Kartarpur Corridor shut from India's side indefinitely, Pak keeps doors open
The Union ministry of home affairs' bureau of immigration announced the closure of the corridor 'till further orders'.
The closure has halted the pilgrimage of Indian Sikh devotees to the historic Gurdwara Darbar Sahib in Kartarpur, Narowal district, Pakistan, while Pakistan continues to keep the corridor open on its side.
On Wednesday morning, around 150 Sikh pilgrims who had arrived at the Dera Baba Nanak integrated check post in Gurdaspur district were turned back after waiting for over 90 minutes.
In contrast, Pakistan has maintained that the Kartarpur Corridor remains open on its end.
Ramesh Singh Arora, president of the Pakistan Sikh Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (PSGPC) and a former MLA, appointed as ambassador for the corridor, said, 'The corridor is open from our side. It is a conscious decision of our government to continue welcoming the pilgrims.'
He added that the corridor was a symbol of peace, brotherhood and harmony propagated by Guru Nanak Dev. 'On Tuesday, we received about 200 pilgrims from India and suddenly, the next day, the arrival was zero. When we checked, we were told that India had stopped pilgrims from going to Kartarpur Corridor. Despite the corridor's close down from India's side, the Pakistan government has decided to keep it open as a goodwill gesture,' Arora told HT over WhatsApp.
He added that PSGPC had also started the process for facilitating pilgrimage visas to Indian pilgrims for June to mark the martyrdom of Guru Arjan Dev.
The corridor, inaugurated jointly by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and then Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan on November 9, 2019, fulfilled a long-standing demand of the Sikh community to access one of their holiest shrines without a visa.
Under the bilateral agreement, Indian devotees have visa-free, dawn-to-dusk access to the shrine, which has turned out be a meeting point of people from Indian and Pakistan Punjabs, divided since the Partition of 1947.
The 4.7-km passage connects Dera Baba Nanak Sahib in India's Gurdaspur and Gurdwara Darbar Sahib in Pakistan's Kartarpur, believed to be the final resting place of Guru Nanak Dev.
Despite its brief closure during the Covid-19 pandemic after just four months of inauguration, the corridor was reopened on November 17, 2021, and both countries renewed the agreement for another five years in 2024.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
26 minutes ago
- Indian Express
HC asks Bengal migrant to appear after he returns from Bangladesh
A day after 19-year-old Bengali migrant Amir Shiekh, who was detained by the Rajasthan Police in June and later pushed into Bangladesh, returned to India on Tuesday, the Calcutta High Court on Wednesday told his family to 'bring back the son first' before it will hear the matter. Amir's father Jiyem Shiekh had moved the Calcutta High Court last week seeking judicial intervention to bring his son back. While the state government and the Centre submitted their respective reports, the High Court upon hearing that Amir was brought back, observed, 'Bring back your son first, we will hear the matter.' Amir's counsel, on Wednesday, told the Division Bench of Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Reetobrata Kumar Mitra that a copy of Amir Sheikh's birth certificate was enclosed with the petition, maintaining that he is a citizen of India and was a resident of Kaliachak in Malda district. 'The grandparents of Amir Shiekh has Indian passport, he has school certificates and all documents. They have not seen anything but they had just pushed him into Bangladesh. Prior to that he was tortured in Rajasthan. Now we are being told that the Border Security Force (BSF) have brought him back.' Deputy Solicitor General (DSG) Rajdeep Majumder, appearing for the MEA and the BSF told the court that Amir had attempted to cross over to Indian territory from Bangladesh on August 12. As he could not produce appropriate documents as regards his identity, he was apprehended and handed over to the officer-in-charge, police station-Basirhat, by the BSF. But no formal case has yet been registered against Amir, he added. He submitted that if the petitioner approaches the police authorities, Amir would be handed over to the petitioner subject to production of all necessary records and upon execution of undertaking, if any. TMC MP Samirul Islam posted on X, 'This evening, Amir Sheikh was handed over to his family from the Basirhat police station. Nearly a month after being unlawfully pushed back to Bangladesh by the BSF, Amir is happy to be back on Indian soil — and his family is equally happy to have him home.' While he questioned the authorities' claims regarding Amir Sheikh's deportation, he posted, 'Amir Sheikh was deported to Bangladesh by the Rajasthan Police with the help of the BSF… we stood by his family.. helped Amir's father filed a Habeas Corpus petition in the Calcutta High Court. Under this pressure, the BSF has brought Amir back to West Bengal. The BSF has already handed him over to the Basirhat Police. Today, the court has asked the police to hand over Amir to his father. Yet strangely, they are now claiming that Amir was never deported! Then what happened? How did he end up in Bangladesh?' 'Don't worry—they have another explanation. They claim Amir 'inadvertently' went to Bangladesh on his own!…The same BJP leaders who scream that hordes of infiltrators are flooding India from Bangladesh now want us to believe that Amir willingly crossed… into that very country through illegal routes! Do they have no sense of shame? Or do they simply think the people of Bengal are fools? If it's the latter, let me tell you, anti-Bengal forces — Bengal's people will give you a fitting lesson. How much lower will you stoop?' he said.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Multiple documents allowed in Bihar SIR voter friendly: SC
The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that the Election Commission of India's (ECI) decision to expand the list of acceptable documents for proof of citizenship under the special intensive revision (SIR) in Bihar seemed 'voter-friendly' and gave electors more options to establish eligibility. Multiple documents allowed in Bihar SIR voter friendly: SC A bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that asking for only one document could be restrictive, but allowing voters to submit any one of several options was more inclusive. 'If they ask for all 11 documents, it is anti-voter. But if any one document is asked for, then…They are expanding the number of documents…it is now 11 instead of 7 items by which you can identify yourself as a citizen,' it remarked. The bench also pointed out that the list of documents is ordinarily prepared after taking feedback from several government departments to maximise coverage. 'This is a battle between a constitutional entitlement and a constitutional right-- between ECI's power of superintendence under Article 324 and the electors' right to vote under Article 326,' said the bench. The court is seized of a bunch of petitions challenging the ECI's June 24 directive ordering an SIR ahead of the upcoming Bihar assembly polls. Petitioners, which include NGOs, political leaders and activists, have alleged that the process, if left unchecked, could disenfranchise lakhs of legitimate voters and undermine free and fair elections. The discussion in the court on Wednesday centred on whether the SIR framework advances inclusion while remaining within the bounds of the law, and whether ECI has the statutory space to tailor procedures for a special revision distinct from an ordinary summary exercise. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing TMC lawmaker Mahua Moitra and some others, argued that the list was not truly inclusive because most of the 11 documents had extremely low coverage in Bihar. 'Aadhaar is the one document with the highest coverage in the last 15 years—50–60%, maybe more. Water, electricity, gas bills are excluded. Indian passport coverage is less than 1–2%. All other documents have between 0–3% coverage. If you don't have land, three of them are out. Residence certificates don't exist in Bihar. This impressive list of 11 is nothing but a house of cards,' Singhvi said. On the non-acceptance of Aadhaar, Singhvi said its exclusion would disproportionately impact genuine voters. To this, the bench replied that those excluded would have to approach the high court, unlike in Assam where Foreigners' Tribunals exist. The court also urged not to 'project Bihar' negatively, noting the state's strong representation in national services. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), contended that the SIR enumeration form had 'no basis in law' and alleged that 65 lakh voters had been removed 'just like this' without due process. He argued that removing voters required amending the Representation of the People Act (RPA), not issuing administrative directives. Calling for a stay on the exercise, he said: 'You cannot take me off the electoral roll just by giving a cut-off date. At inception, it's dead.' The court, however, noted that voter lists 'cannot be static' and periodic revisions were necessary. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, also representing ADR, alleged that booth-level officers had filled enumeration forms themselves, sometimes for deceased persons, instead of collecting them from voters. He also questioned how such a large number of people could be served notices and have their cases decided within a month, calling it a 'fait accompli' that would arbitrarily finalise the rolls. Bhushan reiterated his claim that ECI removed the searchable draft rolls from its website after a press conference by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on 'bogus voters'. But the bench said it had 'no knowledge' of any press conference. On publication requirements, the court clarified that while online disclosure was welcome, the legal standard was defined under Rule 10 of the Registration of Electoral Rules, 1961. Senior advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for one of the petitioners, argued that the SIR process itself was unlawful and unprecedented. 'The draft roll is meant for inclusion. If removal happens, then they have no recourse. These 65 lakh people being ousted is illegal,' he said. During the hearing, the court observed that Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 appeared to give ECI latitude to conduct a special revision 'in such manner as it may think fit,' especially in exceptional situations, while the default regime remains the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. It agreed to explore whether this 'elbow room' allows limited additions, such as extra forms or document options, tailored to a special revision, without violating the statutory scheme. The court will continue hearing the matter on Thursday. Seeking dismissal of the petitions against SIR, ECI has defended its decision, citing demographic changes, urban migration, and the need to remove inaccuracies from rolls that have not undergone intensive revision for nearly two decades. It maintains that it has plenary powers under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 to carry out SIR. In its latest affidavit filed on August 9, the Commission stressed that the 1950 Act and the 1960 Rules do not require it to prepare or publish a separate list of the nearly 65 lakh persons not included in the draft rolls, or to state the reasons for each non-inclusion. It clarified that exclusion from the draft does not amount to deletion from the electoral roll and assured the court that no name will be removed without prior notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a reasoned order by the competent authority. The petitions by ADR and others challenge the ECI's June 24 notification initiating SIR under Section 21(3) of the 1950 Act. The petitioners argue that the ECI's demand for only 11 specified documents, such as birth or matriculation certificates, passport, domicile certificate, etc, as proof of citizenship lacks statutory basis. They further claim that this restrictive documentation requirement could disenfranchise a large number of legitimate voters, especially those from marginalised communities. They have also questioned whether ECI is empowered to conduct such a revision for verifying citizenship, arguing that this function rests with the Union government. SIR has become a major political flashpoint ahead of the Bihar assembly elections scheduled for later this year. Opposition parties in the INDIA bloc have staged protests in Parliament and written to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla seeking a special discussion on what they call an 'unprecedented' revision so close to state polls. Eight parties, including Congress, RJD, Samajwadi Party, DMK, Trinamool Congress and Shiv Sena (UBT), have warned that the exercise could be replicated nationwide. On August 8, Union home minister Amit Shah, addressing a rally in Bihar's Sitamarhi, launched a sharp attack on Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi and the INDIA bloc, accusing them of opposing the revision because 'names of infiltrators' were being removed from the lists. 'Infiltrators have no right to vote. Names of infiltrators must be removed from the voters' lists. But the Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Congress are opposing SIR in Bihar because the names of infiltrators are being deleted,' Shah said. While the government has accused the Opposition of politicising electoral reforms, the Opposition contends that the SIR's timing, methodology and documentation requirements threaten the fundamental right to vote of genuine electors, particularly among the poor, migrants, and minorities.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Pak outspending India 3:1 in US lobbying
Pakistan is outspending India 3 to 1 on payments to lobbying and strategic communications firms in the US in an attempt to gain greater access to the hallways of power in Washington DC, according to filings with the US Department of Justice reviewed by HT. The Trump administration's interest in Pakistan has risen considerably after the two countries agreed to boost cooperation in the critical minerals sector. (AFP) Pakistan spends an estimated $600,000 per month on strategic lobbying efforts to gain greater access to the White House, Congress and US government agencies. The country, which has faced a protracted economic crisis over the last few years , has hired a battery of six lobbying and legal firms to expand its outreach in Washington DC. By contrast, India, with an economy over 10 times the size of Pakistan's, spends roughly $200,000 a month and has hired only two lobbying firms. The numbers are relevant, especially given Indian concerns about the inroads Pakistan has managed to make into the second Trump administration. Islamabad has secured a meeting for Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir with President Trump. It has also managed to get the Trump administration interested in Pakistan by touting the prospects of US investments in critical minerals and oil reserves. In addition, Islamabad has won acknowledgement of its role as a key ally in the global fight against terror from Washington in recent months. Lobbying and strategic communications firms are a mainstay of power politics in Washington DC. In exchange for a hefty fee, elite firms help foreign governments gain access to key political institutions such as the White House, the State Department, the Pentagon and Congress. These firms also offer strategic communications and reputation management services, which help push a foreign government's preferred narrative to the media and the general public. Pakistan is currently spending generously on six lobbying and communications firms with an estimated monthly expenditure of $600,000, according to public filings with the US Department of Justice. A few of these firms have close ties to the Trump Administration. At the top of this list is Orchid Advisers LLC, which is being paid $250,000 a month to secure Pakistan's access to the Trump administration as well as to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Orchid has also hired Squire Patton Boggs — one of Washington DC's most well-connected legal firms — as a subcontractor to provide legal support and help reach out to US lawmakers in an attempt to strengthen US-Pakistan relations. Next on the list is Seiden Law, which is paid $200,000 a month by Islamabad to establish economic partnerships between Pakistan's private sector and US counterparts, particularly in the field of critical minerals. Seiden, which signed a contract with Pakistan's embassy in America in April, also agreed to help Pakistan gain preferential market access for its products in the US market. Strikingly, Seiden also agreed to help Pakistan deal with the 30% reciprocal tariff announced by the Trump administration in April. The firm seems to have delivered on its promises. Pakistan's tariff rate was reduced to 19% after a trade deal was struck between Islamabad and Washington in July. What's more, the Trump administration's interest in Pakistan has risen considerably after the two countries agreed to boost cooperation in the critical minerals sector. A key part of the reason for Seiden's success may be its subcontractors. Javelin Advisors, which is being paid $50,000 a month by Seiden to aid Pakistan, was founded by Donald Trump's former bodyguard Keith Schiller and former Trump Organisation executive George Sorial. Robert Seiden, the founder of Seiden Law, has been hired as a private investigator for Trump's presidential campaigns in the past. Javelin Advisors has also agreed to help Pakistan push its narrative on Kashmir and India to Congress, the White House and the general public. Another one of Seiden's subcontractors is Conscience Point Consulting — a firm run by a former Assistant Secretary of Commerce Nathaniel Wiedecker — which is paid $25,000 a month for its efforts on behalf of Pakistan. Adding to this is Pakistan's $150,000 a month contract with Qorvis, a public relations and reputation management firm. Qorvis prides itself on its skills in 'strategic narrative development' and 'targeted communications', which it has put at the service of a number of major foreign clients. Most notably, Qorvis took the government of Saudi Arabia on as a client in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and worked to rehabilitate the Kingdom's image inside America. Stacked up against this is India's $200,000 monthly spend on two firms. The first is SHW Partners, helmed by former Trump adviser Jason Miller. 'SHW's representation will encompass providing strategic counsel, tactical planning, and government relations assistance on policy matters before the US government, the US Congress, state governments, academic institutions, think tanks, and any other relevant stakeholders as required,'the firm disclosed on April 24 about its contract with the Indian Embassy in Washington DC, which brings in $150,000 a month for the newly created lobbying firm. Miller, a longtime political operative closely associated with Donald Trump, rose to national attention in 2016 while serving as Trump's chief media spokesperson. Known for his combative and outspoken defence of the future president, he was initially in line to take over as White House communications director following Trump's election victory in 2016. However, he withdrew from consideration after allegations surfaced that he had engaged in an extramarital relationship with a fellow Trump campaign staffer. Miller has also subsequently been accused of rape. Despite these controversies, Miller has continued to maintain a strong presence in Trump's inner circle. He played an advisory role in Trump's 2020 re-election effort and returned again as a key strategist for the 2024 presidential campaign. India has also hired BGR Associates, one of Washington's most prominent and influential lobbying firms, to further its interests. By one estimate, BGR was the third largest lobbying firm in Washington DC by revenue and has represented South Korea, Serbia, Panama and Cyprus, among others. The firm was founded by a former Republican governor and retains links to the Trump administration. Sean Duffy, now Secretary of Transportation in the Trump Administration, worked at BGR before joining the Cabinet. While an updated contract between BGR Associates and the Embassy of India cannot be found on the Department of Justice website, people aware of the matter confirmed that BGR still lobbies for India. Over the last three years, BGR has been paid $50,000 a month for its services, bringing India's estimated total lobbying spending to $200,000 a month. While India's spending is considerable, Pakistan's 3 to 1 financial advantage may allow it to reach more political and economic decisionmakers. This has implications for Indian diplomacy, particularly as it tries to hold Pakistan accountable for terrorist attacks on Indian soil and apprise US decisionmakers of its position on sensitive issues like Kashmir.
