A Tibetan man set himself on fire and died in a protest in early November calling for the return of the region's exiled Buddhist leader, the Dalai Lama, a rights monitoring group reported.

The Washington, DC-based International Campaign for Tibet said 23-year-old Dorbe self-immolated in Ngaba county, a traditionally Tibetan region of Sichuan province.

The group reported that Dorbe wished long life to the Dalai Lama before setting himself on fire, becoming the 154st Tibetan to self-immolate since the protests began in 2009. Such acts have grown increasingly rare in recent years amid a smothering security crackdown by the Chinese authorities.

Many Tibetans use just one name.

China insists Tibet has been part of its territory for centuries, but many Tibetans say they were essentially independent for most of that time. The Dalai Lama fled to India in 1959 amid an abortive uprising against China's heavy-handed rule imposed after the People's Liberation Army's battled its way into the Himalayan kingdom nine years earlier.

The sell-immolations by Tibetan monks, nuns and laypeople aim to highlight harsh government regulations and the oppression of Tibet's Buddhist culture, as well as appeal for the return of the Dalai Lama.

The region is closed to foreign media, making it virtually impossible to confirm reported self-immolations. Government officials routinely deny any knowledge of such incidents.
A Reader, Delhi

Sabarimala Temple
Apropos "Right to Equality: Sabarimala Shrine and Women's Entry" by Ram Punyani [Frontier, Vol 51, No. 19, November 11-17, 2018], I would like to say that he has dealt with the important points of the Supreme Court being approached by some doubtful persons whose devotion to Hindu faith is questionable and also the Supreme Court majority decision for women's entry and single [woman] Judge minority dissent against such entry. I have been asserting everywhere, and even written an editorial in our journal LAW ANIMATED WORLD, appreciating and agreeing with the great dissent of Ms Indu Malholra J, in this regard. I wrote in that editorial titled: "3 Crucial Decisions: 3 Great Dissents", that "great dissent to be much appreciated is that of Ms Indu Malhotra J, who being a woman herself, boldly opposed the convoluted thinking of the majority which made encroachments into the cherished religious/cultural traditions of a particular Hindu temple in Kerala though this editor does not agree with her view of Sabarimalai devotees as a virtually separate religious denomination. We stress that local cultural traditions and some needed religious autonomy are to be respected, as exceptions to the rule of gender equality so zealously advocated by the majority; any rule will have / will have to have some exceptions". Elsewhere I wrote: "Hindu temples generally do not discriminate between men and women and in many temples I have seen more numbers of women devotees than men. However, when this is the general situation and if there are some exceptions some male only temples and some women only temples etc. nothing to worry. Because generality is confirmed only by exceptions. It is the case of exception proves the rule I think there was no discrimination to the extent of inviting judicial censure in Sabarimala temple traditions. Once it was submitted to the court that due to longstanding religious custom and local tradition women between 10 and 50 years age are only not allowed and the bar does not apply to all women then the Court should have realised that the discrimination was selective and had some reason (rational discrimination) and had nexus to the end (related to celibacy of the deity to be worshipped) and should have refused to intervene in the censure of local religious custom. I fully support the bold and wise dissent of the single Judge Ms Indu Malhotra in this regard".

I also thinkā€”The Left front or CPM dominated government in Kerala has conducted and still conducting in a most unreasonable manner by unnecessarily taking up the flag of the distorted, and at once incorrect, majority judgment of the Supreme Court and displaying excessive zeal bearing the mantle themselves and mobilising all sorts of women interested or not against the genuinely agitated women who rightly protest against this convoluted judgment. I don't understand what is the need for a rational, atheist minded people's government to do all this nonsense The best thing they could have done is to be neutral in the affair and left the implementation part to the Central Government and themselves citing law and order and public order problems to stall the crisis. Now they have given a Golden Opportunity to the fanatic communal elements, especially BJP to take advantage of this crisis in which effort they have succeeded to a considerable part too. In West Bengal we have seen how they bungled in the Nandigram affair. So at least now let the Left Front Government in Kerala display some wisdom and stall all efforts to implement the SC Judgment by itself and leave the burden to the Central Government or to the next government which may step in after elections which I think may be simultaneously held along with the General Elections in 2019.
I Mallikarjuna Sharma,
Advocate and Editor,
Law Animated World

Women's Liberation
Rape culture is worldwide and women everywhere are working to end it. It is inspiring to learn about the protest by South Korean women against the practice of men secretly creating pornography by filming and broadcasting women in public places and the police's lack of protecting the women and stopping the men. Laws with teeth against the filmings and the courage to enforce them are needed. All success to the South Korean women!
A Feminist, Chicago

Vol. 51, No.23, Dec 9 - 15, 2018