in the covenant, applies to all people under foreign occupation and alien domination, sources said."

Thus the ICCPR is not valid in regards to Kashmir. Jammu&Kashmir is an integral and inalienable part of the republic of India and its citizens are Indian citizens. That is the stated official policy of the Indian Government and no amount of cherry picking to prove this or that is going to change it. So this debate is very much a non-starter.

Thanks

"Foreign occupation" - Indian troops in Kashmir - Check

"Alien domination" - Indians look nothing like Kashmirs and are genetically different - Check

 

[roadrunner]

Article 1 actually says this

"1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.

3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
"
So will India give "All Kashmiri peoples the right of self-determination, so that by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development". I think not!

 

[abhy]

"Foreign occupation" - Indian troops in Kashmir - Check

"Alien domination" - Indians look nothing like Kashmirs and are genetically different - Check

If you say so

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

It matters not what Pakistan signs.

It is a mature action on India's part not to follow this path for the various ethnic groups of Pakistan under similar conditions.

 

[Spring Onion]

It matters not what Pakistan signs.

It is a mature action on India's part not to follow this path for the various ethnic groups of Pakistan under similar conditions.

Same old BS.
Variouse ethnic groups in Pakistan are not occupied they are not waging any war for separation and ABOVE ALL there is no UN resoultion Unlike on Indian Occupied Kashmir.

As far Kashmiris they are not Ethnic Group India ratrher they are dwellers of a seprate state that is being occupied by India illegally.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Same old BS.
Variouse ethnic groups in Pakistan are not occupied they are not waging any war for separation and ABOVE ALL there is no UN resoultion Unlike on Indian Occupied Kashmir.

As far Kashmiris they are not Ethnic Group India ratrher they are dwellers of a seprate state that is being occupied by India illegally.

It is time you learnt better English. BS is not a polite word and is best avoided. Those who are handicapped, use this word. It is however, fashionable amongst the crass and crude.

Kashmiris are not any ethnic group of India and nor are the others too! India is the Union of many ethnic groups who are as Indian as the next!

Since you are not aware of the UN resolutions even though it has been discussed repeatedly, I would rather not waste time on the same with you.

I reckon, by your interesting logic, the Pashtuns too are not ethnic nor are the people of Northern Areas!

This is also interesting:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...15-kashmiris-stopped-loc-pakistan-police.html

 

[Spring Onion]

It is time you learnt better English. BS is not a polite word and is best avoided. Those who are handicapped, use this word. It is however, fashionable amongst the crass and crude.

Its much better to act polite and civilized by not posting something which has no basis resulting in being declared BS.

Kashmiris are not any ethnic group of India and nor are the others too! India is the Union of many ethnic groups who are as Indian as the next!.

Indeed India is Union ocv many ethnic groups BUT Kashmir is not part of Indian UNION. Hence there is no qustion of Kashmiris being ethnic group of India.

This is also interesting:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...15-kashmiris-stopped-loc-pakistan-police.html

A pathatic try in the first place.

secondly also go and read the responses and also read the above news carefully, you will find the truth.


Anyway

Kashmir is occupied by India and Kashmiris are fighting Indian Brutalities that is reality and will remain reality untill Indian Occupied Kashmir is free from Indian brutalities.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Not so pathetic and paranoid as yours!

 

[mujahideen]

As far as the issue of Kashmire goes India has never held its promise of hold an election their to see which country the people of Kashmire want to join. India's first Prime Minister had said elections would be held but its been more then 60 years and still nothing. The Indians have imposed a Martial Law in Kashmire. The Pakistani is free, that is why that side is Azad Kashmire. Azad Kashmire has its own government, its own Prime Minister and if Martial Law is declared in Pakistan, Kashmire is exempt from it. Kashmire is not an integral part of either India and Pakistan, it is about time India give the people of Kashmire what they want and that is freedom.

 

[Contrarian]

What is the point of this thread? Pakistan can talk all it want in any and every international forum it pleases, it would still yield no pressure on India. They can try and they have tried militarily, failed there too.

Do whatever you want, fight for eternity, Kashmir remains in India.

P.S: Sick and tired of these Kashmir discussions that repeat themselves all too oft. Same posts, same rants, same responses...

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Mujahiudeen

Please read the UN resolution.

Pakistan had to do something before the plebiscite was held.

That has not be done as yet.

I don't want repeat all the stuff since this issue has been thrashed threadbare in this forum.

 

[Mustapha]

Assalamulaykum,

If thats the kind of cynicism displayed by India, then by all means let the conflict continue!

Slighty ludricous to say Pakistan has failed, while at the same time India has failed to regain all of Kashmir back.

Hence, India has also failed militarily.


Afterall we could flight on endlessly, causing annihilation and misery.

But then, we could let the Kashmiris decide or hold a Plebiscite!

However for the Plebiscite to work India demands that all Pakistani forces should be removed from the disputed territories without India having to do the same act.

Is this a reliable appeal, I dare say?





Allah Hafiz