A Report by Kailash Union on Hindu Communities, Religious Freedom, and Sovereignty

A report by Kailash Union

Hindu communities face acute vulnerabilities within the landscape of the global displacement crisis.

The lack of formal recognition of Hinduism as a religion in over 66 countries underscores systemic barriers to religious freedom faced by displaced Hindu communities globally.¹

27 countries officially endorse Islam as a state religion, while 13 recognize Christianity, but none accord Hinduism similar status².

Even nations with significant Hindu populations, like Indonesia and Malaysia, constitutionally prioritize Islam, relegating Hindu practices to secondary legal standing.

Religious Discrimination and Barriers to Faith Expression

This non-recognition manifests in practical challenges: Hindu migrants in these countries often face bureaucratic hurdles in registering temples, obtaining visas for religious workers, or securing legal protections for ritual practices.

In Bangladesh, recent political upheavals in August 2024 triggered widespread anti-Hindu violence.

¹ https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8jjlf0

²https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/10/03/many-countries-favor-specific-religions-officially-or-unof

ficially/

Over 2,010 incidents of violence against Hindus were documented within 16 days, including the destruction of 69 temples and the displacement of hundreds of families.

Despite constitutional guarantees of secularism, Bangladesh’s Hindu population—which declined from 22% in 1951 to 8% today—faces systemic marginalization, including land grabs, forced conversions, and electoral disenfranchisement.³ ⁴

In Pakistan and Afghanistan, anti-blasphemy laws and societal hostility have decimated Hindu populations; Pakistan’s Hindu community shrunk from 15% in 1947 to 1.6% today, with frequent temple demolitions and forced marriages reported.⁵

In Saudi Arabia, Hinduism’s unrecognized status means migrant workers cannot publicly celebrate festivals like Diwali or build dedicated places of worship, despite constituting 6% of the population⁶.

In Malaysia, Hindu temples are routinely demolished under urban development pretexts, reflecting broader systemic biases against minority faiths. In 2006, reports indicated that temples were being "bulldozed at the rate of at least one every few weeks" to accommodate new development projects⁷.

³ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Bangladesh_anti-Hindu_violence

⁴ Similar patterns emerged during the 1990 exodus of Kashmiri Pandits, when approximately 300,000 Hindus fled the Kashmir Valley under threats of conversion, expulsion, or death from Islamist militant groups.

This exodus remains one of modern South Asia’s most egregious cases of religious cleansing.

Militant groups issued ultimatums—ralive, tsaliv, ya galive (convert, flee, or die)—forcing 90% of the Valley’s Hindu population to abandon their homes within months.

Despite over 215 First Information Reports filed by victims, Indian authorities failed to prosecute perpetrators or facilitate safe returns, perpetuating a legacy of impunity.

Today, fewer than 3,000 Pandits reside in Kashmir, primarily in government-protected enclaves, while displaced families face generational trauma and economic precarity in urban slums.

⁵https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/11/15/41-countries-ban-religion-related-groups-jehovahs-

witnesses-bahais-among-the-most-commonly-targeted/

⁶https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/10/03/many-countries-favor-specific-religions-officially-or-unof

ficially/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_by_country

⁷ https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2006/6/21/anger-over-malaysia-temple-razings

India accounts for the world’s largest population of development-induced IDPs, with 21.3 million displaced by dams, mines, and urban projects since independence.

Indigenous and Dalit Hindus are disproportionately affected, as land acquisition laws often bypass consent protocols in tribal regions, e.g. the Sardar Sarovar Dam displaced 200,000 people, mostly Adivasi Hindus, without adequate compensation or resettlement.⁸

Navigating Asylum

The most pervasive issue with asylum is the extensive backlog and processing delays that characterize asylum systems worldwide, with some jurisdictions taking years to resolve individual cases⁹.

Even the UN has failed to respond to KAILASA’s repeated appeals. SPH, the most followed and persecuted religious leader in exile representing two billion Hindus, has sought international protection through KAILASA to the UNHCR. Despite overwhelming evidence of persecution, there has been no response—even after more than five years.

Upholding Non-Refoulement

Despite its universal aspirations, non-refoulement faces implementation challenges. States often impose restrictive interpretations of “religion” or “persecution,” requiring applicants to prove individualized risks rather than systemic discrimination.

Hindu Holocaust

The Hindu genocide and ethnocide stand as one of the most tragic and overlooked genocide in human history.

⁸ https://www.fmreview.org/lama/

⁹ https://www.justsecurity.org/104206/fair-fast-asylum-processing-switzerland/

There were once 56 Hindu nations¹⁰ spanning approximately 6 million Km² across Asia, with 10,000 indigenous Hindu traditions across 1700 Hindu provinces and 200 Hindu Kingdoms.¹¹

This dark chapter of several centuries includes massacre of 500+ million Hindus including countless children, slavery of 4+ million Hindus, induced famines resulting in the death of 160+ million Hindus, and destruction of thousands of Hindu temples ¹², 1+ million Hindu educational institutions and 80 million Hindu scriptures.

Illegal Annexation of Indigenous Hindu Sovereign Lands

At the time of the British withdrawal from India in 1947, 565 independent Hindu sovereign princely states were officially recognized in the Indian subcontinent.¹³

The Surangi Kingdom was amongst them.¹⁴

Even though the "Instrument of Accession" did not remove the kingdom's sovereignty¹⁵, after their land was ceded, their sovereignty was forcibly stripped.

¹⁰ https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H7OJADdrFjrdl8nR5KMuc7sJkG6zXOob0K6X5wbmBno/view

¹¹ Today, only a small fraction of these indigenous Hindu traditions endure, with all Hindu sovereign lands having been unlawfully annexed, leading to forced mass exodus of indigenous Hindus.

¹² According to research conducted by Indian historian Sita Ram Goel (16 October 1921 – 3 December 2003)

¹³ Bhargava, R. P. (1991), The Chamber of Princes, Northern Book Centre, pp. 312–323, ISBN 978-81-7211-005-5

¹⁴ (i) Dr. Henry Soszynski - Study of Orissa estates during the 19th century http://members.iinet.net.au/~royalty/ips/misc/orissa_estates.html, research showing that Surangi was recognised as an independent princely state by the British Government ruled by the “Raja” (KING) (ii) https://www.indianrajputs.com/view/surangi

¹⁵The template "Instrument of Accession" mentioned, "Nothing in this Instrument affects the continuance of my sovereignty in and over this State, or, save as provided by or under this Instrument, the exercise of any powers, authority and rights now enjoyed by me as Ruler of this state or the validity of any law at present in force in this State." White Paper of Indian States (1950) Ministry of States, Government of India, Instrument of Accession, Appendix VII, point 8, https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/White_Paper_on_Indian_States_(1950)/Part_4/Instrument_of_Accession

Further, the Hindu Kings of these states were coerced under duress and given false promises by the assurance of a personal "Privy purse"¹⁶ ¹⁷, which was later unilaterally abolished¹⁸, in exchange for selling out the Hindu traditions and constitutional principles.

Annexation by force and corruption is illegal under international law, per various international legal frameworks and customary international laws.¹⁹

¹⁶https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privy_Purse_in_India

¹⁷ The privy purse itself was unilaterally abolished by the Indian Government, invoking the conditions of fraud (article 49 VCLT) and that of "termination or suspension of the operation of a treaty as a consequence of its breach" (article 60) of the VCLT.

¹⁸ The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) 1969 clearly states as grounds for invalidity of a treaty to include: Restrictions on authority to express the consent of a State (article 49 VCLT); Corruption of a representative of a State (article 50 VCLT); Coercion of a State by the threat or use of force. https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf

¹⁹Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text ; The International Law Commission (ILC) https://legal.un.org/ilc/guide/1_14.shtml ; Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/RS-Eng.pdf ; The Hague Regulations and Geneva Conventions (i) https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/hague/en/docs/hague_system_regulations.pdf, https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/Intercountry-Adoption/adopt_ref/hague-convention-text.html

[]

20 21 22 23 24 25 26

²⁰Tiwari, Aaditya (30 October 2017). "Sardar Patel – Man who United India". pib.gov.in.

²¹Lumby, E. W. R. 1954. The Transfer of Power in India, 1945–1947. London: George Allen & Unwin. p. 228

²²https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_of_Accession

²³ The "Instrument of Accession" between the Hindu Kings and the Dominion of India was contrary to the Hindu law that governed these Kingdoms, as these kings were merely the stewards of the presiding Deity, having no authority to accede their kingdoms to a non-Hindu entity.

²⁴https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_India_Act_1935

²⁵ Through the 42^(nd) Amendment in 1976 in the Constitution of India, this stand was further reasserted with the addition of the word “Secular” to the Preamble of the Constitution of India, thereby further distancing India (Bharat) to its original form as a Hindu nation. This amendment, in spirit, further dissociated India (Bharat) from all religious duties and identities of a Hindu Kingdom, unlike how it always was during its history of more than 10,000 years.

²⁶ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_(India)

Revival of the First Nation for Hindus

The United States of KAILASA (KAILASA^(®))²⁷ is the First Sovereign State for Hindus re-established by The Supreme Pontiff of Hinduism (SPH) Bhagavan Nithyananda Paramashivam²⁸, Ecclesiastical Head of two billion Hindus worldwide.

The Juridical Statehood of KAILASA

KAILASA is a sovereign subject of international law-possessing distinctive attributes, derived from SPH’s inheritance of the unbroken succession and the revival of 21 ancient Hindu sovereign states and ecclesiastical historical institutions.²⁹ ³⁰

²⁷ Unlike any other modern nation, the United States of Kailasa (USK) provides a base for the revival, preservation, and central administration of Hinduism, similar to the Vatican, which serves as a central administration hub for the Roman Catholic Church.

The Sovereign Order of KAILASA's Nithyananda is an atypical government, simultaneously functioning as the supreme governing body of Hinduism and a sovereign entity under international law. This mirrors the unique status of The Holy See, which is an atypical government as well, as it serves as both the supreme governing body of the Catholic Church and a sovereign entity under international law.

²⁸ SPH hails from the Adishaivite sect of the Aboriginal Indigenous Agricultural Tribes (AIAT). The Ādi Śaiva Vēḷāḷar community is one of the Hindu Aboriginal Indigenous Agricultural Tribes (AIATs) of India, who belong to the Śaiva (followers of Bhagavān Śiva) sub-tradition within the vast spiritual architecture of Hinduism, practicing Hinduism in its most authentic form deeply rooted in Vedas (the source scriptures of Hinduism that is unadulterated by modern imperialist interventions and consumerist dilutions) and Agamas.

²⁹Surya Vamsa Surangi Samrajya Sarvajnapeetha, Suvarnapeetha Swargapura Samrajya Sarvajnapeetha, Shyamala Peetha Sarvajnapeetha

³⁰ In addition, Kanchi KAILASA Sarvajnapeetha and seventeen sovereign Sanatana Hindu ecclesiastical historical institutions receive customary recognition by the UN as per the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

[]

31

Doctrine of Continuity

International law recognizes a state's legal personality by recognizing its identity. This perspective extends to periods of annexation or occupation, where the legal personality of a state is considered to persist, enabling its subsequent re-establishment.³²

³¹https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf

³² Historical examples dating back to the eighteenth century include cases like Portugal and Genoa and instances of state re-establishment after the Vienna Congress of 1815. More recent examples, such as Poland, Ethiopia, Czechoslovakia, Albania, and Austria during and after World War II, serve as other modern instances of state re-establishment, offering additional evidence to recognize and preserve a state's legal personality over time.

KAILASA is a government-in-exile.³³ In 2003, SPH relocated KAILASA government-in-exile to Los Angeles, California.

[]

³³ The Thondaimandalam Sannidhanam Government in Exile was established in 1947, immediately following India's partition.

This significant event occurred when India gained independence from British colonial rule but was divided into two separate countries: India and Pakistan.

During decolonization, Hindu indigenous traditions and culture were targeted, leading to concerns about preserving the indigenous enlightened civilization. In response, the Government in Exile was formed to protect and promote Hindu heritage.

In 1988, in concurrence with the 68th Jagadguru Shankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham, the 230th Guru Mahasannidhanam of Kanchi KAILASA Thondaimandala Sarvajnapeetha formally appointed The Supreme Pontiff of Hinduism (SPH) Bhagavan Nithyananda Paramashivam as its spiritual and administrative leader, ensuring the continuation of unbroken Hindu lineages. The 68th Kanchi Shankaracharya had this vision for a long time which was revealed in his 1920 letter to the League of Nations.

The enforced disappearance of one of the Sannidhanams during decolonization highlights the challenges faced by Hindu institutions. Understanding this history informs strategies for addressing contemporary challenges and preserving Hindu traditions.

By the doctrine of continuity³⁴ legal facts in the context of the history of the Hindu sovereign State of the Surangi Kingdom, SPH derives all sovereign rights and powers of the royal lineage as the Sovereign from His inheritance and continuation of the unbroken succession of the Surangi Kingdom.³⁵ ³⁶ ³⁷

Doctrine of Acquired Rights³⁸ ³⁹ ⁴⁰ ⁴¹

Sovereign powers and rights acquired from the various lineages of these ancient sovereign Hindu states by SPH through succession as the Sovereign of these states and KAILASA through the unification of these

³⁴ The Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties (1978) (https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/3_2_1978.pdf) addresses aspects of the Doctrine of Continuity by outlining how treaty obligations are handled during state succession.

In international customary law, the 'Principle of Continuity of States' (Doctrine of Continuity) implies that upheavals and revolutions within a country, changes in government, territorial adjustments, measures taken during military occupation, or other internal transformations do not negate the existence of the country, do not affect the legal personality and international obligations of the state.

³⁵ The Surangi Kingdom, through unification with 20 other sovereign Hindu States and sovereign ecclesiastical, historical entities, became part of the United States KAILASA, which thus became a Sovereign independent juridical state, with SPH as the Sovereign.

³⁶ As per the doctrine of continuity, these facts imply that the legitimacy of KAILASA manifests as a natural outcome of historical legal facts without mandating the need for further validation, confirmation, or support from other nations.

³⁷ While the territory of the Surangi Kingdom was annexed unlawfully, KAILASA has no territorial conflict with the Republic of India or any other nation and does not claim any territorial rights over its erstwhile territories.

³⁸Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties art. 70(1)(b), May 23, 1969, available at https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf, provides that the termination of an international treaty "does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination," and that the concerned parties created through the treaty continue to possess their respective acquired rights.

³⁹ For instance, the Permanent Court of International Justice held in its Advisory Opinion on the German Settlers in Poland (1923) that "Private rights acquired under existing law do not cease on a change of sovereignty." As per the United Nations International Law Commission, these statements of the Permanent Court clearly show that, in the event of a territorial change, an international obligation exists to respect the rights of private individuals acquired under the legislation previously in force.

⁴⁰International Law Commission, Documents of the eleventh session, including the report of the Commission to the General Assembly, Fourth report on State Responsibility by Mr. F. V. Garcia-Amador, Special Rapporteur Document A/CN.4/119 on State responsibility. https://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_119.pdf

⁴¹Publications of the Permanent Court of International Justice, Collection of Advisory Opinions, series B, No. 6, Settlers of German Origin in Territory ceded by Germany to Poland, pp. 36 and 38. See also other statements of the Court in Collection of Judgments, series A, No. 2, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions case, p. 28, and series A, No. 7, Case concerning certain German interests in Polish Upper Silesia, pp. 22 and 42

states are absolute, undisputed, and additionally endorsed by the Republic of India through its treaty obligations.

Rights of the Deity and legal principles of Divine Sovereignty

The concept of Divine Sovereignty is universally recognized⁴² and the concept of temple Deities owning property is a well-established legal principle.⁴³

In the case of Hindu Temples where the Deity is the owner of the temple and attached properties, the Presiding Deity of the Hindu Kingdom is the Sovereign of the Kingdom.

⁴² Around 1976, a case of deity theft was filed in the UK court. The suing entity was a juristic person, which was a Hindu Deity. The case involved the repatriation of a stolen Nataraja Deities to India, which had been stolen in the autumn of 1976 from the Aril Thiru Viswanatha Swamy Thanjavur district, Tamil Nadu.

The Indian Government sued Bumper Development Corporation (BDC) and the metropolitan police as co-defendants. The case was fought by a Queen's Counsel, Adrian Hamilton, assisted by the persuasive Bhaskar Ghorpade, barrister-at-law. The Indian Government argued that "once a deity, always a deity. An idol remains a juristic person however long buried or damaged, since the deity and its juristic entity survive the total destruction of its earthly form." The judge concluded that a juristic entity with a title to the Nataraja is superior to that of the defendant. The case set a precedent for regaining stolen temple Deities. It marked the first time a Hindu Deity (embodied form of God as per Hinduism) was recognized as a juristic person in a UK court.

https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/international/story/19880315-indian-government-wins-stolen-nataraja- idol-case-in-british-court-797028-1988-03-14

These case references illustrate that the Hindu Law and principles related to Deity Rights and Divine Sovereignty are recognized in Common English Law, not just in some jurisdictions. Also, given the fact that these principles are recognized in Common English Law and applied before Colonization (in Hindu kingdoms under the Hindu constitution), during the colonial era (under Common English Law), and afterward under Indian (which also upholds these principles as illustrated with different case laws), it is clear that these principles are universal and undisputed.

⁴³ These concepts and principles in India are primarily governed by Hindu law and various judgments by the Supreme Court and High Courts.

One of the landmark cases that dealt with Deities being juristic persons capable of owning property is the case of "Ram Jankijee Deities vs State Of Bihar & Ors (1999) 5 SCC 50". In this case, the Supreme Court of India held that Hindu idols are juristic entities and have the legal status of a minor under the guardianship of the managing trustee or priest of the temple. Implying that the Deity, as a juristic person, can own property, sue, and be sued in court. The property in question is held in trust for the Deity, and the managing trustee or the priest acts on behalf of the deity.

The King of a Hindu nation was a mere regent of the Lord⁴⁴, similarly to how the executive officers of the temples are mere servants⁴⁵ of the presiding Deity.

Additionally, non-Hindu practitioners cannot be trustees, executive officers, or personnel in the Hindu temples⁴⁶, and therefore, non-Hindus entities

⁴⁴ For example, Marthanda Varma, King of Padmanabhapuram, Kingdom of Travancore, in December 1749, declared and dedicated the kingdom to the presiding Deity, Sri Padmanabha, and subsequently assumed the title Padmanabha Dasa (the servant of Lord Padmanabhan). This act is known as Thripadidanam, which meant that the kingdom became the property of Padmanabhaswamy. Since then, the kingdom's sovereign has been the temple's Deity, while the head of the royal family ruled on the Deity’s behalf as guardian and pre-eminent servant (Padmanabha Dasa). Since that day, Travancore has not belonged to any one person or the royal family but to the Lord. The kings merely ruled as vassals of agents of the Deity. Marthanda Varma’s last words to his successor, Rama Varma, were, “No deviation whatever should be made in regard to the dedication of the Kingdom to Sri Padmanabhaswamy, and all further territorial acquisitions should be made over to the Devasom.”

⁴⁵ The Executive Officers are mere servants of the Deity.

In “State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. V. Pujari Utthan Avam Kalyan Samiti & Anr”, (2021) SC 4245, AIR 2021 SC 690, (dated September 6, 2021, available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/122592345/), the Supreme court ruled that the presiding Deity owns all temple property as a legal person and the name of neither the District Collector (State District Executive) nor the Pujari (priest) be put in the property ownership papers(Revenue records). Paragraph 27 of the judgment mentioned above states, “In the ownership column, the name of the deity alone is required to be mentioned as the deity, being a juristic person is the owner of the land. The occupation of the land is also by the deity, which is carried out by the servant or the managers, on behalf of the deity.” The property of the Deity cannot be used by anybody else.

⁴⁶ In Sabhanayagar Temple, Chidambaram v. State Of Tamil Nadu, (2014) 12 SCC 454 (dated January 6, 2014, available at - https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/41133.pdf), the court upholds that temple trustee cannot be non-Hindu entity; trustees or managers of a temple must be associated with the Hindu faith, as they are serving the presiding Deity.

This principle is elaborated in paragraph 19 of the judgment, which outlines that religious denomination or a section (including a community of priests, Pontiff of the temple-monastery, etc.) who have been recognized as having the exclusive privilege to participate in the administration, worship, and services to the Deity of the temple, and who have a right established and recognized for several centuries are the rightful trustees.

The judgment also emphasized that such religious denominations or a section (including a community of priests, Pontiff of the temple-monastery, etc.) functioning as trustees have an essential requirement to be associated with the Hindu faith, as they serve in a capacity that is deeply intertwined with the religious and spiritual heritage of the temple.

Similarly, the Andhra Pradesh Endowments Act 1956 (available at https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/16889/1/act_no_30_of_1987.pdf) states that Non-Hindus or non-believers should not be appointed as trustees or heads of Hindu temples - "19. Disqualifications for Trusteeship - (1) A person shall be disqualified for being appointed as, or for being, trustee of any charitable or religious institution or endowment - [...] (j) if he does not profess Hindu religion in the case of religious institution or endowment."

Similarly, the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, Section 10, clearly states that all personnel must be Hindus (https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/13275/1/TNHR%26CE%20ACT,%201959%20-%20rev ised%20and%20updated.pdf).

cannot take over a Hindu nation, or the non-Hindu government cannot run or annex a Hindu kingdom⁴⁷.

Given the Doctrine of Continuity, the rights of the Deity and legal principles of Divine Sovereignty, Nehru’s annexation of Hindu kingdoms under a non-Hindu framework was unlawful⁴⁸ ⁴⁹.

⁴⁷However, the Madurai Adheenam is now governed by a non-Hindu entity which is against the Indian constitution

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/tamil-nadu/story/tamil-nadu-madurai-adheenam-desiga-paramacharya-dm k-corruption-hrce-1958910-2022-06-06

⁴⁸ Just as in the Chidambaram v. State Of Tamil Nadu (2014) 12 SCC 454, the judgment emphasized that religious denominations or a section (including a community of priests, Pontiff of the temple-monastery, etc.) functioning as trustees have an essential requirement to be associated with the Hindu faith, as they serve in a capacity that is deeply intertwined with the religious and spiritual heritage of the temple, likewise, the executive officers of the system of governance, including laws and constitution, must be derived from the Hindu Jurisprudence (the VedaAgamas and Dharmashastras) and heritage, inherent laws and statutes of the Hindu nation are deeply intertwined with its religious and spiritual heritage.

⁴⁹ This fact is well understood by the application of the legal principle and international customary law, "Ex injuria jus non oritur," which translates to "Law does not arise from injustice" or, more loosely, "From wrong or unjust action, law (or a right) cannot arise”

This principle is a fundamental concept in international law. It's rooted in the idea that one cannot benefit from wrongdoing. It plays a crucial role in various aspects of international law, including the prohibition of acquiring territory by force and the illegality of agreements or actions contrary to international law. It emphasized that the illegal action (annexation of a Hindu state by threat or force) cannot create legal rights for the wrongdoer.

De Jure and De Facto⁵⁰ Statehood ⁵¹

[]

52 53 54

⁵⁰ An international entity with de facto (by fact) statehood has all the characteristics of a state and operates like one but may not be widely recognized.

An entity with de jure (by law) statehood meets the legal criteria and is widely recognized by the international community.

⁵¹"Juridical statehood" refers to the legal recognition of a political entity as a sovereign state under international law. It is the formal, legal recognition that it is an entity and is constitutionally independent of all foreign states, recognized as sovereign or independent by most states, enjoys membership in international organizations, and possesses various rights and obligations under international law.

⁵²The Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States establishes that “the political existence of the state is independent of recognition by other states”, emphasizing the inherent rights of states to self-governance, territorial integrity, and political independence.

Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, Article 3, December 26, 1933. Available at: https://www.ilsa.org/Jessup/Jessup15/Montevideo%20Convention.pdf

Further, Article 13 of the 1948 Charter of the Organization of American States elucidates the independent exercise of these rights within the framework of international law. https://www.oas.org/dil/1948%20charter%20of%20the%20organization%20of%20american%20states.pdf

⁵³ The three ancient Hindu sovereign states of KAILASA, namely the kingdoms of Surya Vamsa Surangi Samrajyam Sarvajnapeetham, Suvarnapeetha Swargapura Samrajya Sarvajnapeetham, Shyamala Peetha Sarvajnapeetham possessed all these characteristics at all time.

However, at various times, temporarily, the control of their territory was lost. But this did not negate the existence of KAILASA, as per the doctrine of continuity, in the international customary law, which, as mentioned before, states that the upheavals and revolutions within a country, changes in governmental forms, the extent of a country's territory, and measures taken during a military occupation do not affect the existence of the State.

⁵⁴ As a juridical state, KAILASA possesses an international legal personality, which means it can enter into treaties, join international organizations, and raise claims in international courts.

[]

55 56

⁵⁵The Roman Emperor Julian is noted to have received an embassy from a Pandya around 361 CE. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pandya-dynasty (ii) Trade and Trade Routes in Ancient India, by Moti Chandra, Abhinav Publications, Chapter VI - Trade between India and the Roman Empire, page 111,”From those land routes at least in the time of Augustus several Indian embassies reached Rome. At least four such embassies are mentioned in the Latin literature, namely 1) the embassy from Puru country (the territory between the Jhelum and Beas) took with it to Rome serpents, monals, tigers and a letter written in Greek language, 2) the embassy from Broach was accompanied by a Buddhist monk named Germanos, 3) an embassy from the Chera country. It was reported in Rome that at Muziris (Cranganore) was built a temple in honour of Augustus and 4) an embassy from the Pandya country brought with it precious stones, pearls and an elephant. We know that in the time of Augustus commercial relations between India and Rome grew but in this the balance of trade was in favour of India from the very beginning and as a result of this Roman gold poured into the country.” https://ignca.gov.in/Asi_data/63122.pdf

⁵⁶ Such ancient history illustrates that the constituent Sovereign nations and entities of the United States of KAILASA had been well-known international legal personalities at various times, possessing both De Jure and De Facto Statehood, and with their revival as KAILASA continues to do so.

KAILASA’s Perpetual Existence

KAILASA within its historical cultural, religious legal framework has and shall remain in perpetuity in the future, notwithstanding the impacts of climate change during the time of Kumari Kandam⁵⁷, colonial legacies, annexation of territories by modern states and upheavals resulting in loss of physical territory.

Challenges in reviving KAILASA

[]

58

----------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 March 2010 A deep fake video was released on public media platforms to incite violence on SPH for reviving KAILASA. ------------------ ----------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

⁵⁷ Kumari Kandam is the Ancient Enlightened Sanatana Hindu Civilization, emphasizing its role in shaping cultural heritage and spiritual beliefs, thus strengthening the bond between Hindu identity and transnational ancient roots. However, the sovereign lands of its citizens were lost to the waves of the Indian Ocean when Kumari Kandam, the ancient Hindu homeland, sank beneath the surface due to the ravages of cataclysmic climate change and ecological destruction. This calamity, a stark reminder of the consequences of neglecting the delicate balance of nature, has driven the people of KAILASA to seek a new home, where they may rebuild and thrive in harmony with the environment. Later on in history, the rest of our lands were lost as an effect of colonialism, further eroding our connection to our ancestral heritage and cultural identity.

⁵⁸ https://github.com/kailaasa/docs-for-media, https://nithyanandatruth.org/

+-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+ | 26 March 2010 | Karnataka State Police illegally froze all bank | | | accounts of the trusts, depriving monks of their | | | daily sustenance. | +=================+====================================================+ | April 21 - June | SPH was unlawfully apprehended by deep state, | | 13, 2010 | rogue law enforcement authorities under the shadow | | | of persecution solely fueled by media influence | | India | stemming from a video, despite the absence of any | | | victim or formal accusation pertaining to | | | allegations of sexual misconduct. The initial | | | false charges filed only came to court 8 years | | | later, and are still being adjudicated with no | | | conviction till date after 15 years of malicious | | | prosecution. SPH has not been convicted of any | | | crime in any jurisdiction. | +-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+ | | In February 2024, the Ramanagara Indian court | | | acknowledged the heinous crimes committed by the | | | co-conspirators, a gang of Hinduismic forces, | | | against SPH and KAILASA.⁵⁹ | +-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+

⁵⁹ The Ramanagara Court has charged Lenin Karupan with rape, extortion, and criminal intimidation, and has ordered immediate action against him and lawyer Sridhar, co-conspirators in the creation of the deep fake video to defame SPH and in the brazen attempt to extort a substantial sum of 100 crore INR (over 12 million USD) from KAILASA. The Ramanagara Court has issued 4 inter-state non-bailable arrest warrants (NBW) against Lenin Karuppan, who is currently on the run and his petition for anticipatory bail has been dismissed by the Court. Lawyer Sridhar has been in custody since February 9, 2024 and his petition for bail has been dismissed by the Court.

[]

60 61 62 63 64 65

Hindumisic, racist and Hindu phobic media has not published this exoneration till date.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- 13 June 2010 A court order prohibited SPH from exercising His right to speech and practice His religion as a bail condition.⁶⁶ ------------------ ---------------------------------------------------- 2012 State-sponsored terror attacks occurred at the Nithyananda Gurukul in Karnataka, deemed illegal by the High Court.

9 June 2012 The Chief Minister of Karnataka called SPH “an enemy of the state” on public television and ordered the property of the community seized illegally.

13 June 2012 SPH was arrested by the police, when he approached the Court for anticipatory bail against the false accusations against Him.

14 June 2012 SPH was again illegally arrested and later released when the High Court termed the arrest of SPH as “illegal”, “without any authority”, “contrary to law”, “without jurisdiction”. Despite the fact that 600 policemen violently restrained SPH and one policeman tried to strangle SPH, all broadcasted on -----------------------------------------------------------------------

⁶⁰ https://kailaasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/116.-Samaya_Judgmentonly-1.pdf

⁶¹ https://kailaasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Ohio-Judgment1.pdf https://kailaasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Ohio-Order.pdf

⁶² https://kailaasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/04.-attachment_Lencioni-Email.pdf

⁶³ https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1FDLLqGfXhjxc9k3eime2-DlozQOvnb0u

⁶⁴https://kailaasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Ex.-M-Rao-Bench-Warrant-11.20.13-copy_Redacted-co

py.pdf

https://kailaasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Ex.-P-Rao-10.9.14-Motion-for-Contempt-Certified-Order3

.pdf

https://kailaasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/AR-DS1-2-Rao-Bench-Warrant-10.20.14-1pg.pdf

⁶⁵https://kailaasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/RAO_MTS_FinalOrder_JudgeBarkley_April18-2012.pdf ⁶⁶ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Xm_cAPBr0t41fSNuXBJu-MhyVe3sqKCC/view?usp=sharing

----------------------------------------------------------------------- television, there has been no accountability for the police brutality displayed during this assault. ------------------ ---------------------------------------------------- 2014 The Karnataka State Minister of Education unlawfully ordered the shutdown of the Nithyananda Gurukul, citing the Right to Education Act, despite the Gurukul's legal exemption as a Vedic Pathashala.

2016 Gurukul children including declared successors to various ancient Hindu kingdoms have been subjected to sexual abuse by cult leaders like Sarah Landry⁶⁷.

11 October 2017 Based on Hindumesic propaganda and pressure by the media, a single Judge of the High Court of Madras, Justice Mahadevan issued an order barring SPH and His community from entering their primary temple of worship in Madurai, violating their right to practice religion guaranteed by Indian Constitution.

29 January 2018 Justice Mahadevan threatened to illegally arrest SPH in a civil case based solely on the deep fake video broadcast 8 years earlier.

3 May 2018 SPH was prohibited by the High Court of Madras from entering Madurai Aadheenam of which He is the 293rd successor. Though the order itself violates the constitution, Justice Mahadevan upheld the decision and even threatened SPH that He would order arrest of SPH if SPH did not resign from His responsibility as the successor.

End of 2018 SPH was forced to leave His country to protect His person, to preserve His exalted humanitarian mission, and was illegally exiled into statelessness by denial of -----------------------------------------------------------------------

⁶⁷https://jesusmeditation.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/christ-consciousness.pdf;

https://oig-movement.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/7/5/127507372/oigo-declaration.pdf

+-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+ | | natural citizenship through revocation and | | | non-renewal of His passport, against Indian court | | | orders. In contrast, India’s MEA, stated recently | | | that Prajwal Revanna's diplomatic passport cannot | | | be revoked unless there is a court order. | | | Prajwal's case is a rape case, and unlike in SPH's | | | case, there was no victim who gave evidence in | | | front of the magistrate. | +=================+====================================================+ | November 2019 | The Gujarat State government Child Welfare | | | Commission (CWC) raided KAILASA’s Hindu female | | | monastery and molested the children. The only | | | women's monastery and Hindu University was | | | demolished. Parents of the children collectively | | | filed a POCSO case against the Child Welfare | | | Committee (CWC), seeking accountability for the | | | ongoing abuse and threats their children | | | experienced during CWC raids. | | | | | | In February 2024, recent legal victories for | | | KAILASA, the Honorable Gujarat High Court | | | exonerated and dismissed all charges in the false | | | “kidnapping” Gujarat case against SPH fomented by | | | anti-Hindu forces. | +-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+ | 16 February | The Hindumisic extremists targeted and attacked | | | the indigenous education of the AIAT and the core | | 2021 | of KAILASA’s lineage and succession by | | | systematically eliminating the Guru-disciple | | | succession in traditional kingdoms like the | | | ancient Thondaimandala aadheenam. | +-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+

In recent victories for Hindus, several articles delegitimizing and defaming KAILASA and SPH have been removed, including by the Washington Post.⁶⁸

[]

⁶⁸An Ambassador of KAILASA and Hindu Nun of The Sovereign Order of KAILASA’s Nithyananda, H.E. Vijayapriya Nithyananda, made an official public statement at the UN on the ongoing persecution of SPH and KAILASA, which sparked an unprecedented backlash of more than 1,000 media stories globally, delegitimizing SPH and KAILASA’s statehood.

KAILASA established bilateral relations with two municipalities of Paraguay. This move sparked a widespread media backlash across the region, referring to SPH as “Nithyananda, facing multiple charges in India” and “a fugitive Indian guru’s..”, and labeling KAILASA as a “fictional country.” This denial of KAILASA's existence as a sovereign nation not only undermines its purpose and necessity but also deprives Hindus of their fundamental right to self-determination.

69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79

KAILASA's Legal Framework for migrants, IDPs, and refugees

In KAILASA, we embrace immigrants with compassion, inspired by the ancient Hindu treatise, Chanakya Neeti, which advocates for welcoming and integrating refugees while maintaining national security and social order. This model serves as a compelling example for nations worldwide.⁸⁰

⁶⁹ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k13qxtAD7jRNd7iyejU41mp8An0hibeE/view?usp=share_link

⁷⁰ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ablp13MZmXaWgn82LRkgGmKEmHWtPSsU/view?usp=share_link

71 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PYP-kJ7bUe9SbqS9gUPMfs4SLuM8swPY/view?usp=share_link

⁷² https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PY0zQ2_-yyde9RkTBrdP5IMk8fr869tn/view?usp=share_link

73 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rKo1wVt1f8c8f9_AD8YroaqpteTO1Sk-/view?usp=share_link ⁷⁴Specialists in Human Rights and Human Mobility https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1zez1O8F9a64G7LFohj-eGf8kTS9J4Y5J

⁷⁵ https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1xGcOHll7AeXdrLyQR2mzvoDNLOoxNlF8

⁷⁶ Mission Scalabriniana (MSC) is part of the Congregation of Missionary Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo

- Scalabrinianas, an organization founded in Piacenza, Italy, by Monserat Juan Bautista Scalabrini, in the year 1895. Its mission is to welcome, promote, protect and integrate migrant and refugee populations. It is present in 27 countries. https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1CX7izIoKQiKyjv_PONRpLuyfhmE24IIw

⁷⁷ Professor at the Andean University Simón https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1fvALF1OFAzAKHq4_SXDrYZ643OjOA2sm

⁷⁸https://github.com/kailaasa/docs-for-media/tree/main/exoneration%20in%20false%20rape%20accusatio

n/expert%20opinion%20by%20medical%20experts

⁷⁹https://github.com/kailaasa/docs-for-media/blob/main/exoneration%20in%20false%20rape%20accusatio

n/Top%2010%20false%20claims%20of%20false%20rape%20accuser%20with%20datewise%20proofs% 20of%20contradictions%20proving%20his%20innocence.pdf

⁸⁰ Additionally, KAILASA’s jurisprudence includes the Manuvadhi Dharma Shastra, Bhagavad Gita, Veda-Agamic scriptures, cosmic principles, Hindu governance, Hindu parliament, responsible democracy and enlightened blissful living.

The most ancient parliamentary system in the world is the Hindu Parliament, revealed in the Treaties of the Nataraja Sabha within the Nataraja Temple in Chidambaram. The system was based on dharma. Dharma is defined by the sage Jaimini, author of the mīmāsa sūtra as follows: codanālakṣaṇo'rtho dharmaḥ (Dharma is a function that propels one to action). These ancient Hindu parliaments functioned based on responsible democracy discussing social, economic and religious problems, framing policies without discriminating between castes or gender, advocating equality and independence for women, enabled the ideas emerging out of discussion to make them reach the communities through discussions, giving importance to disciplined and moral life and advocating a life of generosity and kindness.

[]

81 82 83

Enhancing Multilateral Partnerships

KAILASA is dedicated to religious freedom by fostering robust bilateral and multilateral relationships, forging impactful treaties, and cultivating strategic partnerships.

⁸¹https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/executions/cfis/2024-lgbtiq/subm-killing-lgbtiq

-cso-kailash-union.pdf

⁸² KAILASA's policies create the safest workplace and ecosystem for women where they make up 80% of the senior leadership in The SPH’s mission and 90% of parliament, thereby establishing His vision of Hinduism as not just orthodox, but also highly progressive and committed to gender equality. Women have a secure, sexual harassment free ecosystem due to its zero-tolerance policy against sexual harassment and exploitation. In addition, The SPH Bhagavan Nithyananda Paramashivam has revived the Yogini Sarvajnapeetha established to empower and support girls and women to become enlightened, spiritually powerful global leaders.

⁸³ https://www.facebook.com/share/6qYy9ZwZW1vimzno/?mibextid=WC7FNe

KAILASA has established over 16,000 ecosystems worldwide, providing Hindu migrants, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and refugees with safe environments to freely practice their religion.

Conclusion

The sovereign state of KAILASA hereby declares its willingness to utilize autonomous territories, graciously bestowed by indigenous nations within the sovereign states of Bolivia and Ecuador, for the purpose of refugee resettlement.

KAILASA stands prepared to undertake this humanitarian initiative in full cooperation with the governments of Ecuador and Bolivia, as well as in close coordination with the UNHCR.