Where Unity Is Strength
Header

Preamble


Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.

Sikhs and the Declaration


The Declaration was made at the end of WW2 in which millions of lives were lost in conflict and unspeakable atrocities between communities not recognising the sentiments of the above Declaration and seeing others as lesser beings.


Sikh teachings on human rights predate the Universal Declaration’s emphasis on the oneness of our human family, by some 500 years, with their rejection of caste and race, emphasis on gender equality and, in the closing words of our Ardas: ’sarbat da bhala’ – concern for the wellbeing of all humanity.


As Sikhs, we are therefore concerned that the Universal Declaration has been universally ignored in the last 75 years. Numerous horrific conflicts have resulted in the shameless pursuit of power, so-called strategic interest or worse, and bigotry of belief – something condemned by Guru Nanak who taught the one God of us all was not in the least bit interested in our religious labels, but in what we did for our fellow beings.


The Conflict in Gaza


The brutal attack on Israel on October 7 and the taking of hostages was followed by the no less brutal Israeli attack on Gaza with the continuing killing of thousands of civilians, hospital strikes, and an attack on mosques and refugee camps, along with the denial of food, water, power, or humanitarian assistance.

The Universal Declaration and the way to peace


Old fashioned concepts of dividing countries into friend and foe in our one human family are totally contrary to the spirit of the Universal Declaration. Looking the other way when those we see as allies abuse human rights is not the best way forward. Nor is the much vaunted two state solution talked about for decades practicable, when Israeli ‘settlors’ acquire Palestinian areas. This British government concept of dividing people because of supposed difference is not only contrary to the Universal Declaration of one human family, but also doomed to failure as seen in the conflict in Northern Ireland, and that seen in the Indian subcontinent.
The only way forward is for the West to help ensure equal human rights of freedom of movement and belief, as well as the right to residence and employment in one country, that is both Israel and Palestine. When I suggested this at a meeting in Parliament a few years back, I was told that this will happen at the second coming. I retorted, ’why wait?’


A peace effort on the lines on inherent common identity as mandated in the Universal Declaration would be the best way to celebrate this important anniversary. All Sikhs and non-Sikhs should give it their full support.

Lord Singh, Director – Network of Sikh Organisations

[ENDS]

India’s clampdown in Punjab is not only a threat to the state, but to democracy itself

March 25th, 2023 | Posted by admin in 1984 Sikh Genocide | Current Issues | Human Rights - (Comments Off on India’s clampdown in Punjab is not only a threat to the state, but to democracy itself)

The head of Waris Punjab De – Amritpal Singh became a practising Sikh only recently and has been campaigning stridently for Khalistan. Some of his followers attacked a police station where one of their associates was being held.

Indeed, freedom of speech or discussion should be a fundamental right, but if he or any of his followers have broken the law, then the Indian authorities are within their rights to pursue and investigate them for alleged criminal behaviour.

However, instead learning from Indira Gandhi’s action against Sikhs to boost her standing with a bigoted majority, the government has cynically ordered the clamp down against all Sikhs in Punjab. Indian authorities have been arresting and raiding the homes of human rights activists, with internet blackouts, social media crackdowns, and misinformation being spread across national news by pro-Modi media. Twitter accounts of prominent Sikhs overseas (including politicians in Canada) highlighting India’s record of human rights violations as well as the state’s current clampdown have been censored in India. Respected Indian journalists have also been censored, with the Asia Desk of the Committee to Protect Journalists raising their plight, and journalists overseas have been sent threatening messages for daring to talk about what’s happening.

The state has invoked Section 144 of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure to reduce gatherings in parts of Punjab, of four or more people and threatening its citizens with charges of rioting if this code is broken. These are draconian measures, which only serve to tarnish India’s reputation as the ‘world’s largest democracy’. Needless to say there have been mass arrests.

No reason has been given for why these draconian measures have been implemented, whilst concerns are of course amplified by India’s reputation of conducting torture, extrajudicial killings, and fake encounters. The collective memory of ‘Operation Woodrose’ post 1984, which targeted many thousands of innocent youth and civilians in Punjab under the pretext of quelling Sikh ‘militancy’ is etched in the psyche of Sikhs worldwide. We only have to look in the rear-view mirror of history to understand why Sikhs are fearful.

Many Sikhs abroad have family and friends in Punjab and fear for their safety and wellbeing. The suspension of civil liberties in a nation which prides itself on being a democracy, isn’t just a threat to the people of Punjab, but to democracy itself.

In the beginning of 1984, the Congress government was trailing badly in the opinion polls, yet went on to win a record majority as a result of its appeal to majority bigotry. The BJP is hoping that it will reap a similar dividend in next year’s election.

A word on Khalistan

Why would Sikhs living peacefully in India want a separate state? The issue did not arise until the increasing discrimination against Sikhs culminating in the genocide of 1984.

In 1984, we all shouted Khalistan, as a shorthand way of saying, ‘we hate the action of the Indian government’. Today some are saying it again following recent action in Punjab. The reality is that a separate religious state, like Pakistan, giving Sikhs controlling power, is not only geographically impossible but also against the teachings of the Gurus who taught equal rights for all. Khalistan is a place where Sikh values of equal treatment for all human beings – justice, compassion, and selfless service prevail.

The Khalistan we must strive for is the spread of these values throughout India and further afield.

[Ends]

Network of Sikh Organisations

Our Deputy-Director Hardeep Singh writes about the controversial Assisted Dying Bill 2021 which will be debated in the House of Lords tomorrow.

The push for legalised assisted dying for the terminally ill is back with a private members’ bill (PMB) introduced by Baroness Meacher. We’ve been here before, with Lord Falconer’s 2013 Assisted Dying Bill, and the 2015 Marris Bill – which was overwhelming defeated by 330 votes to 118 in the Commons. But this issue remains emotionally charged and goes to the heart of medical ethics. It is also true that euphemistic language is often deployed by advocates in framing the narrative – another way of describing ‘assisted dying’, is of course, the grislier ‘assisted suicide’, or ‘assisted killing’. Even euthanasia, which is the act of intentionally ending a life to relieve suffering means ‘good death’. Meacher’s PMB will be debated by more than 140 peers tomorrow, but has it addressed concerns like those highlighted by Lord Tebbit during the passage of Falconer’s Bill, when he said legalising assisted suicide, ‘will be a breeding ground for vultures, individual and corporate. It creates too much financial incentive for the taking of life’?

The Bill states it is designed to, ‘enable adults who are terminally ill to be provided at their request with specified assistance to end their own life; and for connected purposes’. A terminally ill individual having capacity to make the decision and is, ‘reasonably expected to die within six months’, must get the consent of a High Court judge. A witnessed ‘declaration’ is however first to be approved and countersigned by two independent medical practitioners. The doctors must examine the patient (and their medical records) and be satisfied the patient: (i) is terminally ill (ii) has the capacity to make the decision to end their own life; and (iii) has a clear and settled intention to end their own life which has been reached voluntarily, on an informed basis and without coercion or duress. But therein lie the inherent problems with these proposals.

Firstly, the Bill is founded on the premise that it is possible to ascertain the time of death for a terminally ill patient accurately up to six months. How can any doctor possibly know? Could a wrong diagnosis not also be made? Second, it is difficult, if not impossible to be certain if an asset-rich individual who feels, ‘they don’t want to be a burden’, has not been pressurised by relatives (or other ‘vultures’) into deciding to end their life. How to then safeguard the vulnerable at end-of-life? Section 8 of the PMB talks of ‘codes of practice’, but says, ‘The Secretary of State may issue one or more’ – ‘may’ is simply not good enough for what in practice would equate to intentional killing.

Supporters of change like the campaign group Dignity in Dying, argue dying people from Britain are already going overseas to end their lives. They say, ‘The absence of an assisted dying law forces dying people to take drastic measures to control their death’. Statistics, however, show that only 42 people travelled to Dignitas (Switzerland) in 2019, and 24 the year before – the highest annual number since 2002 was 47 in 2016. Given these small numbers, why should a right requested by the few be imposed on the majority in law? Dignity in Dying indicate 84% of the public support a choice in assisted dying for the terminally ill, and in September the British Medical Association (BMA) moved their position from opposition to ‘physician assisted dying’ to neutrality. But despite the polling and the BMA’s shift, which is now on par with the Royal College of Physicians, there remains a groundswell of opposition, not least the voice of Dr Gordon Macdonald, Chief Executive of Care Not Killing.

Macdonald told me, ‘It is disappointing that in the midst of the COVID pandemic, which has seen widespread discrimination against the elderly and disabled people, Baroness Meacher is pushing a dangerous bill that seeks to legalise assisted suicide for terminally ill people.’ He went on, ‘Setting aside the considerable issues with the Bill such as the difficulties in securing an accurate diagnosis, the whole thing seems based on a lie which perpetuates a dog whistle message that those with a terminal or chronic condition will die in pain, that current palliative care cannot help them and simply taking a pill will end their lives peacefully.’

Macdonald said in the US State of Oregon, six in ten people ending their lives in 2019 referred to the fear of being a burden on families as a reason. He warns of where things may head if assisted suicide is legalised here, citing the expansion of those qualifying for an assisted death in other jurisdictions. Several countries have legalised assisted dying, including a growing number of states in the US and Australia – a third attempt to legalise assisted dying is afoot in Scotland too. In the Netherlands, assisted death (legalised in 2002) is not limited to those with terminal illness and less than six months to live – but routinely extended to include the disabled, those with chronic non-terminal conditions and those with mental health problems, like depression and dementia – it also extends to children. Were the law to change, there are no guarantees we would not head down a similar and frankly frightening trajectory.  

Right To Life UK are the secretariat for the All-Party Parliamentary Pro-Life Group. Their spokesperson Catherine Robinson told me all the main disability rights groups in the UK oppose any change to the law – including SCOPE, Disability Rights UK, Not Dead Yet UK and the United Kingdom’s Disabled People’s Council. She said, ‘We are calling on Peers to speak against and oppose Baroness Meacher’s assisted suicide Bill on Friday. The overwhelming majority of doctors who work in end-of-life care continue to oppose assisted suicide, according to the latest BMA survey. They know from experience that what vulnerable people need at the end of their lives is love and support, not offers to accelerate their death.’

Robinson is right. Moreover, if the law were to change, vulnerable people at end-of-life are at risk of interpreting it as, ‘a duty to die’ to alleviate emotional burden, whilst Tebbit’s point on financial incentive remains. Assisted suicide has been debated and rejected in parliament before, it must surely be rejected again.

Hardeep Singh @singhtwo2, journalist and Deputy-Director of the Network of Sikh Organisations


On the inference members of the House of Lords are indifferent to the plight of Jagtar Singh Johal

(above) screenshot from Reprieve’s website:

  1. Question from Lord Singh (Director NSO) to Foreign and Commonwealth Office Asked 13 November 2017

Jagtar Singh Johal

‘To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of India concerning the arrest of UK citizen Jagtar Singh Johal; and what response, if any, they have received.’

‘The British High Commission has raised this case with the Indian authorities. Following high level lobbying, consular staff visited Mr Johal on 16th November. The Rt Hon Field, the Minister for Asia and the Pacific met with Mr Johal’s MP and brother on 27 November. We will continue to raise this case with the authorities to ensure we have regular and full consular access.’

Answered 27 November 2017, By Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Conservative, Life peer)

  1. Lord Singh and other crossbenchers working with Reprieve

In February this year Reprieve got in touch with Lord Singh and other peers to request support for a letter to the Foreign Secretary raising the alarm about India’s treatment of Jagtar Singh Johal. Lord Singh and some of his fellow crossbenchers signed the letter and are continuing to work with Reprieve and others moving forwards.

  1. Difficulty to Mr Johal with advocacy from the Sikh Federation UK

The Sikh Federation UK is the successor group to a formerly banned extremist organisation. It does not help Mr Johal to have them speaking for him.

[ENDS]

Network of Sikh Organisations

The Scottish Parliament

The Scottish Parliament voted in favour of the controversial Hate Crime Bill yesterday despite a groundswell of opposition from civil society groups including the Network of Sikh Organisations (NSO).

The NSO joined the efforts of the campaign group Free to Disagree last year, because we realised proposals in the Bill would have a significant impact on civil liberties and a ‘chilling effect’ on free speech. We worked with our allies in playing a major part in pushing back against controversial elements of the Bill, with some success, and gave both oral and written evidence to the Scottish Justice Committee.

The NSO lobbied alongside the National Secular Society, Catholic Church, the Free Church of Scotland and The Humanists Society to secure an amendment to extend free speech for discussion of religion and belief. Expressions of ‘antipathy, dislike, ridicule or insult’ towards religion are now protected, whereas prior to this only, ‘criticism and discussion’ was safeguarded when it came to matters of religion. This is more in line with parallel legislation in England & Wales and allows for more robust discussion, without fear of investigation or censorship.

Notably, the original Bill was drafted without including the need for ‘intent’ to bring a conviction, and the threshold was merely ‘stirring of hatred’ was ‘likely’ to occur – something that would have put actors, or those working in theatrical arts (amongst others) in real difficulty. Lobbying efforts succeeded and the ‘intent’ modification is included in the legislation.

Our Deputy-Director who led on our campaigning, was quoted on BBC Politics Live and in the stage three debate yesterday in Holyrood by the Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Justice Liam Kerr MSP, who said:

‘Let me finish with a quote from Hardeep Singh, ‘for ordinary people there will be a serious ‘chilling effect’ on free speech. MSPs must therefore put free speech first when making the decisive vote on this ill-conceived legislation. The only way to do that is to vote against it. At decision time tonight presiding officer, the Scottish Conservatives will do just that’.’

As we pointed out in evidence to the Justice Committee, the Hate Crime Bill puts women who want to discuss women’s rights and transgender issues in real difficulty, as there is not enough free speech protection for them. It also does not protect conversations in the privacy of one’s home, as there is no dwelling defence – something that is included in legislation in England & Wales. There is now a risk conversations around the dinner table could be investigated.

Hardeep Singh said: ‘The Bill is deeply flawed and will no doubt be used by people to silence or attempt to criminalise critics. It may well lead to a culture of vexatious complaints and heralds a very dark moment for free speech in Scotland. Of course, we are disappointed it has passed, but are grateful to have worked with brave and principled individuals in the Free to Disagree campaign. Thanks to these joint efforts, there have been some important amendments which have helped improve the legislation during its passage.’

Over the last few weeks, the NSO has worked tirelessly with Cllr. Gurch Singh who set up a UK government and parliament petition (e-petition 563473)[i] on the farmers’ protest in India, which received over 115,000 signatories. The petition was debated in a Westminster Hall debate yesterday and we are pleased to see our efforts come to fruition. Of the 19 speakers, 17 spoke in favour of the farmers’ and many of them had been briefed by our Director, Lord Singh of Wimbledon and other members of the NSO. This included the likes of Martyn Day MP for Linlithgow and East Falkirk, who during the debate said:

‘As the world’s largest democracy and a key regional player, India has a pivotal role to play on the world stage. That is why it is vital that the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary impress on our Indian partners our joint convictions on free speech and the right to protest.’

The NSO was also in correspondence with Sir Keir Starmer’s office, and they responded positively, which resulted in the important contribution of Stephen Kinnock MP. He said: ‘Let me stress in absolute terms that the Labour Front Bench stands firmly behind the rights of Indian farmers to exercise their right to freedom of assembly, freedom of expression and the right to peaceful protest.’[ii]

We’d like to thank our network of supporters and activists who all took the trouble to contact their local MPs to urge them to contribute to this important debate and stand up for the farmers’ fundamental right to protest. As a result of their efforts and working in collaboration with us, many MPs who would have otherwise not attended – contributed positively in favour of the farmers. The debate sets a precedent and sends an important message to the Modi government. That is – we the diaspora community will continue to stand up for the human rights of the Indian farmers’, whilst also supporting the freedom of expression of the press in India.

Whilst we are pleased that solidarity was shown with the farmers’ cause in the UK Parliament, much more needs to be done and we cannot rest on our laurels.

Reflecting on the debate and looking forwards our Director Lord Singh said, ‘The success of the debate is seen in the angry reaction of the Indian government in criticising the UK Parliament for daring to shine a spotlight on the abuse of democratic norms by the Modi government. We will continue to speak up for the marginalised in India and elsewhere’.


[i] https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/563473?fbclid=IwAR1tKv4t0p9oq5XwzxuKwLn3tQx-IzoIgqD-WBX1ZphwlWFZpk6uDTdYDYw

[ii] https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-03-08/debates/79128E64-85A5-4BD5-A449-449EC2921060/PressFreedomAndSafetyOfProtestersIndia

NSO submission to APPG for the Pakistani Minorities inquiry into Abduction, Forced Conversions and Forced Marriages of Religious Minority Girls and Women in Pakistan

The Network of Sikh Organisations (NSO) is a registered charity no.1064544 that links more than 130 UK gurdwaras and other UK Sikh organisations in active cooperation to enhance the image and understanding of Sikhism in the UK.

For the sake of brevity and convenience, we have used headings in the APPG briefing document. We are grateful to former councillor/detective Gurpal Virdi for his input.

Human Rights Organisation/NGOs/Faith and non-faith based groups, Experts

i.          Name and organisation? What is the nature of your work on the topic? Do you work with the victims and their families? How many victims or their families do you work with? What assistance do you provide?

Over the last few years, the NSO has followed cases of forced conversion and written about the forced marriage and abuse of religious minority girls and women in Pakistan. This is an issue that has an impact on all non-Muslim minority girls in Pakistan – predominantly Hindu and Christian girls, but it has also impacted the minority Sikh community too. One of the most high-profile cases in recent years has been the case of Jagjit Kaur.[i] She was alleged to be kidnapped at gunpoint from her home in Nankana Sahib (Lahore), converted (given the Muslim name Ayesha) and married to a Muslim boy.[ii]

In many cases the victim’s family face legal challenges, intimidation and according to Professor Javaid Rehman from Brunel University, ‘local authorities, especially police, particularly in the Punjab province, are often accused of being complicit in these cases by failing to properly investigate reported cases or prosecute offenders’.[iii] Legal petitions filed in court from the family members of the accused boy/men, often follow a similar pattern with statements alleging the girl(s) converted and married of their free will. This makes it difficult, if not impossible for the victim families to get access to justice through the courts. Many come from poor backgrounds, and do not have the necessary resources to defend their rights.

According to the academic research on this matter, we understand that approximately 1,000 women and girls from religious minorities are abducted, forcibly converted to Islam, and then married off to their abductors every year in Pakistan.[iv] Our Director Lord Singh of Wimbledon has raised the treatment of minorities in debates in the House of Lords. In a debate on 2nd July 2019 ‘Pakistan: Aid programmes and Human Rights’ – our Director said:

‘Minorities are frequently allocated menial tasks such as the cleaning of public latrines. Homes of minorities are frequently attacked and women and girls kidnapped and converted or sold into slavery. I have at times questioned the appropriateness of Pakistan, with its ill treatment of minorities, still being a member of the Commonwealth, a club of countries with historic ties to Britain. Members are required to abide by the Commonwealth charter, with core values of opposition to, “all forms of discrimination, whether rooted in gender, race, colour, creed, political belief or other grounds”.’[v]

ii.         What, in your opinion, are the weaknesses and limitations of the existing laws?

The APPG briefing paper outlines the existing laws including the Child Marriage Restraint Act 1929 of Pakistan, and in Sindh – the Sindh Child Marriage Restraint Act 2014. It says, ‘In another major province, Punjab, the Punjab Marriage Restraint Act 2015 kept the legal age of marriage at 16 years. In 2018, the chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology announced that a nikah (Islamic marriage) can be performed at any age but the couple can only live together after the age of 18.’ The difficulty here is changes to Pakistan’s law designed to safeguard minors and criminalise those that marry underage boys or girls, although well-meaning conflict with some interpretations of sharia being propagated by influential preachers and Islamic organisations.

Although we submit this isn’t limited to the issue of forced marriage and conversion of minority faith girls only, it has been seen most prominently with the backlash against Pakistan’s Supreme Court decision in the Asia Bibi blasphemy case. Both Bibi and the Supreme Court justices’ received death threats because of the decision to free her.[vi] The courts make important rulings, and some influential clerics push back. The late Khadim Hussain Rizvi, leader of the hardline Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) party (whose family was given condolences when he died by Imran Khan),[vii] was a pro-blasphemy law campaigner.

He can be seen in footage giving a speech in which he says keeping relationships with ‘kaffirs’ (a derogatory term), or non-Muslims should be treated like one’s relationship with a toilet.[viii] The dissemination of this kind of doctrinally motivated hatred against non-Muslims by pro-blasphemy clerics in Pakistan serves to incite hatred against non-Muslims and dehumanises them. Whilst laws designed to safeguard against child marriage are indeed a welcome step, do they make a difference in real terms with this backdrop? We believe the problem is compounded because there appears to be little done to address hate speech against non-Muslims. The propagation of this hatred sows the seeds of prejudice, and facilitates the ongoing issue of abduction, forced conversions, and forced marriages of religious minority girls/women in Pakistan.

iii.        What, in your opinion, is the problem with implementation of the existing laws that should have protected the victims?

The APPG for the Pakistani minorities 2019 report Religious Minorities of Pakistan: Report of a Parliamentary visit (27 September 2018 – 3 October 2018), cites a report produced by the Commonwealth Initiative for Freedom of Religion or Belief (2018):

‘the police will often either refuse to record an [First information Report] FIR or falsify the information recorded on the FIR, thus denying the families involved the chance to take their case and complaints any further. The lack of an FIR or the misrepresentation of information means that the family are unable to seek further justice in law courts, as an FIR is the vital first stage in the Criminal Procedure Code. Police are also often lethargic in attempting to recover a girl who has been abducted, thus allowing the conversion and marriage to take place. Both the lower courts and the higher courts of Pakistan have displayed bias and a lack of adherence to proper procedures in cases that involve accusations of forced marriage and forced conversions [and in such cases] the judiciary is often subjected to external influences, such as fear of reprisal and violence from extremist elements.’[ix]

We believe this sums up the plight for minorities in Pakistani, in their inability to obtain justice through the legal system. Unless the status quo is changed both in the way the police and judiciary deal with such cases, the ill treatment of minorities will continue unabated. The flaws in the existing system, along with the bias in favour of the accused abductors, is likely to not only further embolden perpetrators, but gives them the reassurance they need that they will be granted impunity for their actions.

iv.        How, in your opinion, could the Federal and Provincial Governments improve the laws to eliminate the issue of abductions, forced conversions and forced marriages? 

We believe the way to tackle this is two-prong, looking at both shifting societal attitudes, as well as training and education for officials. Firstly, there must be meaningful effort to reduce societal hatred and hostility towards non-Muslims. Second there must be training for officials to highlight their obligations when it comes to the rights of non-Muslim children.

Rather than reinventing the wheel, there have already been some meaningful recommendations put forward for the attention of the Pakistani authorities by this very APPG in their 2019 report. Some examples which would encourage better treatment of minorities in Pakistan:

  • ban all discriminatory employment advertisements reserving low-paid or menial

jobs for non-Muslims only and introduce financial penalties for breaching the

ban.[x]

  • review all laws that are in conflict with Pakistan’s international human rights

obligations and make recommendations to the Parliament to bring domestic laws

in full conformity with international law.[xi]

  • the right to freedom from sexual and physical harassment should constitute part of

the national school curriculum, accompanied by vigorous television and social

media campaigns condemning sexual abuse, forced marriages and forced

conversions.[xii]

More broadly speaking there should be the requirement of mandatory training programmes for the police, social workers, the judiciary on the rights of children and their responsibility to safeguard those rights which are enshrined under Pakistan’s constitution and the law, moreover, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and within international human rights law.

vii.       What, in your opinion, are the effects of such abductions, forced conversions and forced marriages on a) the victims and b) their families?

Although we have not conducted any direct victim assessments, it is clear the impact of these heinous crimes is severe for the victim and their families. Those who try to fight back through the legal system often face intimidation and threats. The family of Jagjit Kaur were reportedly threatened.[xiii] It is difficult for us to fathom the upheaval and chaos the families and victims go through. Tweeting about the case of Simron Kumari, Veengas a Sindh based journalist and founder of The Rise News, writes, ‘parents have been raising voice for their daughter since 2019. Now, Simron Kumari who was abducted and converted to Islam. Family seeks help but who will listen to their anguish. You cannot do justice to mothers. I request you (sic) that if you have heart then feel their sorrow.’[xiv] In the same thread she writes, ‘Unfortunately, Urdu Elite Media don’t cover Forced conversions issues as they should have covered. Majority of minor girls being abducted & converted to Islam.’[xv] According to another report, a father of two Hindu girls kidnapped in Sindh, protested outside a police station and said, ‘You can kill me. I will never tolerate this. My daughters have been abducted—I had patience.’[xvi]

ix.        How can the Home Office be persuaded that the presumption in any such victims case, if applying for asylum in the UK, should be that they have been persecuted for their faith?            

Country policy and information notes on Pakistan, which are published by the Home Office should be updated to include information about the persecution of minority faiths in Pakistan on the issue of abduction, forced conversions, and forced marriages. There should be an understanding of the issue at hand amongst Home Office staff, not least immigration officials – so they can make the appropriate assessments for asylum applications.

Network of Sikh Organisations

12 February 2021


[i] http://nsouk.co.uk/the-abduction-and-conversion-of-a-sikh-girl-in-pakistan-is-not-an-isolated-incident/

[ii] https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/pakistan-sikh-girl-kidnapped-and-married-to-muslim-yet-to-return-home-1603605-2019-09-26

[iii] https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/24/pakistans-persecuted-minorities/

[iv] https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-artslaw/ptr/ciforb/Forced-Conversions-and-Forced-Marriages-in-Sindh.pdf

[v] https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2019-07-02/debates/B499D3A4-62F1-478B-B6D7-DC97EF160B2B/PakistanAidProgrammesAndHumanRights

[vi] https://edm.parliament.uk/early-day-motion/52298

[vii] https://twitter.com/ImranKhanPTI/status/1329485070344839168

[viii] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcZq-G_E5z0

[ix] https://appgfreedomofreligionorbelief.org/media/190918-Full-Report-Religious-Minorities-of-Pakistan-Report-of-a-Parliamentary-Visit.pdf

[x] Ibid.

[xi] Ibid.

[xii] Ibid.

[xiii] https://www.sikhpa.com/kidnapping-and-forced-conversion-of-sikh-girl-in-pakistan-leads-to-public-outcry/

[xiv] https://twitter.com/VeengasJ/status/1296407534266392576

[xv] https://twitter.com/VeengasJ/status/1296407522270679040

[xvi] https://www.newindianexpress.com/magazine/2019/mar/31/brides-of-despair-1956753.html

JOINT PRESS RELEASE: GLOBAL SIKH COUNCIL & NETWORK OF SIKH ORGANISATIONS UK

We are writing to express our admiration and full support for hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers and their supporters from all walks of life. Despite the winter cold, and police oppression, they have been demonstrating for the months against unjust laws that threaten their livelihoods. Their courageous stand against injustice gives hope for an end to the systematic erosion of democracy in India.

India’s abuse of human rights
The farmers’ cause is just and is fully supported by leading figures in the judiciary, high-ranking civil servants, university and college lecturers, trade unionists, Indians abroad and government spokesmen in the UK and Canada. As a UK spokesman put it, ‘the right to peaceful demonstration is a basic human right’. The response of the Modi government to this basic human right has been widespread use of tear gas, water cannons, and police brutality against peaceful protesters. There is now a call for India to be expelled from the Commonwealth for its flagrant abuse of human rights.

Many will be unaware that Narendra Modi is a supporter of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a fascist group modelled on the Hitler Youth Movement. In 2002, he was Chief Minister at the time of the infamous Gujarat ‘riots’, which led to the slaughter of thousands of Muslims. For some years he was barred from entry to the USA and UK. Today, RSS thugs or ‘goons’ are collaborating with rogue Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) supporters and are being given a free hand to beat and maim peaceful protesters including women and the elderly. The farmers’ peaceful protest has captured the world’s admiration in the way it looks to the wellbeing not only of the protesters, but also in the way food and medical assistance is offered to the attacking police.

On India’s Republic Day (26 January), India’s compliant police following orders, removed barricades and opened the large steel gates to the Red Fort to allow known BJP activists to enter as supposed farmer activists to enable the government to smear the protesters as anti-national. Brave reporters in India’s tightly controlled media, who drew attention to this absurdity or questioned government action have been harassed and arrested. Many have had their social media accounts blocked and some have disappeared without trace.

The farming laws
India’s farmers have long been exploited by greedy middlemen. The Modi government saw this an opportunity to ‘reorganise’ farming. These laws blatantly allow billionaire businessmen who are also party supporters to control the supply and distribution of agricultural produce throughout the country in a way that would leave farmers virtual serfs on their own land.

• The laws were rushed through Parliament with no time given for proper scrutiny or debate.
• They laws are clearly unconstitutional. The Constitution states that agriculture is a devolved responsibility of individual States, not the central government.
• The laws have been condemned as unconstitutional by senior members of the judiciary.
• The laws abolish the minimum support price given to farmers.
• The laws allow for no right of appeal.
• Two close billionaire friends of Modi, with a pre-knowledge of the government’s intentions, brought huge sites in Punjab to build giant silos for the long-term storage of grain allowing for price rigging and manipulation.
• Today, in Modi’s India, 1% of India’s population owns nearly half the country’s wealth.

Erosion of democracy in Modi’s India
We are deeply concerned by the government’s dismissive attitude to the requirements of its secular constitution and the human rights of its people. The Citizens Amendment Act, in its appeal to majority bigotry, deprived more than a million Muslims of their citizenship with Home Minister Amit Shah referring to Muslim refugees as ‘termites’. This was followed by the repeal of Article 370 placing Kashmir under military rule.

The highly respected human rights organisation Amnesty International has been expelled from India to prevent it reporting on the growing abuse of human rights. Amnesty commented, ‘It is a dismal day when a country of India’s stature, a rising global power and a member of the UN Human Rights Council, with a constitution which commits to human rights and whose national human rights movements have influenced the world, so brazenly seeks to silence those who pursue accountability and justice’.

Urgent action required
India’s farmers’ brave stand against injustice is fast becoming a people’s movement for the restoration of democracy and human rights in India. We pledge them our full support. Those of us living abroad have a particular responsibility to support a movement that has at least 67 lives lost already through cold weather and lack of medical supplies.

While calling on governments around the world to condemn India’s repressive behaviour, we urge Mr Modi to commence urgent talks with farmer’s leaders to meet their genuine concerns.

Lord Singh of Wimbledon CBE, Member of House of Lords UK Parliament – Director, Network of Sikh Organisations (UK)

Lady Singh, Kanwaljit Kaur, President Global Sikh Council

Today we are commemorating the martyrdom of the 9th Guru, Guru Tegh Bahadur who on this day in 1675, courageously gave his life defending the right of freedom of belief of those of a different faith to his own.

The Mughal ruler Aurangzeb, in his determination to extend Islam to the whole sub-continent, was forcibly converting large numbers of Hindus in Kashmir. In desperation the Hindu leaders asked Guru Tegh Bahadur to intercede on their behalf. They said, we know that you and earlier Sikh Gurus have always stood up for the rights of all people, will you appeal to the Mughal Emperor to stop this forced conversion? 

The Guru knew that such an appeal would almost certainly cost him his life. But true to Sikh teachings on freedom of belief he set off for Delhi. The Emperor refused to change his policy and instead offered rich gifts to the Guru to convert to Islam. When Guru Tegh Bahadur refused, his close disciples were martyred, and he was publicly beheaded in the centre of Delhi. His crime, defending the right to freedom of belief of those of a different religion to his own. In his writings his son Gobind Rai (aged 9 at the time of the martyrdom), later to become known as Guru Gobind Singh wrote, ‘he laid down his head but not his principles.’

The universal right to freedom of belief is emphasised in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, written in the aftermath of the Second World War. Article 18 reads, ‘everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.’[i] We all applaud its lofty sentiments, but all too often put these important principles below trade and economic interest.

Guru Tegh Bahadur set the bar high when on a cold winter’s day, he gave his life in the defence of human rights and gave stark reality to Voltaire’s words: ‘I disapprove of what you, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’

Unbelievably, the BBC tried to prevent the story of the Guru Tegh Bahadur’s supreme sacrifice being broadcast two years ago, in an extraordinary fit of political correctness. Thousands of Sikhs and people of other faiths wrote to the BBC in protest, and the incident made it on the front page of The Times along with an Editorial which asked the then Director General to reconsider the ‘shabby treatment’ of our Director – his fellow peer.[ii] Sadly, the usually vocal Sikh Federation UK were totally silent; not a peep. Their unhealthy obsession with narrow exclusive identity politics, has blinded them to the universality of Sikh teachings on the need to stand up for others.

On this anniversary of Guru Tegh Bahadur’s courageous martyrdom, we are reminded that we still have much to do to understand and live true to our Gurus’ powerful teachings – they are teachings for not only Sikhs, but for the whole of humanity.


[i] https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html

[ii] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-times-view-on-lord-singh-and-the-today-programme-thought-for-the-day-rmt736ckg

Yesterday Sikhs in Britain and worldwide woke up to the heart wrenching news of the cold-blooded murder of 25 worshippers (including one child) in a gurdwara in the Afghan capital Kabul.

Islamic State gunmen have been held responsible for the massacre of innocent worshippers, and disturbing images of the dead, along with videos of panic-stricken children sitting in a room in the gurdwara, have been widely disseminated online. The Afghan security forces were engaged in a gun battle with jihadists and helped some members of the congregation escape.

The terrorist attack against the Sikh minority is nothing new. In the summer of 2018, a suicide bomber struck a crowd of Afghan Sikhs and Hindus arriving to meet with President Ashraf Ghani as he visited the eastern city of Jalalabad, an attack that killed at least 19 people and wounded 10 others. Almost the entire Afghan Sikh and Hindu leadership were killed, including the only Sikh candidate running for election.

At the time Lord Singh our Director, tabled a written question to the government: ‘To ask Her Majesty’s Government, following the suicide bombing resulting in the death of 19 Sikhs in Jalalabad, Afghanistan in July, what representations they intend to make to the government of India to encourage it to offer asylum or safe passage to Sikhs wishing to leave Afghanistan.’

The minister’s response: ‘The British Government condemned the 1 July attack on a group of Sikhs and Hindus in Jalalabad. The Minister for Asia and the Pacific publicly described it as “a despicable attack on Afghanistan’s historic Sikh and Hindu community”. As part of NATO’s Resolute Support Mission, the UK supports the Afghan National Defence and Security Forces in its efforts to improve security for all communities in Afghanistan. NATO’s Resolute Support Mission is also assisting the Afghan National Defence and Security Forces with security planning for the upcoming elections. The UK regularly raises human rights issues with the Government of Afghanistan, including the need to protect the rights of all ethnic and religious groups in line with the constitution.’

At the time Lord Singh also asked the government whether they would provide asylum to Afghan Sikhs, to which they responded – ‘Those who need international protection should claim in the first safe country they reach – that is the fastest route to safety.’

In 2018 the Home Office put together a briefing paper highlighting the persecution of Sikhs and Hindus in Afghanistan. It cited an article that revealed, ‘prior to 1992 there were about 220,000 Hindus and Sikhs in Afghanistan with another putting that number as low as 50,000. By now, the very few remaining are concentrated in the provinces of Nangarhar, Kabul, and Ghazni’. Sikhs, Hindus and other minorities are being systematically ethnically cleansed from Afghanistan, a country Sikhs have resided in since the fifteenth century.

In response to the Kabul gurdwara massacre, we will continue to raise the targeting of Sikhs and other Afghan minorities with the government. We will also be raising the issue with members of the APPG for International Freedom of Religion or Belief as a matter of urgency.

We request Sikhs write to their MPs requesting asylum rights in the UK for Sikhs escaping genocide, and for strong UK condemnation of the attack on innocent Sikh worshipers.

For further information contact Deputy-Director Hardeep Singh at: info@nsouk.co.uk