A Hindu temple among flashpoints
Border disputes are long-standing issues that have caused periodic tensions between the two neighbours.
Thailand and Cambodia share more than 800km of land border. The contesting claims stem largely from a 1907 map drawn under French colonial rule that was used to separate Cambodia from Thailand.
Cambodia has been using the map as a reference to claim territory, while Thailand has argued the map is inaccurate.
An 11th century Hindu temple called Preah Vihear, or Khao Phra Viharn in Thailand, has also been at the heart of the dispute for decades, with both Bangkok and Phnom Penh claiming historical ownership. The International Court of Justice awarded the temple to Cambodia in 1962, but Thailand has continued to lay claim to the surrounding land.
Tension escalated in 2008 after Cambodia attempted to list the Preah Vihear temple as a Unesco World Heritage site, leading to skirmishes over several years and at least a dozen deaths, including during a weeklong exchange of artillery in 2011. Two years later, Cambodia sought interpretation of the '62 verdict and the ICJ again ruled in its favour, saying the land around the temple was also part of Cambodia and ordering Thai troops to withdraw.
agencies
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
16 minutes ago
- The Print
Malegaon blast probe politics will simmer till Maharashtra polls
A trial court in Mumbai gave its judgment on the case Thursday, acquitting all seven accused, including former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Pragya Singh Thakur, saying there was strong suspicion, but not enough evidence to convict them. And, the most unfortunate part is that nobody seems to be interested in finding out, least of all the government. An explosive went off during the holy month of Ramadan in Maharashtra's Malegaon in 2008. Six people died. Almost a hundred others were injured. It's been 17 years, but in the eyes of the judiciary, there are still no answers as to who was responsible for the attack. The court ordered compensation of Rs 2 lakh to the families of those who died in the attack, and Rs 50,000 for the families of those injured. But it is too little, too late. The Malegaon blast case has, after all, been a victim of politics, and justice or closure has been the biggest casualty. For this reason, the Malegaon blast verdict is ThePrint's 'Newsmaker of the Week.' 'Saffron terror' politics The Malegaon case has been in the public discourse for 17 years, more for the politics surrounding it than for any significant details regarding the investigation process. The probe in the immediate aftermath of the blasts, under the Maharashtra Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) and its former chief Hemant Karkare, had led to the arrests of a bunch of Hindutva activists, including Pragya Singh Thakur, as well as Lt Colonel Prasad Purohit, an Army officer. The accused were said to be linked to a Hindu fundamentalist group, Abhinav Bharat. India had seen a fair number of terror attacks across the country in 2008, raising questions on the efficiency of the home ministry under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. The initial revelations in the Malegaon probe gave a political opportunity to the Congress to turn the narrative. The party raised red flags on terrorism allegedly sponsored by Hindutva organisations, with some senior leaders such as P Chidambaram, Digvijaya Singh, and Sushilkumar Shinde using the word 'saffron terror'. They blamed the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for allegedly encouraging such fringe Hindutva groups. These strong statements had at the time sparked a debate on how the term 'saffron terror' defames the entire Hindu religion and how terror should not be seen through the lens of any religious colour. The BJP and RSS, meanwhile, slammed the Congress for allegedly trying to appease the minorities. Karkare was killed in the 2008 Mumbai attacks. His death too became politically controversial as the Union Minority Affairs Minister AR Antulay, a Congressman from Maharashtra, suggested that there could be a larger controversy behind the IPS officer's death. Thursday's verdict came as vindication for the BJP's political narrative, with party leaders blaming the Congress for allegedly casting Hindus in a bad light, asking for an apology. It was ironic. The government's law enforcement agency had lost a case. It had failed to show sufficient evidence to get a conviction, despite having 17 years, over ten of which were under a BJP-led government at the Centre. And yet, those in power were celebrating. Also read: Fauja Singh's death shows Indian roads remain a national emergency—474 lives lost every day Opposition busy trying to get script right After the verdict, several Congress leaders asked if Pragya Singh Thakur and others are now acquitted, then who was behind the blast? However, the question was blunted by their more emphatic attempts at distancing the Congress from the term 'saffron terror'. Talking about 'saffron terror' in a Hindu-majority democracy had hurt the Congress even back then. In today's scenario, where the BJP has been working with every small spiritual and religious outfit on the ground to consolidate the Hindutva voter base, the consequences could be even worse. So, one after the other, leaders of the Congress tried to make all the right noises, loudly speaking about how they had never coined the term 'saffron terror,' how terror has no religion, and how Congress condemns all acts of terror. The question that should have been the loudest of all—who committed the crime—came out barely as a whimper. The Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) questioned the failure of the government's law enforcement agencies with two back-to-back acquittals in terror cases—first the 2006 Mumbai train blasts and now the 2008 Malegaon blast. However, it stopped short of asking or even suggesting that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) should appeal against the trial court's decision in a higher court. After all, back in 2008, when the Shiv Sena was still undivided under Bal Thackeray's leadership and was a BJP ally, it had openly supported the Malegaon blast accused. On one occasion, party workers had even showered flower petals over the accused outside a Nashik courtroom. Last month, after the Bombay High Court tore into the Maharashtra ATS over the 2006 Mumbai train blasts probe and acquitted all 12 accused, all of whom were Muslims, the Maharashtra government promptly appealed in the Supreme Court. Now that an NIA trial court has done the same in the Malegaon blast case, neither the government nor the agency has shown any urgency in appealing to a higher court. The NIA has said it will decide whether to appeal after studying the order. The political pandemonium will continue as Maharashtra gears up for urban and rural local body polls sometime next year. For the victims and their families, any closure still seems to be a long way off. (Edited by Ratan Priya)
Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Why Arya Samaj marriages are under the scanner of courts
Also by Vineet Bhalla The Allahabad High Court last week directed the Uttar Pradesh government to investigate how 'fake Arya Samaj Societies' that solemnise marriages without verifying the age of the bride and the groom, and in violation of the state's anti-conversion law, 'have flourished throughout the State'. While hearing a case in which a Muslim man is accused of kidnapping, forcibly marrying, and committing statutory rape on a minor Hindu girl, Justice Prashant Kumar said that many marriages in the state, including those officiated by the Arya Samaj, bypass mandatory procedures under the UP anti-conversion law and marriage registration rules. The accused had claimed to have got married at an Arya Samaj temple. The Allahabad HC's directives are the latest in a series of judicial orders that have called for a scrutiny of marriages solemnised by the Arya Samaj. Such weddings are granted legal sanction under the 88-year-old Arya Marriage Validation Act. The Arya Samaj was formally established by Swami Dayanand Saraswati in 1875 as a Hindu revivalist movement. It gained prominence in northern India, especially Punjab (including present-day Pakistan), in the late 19th century. Among other things, the Arya Samaj made the very first attempts to convert persons from other faiths or ideologies to its version of Vedic, monotheistic Hinduism through a process it called 'shuddhi' (purification). One of the ways it facilitated this was by having a progressive view of inter-caste and even interfaith marriages. In effect, till the Special Marriage Act, 1954 came into force, the Arya Samaj provided the only way for a Hindu to marry out of caste or religion and to still retain their caste. In 1937, the Arya Marriage Validation Act was passed to 'remove doubts' and recognise the validity of Arya Samaj marriages. These weddings take place as per a specific set of Hindu rituals, but only require the bride and groom to be of marriageable age and declare themselves to be Arya Samajis — regardless of their caste or religion. The 1937 law states: 'Notwithstanding any provision of Hindu Law, usage or custom to the contrary, no marriage contracted whether before or after the commencement of this Act between two persons being at the time of the marriage Arya Samajists shall be invalid or shall be deemed over to have been invalid by reason only of the fact that the parties at any time belonged to different castes or different sub-castes of Hindus or that either or both of the parties at any time before the marriage belonged to a religion other than Hinduism.' The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — which covers not just Hindus but also Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs — recognises Arya Samaj marriages. Those belonging to other religions simply need to convert to Hinduism before the wedding. However, several Arya Samaj organisations complete this conversion ritual expeditiously. This means that Arya Samaj weddings are fast, often not taking more than a couple of hours. This, along with the ease of paperwork and relaxed requirements, make Arya Samaj weddings popular among eloping or runaway couples, who often belong to different castes or religions. Interfaith couples also have the option to marry under the SMA, which allows marriage without the couple having to give up their faith. However, under the SMA, couples must give a 30-day public notice before they marry, leaving them vulnerable to harassment from their families or the authorities. A petition on whether Arya Samaj marriages must comply with the requirements of the Special Marriage Act has been pending before the Supreme Court since 2022. However, since a number of BJP-ruled states have passed stringent anti-conversion laws over the last 10 years, several HCs have raised questions on the validity of Arya Samaj marriages. This is because the anti-conversion laws bar alternative legal processes for marriage involving religious conversion. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh, Section 6 of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 renders void any marriage that is preceded by an unlawful or procedurally non-compliant religious conversion. Sections 8 and 9 of the law require both a pre-conversion declaration 60 days before marriage and a post-conversion declaration within a specified timeframe to the district magistrate. The law also mandates an inquiry to verify the voluntariness and legality of the conversion process. Section 12 of the Act places the burden of proof on an accused to demonstrate that their spouse's consent for conversion was not obtained illegally. The default legal assumption, thus, is that marriages through conversion are illegal and non-consensual. This puts Arya Samaj marriages at odds with the UP anti-conversion law. The shuddhi performed before most interfaith Arya Samaj marriages does not comply with the onerous process for conversion prescribed in the anti-conversion law. Courts have, over the last few years, expressed concern over the mass-scale solemnisation of marriages by Arya Samaj organisations without sticking to lawful conversion practices or verifying marriage eligibility conditions. The Allahabad HC and Madhya Pradesh HC have ordered police investigations into instances where these organisations allegedly married minors using forged documents, and facilitated conversions without following procedures mandated by the anti-conversion laws of these states. In 2022, the Supreme Court orally observed that the Arya Samaj has 'no business' issuing marriage certificates, while the Delhi High Court last year directed an Arya Samaj temple to use verified witnesses to ensure that marriages performed by the temple were genuine. Justice Kumar referred to one such judgment by the Allahabad HC from May in his order on Thursday. He observed that the marriage between the Muslim man and the Hindu girl would be invalid because the girl was a minor and the man did not convert as per the UP anti-conversion law.
News18
39 minutes ago
- News18
'Triumph Of All Patriots': Pragya Singh Thakur Reacts To Acquittal In 2008 Malegaon Blast Case
Last Updated: The NIA special court in Mumbai on Thursday acquitted all seven accused, including Pragya Singh Thakur, in the 2008 Malegaon blast case. Former BJP MP Pragya Singh Thakur on Saturday called her acquittal by the court in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case a victory of 'Sanatan Dharma" and 'all patriots". The NIA special court in Mumbai on Thursday acquitted all seven accused, including Pragya Singh Thakur, in the 2008 Malegaon blast case. 'The Congress, along with all other non-believers, who are the originators of saffron terrorism and Hindu terrorism, have been disgraced. The victory of saffron, Hindutva, and Sanatan has led to the triumph of all Sanatanis and patriots, many congratulations," she said in an X post. भगवा आतंकवाद और हिन्दू आतंकवाद के जन्मदाता कांग्रेस सहित सभी विधर्मियों का मुंह हुआ काला..भगवा ,हिंदुत्व और सनातन की विजय पर समस्त सनातनियों और देशभक्तों का हुआ बोलबाला बहुत-बहुत बधाई….जय हिन्दूराष्ट्र, जय श्री राम…— Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur (@sadhvipragyag) August 1, 2025 During the verdict, the court noted that the prosecution had failed to establish the case beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the accused, including Pragya Singh Thakur, Major (retired) Ramesh Upadhyay, Sudhakar Chaturvedi, Ajay Rahirkar, Sudhankar Dhar Dwivedi (also known as Shankaracharya), and Sameer Kulkarni. The court concluded that there was no evidence indicating explosives were stored or assembled at the home of Prasad Purohit, another accused in the case. The court directed the Maharashtra government to compensate the blast victims, granting Rs 2 lakh to the families of those who died and Rs 50,000 to the injured. Over the course of the trial, testimonies from 323 prosecution witnesses and 8 defence witnesses were reviewed before the final decision. All the accused were cleared of charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the Arms Act, and other related laws. The case stems from a blast on September 29, 2008, when a bomb attached to a motorcycle exploded near a mosque at Bhikku Chowk in Malegaon, killing six people and injuring 95 others. view comments First Published: August 02, 2025, 07:07 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
