The hanging of Afzal Guru has once again started the debate over human rights and the validity of capital punishment. To discuss what the human rights are and how one could secure them, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind invited Justice Rajinder Sachar at its headquarters on 16 February to throw light on the present scenario in the country. As per the definition of Human Rights, Sachar said, it came into existence after the World War II, when the international community sat together and chalked out new laws applicable to the modern world.
He however claimed that human rights are the birth right of every individual and no civilization or society could ever exist if it trivialises the issue. Speaking of the origin of human rights in India, he clarified that the idea of human rights in India is not something which has been exported from outside, rather it was present since the time of Ashoka who preached and practised religious tolerance in his empire. The idea of human rights further got consolidation during the period of Akbar who formed a tolerant society at the time when Europe was grappling with the issue.
Coming to the issue of violation of human rights in the country, he said that laws like TADA/POTA and UAPA are used to curb them. They give the security agencies sweeping powers which result in the violation of human rights. He likened the rise of injustice in the country with the rise of Hitler in Germany as he said that when people do not raise voices against the injustice, it gives the ruler a confidence that he could get away with anything and this was what Hitler exploited. It is only the silence over the injustice that makes the injustice all encompassing. The need is to stand up for the cause even if it does not matter to you directly, as if you keep mum, the injustice will swallow you one day, he added.
Coming to the question of sedition, he called for the revocation of sedition laws as he finds it a little undemocratic. He said no country could be democratic unless its citizens enjoy the right to display resentment over the issues they are unhappy about. Terming the law of sedition a “shame” he called for the complete revocation of the law.
Concluding his speech, he once again laid stress on the need to rise against the injustices. He said, “Those who do not stand against the violation of human rights and injustices do the same as that of the perpetrator.” Hence the need is to stand at the very first incidence of injustice so as to form a better society which respects human rights.