India's Legal System Actively Safeguards Minority Rights: Khalid Naveed Calls for Balanced Narrative
Mahbubnagar: Highlighting that India's legal system is actively safeguarding the rights of minorities, social activist, Khalid Naveed, who is also President of Youth Welfare organisation, in Mahbubnagar, has called for a more accurate and balanced portrayal of the condition of Indian Muslims, urging both domestic and international observers to move beyond alarmist narratives.
In a press statement on Tuesday, Khalid expressed concern over misleading information flooding the international media and emphasized the need to counter misleading portrayals by certain international media outlets and human rights organizations, which he said paint an exaggeratedly grim picture of Muslim safety in India.
"Is it really that bad?" Naveed asked, pointing to a host of legal, governmental, and civil mechanisms that actively protect minority rights in India. He cited high-profile legal actions against hate speech as strong evidence of India's commitment to rule of law and secular values.
He highlighted the cases of Yati Narsinghanand and Maharashtra MLA Nitesh Rane, where law enforcement agencies acted swiftly against communal incitement. Multiple FIRs were filed in Ghaziabad against Narsinghanand for derogatory remarks about Prophet Muhammad, while Rane was booked for inflammatory speeches on so-called 'love jihad' and 'land jihad.' 'These cases demonstrate that even political figures are not immune from legal accountability when communal boundaries are breached,' he noted.
Naveed further underlined the robust legal framework that underpins minority protections in India. He pointed out that the Supreme Court has repeatedly reaffirmed secularism as a constitutional cornerstone—most notably in its interpretation of the Citizenship Amendment Act, where it asserted that citizenship cannot be decided solely on religious grounds. State High Courts in Punjab and Kerala, he said, have also stepped in to protect Muslim land rights and religious properties from encroachment, showcasing the judiciary's vigilance at multiple levels.
The National Commission for Minorities (NCM), a statutory body, plays a key role in monitoring safeguards and addressing grievances of minority communities, including Muslims, he added.
Alongside legal protections, Naveed stressed that India has significantly expanded its welfare infrastructure for minorities in recent years. Building on the 2006 Sachar Committee report that exposed deep socio-economic gaps, the Ministry of Minority Affairs now runs more than 50 schemes aimed at educational support, skill development, and financial inclusion. In 2022–23 alone, thousands of scholarships were awarded to Muslim students under pre-matric, post-matric, and merit-based programs. Initiatives such as Nai Manzil provide vocational training for school dropouts, while the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana has widened banking access in Muslim-majority districts.
He also cited the 2021 Pew Research Center survey, which revealed that 95% of Indian Muslims expressed pride in their Indian identity, and 85% believed Indian culture was superior in some ways—a powerful indication of inclusion and belonging rather than alienation.
Naveed praised the role of civil society and grassroots organizations in maintaining communal harmony. He pointed to the NCM's 2023 initiative that formed rapid response teams—comprising Muslim leaders, police, and human rights advocates—to respond swiftly and fairly to communal incidents.
"India's pluralistic ethos stands strong even under scrutiny," Naveed said, drawing comparisons with Western democracies where Muslim minorities often face deeper marginalization and political underrepresentation. He urged observers to distinguish between isolated incidents and the broader institutional mechanisms that protect minority rights.
"In spite of challenges, India remains a safe and inclusive country for minorities, especially Muslims. The legal, social, and governmental structures in place speak for themselves,' he observed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Wrong identity of deceased lets murder accused walk free, police probe in question
Critical investigative lapses, including the failure to conduct DNA testing to confirm the identity of a body found on the tracks, led to a murder accused walking free, in Meerut, on Wednesday. Narendra Kumar Dubey, imprisoned for over two years on murder charges, was acquitted by a Meerut court on Wednesday, after the supposed victim, Mohammad Aitabh, was found alive. The alleged assault took place on a Delhi-Ayodhya train on December 15-16, 2022. One Alok Kumar had reported a violent altercation in the train's General Coach D-2 via a railway helpline, claiming a passenger was beaten and thrown out near Tilhar Railway Station, Shahjahanpur. Based on a video provided by Kumar and witness statements from two passengers, Ajni and Dildar, police arrested Dubey, accusing him of throwing the victim from the moving train. The Shahjahanpur GRP station house officer, Rehan Khan, stated that a body had been recovered from the tracks in Tilhar area. The police showed photographs of the body to witnesses, who identified it as the same person thrown from the train. Photographs of the body were posted on social media for identification. On December 21, Mohammad Yakub from Tarsan Sumera village in Kudni police station area of Muzaffarpur, Bihar, arrived at Shahjahanpur district hospital mortuary. He claimed the body was that of his son, Mohammad Aitabh. After formal identification, Yakub performed the last rites as per Muslim customs in Shahjahanpur. However, no DNA testing or forensic analysis was conducted to verify the body's identity, a glaring oversight in the investigation. Six months later, Aitabh returned home from Gujarat, shocking his family and neighbours who had believed him dead. Locals recorded videos and informed the police. Shahjahanpur police brought Aitabh in for questioning. In his statement before the court, Aitabh revealed he was never on that train. He had gone to Delhi to learn embroidery and tailoring and later moved to Gujarat for work. He had no mobile phone and therefore lost contact with his family. Based on this testimony and witness statements, additional sessions judge, Pankaj Kumar Srivastava, acquitted Narendra Kumar Dubey of the murder charge. The court further noted that the person who was thrown from the train was someone else altogether. If that unidentified individual's family wishes to pursue legal action against Narendra Dubey, the present judgment would not hinder such proceedings. Meanwhile, police officials explaining the process followed in cases of unidentified bodies being found, said that once parents or immediate family members identify a body, it takes away the need for ordering a DNA or any other forensic test. To buttress their claim, they also pointed out that the court, in its order, had passed no strictures against the force or the way the investigation was conducted in the case. However, the question still stands. Whose body was found on the tracks?
Time of India
38 minutes ago
- Time of India
Will Trump get to pick US Supreme Court justices in his second term?
Legal experts suggest that Donald Trump may have the opportunity to appoint additional Supreme Court justices during a potential second term, potentially reshaping the court's direction for decades. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Roberts may face pressure to retire, allowing Trump to install younger, like-minded individuals. Experts have said Trump might appoint loyalist justice. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Can Trump overhaul judiciary? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Can Trump pick judges? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Trump may seek loyalty over ideology During his first term in office, President Donald Trump appointed 226 federal court judges, including three US Supreme Court justices. Trump successfully installed judges who promoted his political agenda, including overturning the landmark ruling from 1973 that declared the Constitution guaranteed the right to abortion, Roe v. something unusual appears to be unfolding in his second term. Rather than reinforcing Trump-era policies, federal judges — even those appointed by Trump himself — are now halting key parts of the president's second-term initiatives. So, a question that keeps popping up on everyone's mind is that- Will Donald Trump appoint Supreme Court judges in the US?Trump may have the opportunity to appoint new Supreme Court justices during his second term in office, legal experts told Newsweek. During his first term in office, Trump appointed three justices to the US Supreme Court, thus significantly influencing the judiciary system. Trump may have another chance to nominate a justice in the coming years- —an appointment that could shape the Court's direction for decades. Such a move would likely have profound effects on public policy, particularly in areas like abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, immigration, and executive Justices Clarence Thomas (76), Samuel Alito (75), and Chief Justice John Roberts (70) are already facing calls from some on the right to consider retirement in the coming years. With Republicans currently holding control of the presidency and a 53-seat majority in the Senate, they are in a strong position to confirm new Supreme Court justices without Democratic argue that Republicans should take a lesson from Democrats, who have previously faced setbacks when their justices chose not to retire during favorable political Urman, a law professor at Northeastern University, told Newsweek that while it's impossible to predict exactly when a justice might step down, Justices Alito and Thomas are the most likely candidates for retirement—primarily to allow a like-minded successor to be appointed. However, he noted that this isn't a certainty, as both justices are now part of the majority after spending years as dissenting voices on the Court, a position they deeply from the right may not be convincing to the justices, he said."Judges and especially Justices are very independent, and I don't think they will be too influenced by the pressure campaign," he said. "It's ultimately a very personal decision and the Ginsburg example is important but she was older and faced more health issues than the current justices."None of the current justices on the court have publicly said they plan to retire anytime federal prosecutor Gene Rossi told Newsweek Thomas could wait until after the 2026 midterms to avoid giving Democrats a motivating issue ahead of the elections."However, if that happens, President Trump will pick a very young and conservative nominee because in his mind, he got burned with Justice Barrett," he said. "And he wants to put his further imprint on the tenor of the High Court."Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek: "It's likely Trump appoints at least one Supreme Court Justice, and maybe two. The odds increase over his four-year term, especially with Justices Thomas and Alito being in their mid-70s.""Trump's Cabinet and officer appointees during his second term have been largely loyalists without the experience or independent streaks that frustrated him during his first term. His Supreme Court appointment(s) will likely reflect those same values, especially given the importance of the judiciary in standing in the way of his executive orders."Stephen Wermiel, a constitutional law professor at American University, told Newsweek, "It's uncertain whether Trump will have another Supreme Court vacancy. But there's a good chance conservatives will begin urging Roberts, Thomas, and Alito to retire after this term so Trump could install younger, like-minded justices.'Legal analysts believe Trump may prioritize personal loyalty over ideological alignment when choosing future Supreme Court McQuade, a former federal prosecutor, told Newsweek that frustration with decisions made by Justices Barrett and Roberts may drive Trump to look for candidates who are not only conservative but personally loyal to him."Trump could seek justices who won't break from him on major rulings," McQuade said. "That could have a major impact on upcoming cases dealing with birthright citizenship, transgender healthcare, and the limits of executive power."Justice Amy Coney Barrett has occasionally sided against Trump's positions, including a ruling against deporting alleged gang members under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. Her independent stance has drawn criticism from Trump-aligned analyst Urman agreed that loyalty may guide Trump's future selections, noting that he 'appears to value loyalty above all else in his nominees.' Any new appointments, Urman added, would likely align more closely with the judicial philosophies of Justices Thomas or Alito than Barrett.
NDTV
38 minutes ago
- NDTV
Hong Kong Appoints New Zealand Judge To Top Court
Quick Read Summary is AI generated, newsroom reviewed. A New Zealand judge has been appointed to Hong Kong's top court amid overseas jurist exodus. William Young, 73, joins five other overseas non-permanent justices from the UK and Australia. Hong Kong invites overseas judges to its Court of Final Appeal to uphold common law jurisdiction. Hong Kong: A New Zealand judge has been appointed as a justice of Hong Kong's top court, after a years-long exodus of overseas jurists following Beijing's imposition of a sweeping security law on the finance hub. Hong Kong's lawmakers on Wednesday approved the appointment of William Young, 73, to join five other overseas non-permanent justices from the UK and Australia. Hong Kong is a common law jurisdiction separate from mainland China and invites overseas judges to hear cases at its Court of Final Appeal. Their presence has been seen as a bellwether for the rule of law since the former British colony was handed back to China in 1997. Beijing passed a national security law on Hong Kong in 2020, following huge and often violent pro-democracy protests in the Chinese city the year before. Since then, several overseas judges have quit the Court of Final Appeal without finishing their terms, while others have not renewed their appointments. The lineup of overseas judges has gone from 15 at its peak down to five, not including Mr Young. The newly appointed justice, who retired from his role as a New Zealand Supreme Court judge in April 2022, is expected to start in Hong Kong this month. Hong Kong leader John Lee accepted a recommendation to appoint Mr Young in May and praised him as "a judge of eminent standing and reputation". Cases at the top court in Hong Kong are typically heard by a panel of four local judges and a fifth ad hoc member, who may be a foreign judge. In January, Hong Kong's chief justice said recruiting suitable overseas judges "may be less straightforward than it once was", given geopolitical headwinds. The government has defended the security law as necessary to restore order after the 2019 protests and said the city remains a well-respected legal hub.
