SDPI demands SIT probe into murders of Ashraf, Abdul Rahiman
Mangaluru: Abdul Jabbar, brother of
mob lynching
victim Ashraf from Pulpalli Village, Sultan Battery taluk, Wayanad district, Kerala, said that the family is yet to get justice even after meeting speaker UT Khader, district minister Dinesh Gundu Rao, and chief minister Siddaramaiah.
Jabbar was speaking at a protest organised by the SDPI demanding justice for Ashraf and Abdul Rahiman in Mangaluru on Monday. "They (those who lynched Ashraf) played cricket after killing Ashraf. Imagine the mindset of those people. Anyone will try to shift a person to the hospital if found in critical condition. Moreover, they tried to portray it as an unnatural death. We have no other option but to fight for justice," he said.
Demanding stringent action against the accused in mob lynching, Jabbar said that Ashraf was killed just for one reason: that he was a Muslim. "We have trust in police here. Take stringent action against the accused in all murder cases, be it the Ashraf murder or any other murder. Make every effort to make this a peaceful district. No such instances should recur in this district," he added.
Anwar Sadath S, SDPI Mangaluru Rural District unit president, said that police and the district administration should take a tough stance against all leaders who make provocative speeches. "The murder of Abdul Rahiman would not have taken place if police had taken appropriate action against those who deliver hate speeches. The govt should give a free hand to police. We have faith in police, who are capable of maintaining law," he said.
SDPI state committee member Riyaz Kadambu said that the party will continue its constitutional protests against the murders. He urged the govt to form an SIT to investigate the murders of Ashraf and Rahiman.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
41 minutes ago
- Indian Express
How the new Trump travel ban on 12 countries differs from his previous ‘Muslim ban'
Effective Monday (June 9), citizens from 12 nations, primarily from Africa and the Middle East, will be denied entry into the US, following a proclamation signed by President Donald Trump on Wednesday (June 4). The move revives an effort from his first term (2017-21) to ban entry to vast numbers of immigrants and visitors. Citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen will be banned from entry. The proclamation also announced restrictions on people travelling from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. While Trump has batted for banning entry to Muslim migrants and visitors during his first term, his efforts to institute a travel ban faced a Supreme Court challenge before it was implemented in a limited capacity. This ban was revoked by Joe Biden when he became President in 2021. The current ban, while expected, is expected to hold up against court challenges, and builds on an executive order signed on his first day, authorising US national security agencies to conduct 'a robust assessment of the risk that countries posed to the United States, including regarding terrorism and national security.' The present move comes on the heels of a terror attack by an Egyptian man in Colorado earlier this week, with the Trump administration officials promising a crackdown in its aftermath. 'The recent terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, has underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstay their visas,' Trump said while announcing the travel ban. 'We don't want them.' Here is what to know about the new ban, and how it compares to his efforts from his first term. In a Fact Sheet shared by the White House, the Trump administration said that the country-specific bans would 'encourage cooperation with the subject countries in recognition of each country's unique circumstances'. This opens the possibility for each country to seek bilateral talks and discussions with the US to ease the restrictions, in an effort similar to the trade deals following Trump's tariff announcements. The countries thus far have been identified based on: This rationale has also been used to restrict entry to people from seven nations, without instituting an outright ban. Countries Identified Travel Ban State-sponsored terrorism, or a safe haven for terrorists Iran, Somalia, Libya, and Afghanistan Cuba Lack of a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents Afghanistan, Eritrea, Haiti, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen Venezuela High visa overstay rate Afghanistan, Burma (Myanmar), Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Haiti, Sudan Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, Venezuela Not accepting their removable nationals Burma (Myanmar), Eritrea, Iran, Somalia Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Venezuela The fact sheet explicitly calls Iran and Cuba state sponsors of terrorism, and Somalia a terrorist safe haven. Interestingly, it recognises that Afghanistan is controlled by the Taliban, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) group, without outright condemning them. The fact sheet also sees 'hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian aliens' who entered the US during Biden's term as a national security threat. It also notes that the governments in Yemen and Somalia lack command and control of their territories, with Somalia in particular standing out for the extent to which this is the case. The ban exempts certain categories of individuals from the travel ban: For one, the current ban must be viewed in the context of Trump's larger, systematic crackdown on immigration. Since his return to the White House in January, he imposed a national emergency at the country's southern border, denying entry to asylum-seekers, has authorised nationwide immigration raids, and barred international admissions to Harvard University. Legal experts cited in a report in The New York Times believe the current iteration of the travel ban would withstand legal scrutiny better than the efforts in his first term. 'They seem to have learned some lessons from the three different rounds of litigation we went through during the first Trump administration,' Stephen Vladeck, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center told the NYT. 'But a lot will depend upon how it's actually enforced — and whether it's applied in ways that are themselves unlawful or even unconstitutional.' Vladeck noted that the announcement came after several months of Trump's inauguration, compared to the ban in the first term that came into place just a week after he became President. In the run-up to the 2016 US elections and after becoming President in 2017, Trump repeatedly expressed his desire to impose a 'Muslim ban', a 'total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.' This was accompanied by incendiary rhetoric, with Trump saying 'Islam hates us' and that the US was 'having problems with Muslims coming into the country.' Further, this iteration of the travel ban does not single out Muslim nations, but focuses on administrative issues like visa overstay, or a threat to national security from political instability from the other nation. Trump enacted his first travel ban on January 27, 2017, barring entry to citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for a 90-day period. This was overturned by a federal judge the next month. A second attempt at a travel ban on all these countries, barring Iraq, was made that March, and spared individuals with an existing green card or valid visa. This was overturned by two federal judges that month, who ruled that it was illegal to ban travel from half a dozen countries. A third travel ban was announced in September 2017, barring entry to most citizens of Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen. The move exempted Iranian nationals with valid student and exchange visitor visas. Chad was subsequently removed from this list after its administration reached out to the US. This ban was finally upheld by the Supreme Court in June 2018, which said the president has authority over national security concerns relating to immigration. A fourth travel ban was announced in January 2020, banning entry to immigrants from Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania. Tourists and visitors entering the US temporarily were exempted. All travel bans were subsequently revoked by Biden, upon assuming the presidency in 2021.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Suspect in murder of Tunisian man to appear before French judge: Prosecutors
Representative Image (AI-generated) A Frenchman accused of murdering his Tunisian neighbour in the south of France will appear before an anti-terrorism judge on Thursday, the national anti-terror prosecutor's office said. Christophe B is accused of killing Hichem Miraoui in an attack that sparked alarm over rising racism in France and Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau described as "racist" and "perhaps also a terrorist crime". Anti-terrorism prosecutors, known by their French acronym PNAT, have taken over the case -- the first time a far-right racist attack has been treated as a "terrorist" offence since the unit was created in 2019. Christophe B, a French national in his 50s, shot and killed Miraoui, a Tunisian man in his 40s, on Saturday in the southern town of Puget-sur-Argens before wounding another neighbour, a Turkish national. He posted racist videos on social media both before and after the attack, according to regional prosecutor Pierre Couttenier. A source close to the case told AFP that, unlike jihadist attacks often linked to state-designated "terrorist" organisations like the Islamic State group, far-right attacks are assessed on a case-by-case basis, as they typically lack connections to such organisations. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo The decision to refer them to the anti-terror prosecutors depends on the suspect's profile, the severity of the act, and whether there was a clear intent to seriously disrupt public order through intimidation or terror. Christophe B wanted to "disrupt public order through terror", according to a source close to the case. According to French daily Le Parisien, the suspect said he "swore allegiance to the French flag" and called on the French to "shoot" people of foreign origin in one of his videos posted on social media. Why this hatred? Political and religious leaders have sounded the alarm over growing anti-Muslim acts in France, which increased by 72 per cent in the first quarter, with 79 recorded cases, according to interior ministry figures. The shooting followed the murder of a Malian man in a mosque in April, also in southern France and the burning of a Koran near Lyon at the weekend. Retailleau said Tuesday that the killing of Miraoui was "clearly a racist crime", "probably also anti-Muslim" Chems-Eddine Hafiz, the rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris, called on French president Emmanuel Macron to speak out. "It is time to hold accountable the promoters of this hatred who, in political and media circles, act with complete impunity and incite extremely serious acts," said Hafiz. "Remind people of the reality that we are citizens of this country," he added. Tributes poured in from shocked neighbours and friends mourning the murder of Miraoui, with more than a dozen bouquets placed outside the barbershop where he worked in the quiet town of Puget-sur-Argens. "I don't understand why he was killed. Why all this hatred?", said Sylvia Elvasorre, a 65-year-old pensioner who lives next to the hair salon, tears in her eyes. France is home to the largest Muslim community in the European Union, as well as the largest Jewish population outside Israel and the United States. There has also been a rise in reported attacks against members of France's Jewish community since Palestinian militant group Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023 and the Israeli military responded with a devastating military offensive on the Gaza Strip. France's Holocaust memorial and three Paris synagogues and a restaurant were vandalised with paint on Saturday.
The Wire
an hour ago
- The Wire
Police, Bajrang Dal and the Making of Anti-‘Love Jihad' Squad in Madhya Pradesh
Bhopal: After a series of videos emerged showing Madhya Pradesh police publicly parading crime accused forcing them to chant slogans like ' Police hamari baap hai (police is our father)' and ' Gaai hamari mata hai (cow is our mother)', now, a new video from Bhopal shows a police officer – on camera, in uniform – warning Muslims to stay out of a gym, raising fresh concerns over the police's involvement in promoting communal narratives. The controversy, this time, centres on sub-inspector Dinesh Shukla, who is seen sitting with Bajrang Dal members in a purported video addressing people inside a gym, stating, 'Yahan koi bhi Mohammadan na ayega, na training lene ayega, na training dene ayega. Meine keh diya (No Mohammedan will come here, neither to take training nor to give it. I have said it).' SI Shukla, in a widely circulated video, appears to enforce an informal ban on the presence of Muslim men in public spaces like the gym, reflecting the language used by right-wing groups who push the 'love jihad' conspiracy theory. While the sub-inspector has been line attached, his presence, alongside self-declared vigilantes, has raised serious questions about the narrowing gap between law enforcement and ideological policing in Madhya Pradesh. Slogans, raids and threats in the name of honour Hindutva vigilantes have been increasingly targeting Muslim individuals in the state under the pretext of 'love jihad '. The term lacks any legal basis but is still used to allege that Muslim men lure Hindu women into romantic relationships to convert them to Islam. The Madhya Pradesh Police recently also formed a special investigation team (SIT) to probe allegations of forced religious conversions linked to a rape case . Ayodhya Nagar police station station house officer (SHO) Mahesh Lilhare confirmed to The Wire that the incident took place on May 28 following a visit by members of Hindutva organisations to the gym. He said that the matter is under investigation, but the video that is circulating seems to be edited. However, in another video from a gym in Bhopal, men associated with Hindutva organisations can be seen barging into the gym while shouting slogans like ' Jai Shri Ram ' and 'Love jihad karne walon ko, joote maaro saalon ko (Beat up those who do love jihad ).' One of the men, who is also seen in the other video with SI Dinesh Shukla, is seen advising the gym management, asking, 'Ladkiyon ko training kaun deta hai (Who trains the girls)?' He continues, ' Aap ek cheez dhyan rakho, agar love jihad ka case aapke gym mein ek bhi aata hai to uske zimmedar aap rahoge (Keep one thing in mind, if even one love jihad case comes up from your gym, you will be held responsible).' The Wire cannot confirm the authenticity of video. The man adds, ' Hamara ek nivedan hai aapse, Hindu ladkiyon ke liye Hindu trainer hi rakhoge (We request you to appoint only Hindu trainers for Hindu girls).' He is further heard saying, ' Hamara main maqsad hai apni behen-betiyon ko love jihad se bachana (Our main aim is to protect our sisters and daughters from love jihad ).' Referring to past incidents, he adds, ' Jis prakar ka kratya Indore mein hua, TIT College mein hua – love jihad nahi chalega (What happened in Indore, at TIT College – love jihad won't be tolerated),' ending it with the slogan, ' Love jihad murdabad (Down with love jihad )'. A shared vocabulary of hate According to the 2024 India Hate Lab report , nearly half of all recorded hate speeches, around 581 incidents, referred to conspiracy theories. Among the most common were terms like 'love jihad ,' 'land jihad ,' 'population jihad ,' ' thook (spit) jihad ,' and 'vote jihad .' SHO Mahesh Lilhare said, 'There was a complaint from Hindutva organisations alleging that non-Hindu gym trainers were using Hindu names with the intent of carrying out love jihad or religious conversion. Several organisation members gathered, and our staff accompanied them to the gym. The name of the gym is still unknown, but we are contacting the girls to verify the details. We spoke to the sub-inspector in question, who denied making such a statement, saying the video was clipped. We have taken cognisance of the video and are investigating whether it is authentic or edited.' He further stated that the police have no intention of acting against any caste or community. 'Any action will be taken strictly according to rules and regulations, based on the outcome of the investigation. The police do not represent any religion or group. We are doing our job, as mandated under the IPC, CrPC, BNS and BNSS. Any language or terminology we use is strictly in line with legal provisions.' While the police stress neutrality and adherence to legal procedures, the term 'love jihad ' has steadily seeped into public discourse, used freely by both political leaders and sections of the media. Bhopal MP Alok Sharma was quoted as saying , 'We are making a list and will be submitting it to the police. The police will do their work, the law will do its job, and in Madhya Pradesh, under Dr Mohan Yadav's government, no one has permission to indulge in love jihad or land jihad. The law will take strict action against such people.' This is not the first time Sharma has made such remarks . Recently, he publicly demanded sterilisation as a punishment for those allegedly involved in love jihad . In a similar aggressive rhetoric, Madhya Pradesh minister Vishwas Sarang had earlier said that such individuals should be shot in the chest. Last month, a resident of Bhopal filed a petition in the Madhya Pradesh high court against the use of the term 'love jihad ' by major Hindi dailies accusing them of giving a communal angle to a rape case, and in doing so, linking the crime to entire Muslim community. Advocate Deepak Bundele told The Wire that the matter will be heard on June 19. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
