Latest news with #Husain
Scroll.in
21 hours ago
- Politics
- Scroll.in
Why newly-independent India barred an official from accepting a Cuban honour
In June 1948, Ashfaque Husain, a senior bureaucrat in India's Ministry of Education, received an unexpected letter from Havana: he was being awarded a state honour by the Cuban government. 'I have the honour to inform you that the National Council of the Order of Merit 'Carlos Manuel de Céspedes' has, by a decree dated 18th April, been pleased to confer on you...,' Cuban Under Secretary of State Augel Solanos wrote in the letter. The Cuban official asked Husain to accept the honour by filling out a printed form sent with the letter. 'In congratulating you on the well earned distinction conferred on you, I avail myself of the opportunity to offer you the assurances of my high consideration,' he wrote in bureaucratese. For Havana, the award carried immense importance. It was named after Cuba's most revered figure, Carlos Manuel de Céspedes del Castillo – the revolutionary who, in 1868, made the first declaration of Cuban independence from Spain. At the time Husain received the letter, India – freed from British rule just months earlier – did not even have formal diplomatic relations with Cuba. But what it did have was Cuba's gratitude. At a session of the UNESCO General Conference in Mexico City in November 1947, India had supported establishing the organisation's regional office in Havana. And leading the Indian delegation at the session was none other than the director of education, Husain. Translation time The letter to Husain was written in Spanish, a language he did not understand, but he managed to get its gist. Unsure of how to react, he forwarded it to the Ministries of Home and External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations for advice. 'I may, perhaps, explain that this is not a personal honour for me but as a token of friendliness which the Government of Cuba apparently desires to extend towards the Government of India in recognition of the help which they received at the last General Conference of UNESCO in securing the establishment of the regional centre of UNESCO in Havana,' Husain wrote. He added, 'It is as such that I welcome the distinction.' Since almost no Indian government official at the time knew even basic Spanish, the Cuban missive got stuck in the Indian bureaucratic labyrinth. The External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations Ministry first asked the Defence Ministry's General Staff Branch to translate the letter. In reply, Lt Col KR Menon wrote: 'There are no facilities for translation of documents for this section. Our translation section translates English pamphlets into Roman Hindustani and the limited staff is working overtime on the translation of the much-needed pamphlets.' Menon suggested the letter be sent to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for translation, but its officials were not even sure if the Cuban communication was in Spanish or Portuguese. They recommended a Mr Banerjee, who worked as the Russian Production Officer at the ministry and knew Spanish. 'Incidentally, we suggested several months ago the setting up of a translation bureau as part of our Russian section,' wrote S Sinha, director of the Information and Broadcasting Ministry's Publications Division. 'We do not know if that proposal was ever pursued and, if so, with what results.' He added, 'It is a pity that urgent government documents have to be sent from door to door in the hope of finding someone to translate them instead of having a full-fledged section for this purpose.' As it happened, the in-demand Mr Banerjee was on leave. A few more weeks passed before he returned to New Delhi and translated the three pages that included the letter and the form of acceptance. In all, it took the Indian government six months to fully understand the contents of the letter. Rigid policy Not that the effort helped. Recently freed from foreign domination, India was not keen on accepting awards from other nations, even those that had nothing to do with the colonisation of the subcontinent. Around the time Husain was offered an honour by Cuba, a private citizen named AF Mody, who was secretary at the Danish Consulate in Bombay, received a similar offer from Denmark. Mody too approached the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations for advice. His case appears in the ministry's internal communication. 'The bestowal of honours and awards in India, save in the case of recognition of gallantry, having been discontinued, it would seem doubtful whether in the case under consideration it would be in order to agree to Mr. Mody receiving a foreign medal, that is to say, the Danish Liberty Medal, even though it is for services rendered during the war,' T J Natarajan, a senior official at the ministry, said in a note to Foreign Secretary KPS Menon. 'Such awards, in the absence of any comparable awards in India would, it is feared, create a craving for foreign insignia.' A note signed by Menon and two other senior officials agreed with Natarajan's comments: the government was 'averse to the grant of a medal to an Indian national by a foreign state'. Nevertheless, it was 'deeply appreciative of the sentiments' behind the Danish offer. With such a rigid policy around foreign honours, even for private citizens, there was little chance Husain would be allowed to receive the Cuban award. 'The assistance given by Mr. Ashfaque Husain to the Cuban Government was just a performance of his official duties and as such no award or distinction from the Cuban Government is necessary in lieu in discharge of such duties,' Natarajan said in a note. 'There have been instances in the past when the Foreign Government's requests to confer on officials of the Govt of India distinctions or awards for the meritorious services rendered by them in the capacity of their official duties were refused as our regulations on the acceptance of such awards are very rigid.' Husain was asked to turn down the award and 'explain his suitable terms'. It is possible that the Cuban authorities were displeased by India's refusal, but if it caused any damage to the bilateral relations, there is no public record to suggest it. After the Cuban Revolution in January 1959 and Ernesto Guevara's visit to India, each country opened an embassy in the other's capital. Their relations have remained warm ever since. It is unclear when India changed its policy towards government officials and private citizens accepting foreign awards, but the fears of independent India's first bureaucrats about a 'craving for foreign insignia' resonate more clearly nearly eight decades later.
India.com
a day ago
- Entertainment
- India.com
This star was crazy about Madhuri Dixit, he booked entire theatre, watched Hum Aapke Hain Koun 73 times, his name is...
Popular Bollywood actress, who ruled the silver screen in the '90s with her dazzling smile and unmatched grace, and even today, fans adore Madhuri Dixit! But among her many admirers, one name stands out, a man who was mesmerised not just by her beauty, but by her very presence on screen. That admirer was none other than iconic Indian painter M.F. Husain. The film he watched 73 times, why? It wasn't just a casual crush. Husain watched Hum Aapke Hain Koun 73 times, yes, you read that right, just to watch Madhuri. Her charm had him completely spellbound. He even went so far as to book entire theatres for private screenings, refusing to watch her in a crowd. When a painter turned filmmaker So obsessed was Husain that he didn't stop at watching. He decided to direct a film starring her. Thus came Gaja Gamini (2000), a project born out of admiration more than commercial ambition. The film starred Madhuri alongside Naseeruddin Shah and Shabana Azmi. Though the film flopped, it stood as a tribute to his muse. When did it all start? Husain first saw Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun and was instantly captivated. It wasn't just about her looks; he saw depth, poise, and an ethereal presence that inspired his artistry. Where is Madhuri Dixit now? Madhuri is still active in the entertainment space. While she was last seen as Manjulika in Bhool Bhulaiyaa 3, she currently has no major projects lined up. Still, her legacy continues, and so do her fans.
The National
2 days ago
- Politics
- The National
Banning Palestine Action an 'abuse of power', High Court told
The group's co-founder Huda Ammori is making a bid to legally challenge Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws, announced after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. On July 4, Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge over that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The case returned to the High Court in London on Monday, where lawyers for Ammori asked a judge to grant the green light for a full legal challenge against the decision to ban the group, saying it was an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression. Raza Husain KC said: 'We say the proscription of Palestine Action is repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the [European Convention on Human Rights].' The barrister continued: 'The decision is so extreme as to render the UK an international outlier.' Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.' 'The consequences are not just limited to arrest,' Husain later said, telling the court there was 'rampant uncertainty' in the aftermath of the ban. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also for Ammori, later said: 'The impacts [of proscription] have already been significant.' She continued: 'Dozens and dozens of people have been arrested for protesting, seated and mostly silent protest.' The barrister later told the court that Merseyside Police had bailed arrested protesters with a condition not to mention Palestine. 'People have been bailed to not mention Palestine?' Justice Chamberlain asked, with Ms Ni Ghralaigh replying: 'It is a condition of bail that they do not mention Palestine.' 'The Secretary of State has not distanced herself from any of these actions,' she continued, adding that Cooper had not described actions like this as an 'overreach'. The Home Office is defending the legal challenge. READ MORE: Three men arrested under Terrorism Act after national Palestine demo in Edinburgh Previously, Ben Watson, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. James Eadie, representing the department on Monday, said that an 'exceptional case' would be needed for it to go to the High Court, rather than the POAC. He said: 'Judicial review is, and has been accepted to be, a remedy of last resort and that is for very good and well-established reasons.' However, Husain told the court on Monday morning that the POAC was not 'convenient nor effective' in this case. He continued: 'It would be quite absurd to say that we should tolerate the consequences of the proscription […] even if it is unlawful, and just go to POAC. 'That is an absurd position.' In written submissions, Eadie (above) said that by causing serious damage to property, Palestine Action was 'squarely' within part of the terrorism laws used in proscription. He said: 'There is no credible basis on which it can be asserted that the purpose of this activity is not designed to influence the government, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.' Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. More than 100 people were arrested across the country during demonstrations this weekend protesting against the proscription, with protests held in London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro on Saturday. Saturday's arrests brought the total number of people arrested since the ban came into force to more than 200, with more than 72 arrested across the UK last weekend and 29 the week before. The hearing before Justice Chamberlain concluded on Monday, with the judge saying he would give his decision on July 30.
Powys County Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Powys County Times
Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told
Banning Palestine Action as a terror organisation had the hallmarks of a 'blatant abuse of power' and made the UK an 'international outlier', the High Court has heard. The group's co-founder Huda Ammori is making a bid to legally challenge Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws, announced after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. On July 4, Ms Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge over that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The case returned to the High Court in London on Monday, where lawyers for Ms Ammori asked a judge to grant the green light for a full legal challenge against the decision to ban the group, saying it was an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression. Raza Husain KC said: 'We say the proscription of Palestine Action is repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights).' The barrister continued: 'The decision is so extreme as to render the UK an international outlier.' Mr Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.' 'The consequences are not just limited to arrest,' Mr Husain later said, telling the court there was 'rampant uncertainty' in the aftermath of the ban. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also for Ms Ammori, later said: 'The impacts (of proscription) have already been significant.' She continued: 'Dozens and dozens of people have been arrested for protesting, seated and mostly silent protest.' The barrister later told the court that Merseyside Police had bailed arrested protesters with a condition not to mention Palestine. 'People have been bailed to not mention Palestine?' Mr Justice Chamberlain asked, with Ms Ni Ghralaigh replying: 'It is a condition of bail that they do not mention Palestine.' 'The Secretary of State has not distanced herself from any of these actions,' she continued, adding that Ms Cooper had not described actions like this as an 'overreach'. The Home Office is defending the legal challenge. Previously, Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Sir James Eadie KC, representing the department on Monday, said that an 'exceptional case' would be needed for it to go to the High Court, rather than the POAC. He said: 'Judicial review is, and has been accepted to be, a remedy of last resort and that is for very good and well-established reasons.' However, Mr Husain told the court on Monday morning that the POAC was not 'convenient nor effective' in this case. He continued: 'It would be quite absurd to say that we should tolerate the consequences of the proscription… even if it is unlawful, and just go to POAC. 'That is an absurd position.' In written submissions, Sir James said that by causing serious damage to property, Palestine Action was 'squarely' within part of the terrorism laws used in proscription. He said: 'There is no credible basis on which it can be asserted that the purpose of this activity is not designed to influence the government, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.' Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. More than 100 people were arrested across the country during demonstrations this weekend protesting against the proscription, with protests held in London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro on Saturday. Saturday's arrests brought the total number of people arrested since the ban came into force to more than 200, with more than 72 arrested across the UK last weekend and 29 the week before. The hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain is due to conclude on Monday. A decision may be given at the end of the hearing, or in writing at a later date.
South Wales Guardian
3 days ago
- Politics
- South Wales Guardian
Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told
The group's co-founder Huda Ammori is making a bid to legally challenge Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws, announced after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. On July 4, Ms Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge over that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The case returned to the High Court in London on Monday, where lawyers for Ms Ammori asked a judge to grant the green light for a full legal challenge against the decision to ban the group, saying it was an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression. Raza Husain KC said: 'We say the proscription of Palestine Action is repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights).' The barrister continued: 'The decision is so extreme as to render the UK an international outlier.' Mr Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.' 'The consequences are not just limited to arrest,' Mr Husain later said, telling the court there was 'rampant uncertainty' in the aftermath of the ban. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also for Ms Ammori, later said: 'The impacts (of proscription) have already been significant.' She continued: 'Dozens and dozens of people have been arrested for protesting, seated and mostly silent protest.' The Home Office is defending the legal challenge. Previously, Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Sir James Eadie KC, representing the department on Monday, said that an 'exceptional case' would be needed for it to go to the High Court, rather than the POAC. He said: 'Judicial review is, and has been accepted to be, a remedy of last resort and that is for very good and well-established reasons.' However, Mr Husain told the court on Monday morning that the POAC was not 'convenient nor effective' in this case. He continued: 'It would be quite absurd to say that we should tolerate the consequences of the proscription… even if it is unlawful, and just go to POAC. 'That is an absurd position.' Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. More than 100 people were arrested across the country during demonstrations this weekend protesting against the proscription, with protests held in London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro on Saturday. Saturday's arrests brought the total number of people arrested since the ban came into force to more than 200, with more than 72 arrested across the UK last weekend and 29 the week before. The hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain is due to conclude on Monday. A decision may be given at the end of the hearing, or in writing at a later date.
