Showing posts with label Hindu. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hindu. Show all posts

Saturday, August 20, 2016

No-Fault Divorce Does Not Violate Hindu Husband's Free Exercise Rights.

In Bhandaru v. Vukkum, (KY App., Aug. 19, 2016), a Kentucky appeals court rejected an argument that the state's no-fault divorce law violates the free exercise rights of a Hindu husband.  The husband argued that his Hindu religion only permits divorce if some grounds for divorce are stated. The court concluded however that the divorce law is a law of general applicability and the state has a rational basis for it.  It thus survives a 1st Amendment challenge and the free exercise provisions of the Kentucky constitution offer no greater protection than those in the 1st Amendment.  The court also rejected the argument that under notions of comity it should have applied the Indian Hindu Marriage Act.

Sunday, June 19, 2016

Indian Court Sentences 24 For Roles In 2002 Gujarat Religious Riots

On Friday, a court in India imposed sentences on the 24 defendants who were convicted earlier this month in the 2002 killings of 69 Muslims during religious riots in Gujarat state. AFP reports that eleven of the Hindu defendants were sentenced to life in prison for their part in the massacre at the Gulbarg Society housing complex.  The court sentenced twelve others to seven years in jail, and the remaining defendant to ten years for rioting and arson.

Friday, June 03, 2016

Indian Court Convicts 24 In Killing of Muslims In 2002 Gujarat Riots

Al Jazeera reports that a court in India yesterday convicted 24 people in the 2002 killings of 69 Muslims during religious riots in Gujarat state.  36 others were acquitted for lack of evidence.  The killings took place when a Hindu mob stormed a cluster of buildings in Ajmedabad where Muslims were hiding.  The mob burned and hacked the victims to death.

Friday, March 11, 2016

Next SCOTUS Nominee Might Be A Hindu

Washington Post, in an article titled What would a Hindu justice mean for the Supreme Court?, reported that D.C. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan is on President Obama's shortening list of potential Supreme Court nominees.  He would be the first Hindu justice ever to serve on the Supreme Court.  When sworn in as judge on the D.C. Circuit, Srinivasan took the oath on the Bhagavad Gita. Most of those interviewed by the Post suggested that Srinivasan's faith would have little impact on the positions he would take on the Court.  While Protestants are the largest religious group in the United States, no Protestant (mainline or evangelical) has been on the Supreme Court since Justice Stevens retirement in 2010.

Monday, February 22, 2016

UC Irvine Rejects Endowed Chairs in Religious Studies Because of Donor Restrictions

The University of California Irvine is rejecting some $6 million in contributions to create four endowed chairs relating to the religions and history of India. Inside Higher Ed reports that an Ad Hoc Committee on Endowed Chairs in the School of Humanities has recommended against the chairs because the agreements establishing them "include language that is not consistent with University policies related to religious and academic freedom."  (Full text of committee's report).  The report recommends rejection, regardless of agreement modifications, of two chairs proposed by the Dharma Civilization Foundation (DCF)-- one a chair in Indic and Vedic Civilization Studies and a second in Modern India Studies-- because "DCF is unusually explicit and prescriptive on appropriate disciplinary formations, what constitutes good or acceptable scholarship, and, indeed, what constitutes good or acceptable scholars."  According to Inside Higher Ed, The Dharma Civilization Foundation is:
a California entity that seeks to fund the academic study and teaching of Indian religions as a corrective to what it describes as widespread misrepresentations of Hinduism by scholars who do not practice the religion.
The Committee also recommended that two other proposed chairs endowed by families-- one chair in Jain Studies and one in Sikh Studies-- be returned to the dean's office for further review.  The Dean of the School of Humanities accepted all the recommendations.

Friday, December 18, 2015

India's Supreme Court Balances Religious Rights Against Social Reform

In Adi Saiva Sivachariyargal Nala Sangam v. Government of Tamil Nadu, (India Sup. Ct., Dec. 16, 2015), the Supreme Court of India came down with a complicated holding on the constitutionality of an administrative order ("GO") adopted by the State of Tamil Nadu that attempts to eliminate the hereditary priesthood in Hindu temples.  It provides instead that "any person who is a Hindu and  possessing the requisite qualification and training" is eligible for appointment.  This was challenged by an association representing Hindu priests as well as by individual priests as infringing Constitutional rights of freedom of religion and of religious denominations to manage their own affairs.  India's First Post describes the Supreme Court's holding:
[T]he crucial purpose of the GO was to eliminate the monopoly of Brahmins as priests in the temples of Tamil Nadu. The idea was to open these positions to all suitable candidates from all castes who had obtained the appropriate training in the centres set up by the government.
The petitioners on the other hand contended that this GO went against the fundamental tenets of the Hindu religion, represented here by the agama shastras which prescribed how the rituals were to be carried out and who could be appointed as priests to Hindu temples. It was argued that following the agama shastras were “essential religious practices” protected under Article 26 of the Constitution which if deviated from on the basis of a GO, would amount to an invasion of the right of a denomination to carry out its religious practices.
[The Supreme Court] ... upheld the [GO] but with a rider that appointments made under it can be challenged on a case-by-case basis, as being contrary to the agama sastras or customs. But crucially, the agama sastras or customs may themselves be subject to scrutiny by the court to see if they are contrary to the provisions of the Constitution of India. The court has thus tried to strike a balance between two very contradictory impulses in our polity: The right to practice one’s religion and the social reform of religious practices.

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Proposed Hindu Statue At Arkansas Capitol Turned Down Initially

In Arkansas, a request by the Universal Society of Hinduism to place a privately-financed statute of the Hindu god Lord Hanuman on the grounds of the state Capitol has been rejected by the Secretary of State's office.  Arkansas News Bureau reported last Friday that Chief Deputy Secretary of State Kelly Boyd told the Hindu group that it is the State Capitol Arts and Grounds Commission that is responsible for approving monuments on the Capitol grounds.  The Hindu group's request follows the state legislature's approval in April of a Ten Commandments monument at the Capitol. (See prior posting.) The Secretary of State's office suggested that the Hindu group seek similar legislative approval. The group says it may send its request to the governor.  According to Merinews, Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, Baha'i and other faith leaders have backed the Hindu group's request.  [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Sunday, April 19, 2015

NYT Op-Ed On Increased Ban On Cattle Slaughter In India

Today's New York Times carries an interesting Opinion piece by University of Maryland Mathematics Professor Manil Suri criticizing steps taken last month by the Indian state of Maharashtra (which includes Mumbai) to expand the ban on slaughter of cows. The ban was extended to slaughter of bulls and oxen and the sale of beef was made punishable by up to five years in prison. He says in part:
The laws have affected more than just restaurants. Thousands of butchers and vendors, their livelihood abruptly suspended, have protested in Mumbai. The leather industry is in turmoil. Beef is consumed not only by Indian Muslims and Christians, but also by many low-caste Hindus, for whom it is an essential source of affordable protein. The poorest waste nothing, from beef innards to coagulated blood, while their religion pragmatically turns a blind eye. Low-caste Dalit Hindu students, and others, have organized beef-eating festivals to protest the infringement on their culture and identity.
With the recent re-criminalization of gay sex, bans on controversial books and films and even an injunction against the use of the colonial-era name “Bombay” instead of “Mumbai” in a Bollywood song, the new laws join a growing list of restrictions on personal freedom in India. Already, the police in the city of Malegaon have arrested three Muslim men accused of calf slaughter, and ordered livestock owners to submit mug shots of cows and bulls to a cattle registry, to create a record in case any of them go missing.

Tuesday, March 03, 2015

Idaho State Senator Objects To Hindu Invocation

Hindu cleric Rajan Zed of Reno, Nevada is scheduled to open this morning's session of the Idaho state Senate with an invocation.  Zed has offered invocations in a number of state legislatures and the U.S. Senate.  The Spokane (WA)  Spokesman-Review, however, reports that Idaho state Senator Steve Vik is raising objections to invocations not in the Judeo-Christian tradition.  Speaking of Hindus, he said: "They have a caste system. They worship cows."

Friday, January 23, 2015

Suit Seeks To Require Foreign Terrorist Designation For Hindu Nationalist Group

The Hindu reports that Sikhs for Justice filed a declaratory judgment action in a New York federal district court last week seeking to require Secretary of State John Kerry to designate an Indian Hindu nationalist group as a "foreign terrorist organization."  The lawsuit claims that Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has targeted Muslim, Sikh and Christian minorities in an attempt to turn India into a homogeneous Hindu nation. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party has ties to RSS. Last week a New York federal district court dismissed on immunity grounds a suit brought directly against Modi for his alleged role in Gujarat anti-Muslim rioting in 2002. (See prior posting.)

Sunday, November 02, 2014

Extremist Hindu Groups In India Using Violence To Prevent Hindu-Muslim Marriages

Today's New York Times carries an opinion piece on right-wing extremist Hindu groups in India that are using violence to stop marriages between Hindu women and Muslim men, saying in part:
right-wing politicians have used the boogeyman of love jihad in states with sizable Muslim populations like Gujarat and Maharashtra to present themselves as the protectors of Hindu virtue and win Hindu votes. Their behavior fit the descriptions of a hate crime, although no charges have ever been filed against them. 

Thursday, October 23, 2014

President Sends Diwali Greetings

Today is Diwali. Yesterday the White House posted a video and transcript of a message from President Obama sending wishes for a joyous celebration to Hindus, Jains, Sikhs and Buddhists celebrating this festival of lights.

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Suit Filed In US Court Against Indian Primie Minister Over 2002 Anti-Muslim Riots

Reuters reports on a lawsuit filed last Thursday in the Southern District of New York federal district court against Indian Prime Minister Narenda Modi over his alleged lack of action as Chief Minister of Gujarat during anti-Muslim rioting in 2002. Modi is a member of the Hindu nationalist BJP Party.  The person behind the lawsuit is 70-year old Joseph Whittington, a member of the Harvey, Illinois City Council. Whittington, who is African-American, says some of his constituents or their families were victims of the Gujarat riots, which reminded him of the U.S. civil rights movement. Whittington worked with a group of New York lawyers to found a non-profit, American Justice Center, which filed the suit against Modi. AP reports that American Justice Center is offering a $10,000 reward to anyone who can serve process on Modi while he is in the United States for a visit. Normally sitting heads of state enjoy immunity from lawsuits in American courts and cannot be served.

Friday, July 18, 2014

Court In India Says Enforcing Wildlife Protection Against Cobra Worship Is Constitutional

According to Pune Mirror, in India yesterday a 2-judge panel of the Bombay High Court rejected claims by residents of a village in Sangli that their constitutional right to freely practice their religion is being violated by enforcing the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 against them.  The villagers are known for observing Nag Panchami by capturing wild King Cobras in the forest, worshiping them and then releasing them back into the wild.  A public interest lawsuit filed last year has been attempting to stop the practice. A 2-judge bench of the Bombay High Court rejected villagers free exercise assertions, saying:
The capture and worship of live snakes for worship is not an essential part of the Hindu religion. Capturing live snakes and later releasing them back into the wild could cause them harm, which is against the law. Under the Constitution, citizens are duty-bound to protect these creatures.

Friday, May 16, 2014

Concerns Over Religious Tolerance In India Raised As BJP's Modi Is Elected Prime Minister

Reuters this morning reports that in India, markets are soaring as Narendra Modi's pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) appears to have won a landslide Parliamentary majority. Modi has been Chief Minister of Gujarat state since 2001. Writing at CNN, journalist Sunny Hundal however raises the question of whether Modi as prime minister will threaten India's liberal secular tradition. He writes in part:
Established as a secular and liberal nation in 1950, India will find itself in uncharted territory as it has never before had a hardline Hindu nationalist at the helm.
This raises an important question: what will Modi the prime minister be like? Will he sweep away the corruption scandals blighting the country's reputation and do a better job of rejuvenating India, or will he inflame religious tensions as some fear?
Much of the criticism aimed at Modi has focused on the riots of 2002 when hundreds, possibly thousands, of Muslims were butchered by Hindu mobs, while his government was accused of standing by and watching. But if a Prime Minister Modi carries on like he did as Chief Minister of Gujarat state and as the candidate for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) during campaigning, there are plenty of reasons to be worried about the future. The future Modi is a terrifying prospect if he is based on the past Modi.

Saturday, May 03, 2014

Defamation Claim Between Hindu Temple Members Dismissed

In Thiagarajan v. Tadepalli, (TX App., April 30, 2014), a three-judge panel of the Texas Court of Appeals dismissed under the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine both a defamation action against the secretary of the board of directors of a Hindu temple, and (by a 2-1 vote) a claim by the secretary against the Temple for indemnification for the costs of defending the action.  At issue were the alleged defamatory content of e-mails sent out by Sharma Tadepalli objecting to the DVDs available for purchase or rental from the Temple's library.  Thiagarajan, plaintiff in the defamation action, oversaw operation of the temple’s library.  Tadepalli claimed that some of the DVDs were non-religious and included X-rated Indian movies. The court held:
allowing Thiagarajan’s defamation claim to proceed unavoidably would lead a civil court into the forbidden territory of litigating “‘conformity of the members of a church to the standard of morals required of them.... Subject matter jurisdiction is foreclosed when defamation claims are bound up with ecclesiastical implications such as those present in this case.
The majority also concluded that:
Having pleaded that MTS [the Temple] should indemnify him precisely because the statements at issue “concerned  matters related to the conduct and governance of MTS and to other ecclesiastical matters,” Tadepalli cannot plausibly contend that a determination as to whether MTS should indemnify him nonetheless will avoid determination of “ecclesiastical matters.”
A concurring and dissenting opinion by Chief Justice Frost agreed that the defamation claim should be dismissed, but argued that the claim for indemnification can be decided using neutral principles of law and without resolving religious controversies.

Friday, February 14, 2014

India Supreme Court Orders Stop To Imminent Devadasi Ceremony That Often Exploits Young Girls

The Calcutta Telegraph reports that India's Supreme Court yesterday took quick action in response to a recently filed Public Interest Lawsuit to try to prevent exploitation of young girls in a ceremony scheduled for the night of February 13-14 in front of the Uttangi Durga Hindu temple in the city of Davangere in India's Karnataka state. According to the report:
Under the devadasi system, girls on attaining puberty are married off to the local temple’s female deity at a ceremony willingly consented to by the parents in most cases, though in some cases local panchayats have been known to use a certain degree of coercion.
After being “married” off and “dedicated” to the deity, the girls are forced to sing and dance before their village chiefs, rich landlords and other influential persons and have often been sexually exploited.
The PIL cited newspaper reports that said that despite the Karnataka Devadasis (Prohibition of Dedication) Act, 1982, the practice continued.... The petition alleged that many devadasis, exploited by local landlords and influential men, had been left to fend for themselves and were dying of poverty or sexually transmitted diseases.
The court told counsel for the non-profit foundation filing the suit that they should have come to the court sooner.  As an interim measure, the court yesterday faxed an order to the chief secretary of the state of Karnataka ordering him to take steps to prevent unmarried girls from being forced to become devadasis at the February 13-14 religious event.

Monday, December 09, 2013

Hindu Priest Charged In Georgia With Bankruptcy Fraud, Money Laundering

In Atlanta, Georgia last Wednesday, the former priest of a Norcross (GA) Hindu temple and the temple's former CEO were arraigned on federal charges of conspiracy, bankruptcy fraud, money laundering and obstructing justice. According to the Dayton (OH) Daily News, prosecutors charge that the priest, Annamalai Annamalai, a native of India who also goes by the name Dr. Commander Selvam,  fraudulently concealed property belonging to the Hindu Temple and Community Center of Georgia, Inc. from its court-appointed bankruptcy trustee. The indictment charges that the priest funneled over $1 million of Temple money to his own and his family's accounts and businesses, as well as to various priests.

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

International Court of Justice Rules On Cambodian- Thailand Dispute Over Hindu Temple Site

Yesterday the International Court of Justice in the Hague issued a decision in Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand). (Full text of decision; Summary of the judgment; Press Release).  In 1962, the ICJ ruled in a border dispute that the Temple of Preah Vihear (now a UNESCO world heritage site) is located in Cambodian territory, and ordered that "Thailand is under an obligation to withdraw any military or police forces, or other guards or keepers, stationed by her at the Temple, or in its vicinity."  Yesterday's decision clarified what was meant by the area in the "vicinity" of the Temple. As described in a Voice of America report:
The unanimous ruling by the 17 judges of the world court says all of the raised land on which the ancient Khmer Hindu temple sits belongs to Cambodia.... While adjusting some of the disputed boundary, the decision leaves unresolved the sovereignty of much of the 4.6 square kilometer area in the immediate vicinity of the religious site.....
The ICJ decision rejects some territorial claims in the area made by each country thus it is not a total victory for either side.....
Within hours of the verdict, Thailand’s Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra appeared in a nationally televised address, saying the court had taken her country’s stance into consideration and that Bangkok should work with Phnom Penh to resolve outstanding issues.
The territorial dispute led to an exchange of gunfire and dozens of deaths in 2011.