PUCL criticizes Cauvery Aarti, says money should be spent on reducing river pollution
The People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), Mysuru, has criticised the State government's proposal to organise a Cauvery Aarti at an estimated cost of nearly ₹100 crore and against the recommendations of the Department of Finance.
The PUCL said in a release that the traditional 'Baagina' offered to the river whenever KRS fills to the brim, and the Threethotbava rites at Talacauvery are enough religious offerings to the river.
In a release, Kamal Gopinath, president of PUCL, and V. Purushotam, vice-president, said instead of the proposed Cauvery Aarti, the same amont can be spent to take concrete initiatives to reduce the pollution in the river.
The river is polluted by chemicals from fertilizers flowing into the river from the coffee and other estates of Kodagu, and from agricultural and industrial pollutants as also effluents flowingin to the river all along its route to Mysuru. The amount stipulated for Cauvery Aarti can as well be spent on reducing the river pollution, said the PUCL.
It said the State government should also focus on the restoration of natural rainwater flows into the river all along its route, by curbing the unabated real estate developments which are cutting off and impinging on such flows.
This apart, the pollution and wasting of its tributary, Lakshmanthreetha, owing to the affluents from the tobacco industry of Hunsur and surrounding regions is a long-pending matter of concern which the State government appears to be completely unmindful about, said the PUCL.
The government should also lend its focus and finances to restoring the various lakes and other water bodies in the Cauvery basin which are under threat, it added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
a day ago
- NDTV
If Trump's Tariffs Are For China, Why Are They Hurting Canada Instead?
'We can't be kicked around any longer.' These words from Ontario Premier Doug Ford echo the sentiment of the vast majority in Canada as it faces a fresh onslaught of Trump tariffs. From June 4, the tariff on steel and aluminium doubled from 25% to 50%. President Trump made the announcement last week in Pittsburgh and signed an executive order on Tuesday. Canada will be one of the most impacted countries because it is the largest supplier of steel and aluminium to the US. Almost 90% of these metals from Canada are exported to American companies, as per data from Statista. Canada's steel constituted 22% of America's total imports over the last year, according to the US International Trade Administration. Brazil, Mexico, and South Korea come next. China is America's 10th-largest supplier of steel. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has called the doubling of tariffs 'unjustified and illegal' but pointed out it's a global measure and not targeted at Canada alone. However, the timing of the tariff increase is also significant, coming just 10 days ahead of the G7 Summit hosted by Canada. Trump will be travelling to Kananaskis in Alberta for the summit. How Canada Retaliated In March, after the first round of tariffs on steel and aluminium, Canada used a dollar-by-dollar approach to levy reciprocal tariffs on $12.6 billion worth of aluminium products and $3 billion worth of steel products from the US, as well as additional imported US goods worth $14.2 billion. The list of additional products affected by counter tariffs included tools, computers and servers, display monitors, sports equipment, and cast-iron products, as per a statement by the Department of Finance, Canada. Canada also filed an appeal against the US in the World Trade Organization (WTO). It argued that the measures, which terminate Canada's exemption from additional duties on certain steel and aluminium products and increase duties on aluminium articles, were 'inconsistent with US obligations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994". The Impact Is Heavy Canada was already reeling under the impact of the 25% tariff on aluminium and steel. There were job losses as businesses were impacted. In March, the Canadian media had widely reported layoffs hitting people in the steel towns of Ontario. As many as 100 workers at Ivaco Rolling Mills were either laid off temporarily or permanently. The Canada Metal Processing Group had also indicated that they would be forced to cut their workforce due to the uncertainty caused by the tariffs and a possible plunge in demand. The Metals Service Centre Institute reported that the Canadian steel shipments in April 2025 were down by over 16% compared to the same period last year, while aluminium shipments dropped even more, around 18% in comparison to April 2024. To check these losses, Canada launched the Trade Impact Program, which would utilise $5 billion over two years to help exporters tap new markets for Canadian products. Canada has also anticipated harmful takeovers, so the federal government has updated the Investment Canada Act Guidelines to protect Canadian companies. The readout from the government in March said these steps were being 'taken at a time when our economy is facing unprecedented challenges". Trump's Case Trump's protectionist measures fly in the face of the global trade regime carefully crafted after World War II, of which the US was the main architect. Trump cites national security to justify his actions to protect the metal industry. He repeated this in Pittsburgh, saying that a robust steel industry is essential for a reliable supply for the defence industry. "We're not going to have World War III. But if we ever had - I mean, steel is a business you have to have. If we ever had a war - if we ever had a war, you need steel. War with China. Oh, do you think they'll keep selling us steel?" he said. Trump claims that the 25% tariffs in the first round protected American steel mills from shutting down and prevented China from dumping its steel in the US. His administration has been stressing that the offshoots of the heavy tariffs would boost the domestic industry, increasing and protecting American jobs in the steel industry. A Flawed Argument While China is the world's largest steel manufacturer and exporter, it is only the 10th-largest steel supplier to America. It supplied less than 2% steel to the US over the last year. Compare this to the 22% coming from Canada, and it becomes clear who is impacted more by this move. Steel and aluminium tariffs have had an impact on American consumers as well. Ontario Premier Doug Ford stated that the Americans are already paying 16% more on any product that uses these metals. The rising cost of cars and building homes is an immediate and major fallout. Sports equipment and canned goods are some other products that are impacted by this measure. Overall, for industry, tariffs create a non-competitive domestic environment, which can impact quality. Tariffs almost always attract retaliation. Canada has already taken some steps in this direction with counter tariffs on some $90 billion worth of goods from the US. Ontario, the province most impacted by the steel and aluminium tariffs, is pushing for more retaliatory measures. For the moment, Carney has indicated that there will be no immediate measures from Canada because they are already in talks with the US on their trading relationship. However, he has stressed that they will "take some time, not too much time' to respond. All eyes are now firmly on the meeting between Carney and Trump at the G7 summit.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Time of India
Jenu Kuruba leaders refuse to call Nagarahole a tiger reserve
Mysuru: Jenu Kuruba tribal leaders from Karadikallu Atturu Kolli Haadi inside the Nagarahole Tiger Reserve in Ponnampet taluk of Kodagu district said on Monday that they will never call Nagarahole a tiger reserve. This is not a tiger reserve. It is just Nagarahole. We were forcibly moved out of our soil in the name of forest-tiger protection, Shivu JA, JK Timma, and Shivamma said. Speaking at a press meet organised by the Nagarahole Indigenous Land Assertion Committee, People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), and Communities Network Against Protected Areas (CNAPA), they alleged that those who don't know anything about the forest are encroaching on the forests in the name of conservation. Shivu stated that all the 52 Jenu Kuruba families now staying in their ancestral land are happy with what is available inside the forest now. "For decades, we were made to struggle in the lane houses," he said. He alleged that forest department officials misused the provisions of the law to displace them. Timma recollected his experience with a tiger conservation project where he demonstrated his understanding of the forest. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Homens acima dos 40 anos estão comprando esse óculos militar Óculos Max Saiba Mais Undo "Unfortunately, those who don't know anything about the forest and wild animals are allowed to encroach on the forests while those who know the forest are sent out of the forests," he charged. He alleged that the tiger conservation projects resulted in the death of tigers. Shivamma urged govt agencies not to displace them as they are leading a real life in their own hamlets. Nitin Rai, an independent scholar who has looked at the socio-ecological impacts of wildlife conservation, and Pranab Doley, a community leader from the Mising community, Kaziranga, Assam, and convener of the Greater Kaziranga Land and Human Rights Committee, who is also the founding member of CNAPA, spoke during the press meet. Rai alleged that govt agencies are misusing the increase in the number of tigers to dilute the forest laws for the benefit of mining and other activities.
Indian Express
28-05-2025
- Indian Express
Supreme Court asks Assam Human Rights Commission to inquire into alleged fake encounters in state
The Supreme Court Wednesday asked the Assam Human Rights Commission (AHRC) to inquire into allegations of fake police encounters in the state 'for advancing it to its logical conclusion' after a petitioner pointed to as many as 171 such incidents. Deciding a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), a bench of Justices Surya Kant and N K Singh noted that 'after minutely scanning' the 'data' placed before it by the petitioner, 'prima facie it seems that barring a few cases, it is difficult to infer that there has been a procedural breakdown or the PUCL guidelines were flagrantly violated.' 'The records furnished by the state themselves indicate that some instances may warrant further evaluation to ascertain whether the guidelines laid down in PUCL have been meticulously complied with in both letter and spirit,' the bench added, and decided to entrust the inquiry to AHRC. The SC set aside the January 12, 2022, order passed by a full bench of AHRC disposing of the issue, and directed that the matter be reinstated on the board of the Commission 'for necessary inquiry into the allegations, independent and expeditiously in accordance with law.' The court noted, 'It has come to our knowledge that the…The Commission is now headed by an erudite jurist who is a retired chief justice of the High Court, whose judicial acumen and integrity inspire confidence. This court has every reason to believe that under his stewardship, the state human rights commission will decide the duties with diligence, sensitivity, and an abiding commitment to the constitutional values.' In the 1996 People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) judgement, the top court laid down guidelines against arbitrary state action, reaffirming the primacy of the rule of law as the bedrock of India's constitutional democracy. The guidelines laid down by the court provided for registration of FIR, independent investigation, magisterial inquiry, involving forensic science, informing the next of kin, compensation, and information to the National Human Rights Commission, and the state human rights commission, among others. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court underlined the importance of the human rights commissions in protecting vulnerable groups, ensuring accountability, and strengthening institutional mechanisms for enforcing human rights. 'The domestic human rights architecture in India is supported by a robust statutory framework that complements the constitutional guarantees enshrined in part three and the directive principle of state policy… At the centre of this framework stands the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, which institutionalised the commitment of the Indian state to uphold and monitor human rights in a structured and independent manner. The act serves as the primary statutory instrument for the promotion and protection of human rights in India,' said the court. The court pointed out that its judgement in the extrajudicial execution victims case 'has rightly underscored the roles of the human rights commissions such as that of protector, adviser, monitor, and educator of human rights'. 'Applying this understanding of the human rights framework to the instant matter, we have no hesitation in holding that the role of the human rights commission both at the national and state level is paramount in a democratic polity governed by the rule of law.' 'In a country as vast and diverse as India, marked by complex sociopolitical dynamics and systemic inequities, these commissions provide an essential form of accountability, transparency, and remedy against human rights violations.' The court noted that though the petitioner had brought a compilation of as many as 171 incidents before it, 'however…mere compilation or aggregation of cases does not by itself call for omnibus judicial directions.' 'Issuance of broad brush directives without individual scrutiny could result in a miscarriage of justice either by shielding the guilty or by stigmatising legitimate action by public servants discharging their duty under challenged circumstances,' added the court.
