最美和声

Study: United States - Mexico Border Now the Most Dangerous Land Crossing in the World_我的网站

A |     New Delhi, Oct 13 (UNI) One of the judges in the Supreme Court bench, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, differed with the view of his colleague, Justice Hemant Gupta on many issues.

Justice Dhulia said that asking a pre university schoolgirl to take off her hijab at her school gate, is an invasion on her privacy and dignity.

"Asking a pre university schoolgirl to take off her hijab at her school gate, is an invasion on her privacy and dignity. It is an attack on their dignity, and then ultimately it is a denial to them of secular education. These are clearly violative of Article 19(1)(a), Article 21, and Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India," Justice Dhulia said, in his verdict.

"Under our Constitutional scheme, wearing a hijab should be simply a matter of Choice. It may or may not be a matter of essential religious practice, but it still is, a matter of conscience, belief, and expression. If she wants to wear hijab, even inside her class room, she cannot be stopped, if it is worn as a matter of her choice, as it may be the only way her conservative family will permit her to go to school, and in those cases, her hijab is her ticket to education," Justice Dhulia said, in his verdict.

Justice Dhulia even went onto say that the unfortunate fallout of the hijab restriction would be that we would have denied education to a girl child. A girl child for whom it is still not easy to reach her school gate.This case here, therefore, has also to be seen in the perspective of the challenges already faced by a girl child in reaching her school.

"The question this Court would put before itself is also whether we are making the life of a girl child any better by denying her education merely because she wears a hijab!," Justice Dhulia questioned?

Our Constitution has visualised a just society and it is for this reason that the first virtue that is secures for the citizens is ‘Justice’ which is the first of our Preambular promises, he said.

On the other hand, the judge heading the bench of the Supreme Court, Justice Hemant Gupta, differed with the view of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and said that the Government (Karnataka) Order cannot be said to be contrary to the State goal of promoting literacy and education as mandated under the Constitution.

"Article 21A is not applicable as all the students are over 14 years of age. The students have a right to education under Article 21, but not of insisting on wearing something additional to the uniform, in a secular school, as a part of their religion," Justice Gupta, heading the bench of the Top Court said.

"Secularism applicable to all citizens. Permitting one religious community to wear religious symbols would be antithesis of secularism. Govt Order can't be said to be against secularism or objective of Karnataka Education Act," Justice Gupta in his 133-page, out of 209-page, verdict said.

"It can't be said that State is restricting the access to education to the girl students through such an Order. The Government Order only ensures that the uniform prescribed is adhered to by the students and it cannot be said that State is restricting the access to education to the girl students through such an Order, Justice Gupta said.

He went on to say that the Act itself contemplates providing of opportunities and facilities in a healthy manner and maintaining the dignity of childhood and youth so that there is no moral or material abandonment. "The uniform for the students has been prescribed so that there is no distinction between the students coming from diverse background and that each student grows in an environment of equality, fairness and equal opportunities," Justice Gupta said.

The uniform is an equalizer of inequalities. Therefore, prescribing uniform for children at an impressionable age is not only important but has a salutary effect on the mental development of the child to grow in the environment of oneness, he said.

Justice Gupta, find that the following 11 questions arise for consideration in the present appeals:

Whether the appeals should be heard along with Kantaru Rajeevaru (Right to Religion) and/or should the present appeals be referred to the Constitution Bench.?

Whether the State Government could delegate its decision to implement the wearing of uniform by the College Development Committee or the Board of Management or otherwise on headscarves is ex facie violative of Section 143 of the Act?

What is ambit and scope of the right to freedom of ‘conscience’ and ‘religion’ under Article 25? What is the ambit and scope of essential religious practices under Article 25 of the Constitution?

UNI SM BAV GNK。    The United States - Mexico land border is now the most dangerous land crossing in the world, according to a study by the International Organization for Migration’s (IOM) Missing Migrants Project (MMP).,At least 728 migrants have died making the trek from Mexico to the United States, an increase of 52% from 2020. That number makes up the majority of the 1,238 migrant deaths that were reported in all of the Americas in 2021, the highest number since the MPP started tracking migrant deaths and disappearances in 2014.,But even that ghastly number is likely underreported, the study’s authors say. That is because an unknown number of dead migrants are never found or reported as missing.,Death toll rises to 51, Three Men Arrested in Texas Migrant Truck Case29 June, 01:59 GMT,“Our data shows the growing crisis of deaths during migration in the region, and the need to strengthen the forensic capacity of the authorities to identify deaths on these routes,” explained Edwin Viales, the lead author of the IOM study. “We cannot forget that every single number is a human being with a family who may never know what happened to them.”,The study was released less than a week after the discovery of a tractor-trailer in San Antonio, Texas, that was filled with over a hundred migrants, 53 of whom died after temperatures in the area soared to 103 F. That incident increased the number of migrant deaths along the United States - Mexico border to 493 in 2022 so far, putting this year on track to surpass even 2021.,While the land route is dangerous, traveling by sea is not much better. The study notes that at least 67 migrants have died traveling maritime routes between the Caribbean and the United States. That number is also likely underreported due to the number of vessels lost at sea that are never found.,Authorities attempt to identify the country of origin of dead migrants, but more often than not they are unable to. Over 500 of the deaths reported since the start of 2021 have an unknown country of origin.,Former DEA Agent: Biden’s ‘Lack of Law and Order’ to Blame for 53 Deaths in Texas Lorry Incident2 July, 03:44 GMT,While the economic crisis in Venezuela is cited as one cause of the increase in migrant activity, it is the border policies of the destination countries that the MPP points to as the primary culprit in the rise in migrant deaths.,“These deaths and disappearances are related to the lack of options for safe and regular mobility, which increases the likelihood of migrants opting for irregular migration pathways that put their lives at risk,” the executive summary of the studies states.,The Biden administration has been attempting to end Title 42, a Trump-era COVID-19 prevention policy that prevented asylum seekers from entering the country while they wait for their cases to be heard. However, multiple states have sued the federal government, delaying the policy’s cessation.,That and other strict border policies have forced migrants to seek alternative, more dangerous routes.,The study’s executive summary ends with a plea to governments to do something to prevent the deaths of migrants.,“States must honor their commitments … to save migrant lives and prevent further deaths and disappearances.”。

Current article:http://qlfy.cengzaodengchawonin.cyou/edntyh0/avjq.html

Published on:00:00:00