Sri.K.V.Kunhikrishnan: Last time I had mentioned that while introducing the subject I missed to mention an important point about the various conventions under the Declaration of Human Rights. It is about the International Criminal Court. One of the most important agreements among 80 Conventions and Covenants under the Declaration of Human Rights is the International Criminal Court established by what is called the Rome Statute in July 1998. When it came into force in July 2002 only 60 countries were signatory to it. Now there are 105 countries agreeing to it. India is not one of them. Instead, we have already our Human Rights Act of 1993, The National Human Rights Commission, the provisions guaranteed under the Indian Constitution, and the obligations under various other conventions entered into earlier. That was considered more than sufficient The U.S.A. was signatory to the ICC during President Clinton’s time. But Bush managed to withdraw/’unsign’ from it. If USA continued, some of their soldiers could have been punishable by the international Criminal Court. It was clearly to avoid such a contingency that Bush withdrew from the convention and pursued several unilateral policies like authorizing pre-emptive strikes against other countries, ignoring International Laws.
In the UN, the High Commissioner for Human Rights monitors violations and looks after complaints (The present High Commissioner is Louise Arbour). But all the international agreements are only obligations to be complied with and have no full force of any International Law. It is ‘pathetically un-enforceable’, as put by Srilankan Permanent Mission in Geneva recently. International conventions can be flouted by countries in special cases of change in circumstances. Such circumstances are not easy to concoct!
Actually the most effective instruments enforceable for any HR violations are sanctions of the Security Council.
The erstwhile Human Rights Commission of the UN is now, since March 2006 known as Human Rights Council established as a political body of members of the General Assembly for policy matters on Human Rights. It gets support from the Office of the High Commissioner for HR. As said earlier there are about 80 conventions and covenants to be monitored by the High Commissioner for HR. There are also many other organizations working for the cause of Human Rights. Some of the Major Organizations are,
Amnesty International
Committee to Protect Journalists
Lawyer’s Committee for Human Rights
Human Rights Watch
Freedom House
Global Vision’s TV Channel ‘Rights and Wrongs’
Fourth World Documentation Project
The Electronic Frontier Foundation.
In spite of all this, human rights violations do take place with immunity because of the lack of a proper legal mechanism to strictly enforce even the existing laws. It is history that a sage like Osho could be attempted to be poisoned in the US, and hunted out without proper trial in spite of all the noise being made there about Human Rights violations by others. Only the influence of interested parties and organizations succeeded there against Human Rights. It appears that even Pentagon and White House had agreed and authorized the violations in Guantnamo and Abu Grieb. America’s own Newspapers have exposed this.
Dr. Abdulla: Most of the aspects of Human rights have already been discussed. I shall therefore confine myself to certain broad problems in a general way leading to a possible suggestion for a solution.
Everyday the newspapers illustrate incidents of human rights violations at the level of the local circles, at the national level or at the international level. Internationally, the Iraq and Afgan wars are still continuing endlessly. The newly found Chinese high handedness on Tibet is another violation. At the national level we have the problems in Maharashtra, Manipur and Delhi, where the migrants from other states face very serious human rights crises. At the local level, the adivasis are facing problems at Wynad and other places. There were violations in other states like Gujarat and West Bengal.
At the International level, we are now left with one super power. After the fall of the Soviet Union, USA has in some sense, taken on the role of a ‘De Facto World Government’, or that of an International arbiter. The high handedness of the Super Powers has proved one thing; that is, the new world order has completely failed to deliver, not so much for lack of means or materials as for lack of moral credibility. This has been proved undoubtedly right from Vietnam war of the 70’s, through the Arab Israel conflicts, to the Afghan and Iraq wars. The recent Chinese actions in Tibet only confirm what a big power can perpetrate in a region.
At the national level, the recent incidents in Maharashytra against migrants from other states pose a big question against the functioning of democracy itself. The hatred and violence against non-domiciles, non-locals particularly migrants, could constitute one of the main sources of hard core conservatism in contemporary India.
In a globalizing, liberalizing and ‘corporatising’ economy, we have been ignoring the substantial body of the labour force, and migrants, not allowing them the benefits of labour rights laws and the guarantees of the rights of inter-state migrants. Our Governments have no will today to turn the guarantees into practical and meaningful measures in order to respect, protect and promote migrant rights. But for a few trade unions and labor support groups there is hardly anybody working and campaigning to exert pressure on governments, employers and others to make the rights that are set out in the national and international laws into a reality for individual immigrants. This human rights crisis in this regard should really shame our conscience.
People’s welfare and quality of life are indices that measure human rights maintenance in a society or state. Improvements in infrastructure developments, growth of industry and agriculture output, more number of qualified youth through better educational institutions, are all important parameters in the progress of human rights. To achieve this, the governments have to protect the most basic rights of an individual, viz. the right to life, liberty and security. It is doubly sad that this is not being assured now. With the advent of globalization and with the mankind facing such insurmountable problems as climate change, global warming, atmospheric pollution etc, we need a effectively functioning world governance mechanism and structure that is not only participatory but trustworthy at the same time. The need for this is now felt more than ever.
Saturday, May 17, 2008
HUMAN RIGHTS 2
Dr.K.P.Thomas: Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote the book Uncle Tom’s Cabin in the middle of 19th century. She keenly observed the pang of separation of children from their mothers at a very tender age in the wilderness of Africa due to the prevailing business of slavery in the Cotton fields of Southern America. She was born in 1812, after the death of previous four siblings of her in infancy. In her family of slave owners, this also contributed to the increased sensitivity of separation of children. She had the occasion to observe the last days of an old Negro in suffering and dying, to whom she had developed an understanding, compassion and attachment. This and several other incidents were recorded by her, including some from the accounts of others, and were published in a newspaper serially. She later codified and rewrote these in the form of a novel, titled Uncle Tom’s Cabin, which became a best seller and a classic in American literary, social and political fields. At a time when many took slavery as nothing but natural and not evil, this book startled them and shocked them. But it also opened the eyes of many and slowly people started to think otherwise. The awareness created by it produced a congenial atmosphere for the slaves being released later, allowing them to choose their own destiny. Unable to reconcile with the consequent economic backlash, the southern states vehemently opposed the legislation to abolish slavery by the then president of American Union, Abraham Lincoln. The bloody civil war that broke out was very destructive, and the southern states were defeated.
Now, after about one and a half centuries later, to-day we cannot imagine about man’s slavery. But it took one full century for America to get rid of the discrimination of slavery to be completely taken off in the nineteen sixties by the late President John F. Kennedy, who paid the price with his mortal life, like his great forerunner of the cause, Abraham Lincoln. Thus after abolition of slavery by law it took nearly a century of transition period for it to be effective. The minds of the oppressor as well as the oppressed have to get used to the change. Actually, after abolition of slavery the Negroes were thrown into joblessness and crime.
This, in fact, is a lesson in Human Rights. Awareness has to be cultivated for the society’s mental make up to change. Nationhood requires time to mature and accept an idea for change. The social, economic and political changes require more than three generations to absorb and implement the righting of a wrong that is enrooted in the psyche of the people concerned.
Denial of Rights of women in the Namboothiri Community was rectified by the historically great efforts by the enlightened social workers like V.T.bhattathirippad and others. Their dramas highlighted the traditional atrocities in the community, and got themselves ostracized in the bargain. Although the whole of the traditional community was against them in the beginning, finally it was the traditionalists who got into trouble. In southern Kerala, untouchability was very much there up to early 1940s, although it was supposed to be abolished by the Maharaja of Travancore in 1936.
Dr. Babu Ravindran: In some states ostracism is prevalent even now. In some parts of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, low cast people are prevented from wearing chappals. In most villages in Bihar even now they have to drink tea only in earthen pots, not in glasses.
Dr. Thomas: The Syrian Christian community was free of this malady, and this contributed a lot to the thriving of their farming activities for two centuries or more. And they still enjoy the benefits and thrive.
The universal education policy of the British Government in the erstwhile Malabar prevented the marginalization of some of the communities into backwardness in that region. Clearly, it is ultimately education that produces awareness which prevent any Human Right infringements.
While religion is good in its own way, it sanctifies perpetration of cruelty on its own defenseless members as well as others. Violation of Human Rights can result. Politically, the consolidation of power in the hands of a group of organized people can also perpetrate cruelty infringing Human Rights. Justice H.R.Khanna who died recently stood against infringement of Human Rights even during emergency in a habeas corpus petition on which he wrote a dissenting judgement disagreeing with four other Supreme Court judges including the then Chief Justice. His was a lone voice holding up against infringement of freedom by detention without trial even in times of emergency. The ruling hierarchy then saw to it that he never got his chief justiceship in the Supreme Court. It required great courage of conviction and an amount of self sacrifice to be on the right side at the time of crises. He then said that the avenue of a citizen to present a grievance in court should not be denied under any circumstance. Although Justice Khanna was made Law Minister in 1979 when the Government changed he resigned on the third day. He died recently on 24th Feb this year at the ripe age of ninety-four.
A fearless judiciary and press are essential for maintenance of Human Rights. A certain amount of activism is also essential on the part of the judiciary as the common man may not always have the ability to fight due to lack of resources or time.
Regarding the rights of women, it is very difficult to ensure and preserve their rights legally. We find that generally men are gentler towards their counterparts of the other sex because of their weak predicaments. Help from kith and kin as well as an effective executive action can only give them succour wherever aberrations and atrocities happen.
Sri K.V.Kunhikrishnan: There was an omission in my initial talk on introducing the subject. I had mentioned that India is signatory to most of the covenants and conventions on Human Rights. But India is not a signatory to an important agreement, although 105 countries had signed it. It is the International Criminal Court established under what is called the ‘Rome Statute’ in a UN conference there in 1998. India had no need to sign it because it was already covered by the Human Rights Act of 1993 and the fundamental rights of Indian Constitution. Details of ICC can be explained next time.
Now, after about one and a half centuries later, to-day we cannot imagine about man’s slavery. But it took one full century for America to get rid of the discrimination of slavery to be completely taken off in the nineteen sixties by the late President John F. Kennedy, who paid the price with his mortal life, like his great forerunner of the cause, Abraham Lincoln. Thus after abolition of slavery by law it took nearly a century of transition period for it to be effective. The minds of the oppressor as well as the oppressed have to get used to the change. Actually, after abolition of slavery the Negroes were thrown into joblessness and crime.
This, in fact, is a lesson in Human Rights. Awareness has to be cultivated for the society’s mental make up to change. Nationhood requires time to mature and accept an idea for change. The social, economic and political changes require more than three generations to absorb and implement the righting of a wrong that is enrooted in the psyche of the people concerned.
Denial of Rights of women in the Namboothiri Community was rectified by the historically great efforts by the enlightened social workers like V.T.bhattathirippad and others. Their dramas highlighted the traditional atrocities in the community, and got themselves ostracized in the bargain. Although the whole of the traditional community was against them in the beginning, finally it was the traditionalists who got into trouble. In southern Kerala, untouchability was very much there up to early 1940s, although it was supposed to be abolished by the Maharaja of Travancore in 1936.
Dr. Babu Ravindran: In some states ostracism is prevalent even now. In some parts of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, low cast people are prevented from wearing chappals. In most villages in Bihar even now they have to drink tea only in earthen pots, not in glasses.
Dr. Thomas: The Syrian Christian community was free of this malady, and this contributed a lot to the thriving of their farming activities for two centuries or more. And they still enjoy the benefits and thrive.
The universal education policy of the British Government in the erstwhile Malabar prevented the marginalization of some of the communities into backwardness in that region. Clearly, it is ultimately education that produces awareness which prevent any Human Right infringements.
While religion is good in its own way, it sanctifies perpetration of cruelty on its own defenseless members as well as others. Violation of Human Rights can result. Politically, the consolidation of power in the hands of a group of organized people can also perpetrate cruelty infringing Human Rights. Justice H.R.Khanna who died recently stood against infringement of Human Rights even during emergency in a habeas corpus petition on which he wrote a dissenting judgement disagreeing with four other Supreme Court judges including the then Chief Justice. His was a lone voice holding up against infringement of freedom by detention without trial even in times of emergency. The ruling hierarchy then saw to it that he never got his chief justiceship in the Supreme Court. It required great courage of conviction and an amount of self sacrifice to be on the right side at the time of crises. He then said that the avenue of a citizen to present a grievance in court should not be denied under any circumstance. Although Justice Khanna was made Law Minister in 1979 when the Government changed he resigned on the third day. He died recently on 24th Feb this year at the ripe age of ninety-four.
A fearless judiciary and press are essential for maintenance of Human Rights. A certain amount of activism is also essential on the part of the judiciary as the common man may not always have the ability to fight due to lack of resources or time.
Regarding the rights of women, it is very difficult to ensure and preserve their rights legally. We find that generally men are gentler towards their counterparts of the other sex because of their weak predicaments. Help from kith and kin as well as an effective executive action can only give them succour wherever aberrations and atrocities happen.
Sri K.V.Kunhikrishnan: There was an omission in my initial talk on introducing the subject. I had mentioned that India is signatory to most of the covenants and conventions on Human Rights. But India is not a signatory to an important agreement, although 105 countries had signed it. It is the International Criminal Court established under what is called the ‘Rome Statute’ in a UN conference there in 1998. India had no need to sign it because it was already covered by the Human Rights Act of 1993 and the fundamental rights of Indian Constitution. Details of ICC can be explained next time.
HUMAN RIGHTS 1
Sri.K.V.kunhikrishnan: When we talk of Human Rights we do not generally mean the rights that we expect each of us to have as a human being living in this world. Such a concept would mean all the very different notions about individual freedom and rights that each of us may have. What we mean about Human rights is only the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on 10th December 1948.
As we all know the United Nations came into being immediately after the IInd World War in 1945, as an attempt to stop the possibility of any further World Wars. In 1946 the UN appointed a commission to formulate the Human Rights that any citizen of the world could enjoy without restraint. The commission was appointed under the Economic and Social Council of the U.N. The U.N. had already affirmed its faith in Fundamental Human Rights in its charter, and the declaration of human rights was meant to pave the way for its implementation.
There are thirty articles in all in the declaration. The first twelve articles of the declaration stress equality and liberty to all without any discrimination, abolition of slavery, security and safety to life, recognition and honor, justice and equality before law, and natural justice. Art.13,14, and 15 refers to freedom of movement, asylum and freedom to change nationality. Right to marriage by mutual consent is assured by art.16, and art.17 preserves the right to property. Freedom of thought and expression are covered by art,s 18 and 19. There are also rights for assembly and elections, which are assured under articles 20 and 21. Other political rights like right to work, rest, leisure, standard of living, and freedom for self development are covered by articles 22 to 25. Separate provisions are there for education and culture in articles 26 and 27. The rest of the three articles 28, 29, & 30 are of a general nature to establish a set up to implement these provisions, imposing some limitations to the freedoms subject to the general purpose of the UN Charter, and to avoid misinterpretation of the provisions in the declarations.
We can thus see that the declarations are elaborate and rather exhaustive. But alas, the declaration does not have sufficient teeth to impose it on the nations of the world. It has no legal validity or backing unless each country incorporates the same in their constitutions. The declaration itself is recommendatory in nature and is a standard prescribed for such incorporation. For example, in our own constitution, which came later on in Nov 1949, most of the provisions are incorporated in the Fundamental Rights, but with modifications. Most of the nations violate the provisions of the declaration, in what are called ‘public interests’, by enacting special emergency laws. But although not strictly legal, the Declaration of Human Rights have powerful moral authority, which is very often used (or even misused) by superpowers as a stick to beat other nations with. And they themselves, like in the case of Guantnamo Bay, are sometimes caught violating human rights.
Prof. Sankarankutty: Violation of Human Rights is naturally a matter for condemnation. All the same, certain degree of cruelty becomes necessary to be practiced by those who defend the rights. The question is how do one deal with the terrorists? Normal mild approach would not do.
Prof. Richard Hay: And where is Human Rights in the matter of freedom of expression? Take the case of Taslima Nasreen. She was hunted out for writing a novel.
Prof. Sankarankutty: She criticized the clergy and the whole community turned against her, even in India. She has a right to express her views. In Hyderabad in India, she was physically manhandled. She is a Bangladeshi who was denied any Human Rights in her own country. She was to be safe in India, but that also turned out to be unsafe for her. It is a chain of Idea Vs Politics Vs Human Rights.
Dr. Thomas: There is a view that she is uncomfortable with herself like Kamala Surayya, and that is why both of them behave eccentrically.
Sri.Kunhikrishnan: That would be no excuse for denying freedom of expression. Now to continue, there are some mechanisms to implement the Human Rights. The covenant on Economics, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture, the conventions for women’s and children’s rights and the Convention against Racial discrimination are some of them. Again, these are applicable to the member nations who have entered into the respective agreements. In so far as India is concerned it is a signatory to all major conventions. Although all cases relating to Human Rights are still dealt with under the common criminal law of the country, we have an effective monitoring system under the Human Rights Protection Act. Under this Act, there is a National Commission for Human Rights, and State Commissions in the States. The commission takes notice of human right violations and receives complaints, and proceeds to see that justice is done. One sessions court in each district is designated as Human Rights Court for giving speedy justice. The commission takes up cases suo motu when violations come to its notice.
In Law, if precisely worded, there is not much room for any free thinking. The provisions have to be strictly interpreted according to rules of interpretation. There are many books on principles of statutory interpretations, on jurisprudence, and on Natural justice. There are also binding decisions of the Supreme courts, which have the force of law. While passing comments and references in the course of a judgment, called ‘obiter dicta’, of the Apex Court are not Law. Substantial findings of the courts are as good as any enactment by parliament. But yet they are only interpretations. It would be foolish to criticize the judge, as the present day politicians often do, for a decision because he has no other alternative but to go strictly according to the principles of interpretation. If the politician cannot agree, he has the remedy to change the law, which is within his area of action. Thus in Law there is no scope for free thinking.
That is not the case with Natural Human Rights. Having been born in this world, has he not the basic rights to keep his life safe till nature takes it back, pursue happiness and avoid unhappiness, and have his minimum needs met? But naturally, others have also such rights which he has to recognize and concede. Therefore he must be prepared to compromise, and find a balance. That is what is called living in a society. Man is thus a social being.
Stretching the idea further, the question will arise whether only man has rights in this world? What about animal rights? They have also the right to live as comfortable as possible. Among themselves survival of the fittest is Nature’s rule. But vis-à-vis the humans it is the duty of man to recognize the rights of animals and to see that a balance is maintained by doing only the minimum harm to the animals in the course of pursuit of his own happiness. He should not have the attitude that all other beings are here on earth to satisfy the pleasure of Man as maintained by the captain of the ship on which Mahatma Gandhi traveled.
Sometimes one has to kill or destroy insects and animals, knowingly or unknowingly. This cannot be avoided. That is definitely part of nature. That is why perhaps the Puranic writers invented the system of giving ‘Moksha’ to their enemies whenever they needed to kill. There was nothing wrong in Rama killing Bali hiding behind a tree, because he was giving him Moksha!. So many instances of giving such Mokshas to Rakshasas and demons can be found in the Epics.
Ultimately one has to find his own balance among human rights, animal rights, insect rights, and Rakshasa (murderers, rapists, and the like) rights, to live properly in this world!
As we all know the United Nations came into being immediately after the IInd World War in 1945, as an attempt to stop the possibility of any further World Wars. In 1946 the UN appointed a commission to formulate the Human Rights that any citizen of the world could enjoy without restraint. The commission was appointed under the Economic and Social Council of the U.N. The U.N. had already affirmed its faith in Fundamental Human Rights in its charter, and the declaration of human rights was meant to pave the way for its implementation.
There are thirty articles in all in the declaration. The first twelve articles of the declaration stress equality and liberty to all without any discrimination, abolition of slavery, security and safety to life, recognition and honor, justice and equality before law, and natural justice. Art.13,14, and 15 refers to freedom of movement, asylum and freedom to change nationality. Right to marriage by mutual consent is assured by art.16, and art.17 preserves the right to property. Freedom of thought and expression are covered by art,s 18 and 19. There are also rights for assembly and elections, which are assured under articles 20 and 21. Other political rights like right to work, rest, leisure, standard of living, and freedom for self development are covered by articles 22 to 25. Separate provisions are there for education and culture in articles 26 and 27. The rest of the three articles 28, 29, & 30 are of a general nature to establish a set up to implement these provisions, imposing some limitations to the freedoms subject to the general purpose of the UN Charter, and to avoid misinterpretation of the provisions in the declarations.
We can thus see that the declarations are elaborate and rather exhaustive. But alas, the declaration does not have sufficient teeth to impose it on the nations of the world. It has no legal validity or backing unless each country incorporates the same in their constitutions. The declaration itself is recommendatory in nature and is a standard prescribed for such incorporation. For example, in our own constitution, which came later on in Nov 1949, most of the provisions are incorporated in the Fundamental Rights, but with modifications. Most of the nations violate the provisions of the declaration, in what are called ‘public interests’, by enacting special emergency laws. But although not strictly legal, the Declaration of Human Rights have powerful moral authority, which is very often used (or even misused) by superpowers as a stick to beat other nations with. And they themselves, like in the case of Guantnamo Bay, are sometimes caught violating human rights.
Prof. Sankarankutty: Violation of Human Rights is naturally a matter for condemnation. All the same, certain degree of cruelty becomes necessary to be practiced by those who defend the rights. The question is how do one deal with the terrorists? Normal mild approach would not do.
Prof. Richard Hay: And where is Human Rights in the matter of freedom of expression? Take the case of Taslima Nasreen. She was hunted out for writing a novel.
Prof. Sankarankutty: She criticized the clergy and the whole community turned against her, even in India. She has a right to express her views. In Hyderabad in India, she was physically manhandled. She is a Bangladeshi who was denied any Human Rights in her own country. She was to be safe in India, but that also turned out to be unsafe for her. It is a chain of Idea Vs Politics Vs Human Rights.
Dr. Thomas: There is a view that she is uncomfortable with herself like Kamala Surayya, and that is why both of them behave eccentrically.
Sri.Kunhikrishnan: That would be no excuse for denying freedom of expression. Now to continue, there are some mechanisms to implement the Human Rights. The covenant on Economics, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture, the conventions for women’s and children’s rights and the Convention against Racial discrimination are some of them. Again, these are applicable to the member nations who have entered into the respective agreements. In so far as India is concerned it is a signatory to all major conventions. Although all cases relating to Human Rights are still dealt with under the common criminal law of the country, we have an effective monitoring system under the Human Rights Protection Act. Under this Act, there is a National Commission for Human Rights, and State Commissions in the States. The commission takes notice of human right violations and receives complaints, and proceeds to see that justice is done. One sessions court in each district is designated as Human Rights Court for giving speedy justice. The commission takes up cases suo motu when violations come to its notice.
In Law, if precisely worded, there is not much room for any free thinking. The provisions have to be strictly interpreted according to rules of interpretation. There are many books on principles of statutory interpretations, on jurisprudence, and on Natural justice. There are also binding decisions of the Supreme courts, which have the force of law. While passing comments and references in the course of a judgment, called ‘obiter dicta’, of the Apex Court are not Law. Substantial findings of the courts are as good as any enactment by parliament. But yet they are only interpretations. It would be foolish to criticize the judge, as the present day politicians often do, for a decision because he has no other alternative but to go strictly according to the principles of interpretation. If the politician cannot agree, he has the remedy to change the law, which is within his area of action. Thus in Law there is no scope for free thinking.
That is not the case with Natural Human Rights. Having been born in this world, has he not the basic rights to keep his life safe till nature takes it back, pursue happiness and avoid unhappiness, and have his minimum needs met? But naturally, others have also such rights which he has to recognize and concede. Therefore he must be prepared to compromise, and find a balance. That is what is called living in a society. Man is thus a social being.
Stretching the idea further, the question will arise whether only man has rights in this world? What about animal rights? They have also the right to live as comfortable as possible. Among themselves survival of the fittest is Nature’s rule. But vis-à-vis the humans it is the duty of man to recognize the rights of animals and to see that a balance is maintained by doing only the minimum harm to the animals in the course of pursuit of his own happiness. He should not have the attitude that all other beings are here on earth to satisfy the pleasure of Man as maintained by the captain of the ship on which Mahatma Gandhi traveled.
Sometimes one has to kill or destroy insects and animals, knowingly or unknowingly. This cannot be avoided. That is definitely part of nature. That is why perhaps the Puranic writers invented the system of giving ‘Moksha’ to their enemies whenever they needed to kill. There was nothing wrong in Rama killing Bali hiding behind a tree, because he was giving him Moksha!. So many instances of giving such Mokshas to Rakshasas and demons can be found in the Epics.
Ultimately one has to find his own balance among human rights, animal rights, insect rights, and Rakshasa (murderers, rapists, and the like) rights, to live properly in this world!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)