US Alone, Enables Continued Israeli Mockery of International Justice

UN Human Rights Council adopts five resolutions against Israel

compiled by Cem Ertür
Featured Writer
Dandelion Salad


The UN Human Rights Council has roundly condemned Israel in resolutions tabled under the agenda item 7, “Human Rights Situation in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories”.


Five resolutions have been adopted against Israel, amounting to the greatest number of condemnatory resolutions on a single country:

  • Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan
  • The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination
  • Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan
  • The grave human rights violations by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem
  • Follow-up to the report of the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict

______________________________


1) Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan
(voted on 24/03/2010: 31 in favour, 1 against, 15 abstentions)


In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.2) on human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan, adopted with thirty-one in favour, one against, and fifteen abstentions, the Council calls upon Israel to desist from its continuous building of settlements and from changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and legal status of the occupied Syrian Golan, and emphasizes that the displaced persons of the population of the occupied Syrian Golan must be allowed to return to their homes and to recover their property; further calls upon Israel to desist from imposing Israeli citizenship and Israeli identity cards on the Syrian citizens in the occupied Syrian Golan, and to desist from its repressive measures against them and from all other practices that obstruct the enjoyment of their fundamental rights and their civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights; calls upon Israel to allow the Syrian population of the occupied Syrian Golan to visit their families and relatives in the Syrian motherland through the Quneitra checkpoint and under the supervision of the International Committee of the Red Cross, and to rescind its decision to prohibit these visits, as it is in flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; also calls upon Israel to release immediately the Syrian detainees in Israeli prisons, some of whom have been detained for more than 24 years; further calls upon Israel to allow delegates of the International Committee of the Red Cross to visit Syrian prisoners of conscience and detainees in Israeli prisons accompanied by specialized physicians to assess the state of their physical and mental health and to protect their lives; determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken or to be taken by Israel, the occupying Power, that seek to alter the character and legal status of the occupied Syrian Golan are null and void, constitute a flagrant violation of international law and of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and have no legal effect; again calls upon States Members of the United Nations not to recognize any of the above-mentioned legislative or administrative measures; and requests the Secretary-General to report on this matter to the Council at its sixteenth session.


The result of the vote was as follows:

in favour (31): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay and Zambia.

against (1): United States of America.

abstentions (15): Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, France, Gabon, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

______________________________


2) The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination
(voted on 24/03/2010: 45 in favour, 1 against)


In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.27) on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, adopted with forty-five in favour, one against, and no abstentions, the Council reaffirms the inalienable, permanent and unqualified right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including their right to live in freedom, justice and dignity and to establish their sovereign, independent, democratic and viable contiguous State; also reaffirms its support for the solution of two States, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security; stresses the need for respect for and preservation of the territorial unity, contiguity and integrity of all of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; and urges all Member States and relevant bodies of the United Nations system to support and assist the Palestinian people in the early realization of their right to self-determination.


The result of the vote was as follows:

in favour (45): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, France, Gabon, Ghana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay and Zambia.

against (1): United States of America.

abstentions (0):

______________________________


3) Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan
(voted on 24/03/2010: 46 in favour, 1 against)


In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.28) on Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan, adopted with forty-six in favour, one against, and no abstentions, the Council condemns the new Israeli announcement on the construction of 120 new housing units in the Bitar Elite settlement, and 1,600 new housing units for new settlers in the East Jerusalem neighbourhood of Ramat Shlomo, and calls upon the Government of Israel to immediately reverse its decision which would further undermine and jeopardize the ongoing efforts by the international community to reach a final settlement compliant with international legitimacy, including the relevant United Nations resolutions; urges the full implementation of the Access and Movement Agreement of 15 November 2005, particularly the urgent reopening of Rafah and Karni crossings, which is crucial to ensuring the passage of foodstuffs and essential supplies, as well as the access of the United Nations agencies to and within the Occupied Palestinian Territory; calls upon Israel to take and implement serious measures, including confiscation of arms and enforcement of criminal sanctions, with the aim of preventing acts of violence by Israeli settlers, and other measures to guarantee the safety and protection of the Palestinian civilians and Palestinian properties in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; demands that Israel, the occupying Power, comply fully with its legal obligations, as mentioned in the Advisory Opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice; and urges the parties to give renewed impetus to the peace process.


The result of the vote was as follows:

in favour (46): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, France, Gabon, Ghana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Uruguay and Zambia .

against (1): United States of America.

abstentions (0):

______________________________


4) The grave human rights violations by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem
(voted on 24/03/2010: 31 in favour, 9 against, 7 abstentions)


In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.29) on the grave human rights violations by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, adopted with thirty-one in favour, nine against, and seven abstentions, the Council demands that the occupying Power, Israel, end its occupation of the Palestinian land occupied since 1967, and that it respect its commitments within the peace process towards the establishment of the independent sovereign Palestinian State; strongly condemns the Israeli military attacks and operations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; demands that the occupying Power, Israel, stop the targeting of civilians and the systematic destruction of the cultural heritage of the Palestinian people; condemns the disrespect for religious and cultural rights provided for in core human rights instruments and humanitarian law by Israel, in the Occupied Palestinian Territories; demands that Israel immediately cease all diggings and excavation works beneath and around Al-Aqsa mosque compound and other religious sites in the old city of Jerusalem; calls for the immediate cessation of all Israeli military attacks and operations throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory; demands that the occupying Power, Israel, immediately stop its illegal decision to demolish a large number of Palestinian houses in East Jerusalem; demands that Israel, release Palestinian prisoners and detainees including women, children and members of the Palestinian Legislative Council; calls upon Israel to lift checkpoints and open all crossing points and borders according to relevant international agreements; and demands that Israel immediately lift the siege imposed on the occupied Gaza Strip.


The result of the vote was as follows:

in favour (31): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Uruguay and Zambia.

against (9):Belgium, France, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Slovakia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and United States of America.

abstentions (7):Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Japan, Republic of Korea, Slovenia, and Ukraine.

______________________________


5) Follow-up to the report of the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict
(voted on 25/03/2010: 29 in favour, 6 against, 11 abstentions)


In a resolution (A/HRC/13/L.30) on follow-up to the report of the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, adopted with twenty-nine in favour, six against, and eleven abstentions, as orally amended, the Council reiterates the call by the General Assembly upon the Government of Israel to conduct investigations that are independent, credible and in conformity with international standards into the serious violations of international humanitarian and international human rights law reported by the Fact-Finding Mission, with a view to ensuring accountability and justice; reiterates the urging by the General Assembly for the conduct by the Palestinian side of investigations that are independent, credible and in conformity with international standards into the serious violations of international humanitarian and international human rights law reported by the Fact-Finding Mission, with a view to ensuring accountability and justice; calls upon the High Commissioner to explore and determine the appropriate modalities for the establishment of an escrow fund for the provision of reparations to the Palestinians who suffered loss and damage as a result of unlawful acts attributable to the State of Israel during the military operations conducted from December 2008 to January 2009; decides to establish a committee of independent experts in international humanitarian and human rights laws to monitor and assess any domestic, legal or other proceedings undertaken by both the Government of Israel and the Palestinian side, in the light of General Assembly resolution 64/254, including the independence, effectiveness, genuineness of these investigations and their conformity with international standards; and invites the International Committee of the Red Cross and interested parties and stakeholders to consider the launching of an urgent discussion on the legality of the use of certain munitions, as recommended by the Fact-Finding Mission. Draft resolution L.30 was presented by Pakistan at the end of yesterday’s meeting (please see separate release, HRC/10/045E).


The result of the vote was as follows:

in favour (29): Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovenia, South Africa, Uruguay and Zambia.

against (6): Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, Ukraine, and United States of America.

abstentions (11): Belgium, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, France, Japan, Madagascar, Mexico, Norway, Republic of Korea, and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

______________________________


sources:


[1]  Human Rights Council renews mandates on right to food and on elaboration of optional protocol to children’s rights convention

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights website, 24 March 2010

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=9940&LangID=E


[2]  Council establishes committee on experts in context of follow-up of Goldstone report, renews mandate on Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights website, 25 March 2010

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=9942&LangID=E

Obama tells Pak to catch 26/11 brain

Obama tells Pak to catch 26/11 brain

K.P.NAYAR

Ashfaq Kayani, Barack Obama

Washington, March 26: Securely hidden from public view, belying the head-butting, handshakes and the toasts between Americans and Pakistanis taking part in their first ministerial-level “strategic dialogue” this week, US president Barack Obama asked for the arrest of Hafiz Saeed, one of the masterminds of the Mumbai terror attacks in 2008.

Although the top-level Pakistani delegation to the talks, including chief of army staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, has been in Washington since Monday, Obama has not met any member of the delegation till the time of writing.

According to sources at the heart of the bilateral dialogue, however, during pre-talks, inter-agency discussions among US officials and key members of his cabinet at the White House, Obama made it clear that the US-Pakistan strategic partnership cannot be a partnership of hearts and minds unless the Pakistani government firmly targets Saeed’s Lashkar-e-Toiba, which has acquired the image here of the next al Qaeda.

In taking a tough line on Saeed’s arrest, which has been demanded by India, Obama disagreed with the views of the Pentagon, US intelligence agencies and sections of the state department led by special envoy for Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, all of whom are for treating Pakistan with kid gloves on anything to do with India, including the Mumbai terror attacks.

The President appears to have been somewhat cornered into his hardline stand after a key hearing last fortnight of the South Asia sub-committee of the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, at which every member of the panel — except one — called for heavy-handed action against the Lashkar by the Pakistanis.

“This group of savages needs to be crushed,” the highly respected chairman of the committee, Gary Ackerman, said at the hearing without mincing words.

Such was the strength of opinion against Islamabad’s double-dealing over Lashkar that even Shuja Nawaz, a Pakistani-American scholar whom Pakistani lobbyists had planted at the hearing as a witness, was forced to put the gloss that “the former trainers and associates from the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) perhaps now have an opportunity of independently working with the LeT”.

This week’s strategic dialogue made absolutely no progress on the issue of a nuclear deal for Pakistan, similar to the one the US signed with India. The subject does not find even a passing mention in a joint statement released at the end of the talks.

In fact, an American source privy to the entire proceedings blamed the sudden brouhaha over a nuclear deal for Pakistan on a section of the Indian media that thought up the issue as a headline-grabbing curtain raiser for the talks.

“The issue has been injected periodically by the Pakistanis into our talks directly and through third parties since 2006,” conceded the source. “This time the media asked about it at press conferences. If we are asked in public, we are not going to sour the mood by saying that Pakistan cannot have a nuclear deal. We have been diplomatic in public but very clear in private on this issue.”

The Americans are understood to have told Qureshi and Kayani that Pakistan must first put in place proper export control laws which will give the US Congress some confidence that there is at least a fig leaf of rationale behind Islamabad’s request for a nuclear deal.In 1999, as talks between then Planning Commission deputy chairman Jaswant Singh and the US deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott got under way on India’s nuclear programme, the Americans similarly asked for new, water tight export control laws on Indian statutes as a guarantee against nuclear proliferation.

An expert on such laws was then posted to the US embassy in New Delhi for six months and she worked with Rakesh Sood, then joint secretary in South Block for disarmament, on new laws. That was six years before the US announced a nuclear deal with India.

This experience offers a road map for any such deal with Pakistan, if at all. Besides, an American source involved in the talks with Pakistan pointed out that “if this president had been in power in 2005, there would have been no nuclear deal even with India. So where is the question of him initiating any such deal for Pakistan?”

A $1.2 trillion timebomb ticks in China

A $1.2 trillion timebomb ticks in China

Venkatesan Vembu / DNA



Hong Kong: A major fiscal shock looms over China, arising from local governments’ shadowy finances and banks’ reckless lending to them as part of the frantic rush to boost GDP growth in China following the global economic slowdown in 2008.

The fiscal crisis represents “the biggest risk to China’s economic and financial stability over the next two years” and has the potential to more than completely wipe out Chinese banks’ equity base, and trigger an equity market panic when it bursts, says Credit Suisse chief regional economist Dong Tao.

At the heart of the crisis are about 8,800 investment vehicles set up at the local government level to take up massive infrastructure projects to prop up GDP growth to make up for the export slowdown owing to the global economic recession.

These vehicles —- called urban development investment corporations (UDICs) —- were set up “in part to circumvent rules prohibiting local governments from borrowing,” notes Louis Kuijs, senior economist in the World Bank’s China office. Local governments injected land and cash into these UDICs as equity, and the land was used as collateral to get bank loans for infrastructure projects.

“UDICs share many common characteristics with the investment vehicles that caused the financial crisis in the US,” adds Tao. “They lack transparency, are high on leverage, rely on short-term funding and land-based valuation, and their assets are illiquid.”

And although it’s very hard to determine how much bank lending has been channelled to the UDICs, Tao estimates outstanding loans to be about 8 trillion yuan (about $1.2 trillion), which is about 24% of China’s GDP, 83% of overall new lending in 2009, and a whopping 180% of the equity base of all Chinese banks.

Estimates by other economists paint a grimmer picture.

Victor Shih of Northwestern University, who has studied local governments’ debt, estimates total bank lending to UDICs (including further lendings) to balloon to 24.2 trillion yuan ($3.5 trillion).

“If large portions of the debt end up being taken over by the central government, that will add significantly to the official government debt,” says Kuijs. In Tao’s estimation, if the central government absorbed 8 trillion yuan of UDICs’ liabilities, China’s debt-to-GDP ratio would explode from an estimated 19.1 in 2010 to an estimated 50.3 in 2010.

The key problem with the UDIC financing model is its use of land as collateral, points out Tao. “If there is a change in the assessment of the value of the land that UDICs pledge to banks as collateral, we may have a serious problem.”

In particular, when property prices in China fall —- as Tao expects them to in the second half of this year, owing to an oversupply of finished apartments and expected interest rate hikes to fight inflation —- “banks will review the value of the land they have as collateral, become risk-averse, and initiate a loan call-back.”
If even one or two UDICs fail as a result, Tao reckons, “it will trigger a wider loan call-back and trigger an equity market panic.”

Flagging the risk of policy errors, he adds that Beijing is “too complacent about how a property market correction could aggravate the UDIC problem.”

Zhu Min, deputy governor of China’s central bank, the People’s Bank of China, however, dismisses concerns about the stability of Chinese banks arising from local governments’ debt as exaggerated. Greater economic activity from China’s enhanced infrastructure would offer sufficient payback on loans for these projects, he observed in a speech at the 13th Credit Suisse Investment Conference in Hong Kong on Thursday. “In 1998, following the Asian financial crisis, China unveiled a 400 billion yuan stimulus package, almost all of which went into building highways,” he recalled.

And although the highways remained empty for a while, the roads catalysed economic activity, and today they are packed, he added. “So long as China keeps growing and these loans have gone into real infrastructure projects, things will be okay.”

The problem with UDICs can be solved right away if the central government cracks the whip and asks the central finance ministry, the local governments and the banks to absorb the losses, Tao believes. But Beijing perhaps lacks a sense of urgency, and it may be difficult for the three parties to agree on who should bear how much of the losses.

The UDICs’ financial problems would affect future local government investment spending and could lead to a rise in banks’ non-performing loans, points out Kuijs. “Problems would emerge if the infrastructure projects do not generate enough growth and revenues to pay the operating and interest costs and repay the loans.”

The time duration of the crisis, when it blows up, could determine the severity of the crisis, reasons Tao. “If the crisis lasts just two weeks, there will only be short-lived market panic. If it lasts two months, fixed asset investments could be affected. And if it lasts two years, China may go down the path of Japan in the 1990s —- but without a property safety net.” However, he expects any crisis to be an “abrupt but short one” —- for three reasons.

In China, the government owns all banks, “and once Beijing realises the magnitude of the risks, it will order banks to keep lending.” Of course, banks’ shareholders would lose out.

Secondly, although local governments are low on cash, the central government is cash-rich, and “we could see another 4 trillion yuan or even 8 trillion yuan fiscal spending program to boost growth and stabilise the banking sector.” And thirdly, China is, in the global context, “too big to fail” —- and in any case it has a roadmap in the form of the US bailout of banks.

“You have a Western recipe —- and you have lots of fresh materials (in the form of China’s fiscal strengths)… Even a mediocre chef can cook a reasonably good meal,” says Tao.
But even as he sounds the alarm over local governments’ debt, Tao puts it in perspective. “What’s happening in China is not very different from what’s happening elsewhere: the government leveraging up during a global financial crisis to stimulate the economy.” The critical difference is that China’s starts with a low debt-to-GDP ratio, about 19% currently.

“It’s a hiccup, and a big hiccup at that,” he acknowledges. “But nevertheless, this is not something that will derail my fundamental view of China over the next decade… We remain bullish on China’s long-term outlook.”

Headley Names 6 Pak Armymen In Karachi Project

NEW DELHI: David Coleman Headley has identified five-six serving officers of Pakistan army among the leaders of the Karachi Project, which seeks to organize attacks on India through fugitive Indian jihadis being sheltered in Karachi by the ISI-Lashkar combine.

Sources said that besides serving Majors Samir Ali and Iqbal of Pakistan army, Headley has told his FBI handlers about the role of one Colonel Shah and at least two other officers of the Pakistan army in the Karachi Project.

On February 26, TOI was the first to report about the role of serving officers of the Pakistan army – Majors Samir Ali and Iqbal – in the Karachi Project. These two have been mentioned in the dossier that was submitted to visiting Pakistani foreign secretary Salman Bashir on February 25.

This disclosure demolishes Pakistan’s claim that terrorism against India being directed from its soil was limited to non-state actors. This came on a day when sources in the home ministry disclosed that an NIA team preparing to leave for the US to question Headley will be accompanied by a magistrate.

The magistrate will be sent when the US grants permission for direct access to Headley to record his statement under CrPC 164, which is admissible in an Indian court of law, sources said. The statement would be crucial when a chargesheet is filed against Headley and his collaborators.

A statement made before a magistrate under section 164 of CrPc is admissible in a court of law and can help India’s efforts to get Headley’s record as judicial evidence.

FBI’s chargesheet against Headley also mentions Lashkar members A, B, C and D – identified as Sajid Mir, Zakiur Rahman Lakhvi, Muzammil and Abu Hamza or Abu Al Qama – as those who, along with Headley, plotted the attack on Mumbai. The role of top Lashkar jihadis was mentioned also by Ajmal Kasab, the lone Mumbai gunman to have been captured. But what will make Headley’s statement seconding the same before a magistrate significant is that Pakistan cannot trash it as having been extracted under “force by Indian cops”.

This falls in line with the statement made by home minister P Chidambaram on March 20 after his telephone conversation with US attorney general Eric Holden. “It is my understanding that India would be able to obtain access to David Coleman Headley to question him in a properly constituted judicial proceeding. Such judicial proceeding could be either pre-trial or during an inquiry or trial,” the minister said.

He added that the NIA and other agencies had been asked to “quickly prepare the documents necessary to start a judicial proceeding in which Indian authorities could require David Coleman Headley to answer questions and/or to testify.”

As Headley’s extradition appeared difficult, India was immediately focussing on getting direct access to him to know details about the terror plot.

Under the plea bargain, India can have access to the terrorist by deposition, video conferencing or through Letters Rogatory. Sources said India will like to explore all three.

Headley had last week pleaded guilty to all the 12 terror charges of conspiracy involving bombing public places in India, murdering and maiming persons and providing material support to foreign terrorist plots and Pakistan-based LeT besides aiding and abetting the murder of six US citizens in the 26/11 attacks that killed 166 people.

Naxal Leader Allegedly Commits Suicide

Naxal leader Kanu Sanyal, 78, commits suicide

Agencies | 2010-03-23 14:50:00
Siliguri (West Bengal): Kanu Sanyal, one of the founding members of the Naxal movement in India, was on Tuesday found hanging in his thatched hut at Seftullajote village. He was 78.

Sanyal is alleged to have committed suicide at his residence in the Siliguri sub-division of Darjeeling district, police said.

Sanyal, a bachelor, was suffering from age-related ailments. The body has been sent for post-mortem, Inspector General of Police (North Bengal) K L Tamta said.Sanyal was a founder of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) formed in 1969.

The Naxalite movement started from Naxalbari, a small village in North Bengal on May 25, 1967. It was led by Charu Majumdar and Sanyal.

Pakistan Names 12 Taliban Leaders In Custody

Govt ordered to produce Afghan Taliban in court

LAHORE: Lahore High Court Chief Justice Khwaja Muhammad Sharif on Friday ordered the federal and the Punjab governments to make necessary arrangements for producing 12 arrested Afghan Taliban before a magisterial court as required under the law.

The chief justice passed the orders while hearing two identical petitions, challenging the possible extradition of the arrested Afghan Taliban after their counsel pointed out that they had not been produced before a court. He argued that under the Constitution, an arrested person should be produced before a magisterial court within 24 hours of his/her arrest while the same constitutional provision had not been implemented in the case.

“The additional advocate general, representing the Punjab government, and deputy attorney general, representing the federal government, are directed to get the needful done in line with submission made by the petitioners’ counsel,” the chief justice ordered.

Earlier, the Ministry of Interior submitted a reply before the court, saying it had no concern with the matter and its name might be deleted from the list of the respondents. At this, the DAG submitted that as far as the Ministry of Defence was concerned, the petitioners had not made it a necessary party in the petition. He, however, said he, on his own, had sought a reply from the Defence Ministry but he needed some time in this regard. The court admitted his plea and adjourned hearing till April 12. The petitions were filed by Defence of Human Rights Commission chief Khalid Khawaja.

The arrested Taliban are Mulla Abdul Ghani Baradar, Mulla Abdul Salam, Maulvi Kabir, Mulla Muhammad, Ameer Muawiyia, Tayyab Agha, Hakeemuddin Mehsud, Mulla Tayyab Popalzai, Abdul Qayum Zakir, Musa and Mohtasim Agha Jan.

ISI Needs New Phantom Terror Leader to Chase–Qari Zafar, Back From the Dead

[Look for a dramatic expansion of anti-Shia sectarian attacks, Lashkar e-Jhangvi's specialty.  SEE:   Pakistani Taliban confirm death of Qari Zafar ; Wanted Punjabi militant dies in Wednesday’s drone attack]

Qari Zafar alive, plotting attack on DGK oil fields

By Ali Raza

LAHORE: Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) commander and Acting Ameer of the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) Qari Zafar, claimed to have been killed in a drone attack in North Waziristan on February 24, 2010, is still alive and evolving strategies to carry out terrorist attacks across the country, especially in the Punjab, The News has learnt.

“Qari Zafar and Rana Afzal, terrorists/commanders of the Punjab TTP, are very much alive and are planning to strike sensitive targets in major cities of the Punjab,” revealed a letter written by the commissioner Lahore Division to the Capital City Police Officer, Lahore among others.

“Qari Zafar is now operating with new code name Imam Rabbani and Rana Afzal’s new code name is Wali Manan,” the letter revealed. The letter said one of the likely targets of Qari Zafar and Rana Afzal was the DhodakOil Depot and Fields in DG Khan. It said they had also planned to kidnap foreigners working there for getting their arrested leaders released.

The commissioner Lahore, in another letter, warned security and law-enforcement agencies that Qari Zafar’s group had assigned three terrorists to target the brother and son of the prime minister of Pakistan in the coming days. Sources in the Interior Ministry revealed that intelligence agencies gathered the information regarding the mission and immediately shared it with all concerned.

The letter, quoting a report of an intelligence agency, said terrorist Obaid Ullah of the TTP (Qari Zafar Group), based in Miramshah (NWFP), had deputed three terrorists of his group to target Mujtaba Gilani (brother of prime minister) and MPA Abdul Qadir Gilani, the son of prime minister Gilani. The letter also mentioned the names of terrorists deputed to complete the task. They are Abu Azzam, Abu Mughera and Talah. The letter mentioned that all the three terrorists belonged to different districts of south Punjab. The letter further claimed that the terrorists had already conducted reconnaissance and were waiting for an opportune time to carry out the task.

The Interior Ministry sources said Qari Zafar hailed from Karachi and was the former Imam of Bilal Mosque, Model Colony, Karachi. They said Qari Zafar had joined the TTP in North Waziristan prior to the Pakistan Army’s operation in South Waziristan.