Connect with us

Featured

India Ranks 161st in Terms of Journalistic Freedom- RSF

Published

on

RSF report on World Press Freedom Index

On Wednesday, May 3, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) published the 21st edition of its World Press Freedom Index, and it was unfavourable for India. India has lost 11 places from 2022, when it was ranked 150, to 161st in terms of journalistic freedom. The index ranked 180 countries. Reporters Without Borders (RWB; Reporters sans frontières; RSF) is a worldwide non-profit organisation that has as its stated goal defending the right to freedom of information. According to its advocacy, everyone must have access to news and information, in accordance with Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognises the right to receive and share information without regard to national boundaries, and other international human rights treaties.

The embarrassing score of India, according to critics, demonstrates rising hostility and pressure on journalists in India. India is now one of the 31 nations that RSF considers to have “very serious” journalistic conditions. According to the report from Reporters Without Borders, a group that assesses the conditions for journalism worldwide, press freedom in India has gone from “problematic” to “very bad,”.

“The situation has gone from ‘problematic’ to ‘very bad’ in three other countries: Tajikistan (down 1 at 153rd), India (down 11 at 161st) and Turkey (down 16 at 165th),” said the report released on Wednesday, celebrated globally as World Press Freedom Day.

Also, read India- The Killing of Gangster-Turned-Politician Atiq Ahmad

Methodology of RSF

RSF has consultative status with the International Organisation of the Francophonie, the Council of Europe, the United Nations, and UNESCO.180 nations are included in the index, which rates conditions for journalists. From 0 (worst) to 100 (best), the five “contextual indicators” on which countries are assessed by RSF now replace the seven categories that it used to rate nations until 2021. With a total of 117 questions and sub-questions, these are the following contextual indicators: political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural background, and safety.

Following the compilation of the indicators, the countries are divided into five categories: good situation (85–100 points), satisfactory situation (75–85), problematic situation (65–75), difficult situation (45–65), and very serious situation (below 45). India has scored in the last category. According to the report from RSF, press freedom in India has gone from “problematic” to “very bad,”. Therefore, India ranks 161st in terms of journalistic freedom.

Read here, Pro-Khalistan Activist Amritpal Singh declared fugitive- What is happening in “India’s Bread Basket” Punjab?

The Remarks of RSF on India

In its opening remarks about why India has been classified this way, RSF states, “The violence against journalists, the politically partisan media and the concentration of media ownership all demonstrate that press freedom is in crisis in “the world’s largest democracy”, ruled since 2014 by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the embodiment of the Hindu nationalist right.”

The RSF draws attention to a number of grave issues with India’s media environment, one of which is ownership concentration:

“…the abundance of media outlets conceals tendencies toward the concentration of ownership, with only a handful of sprawling media companies at the national level, including the Times Group, HT Media Ltd, The Hindu Group and Network18. Four dailies share three quarters of the readership in Hindi, the country’s leading language. The concentration is even more marked at the regional level for local language publications such as Kolkata’s Bengali-language Anandabazar Patrika, the Mumbai-based daily Lokmat, published in Marathi, and Malayala Manorama, distributed in southern India. This concentration of ownership in the print media can also be observed in the TV sector with major TV networks such as NDTV. The state-owned All India Radio (AIR) network owns all news radio stations.”

The fact that these businesses and the Modi administration have overtly mutually beneficial partnerships only makes matters worse, it continues: “The prime example is undoubtedly the Reliance Industries group led by Mukesh Ambani, now a personal friend of Modi’s, who owns more than 70 media outlets that are followed by at least 800 million Indians. Similarly, the takeover of the NDTV channel at the end of 2022 by tycoon Gautam Adani, who is also very close to Narendra Modi, signalled the end of pluralism in the mainstream media.”

Anxiety in the newsroom has increased since controversial businessman Gautam Adani declared his plan to take over the channel in a hostile bid last August, and journalists like Ravish Kumar have left their positions as a result. NDTV had employed 48-year-old Ravish for 26 years. He was senior executive editor of the news organisation at the time of his resignation. He was noted for its scathing and critical coverage of public policies and opinions of the current government. These reasons explain why India ranks 161st in terms of journalistic freedom.

Also, read UN Defender Demands End to Crackdown on Kashmiri Activists

Lack of Diversity in Indian Newsrooms and Harassment of Journalists

RSF claims that there is a dearth of diversity in Indian newsrooms. “For the most part, only Hindu men from upper castes hold senior positions in journalism or are media executives ­– a bias that is reflected in media content. For example, fewer than 15% of the participants in major evening talk shows are women.”

According to RSF, there are many legal methods that those in power harass journalists, including by accusing them of criminal defamation and sedition. “Indian law is protective in theory but charges of defamation, sedition, contempt of court and endangering national security are increasingly used against journalists critical of the government, who are branded as “anti-national”,” the report notes.

Read here, The Saudi-Iran Deal and its Implications

India Ranks Among the Worst Performers in South Asia

India ranks among the worst performers on the rating, even within South Asia as it ranks 161st in terms of press freedom. At 163, Bangladesh performs somewhat worse than Pakistan, while India comes in at 150th, several positions behind Pakistan. With a rating of 152, even Afghanistan, where the Taliban administration is well known for being hostile to independent journalists, has performed better. Sri Lanka is at 135 and Bhutan is at 90. The report also added that the last three slots were occupied by Asian countries.

“The last three places are occupied solely by Asian countries: Vietnam (178th), which has almost completed its hunt of independent reporters and commentators; China (down 4 at 179th), the world’s biggest jailer of journalists and one of the biggest exporters of propaganda content; and, to no great surprise, North Korea (180th),”

Also, read Festival turns bloody after Hindutva Mob Burnt Centennial Mosque

The Indian Press Voices Concern Over RSF Report

The Indian Women’s Press Corps, Press Club of India, and the Press Association released a joint statement voicing their concern over the country’s dip in the index.

“The indices of press freedom have worsened in several countries, including India, according to the latest RSF report,” the joint statement said.

“For developing democracies in the Global South where deep pockets of inequities exist, the media’s role cannot be understated. Likewise the constraints on press freedom due to hostile working conditions like contractorization have to also be challenged. Insecure working conditions can never contribute to a free press,” it added.

Read here, Karnataka Elections: Setback for Modi

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured

The 20-Point Gaza Plan: A Blueprint for Dispossession?

Published

on

The-20-Point-Gaza-Plan

As Gaza’s hospitals ran out of oxygen and children continued to die of hunger, a new “Peace Plan” emerged from Washington. The US President Donald Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Plan was announced recently in late September 2025. It has promised to rebuild Gaza and bring “a new era of stability.” However, to many Palestinians and observers across the world, it sounded like something else: a blueprint to erase what remains of Gaza’s sovereignty. What was initially discussed with the Arab states as a cooperative humanitarian initiative was, by the time of its release, cleverly reshaped. It is rewritten to preserve occupation under a new label.

From Arab Consensus to American Control

Early drafts of a postwar Gaza plan were reportedly framed through consultations among Arab and Muslim nations. They emphasized three principles: Palestinian self-rule, unrestricted humanitarian access, and reconstruction without foreign trusteeship. Yet as negotiations evolved, the plan was absorbed by U.S. diplomacy and redrafted in a way that aligned with Israeli conditions rather than Arab consensus. Several diplomats confirmed that Washington’s version quietly removed any reference to Palestinian sovereignty, replacing it with phrases like “transitional governance” and “security oversight.”

Even before it was officially unveiled, Reuters reported growing unease among Arab delegations, who complained that the new text ignored their agreed-upon points and reflected Israel’s security agenda. Pakistan’s foreign minister stated openly that “Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Plan is not our plan.” The shift marked more than a diplomatic re-edit as it exposed the power imbalance shaping Gaza’s future.

The 20 Points: Promises and Omissions

Publicly, Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Plan claims to rest on four pillars: ceasefire, hostage release, reconstruction, and demilitarization, yet its deeper clauses reveal troubling gaps. There is no guarantee of Palestinian sovereignty, no timeline for Israeli withdrawal, and no provision for international accountability. Instead, it envisions Gaza’s future under external trusteeship, with reconstruction funds controlled by a multinational board led by Washington and oversight committees dominated by Israel and allied states.

Several points speak of creating “safe redevelopment corridors” and “security zones,” terms human rights experts warn could mask forced relocations and demographic engineering. The plan further ties aid to behavior clauses, conditions governance on foreign approval, and places border control under “temporary supervision,” a phrase that critics fear means indefinite control. Amnesty International cautioned that “reconstruction must not become a pretext for displacement or collective punishment.”

In essence, while the plan’s language of peace and rebuilding appeals to diplomacy, its structure embeds dependency and control. To rebuild Gaza without granting it freedom is, as one Palestinian analyst put it, “to rebuild the prison walls, just higher and cleaner.”

The Human Cost Hidden Behind Diplomacy

Behind every clause of this plan lies a humanitarian catastrophe. The World Health Organization confirms that more than half a million people in Gaza face famine-level hunger, and over 360 have already died from malnutrition. The UN’s humanitarian office says 80% of Gaza’s population now depends on aid that Israel continues to restrict. In this reality, talk of “redevelopment corridors” rings hollow. Gaza does not need trusteeship—it needs food, medicine, and an end to the siege.

On the streets of Rafah and Deir al-Balah, survivors of months of bombardment heard the plan’s announcement with disbelief. “They speak of building new homes,” one displaced teacher told a reporter, “but they won’t even let cement cross the border.” Another woman asked, “Who gives them the right to plan our lives while we bury our dead?” These voices reveal the heart of Gaza’s objection: no document signed abroad can substitute for the will of its people.

Resistance and Rejection

Hamas’s initial response to the plan was mixed. The group welcomed references to reconstruction and aid delivery but rejected disarmament and external trusteeship. “No peace built on surrender will last,” its spokesman said. Across Palestinian civil society, activists dismissed the plan as “occupation repackaged.” Hashtags like #NoTrusteeship and #GazaIsNotForSale flooded social media, uniting Gazans and diaspora voices in digital defiance.

Former U.S. diplomat Robert Malley, writing for Le Monde, described the plan as “a maze of ambiguities and potential pitfalls.” His analysis noted that the proposal’s vagueness is deliberate—creating space for powerful states to interpret its clauses to their advantage. It is a familiar strategy: promise reconstruction while ensuring dependency.

Reactions among Arab and Muslim nations were cautious and divided. The Arab League issued a restrained statement calling for further review, while countries like Algeria, Iran, and Pakistan warned that any plan lacking Palestinian representation was unacceptable. Meanwhile, Western governments praised the proposal as a “bold step toward stability.” For Gazans, these words offered little comfort. They have seen such language before in the Oslo Accords, the Road Map, and countless other documents that delivered control, not liberation.

International law offers a clear measure. The plan’s idea of trusteeship contradicts the principle of self-determination guaranteed by the UN Charter and multiple General Assembly resolutions. Legal scholars argue that placing Gaza under external administration without consent would constitute a new form of occupation. The International Court of Justice’s 2024 advisory opinion warned that “peace agreements cannot validate the continuation of unlawful control.” Trump’s plan, critics say, does precisely that.

What True Peace Would Look Like

A genuine peace framework would begin not with political engineering but with justice. It would:

  • End the blockade entirely, allowing Gaza to trade and rebuild freely.
  • Place reconstruction under Palestinian-led management, not foreign trusteeship.
  • Hold accountable those responsible for war crimes and the starvation policy.
  • Guarantee the right of return and compensation for the displaced.
  • Empower Gaza’s people to elect their own representatives without external approval.

Anything less is not peace but an administrative occupation.

The Moral and Legal Test for the World

The 20-Point Plan is not a diplomatic breakthrough but a moral test. To accept it as written would mean endorsing a future where Gaza remains controlled by the same forces that destroyed it. It would normalize collective punishment under the banner of reform. And it would bury the core demand that Palestinians have made for decades: the right to decide their destiny.

Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and UN experts have all warned that Gaza’s crisis cannot be resolved through imposed governance. The path forward must restore dignity, not dependency. Yet, while the world debates corridors and committees, Gaza’s hospitals run without light, and its children die nameless in the dark.

The Bottom Line

Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Plan may speak the language of peace, but its structure carries the logic of control. For Gaza, peace cannot be built by those who silence its voice. True reconstruction will not come from Washington or Tel Aviv, but it will rise from the streets of Khan Yunis and the refugee camps that still believe in freedom.

The people of Gaza do not reject peace but subjugation disguised as diplomacy. Their message to the world remains clear: “We will rebuild, but on our own terms.” And until that right is honored, no plan, however polished, can claim the name of peace.

Continue Reading

Featured

Global Sumud Flotilla Intercepted: Israel’s Naval Siege, Famine and Resistance

Published

on

Global Sumud Flotilla

The Mediterranean dawn on 2nd October, 2025, was meant to carry a different story. For hundreds of activists aboard the Global Sumud Flotilla, including doctors, artists, parliamentarians, and volunteers from over 37 countries, it was a mission of a lifetime. Their ships carried medical supplies, food packets, and a message written in humanity’s oldest language: solidarity. However, as Israeli naval vessels surrounded them 40 nautical miles from the Gaza Strip, that message was silenced most brutally. Within hours, the flotilla had been seized, its passengers zip-tied and blindfolded, and its aid confiscated.

Israel’s interception of the Global Sumud Flotilla is not just a naval incident but another chapter in the long story of Gaza’s suffocation. In a land already starved by siege, famine, and bombardment, this act tightened the blockade around two million civilians who had endured what human rights organizations now recognize as a continuing genocide.

Gaza in Famine: A Manufactured Catastrophe

According to the World Health Organization, over half a million Palestinians are now living under confirmed famine conditions. Malnutrition has become a silent killer, claiming the lives of more than 360 Palestinians, including 130 children. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) places Gaza in Phase 5, which is the highest possible level of hunger emergency, categorized as Catastrophic. Gaza’s farms, bakeries, and water networks have been systematically destroyed, leaving families with little more than contaminated water and animal feed to survive.

The famine is not a natural consequence of war but a lethal weapon. Amnesty International has repeatedly stated that Israel is using starvation as a method of warfare, an act that meets the legal threshold for genocide.As per a report of Amnesty International published in October,

“Israel’s deliberate starvation of civilians is a war crime.”

Each blockade, each denied aid truck, and now each seized ship deepens this crime against humanity.

What is the Global Sumud Flotilla?

The flotilla, meaning steadfastness in Arabic, embodied the principle of Sumud, which means unshakable resistance. It consisted of more than 40 vessels and 500 international participants from 37 countries. Departing from ports across Europe and North Africa, it aimed to reach Gaza’s coast peacefully and symbolically challenge Israel’s naval siege. Among those on board were parliamentarians, humanitarian doctors, and activists, including climate advocate Greta Thunberg, united under one flag: human conscience.

Their mission was not to wage war, but to deliver aid and visibility. Yet as their ships neared Gaza, Israeli drones shadowed them, communications were jammed, and warning messages filled the airwaves. Finally came the interception.

The Interception: How the Siege Struck at Sea

Around midnight, Israeli commandos surrounded the final ship, Marinette, approximately 42.5 nautical miles off Gaza’s shore. Activists reported being forced to kneel for hours, zip-tied and beaten, as soldiers confiscated cameras and personal belongings. All contact was cut as the ships were redirected to Ashdod Port inside Israel. The Israeli military justified the action by claiming the flotilla violated a lawful blockade and that “no humanitarian aid was found aboard,” which is a statement disputed by multiple international witnesses.

More than 450 activists were detained, among them citizens of Spain, Italy, Turkey, South Africa, and the United States. Many were held without immediate consular access, with reports of inhumane treatment emerging within days. Amnesty International condemned the detentions as “an unlawful act of aggression” and a “deliberate effort to enforce collective punishment through starvation.”

Before communications were cut, Irish activist Tadhg Hickey recorded a final message: “We sail not just for Gaza’s survival, but for our own humanity. If silence is complicity, then to sail is resistance.” His words have since circulated across social media, embodying the flotilla’s spirit of nonviolent defiance.

Survivors deported to Turkey later described their ordeal. “We were treated like criminals for carrying food,” one volunteer said. “They zip-tied our wrists until they bled, but we’d do it again because Gaza is worth every risk.” Their testimonies echo the voices of thousands protesting globally after the interception, from London to Kuala Lumpur, demanding accountability and an end to the siege.

Law, Morality, and the Machinery of Blockade

The Israeli blockade, in place since 2007, has been condemned as illegal under international humanitarian law. The Fourth Geneva Convention forbids the collective punishment of civilians, and maritime law recognizes the right to deliver humanitarian aid in the face of mass suffering. Yet Israel continues to act with impunity, supported by global silence and diplomatic paralysis.

The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has warned that the blockade constitutes “a form of apartheid and starvation-based warfare.” Meanwhile, the UNRWA reports that 80% of Gaza’s population now depends on humanitarian aid for survival—aid that often never arrives.

Each intercepted vessel, carries a moral weight beyond its cargo. The Global Sumud Flotilla is more than a convoy; it was a reminder that humanity refuses to abandon Gaza to darkness. To criminalize compassion is to declare war on conscience itself.

Global Reactions and Outrage

Governments across the world have expressed alarm. Switzerland, Spain, and South Africa lodged formal protests, demanding explanations for the detention of their citizens. Turkish authorities arranged emergency flights to repatriate deported activists. Protests erupted in Paris, Istanbul, and Jakarta, as demonstrators carried placards reading, “Feeding Gaza is not a crime.”

Yet, in the corridors of power, condemnation remains cautious. Western governments have largely avoided direct criticism, framing the interception as a “security matter.” Meanwhile, humanitarian organizations, from Amnesty International to Human Rights Watch, have demanded that the blockade be lifted immediately and that the international community recognize the ongoing genocide.

The Broader Picture: Gaza’s Siege as Global Failure

The interception of the flotilla is not an isolated act, but the symptom of a global collapse of moral responsibility. While Gaza’s hospitals run without anesthesia and its children starve in makeshift tents, world leaders debate terminology instead of stopping the crime. Every intercepted aid convoy, every silenced activist, marks another day when humanity looked away.

The sea that once connected civilizations now separates the starving from salvation. Israel’s naval blockade is not a shield but a weapon. It starves, isolates, and erases. And yet, every time someone dares to sail toward Gaza, the truth resurfaces: even in the face of warships, the human spirit remains unsinkable.

However, the Global Sumud Flotilla did not fail, but it exposed the blockade for what it truly is: an act of cruelty sustained by silence. It reminded the world that solidarity still sails, that compassion still defies orders, and that Gaza’s struggle is humanity’s test.

Every intercepted ship tells the same story: that courage is contagious, that empathy is rebellion, and that the people of Gaza are not forgotten. The world may build walls of steel and propaganda, but the sea remembers those who dared to cross it—for justice, for life, and for Gaza.

Continue Reading

Featured

If Law Still Means Anything: What the UN Genocide Finding Demands Next

Published

on

If-Law-Still-Means-Anything

A mother in Gaza scrolls past a headline on a cracked smartphone: “UN inquiry finds genocide.” The generator coughs once and dies. In the quiet that follows, the question is small and sharp: If law still means anything, what happens now?

What does the Finding Mean?

The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry (CoI) concluded that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza. It has created conditions meant to destroy life. This is not a social media label but a formal UN investigation using the standard of “reasonable grounds to conclude.” It is not a criminal verdict that belongs to courts, but it triggers duties for states and institutions that signed up to prevent and punish genocide.

The findings sit alongside the International Court of Justice (ICJ) provisional measures from January, March, and May 2024 ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts while enabling humanitarian aid. These orders are legally binding and not just a piece of advice.

What States Must Do Now?

The Genocide Convention creates a duty for every state to prevent and punish genocide wherever there is a serious risk. After a UN genocide finding, the excuses thin out. Here is what action looks like in the real world:

1) Stop Feeding the Fire

Suspend weapons transfers, ammunition, and dual-use items that risk enabling unlawful attacks. Close loopholes in export licenses and re-exports. This applies first to Israel’s closest backers, including the United States and European states. Continuing diplomatic cover, like the sixth U.S. veto of a ceasefire, does not erase responsibility, but it deepens it.

2) Force Open the Lifelines

Use leverage so that aid, fuel, and medical supplies may move now, especially to the north. De politicize access and back neutral monitoring. Protect UNRWA shelters that have been hit again and again.

3) Back the Courts

Cooperate with the ICJ as a state responsibility and the International Criminal Court as an individual responsibility. Preserve and share evidence. If arrest warrants are issued, assist rather than obstruct.

4) Tell the Truth at Home

Launch transparent parliamentary reviews of your government’s role. Publish what was sold, licensed, trained, or shared during this war, and what will stop today.

What Must Change on the Ground?

Law only matters if it touches the day, and in Gaza, that day looks like this:

A Ceasefire that actually holds. Not a pause or a window but a complete halt to bombing that lets ambulances move, families sleep, and aid surge without fear. Moreover, reopening and securing corridors, including the northern ones, where hunger is worst, is a must-have. Restore fuel for hospitals, bakeries, water desalination, and sewage pumps. End the ritual of “approved” lists that starve clinics of surgical kits.

Protect people where they stand by stopping demolitions that erase neighborhoods and block return. Demine unexploded ordnance so children can walk to water without losing limbs. Shield health care from such attacks. Let families find the missing and bury the dead while supporting DNA identification, power labs, and safe access to cemeteries.

“Human dignity is not a luxury.”

The Ledgers that Don’t Lie

Numbers are not feelings, but they make denial harder. The ICJ told Israel to prevent genocidal acts and enable aid, which was a binding order as discussed earlier. It should have been taken seriously. UNRWA also reported multiple shelters struck within days in mid-September, killing and injuring people who fled for safety.

Satellite analysis for the UN found roughly three-quarters of structures in Gaza damaged or destroyed by now, with Gaza City suffering fresh tower demolitions later in the month. We do not list numbers to numb you, but rather to document a few so that history cannot pretend it did not know.

Accountability that Counts

Real accountability is a sequence and not just a slogan. It is the responsibility of states to enforce existing orders of the ICJ. If the Security Council blocks action, take the case to the UN General Assembly under the Uniting for Peace resolution to recommend collective measures, including the suspension of arms, guarantees of aid access, and reliable monitoring.

When it comes to individual accountability as per the ICC rulings, one should support investigations into war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Share satellite imagery, export records, and military-aid timelines. Do not host or welcome officials under credible suspicion and prepare to act on arrest warrants when they come.

Application of universal jurisdiction is compulsory, including travel bans and asset freezes on specific officials and entities tied to unlawful attacks. Ensure reparations and return while documenting destroyed homes, clinics, and schools. The right to safe, voluntary return cannot be bombed out of existence.

So, if law still means anything, it means ceasefire, access, protection, and true justice. It means the phones in Gaza do more than carry bad news. When the law works, a generator coughs back to life, a surgeon’s lamp stays on, and a shelter door stays standing through the night.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending