Women, children among dozens killed in Myanmar: Report
Bangkok, Dec 25: Myanmar government troops rounded up villagers, some believed to be women and children, fatally shot more than 30 and set the bodies on fire, a witness and other reports said Saturday.
The purported photos of the aftermath of the Christmas Eve massacre in eastern Mo So village, just outside Hpruso township in Kayah state where refugees were sheltering from an army offensive, spread on social media in the country, fuelling outrage against the military that took power in February.
The accounts could not be independently verified. The photos showed the charred bodies of over 30 people in three burned-out vehicles.
A villager who said he went to the scene told The Associated Press that the victims had fled the fighting between armed resistance groups and Myanmar's army near Koi Ngan village, which is just beside Mo So, on Friday. He said they were killed after they were arrested by troops while heading to refugee camps in the western part of the township.
The government has not commented on the allegations, but a report in the state-run Myanma Alinn daily newspaper on Saturday said that the fighting near Mo So broke out on Friday when members of ethnic guerrilla forces, known as the Karenni National Progressive Party, and those opposed to the military drove in suspicious vehicles and attacked security forces after refusing to stop.
The newspaper report said they included new members who were going to attend training to fight the army, and that the seven vehicles they were travelling in were destroyed in a fire. It gave no further details about the killings.
The witness who spoke to the AP said the remains were burned beyond recognition, and children's and women's clothes were found together with medical supplies and food.
The bodies were tied with ropes before being set on fire, said the witness, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he feared for his safety.
He did not see the moment they were killed, but said he believed some of them were Mo So villagers who reportedly got arrested by troops on Friday. He denied that those captured were members of locally organised militia groups.
Myanmar's independent media reported on Friday that 10 Mo So villagers including children were arrested by the army and four members of the local paramilitary Border Guard Forces who went to negotiate for their release were reportedly tied up and shot in the head by the military.
The witness said the villagers and anti-government militia groups left the bodies as military troops arrived near Mo So while the bodies were being prepared for cremation. The fighting was still intense near the village.
It's a heinous crime and the worst incident during Christmas. We strongly condemn that massacre as a crime against humanity, said Banyar Khun Aung, director of the Karenni Human Rights Group.
Earlier this month, government troops were also accused of rounding up villagers, some believed to be children, tying them up and slaughtering them. An opposition leader, Dr Sasa, who uses only one name, said the civilians were burned alive.
A video of the aftermath of the Dec 7 assault apparently retaliation for an attack on a military convoy showed the charred bodies of 11 people lying in a circle amid what appeared to be the remains of a hut.
Fighting meanwhile resumed Saturday in a neighbouring state on the border with Thailand, where thousands of people have fled to seek shelter. Local officials said Myanmar's military unleashed airstrikes and heavy artillery on Lay Kay Kaw, a small town controlled by ethnic Karen guerrillas, since Friday.
The military's action prompted multiple Western governments including the US Embassy to issue a joint statement condemning serious human rights violations committed by the military regime across the country".
We call on the regime to immediately cease its indiscriminate attacks in Karen state and throughout the country, and to ensure the safety of all civilians in line with international law, the joint statement said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Govt comes out with set of FAQs on women's reservation bill
New Delhi (PTI): The government on Sunday came out with a set of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to the reservation for women in legislatures following the defeat of a Constitution Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha that seeks to provide 33 per cent quota for women in the Lower House and state assemblies.
The FAQs came amid the Opposition's claim that in the name of women quota, the government was trying to carry out delimitation on its own will based on 2011 census.
Here are the FAQs:-
1. Which Bills were introduced by the central government in the Lok Sabha on April 16, 2026?
A:- On April 16, the central government introduced three key Bills in the Lok Sabha: The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-First Amendment) Bill, 2026, The Delimitation Bill, 2026 and The Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026.
2. Why were these three Bills brought at this point in time?
A:- The 'Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam', commonly known as the Women Reservation Act, provides that reservation for women will be implemented based on delimitation after the Census conducted post-2026.
If the government had waited for the Census and subsequent delimitation, women would not have been able to benefit from 33 per cent reservation even in the 2029 general elections as the Census and subsequent delimitation period takes time.
Therefore, to ensure timely benefits to half the population, it was considered necessary to delink implementation of the Act from this condition.
3. What would have been the benefits if these Bills had been passed?
A:- If passed and approved, these Bills would have enabled women to receive 33 per cent reservation in the Lok Sabha as early as the 2029 general elections.
4. Why was delimitation linked with the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, and why was there a proposal to increase seats?
A:- Delimitation means finalising the boundary of a constituency. It is essential for implementing women's reservation. The limit on seats in the Lok Sabha was set at 550 in 1976. In 1971, the population of India was 54 crore. Today it is 140 crore. Therefore, it is important to increase seats to 850 in the Lok Sabha. This would enable fair representation of people in Parliament.
5. Was there any attempt to modify the Delimitation Commission Act for political advantage? Would ongoing state elections be affected?
A:- No changes were proposed to the Delimitation Commission Act. The existing legal framework remains intact, and any recommendations of the commission would require parliamentary approval and Presidential assent.
Ongoing elections, including those in states like Tamil Nadu or West Bengal, would not be affected, as elections up to 2029 will be conducted under the current system.
6. What was the rationale behind increasing Lok Sabha seats to 850?
A:- The proposal was based on a proportional expansion approach. A uniform 50 per cent increase in seats would maintain the proportion for all states and UTs. Applying this principle to the current 543 seats would lead to approximately 815 seats. Therefore, the upper limit on seats was increased from current cap of 550 seats in Lok Sabha to 850 seats.
7. Would southern or smaller states have been adversely affected by the new delimitation proposal?
A:- No. All states would see uniform 50 per cent increase in seats. Southern states would not face any reduction in representation; rather, their overall share would remain stable. For example, Tamil Nadu's seats would increase proportionally, ensuring no disadvantage. The southern states currently have 23.76 per cent seats in Lok Sabha. This would have become 23.87 per cent after the passage of the Bills.
Lok Sabha seats in Karnataka would have increased to 42 from present 28; in Andhra Pradesh, the seats would have been 38 from the present 25; in Telangana, the total seats would have been 26 from the present 17; in Tamil Nadu, it would have been 59 seats from the present 39 and in Keralam, it would have been 30 from the present 20 seats.
Total seats in the five southern states would have been increased to 195 from the present 129.
This is 543 seats to 816 seats - 50 per cent increase model.
8. Would states that have controlled population growth face any disadvantage?
A:- No, as the increase in seats was proposed uniformly across states, their proportional representation would remain unchanged or slightly improve.
9. Would the representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes be affected?
A:- No, the process of delimitation ensures proportional reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. With an expanded House, the number of reserved seats would increase significantly, thereby strengthening their representation.
10. Was this Constitutional Amendment Bill introduced to delay caste census?
A:- No, the government has already started a time-bound programme for caste census. The process includes detailed enumeration, and caste-related data will be recorded during the population count phase.
11. Why was there no separate quota for Muslim women within the reservation framework?
A:- The Constitution of India does not provide for reservation based on religion. Reservation policies are based on social and economic backwardness, as laid out in the Constitution.
12. Why was women's reservation not implemented in the 2024 general elections itself?
A:- Implementing reservation requires delimitation of seats. Delimitation is an extensive consultative process. It takes about two years to complete delimitation. Therefore, these Bills (including Delimitation Bill) were brought in Parliament for implementing women's reservation.
13. Why was the Women's Reservation Bill introduced in 2023 if it was not to be implemented immediately?
A:- The Bill was introduced and passed in 2023 to establish the legal and constitutional framework for women's reservation. Its unanimous passage reflected broad political support at the time, enabling the enactment of the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam.
14. Why was a separate Union Territories Bill required?
A:- Legislative Assemblies in Union Territories such as Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi and Puducherry are governed by separate legal provisions. Therefore, specific amendments were required to implement women's reservation in these regions, necessitating a separate Bill.
