If not for the sake of herself at least for the reputation of the University of Westminster, NItasha should move the concerned authorities and forums (ii)_ NItasha can rely on the important and effective support of the leader of free world the USA especially in this election year 2024. 

Nitasha Kaul a Kashmiri Pandit of Indian origin a  OCI card holder and a citizen of the UK and professor of Political science and International relations was deported from Bengaluru airport on the charge of being anti-India as reported and discussed at https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/nitasha-kaul-orders-from-delhi-indian-origin-writer-deported-from-bengaluru-airport-5126489 and  https://thewire.in/video/watch-i-was-treated-like-a-criminal-im-not-anti-indian-nitisha-kaul-on-her-deportation-to-uk  

But it raises an important question that Nitasha is  a professor of Political science and INternational relations at the prestigious university of Westminster then how come she could not understand the simple laws of international relations moreover by her acts of omission as given below Nitash has allowed the government of INdia (GoI) to propagate the myth of ‘sovereign decision as reported at https://indianexpress.com/article/india/sovereign-decision-mea-entry-denied-writer-nitasha-kaul-9188934/

(1)_ Why Nitasha didn’t move the government of his country (of her passport) the UK to seek explanation from the GoI as to why it was impossible for the GoI through government of Karnataka (On who’s invitation NItasha went to Bengaluru to attend a conference) or by itself to ask Nitasha in time to cancel her journey to Bengaluru which (such cancellation of journey) would have avoided unnecessary harassment and humiliation of a citizen of the UK on Indian soil [The government of the UK can always move the ‘International Court of Justice’ to  constrain the GoI to  provide such explanation in case the GOI doesn’t provide such explanation directly to the government of the UK].

(2)- Why didn't Nitasha move the US-establishment (The WHite House and US-congress may be through the embassy of the USA in the UK) to complain that on the basis of her testimony (which was allegedly misrepresented and distorted by the GoI) to US-Congress she was harassed and humiliated at Bengaluru airport. Nitasha should know that unlike constitution of other democratic countries the constitution the USA gives first place in the hierarchy to legislature and not to the executives and if people are harassed and humiliated for the testimonies before US-congress (Even allegedly by distorting or misrepresenting these testimonies) then people will avoid appearing before US-congress which tantamount to obstructing the power and jurisdiction of US-Congress which the US-Congress wouldn't  tolerate and would certainly  take some remedial and justifiable measures.

(3)- Though the past record of the USA doesn’t inspire confidence but in the present scenario NItasha could rely on the support of the USA for free world because presently the USA is engaged in Cold War - II of WEstern liberal democracy led by the USA v/s Authoritarian Chinese democracy hence the USA will support the case of Nitasha in every way for the victory of the free  world. 

(4)- Why Nitasha (a professor of Political science and International relations ) has not come out with public statement that the myth of sovereign decision being wrongly propagated by the MEA Of the GoI is legally untenable because we're living in a globalized world where the global order of the UNited Nations (sponsored by the USA in 1945) have made it mandatory for every member country to respect the civil and political rights of the people on their soil as enshrined in th ICCPR of the UN and these human rights are enforceable by the courts in India as per section 2(d) of The Protection of Human Rights Act 1973. which reads as - “[Human rights means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the constitution or embodied in the international covenant and enforceable by courts in India]” and section 2(h) of this Act (as given at https://nhrc.nic.in/sites/default/files/PHRA_Bilingual_2018.pdf ) which reads as - “[''International Covenant'' means the International covenant on civil and political rights and the international covenant on Economic, social and cultural rights adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on the 16th DEcember 1966 

and such other covenants or convention adopted by the General Assembly of the UNited Nations as the central government may by notification specify. 

(5)- why Nitasha [who is already a (Overseas) Citizen of India, an OCI card holder] didn’t move the Supreme Court of INdia against her said harassment and humiliation on the soil of India in violation to the national and international laws. Moreover Nitasha should have also complained to the Press Council of India against the Times of INdia and ND TV Who allegedly didn’t get the version of Nitasha before publishing the version of the GOI which tantamount to sully the image of Nitasha by wrongly projecting her as guilty of sedition and anti-Indian without giving her an opportunity to clarify her position (as revealed during her said interview to ‘the Wire’). . 

(6)- Nitasha when asked to clarify (during said interview on ‘The Wire) her alleged statement about HIndutva forces where she allegedly said  that the Kashmiri Pandits are pawns in the hands of Hindutva forces rather Nitasha should have said two things:-

(i)-  India neglected its duty (which is the main cause of chronic & ghory Kashmir problem) of  carrying out plebiscite (for knowing the wishes of the people) in united J&K by getting it free from invaders and outsiders as mandated by the IoA of J&K to India which reads as [Consistently with their (GoI) policy that, in the case of any State where the issue of Accession has been the subject of dispute, the question of Accession Should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the State, it is my Government’s wish that, as soon as law and order have been restored in Kashmir, and her soil cleared of the invader, the question of the State’s Accession should be settled by a reference to the people. Yours Sincerely Sd/- Mountbatten of Burma] ? as mentioned at https://ikashmir.net/historicaldocuments/115.html . Whether India gets united J&K free from outsiders and invaders on its own or with the help of the UN or with the military support of some of its friendly countries is the head ache of India as per international law and Kashmiris (whether Hidus or Muslims) have no responsibility about it (which Nitasha as professor of political science and international relations should know).

(ii)- The Kashmiri Pandits (like her) have grudge against Hindutva forces that they only pay lip service to the cause of Hindus which is evident from the fact that in hundreds of thousands they could go to AYodhya to demolish Babri Masjid and for other kar seva but couldn't come to Kashmir to protect the Kashmiri Pandits who were expelled by force by militant Jihadis and separatists and that too in  Hindu majority India with the result militant Jihadis got emboldened hence hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri Pandits are still not rehabilitated in their native land of Kashmir. 

It is hoped Nitisha would rectify her above mentioned mistakes and would still move the said authorities & Forums if not for the sake of herself then at least for the sake of the UNiversity of Westminster so that an unfortunate impression doesn’t gain ground that when professor of political science and international relations of this university can’t get justice under international laws then how hopeless is  the level and quality of education of the students of this department in this otherwise esteemed university.