Sunday, December 6, 2015
AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM By A Pereira
Municipalities should embark on renaming places, primarily because they derive from colonialism and therefore, not in the spirit of the new Goa State. Names should be replaced by what proponents of name change groups state reflect the history and culture of the indigenous Goans (GAKUVED/Gãocares).
Renaming places is also seen as a catalyst to transformation, but is there an amended established body to discuss the same, known as:- Goan Geographical Names Council (GGNC)? Wherein, inter alia, will ensure the standardisation of geographical names and to facilitate the transformation process for geographical names?
Is the renaming of places an exercise that is likely to continue for a long time in Goa that will continue to redefine itself by Ganttiaisms?
BOLETIM OFFICIAL isn't there anymore, OFFICIAL GAZETTE will mislead Goans. It is critical for municipalities to be mindful of three procedural steps when introducing a name change, namely, giving sufficient notice as to when public meetings will be held, consulting with as many communities within the municipality and stakeholders as possible, and allowing enough time for public and stakeholder debates before name changes are recommended to the Minister. Failure to do this will result in municipalities having to go back to the drawing board and bearing the costs of long drawn-out litigation. Has this been done?
Human law has progressed in some ways over the last hundred years. First there was the establishment of the International Court at the Hague, then the Nuremberg and Japanese Trials, the development of the United Nations and of International Laws, et cetera.
Today, there are influential groupings of Goans throughout the West, in Lisbon, Portugal, in London, in America and Canada, in Australia and New Zealand, et cetera, and there are very many qualified, capable and eminent lawyers, criminologists, et cetera, of Goan extraction.
Moreover, Portugal is also a member of the European Community. All this creates a great opportunity for support towards a SEPERATE STATE or INDEPENDECE. Goans must haul up Portugal before the European Community and International Court of Justice for its act of fraud perpetrated by the so-called 'Chavan-Soares Treaty', and force it to nullify that fraud upon Goa, and to resume its obligations towards Goa under the relevant provisions of International Laws. Furthermore, it should be possible to also haul up the Indian Union under these laws. For residents in the United States, it should be possible to file a case against the Indian Union for damages for its invasions of 1954 & 1961, its act of occupation and pretended annexation, its flagrant acts of hypocrisy, the trauma, injuries, losses and displacements resultant to the invasions, the occupation and the pretended annexation, acts of state-sponsored terrorism prior and subsequent to the invasion, the rape of Goan women, the murder of Goans, the robberies by troopers of the invading forces, the destruction of Goan assets such as the Diu and Dabolim airports and the Goan Airlines TAIP (Transportes Aeros India Portuguesa), Emissora de Goa Transmitters et cetera, as also against Portugal for its act of fraud, the 'Chavan-Soares Treaty'. And even if it is only a class-action suit for billions of dollars in damages, it will still force Portugal, the Indian Union and the world to sit up and notice. All this will build up pressure on both Portugal and the Indian Union and force the Goan Question to the forefront of international consciousness, and make it impossible for both perpetrators to continue with their wrong-doing.
1. We must unanimously agree that the events of 1954 & 1961 were forced upon us without our request for them, i.e. gratuitously, and that there was no provocation or legal or moral basis for the Indian Union to levy any claim upon us or Portugal which the Indian Union had made.
2. We agree that, therefore, we are not a legal, moral and constitutional part or member of the Indian Union, and that the Indian Union is merely an aggressor and occupier, in the illegal, immoral and criminal occupation of our country.
3. All, each and every pretended action, law, et cetera, by the Indian Union and or its subsidiary bodies, including the collaborationist governments, legislatures, et cetera, of the Occupation are illegal, null and void.
4. We recognise that Portugal in signing the 1973 Treaty with the Indian Union has both committed a fraud upon us, and also formally abdicated and resigned any and all claims upon us, that therefore, as a result, while we continued to be under the jurisdiction of Portugal until that date, from that date we were cast adrift and constituted into a separate state.
5. The Constitutional Law of the EIP as of 1973, whether enacted by the EIP or by Portugal, remains in force and is still the Constitutional Law of the EIP.
6. We demand nothing less than the full complete and unconditional restoration of the Status Quo Ante prior to the piece-meal occupation of the EIP in 1954 & 1961. The Indian Union has no locus standi in the EIP, and is not to remain under any form, whether as transitional administration, or a contributor and participant in one, et cetera, whatsoever.
7. We demand not only the Restoration of the Status Quo Ante, but also of Restitution and Reparations; of the Constitution of an International Council of Arbitration to whom the persons and estates of persons, whether deceased or living, be handed over, of such persons who had participated or caused the criminal acts of 1954 & 1961, pending their trial and the application of their estates to Restitution. Moreover, even the Indian Union, as an entity being culpable, must formally and sincerely apologise and make restitution and reparation for its wrongdoings.
8. We demand the Constitution of an Interim Administration under the auspices of Portugal and the Lusophone Community: Brasil, Cabo Verde, East Timor, et cetera. However, specifically, we refuse any participation by Angola and Moçambique as being complicit in the crimes against us.
4th point of the five traditional modes of acquisition of sovereignty over territory - CESSION:-
CESSION is the transfer of territory, usually by treaty, from one State to another. The situation is rather like the transfer of property in municipal law. Therefore, there may sometimes be exchange of territory. The treaty signed between Portugal and India bears no significance to Goa because Portugal neither had Sovereignty over Goa nor held absolute ownership titles over the territory of Goa, Portugal was only an administrative member and it lacked the capacity and authority to enter into any treaty with any nation as regards transfer of sovereignty of Goa. Hence the peace treaty signed between India and Portugal is null and void. (Treaty between India and Portugal, (No. 14321) on recognition of India's sovereignty over Goa, Damão, Diu, Dadrá and Nagar-Aveli and related matters. Signed at New Delhi on December 31, 1974). It is not the sovereignty, but only the administrative responsibility that can be transferred by Portugal to India. So if India assumes the responsibility of an Administrative member nation, then it may do so under Article 73e of Chapter XI of the UN Charter, to develop Goa into a fully self-governing independent sovereign territory.
The U.N. Security Council in similar circumstances had proclaimed annexations illegal, void and untenable. The Security Council declared annexation of Goa by India as illegal (vide S/5033, Scor, 988th meeting, December 18, 1961). But no liberation movement ensued in Goa, as ours is the first of its kind. It acted against Iraq under Security Council Resolution No. 660-678 for annexation of Kuwait in 1991. The U.N. declared annexation of East Timor and Western Sahara illegal. The U.N. precedents, contemporary International Law, Jus Cogens and Vienna Convention of Law of Treaty would clearly regard annexation of Goa by India in 1961 after fourteen years of the independence of Indian independence unjustified and illegal. The official stance of the colonial government of India that the illegal annexation has assumed finality is not only absurd, null and void but also unacceptable to the people of Goa, who are yet to exercise their right to self-determination. The colonial Government has failed to justify her annexation of Goa, under International Law.
Considering the historical material and records, documents and treaties, the sovereign and independent political status of Goa, which had been continuing for centuries, has been dislocated by the Indian colonial Administration. The unlawful colonial occupation of Goa shall have to be terminated by the Indian Government at the earliest moment in adherence of the U.N. eradication of colonialism. The U.N. is yet to oversee this process.
Since there was no reference to the people of Goa, and since the indigenous people of Goa did not ratify the TREATY or agree to it in any manner before or after, it has no value and no legal meaning.
The TREATY in itself is an act of Fraud. It alleges that Goa became an integral part of the Indian Union from the dates of the Indian occupations - 1954 & 1961. That is Fraud because between those dates and 1974, when "Portugal" formally "repudiated" Goa, the Indian occupation was not accepted either by the Goans or by the Portuguese government, and the same could not be imposed upon either as having been with their agreement and assent by retrospective effect and effectively by one not in continuity with them, but a mere robber and outlaw!
Goa can become free only when Portugal returns to its senses. We need to wake up Portugal. At the moment, metropolitan Portugal has rebelled against the Portuguese State, against the Portuguese Communion, and has seceded and constituted itself a secessionist state. It abandoned Timor and other Portuguese provinces to their fates and to the tender mercies of their enemies.
Are you listening Mário?
Chakravarti Rajagopalachari said:-
The Hindu, December 20, 1961:- "It would be presenting a deceptive picture to suggest that everyone is supremely happy over the Goan development without any reservation".
Swaraj, December 27, 1961:- "…India had totally lost her moral stature to raise her voice against militarism; and that Portugal's presence in Goa was not greater offence than China's occupation of Indian Territory."
Such situations are proven to be less pallatable to many of the locals, witnessing the degrade and downgrading of the Estado da India to State of another colonial power, which otherwise could have been better being a SEPERATE STATE or INDEPENDANT for the indigenous people of Goa.