About Us Contact Us
Home Blog Page 950

Social media use by Guj cops under the scanner?

By
-
0

Gujarat Police
Representation Image
 

In what is being seen as a possible way to stomp out dissent in the police force, Gujarat Director General of Police (DGP) Shivanand Jha issued a virtual ‘gag-order’ by way of a code of conduct with respect to social media usage by police personnel in the state.

The Indian Express quoted the notification as saying, “The code of conduct will be applicable to all personnel of Gujarat Police using social media for public as well as private use… They should not make any critical comments on the government or police department while using social media related to their duty. They should not post or transmit any service related application, they should not post any personal opinion while using social media for government work (sic).”

The code of conduct also reportedly prohibits policemen from being a part of any agitation or campaign, post any opinion related to government work, post requests related to police service or post anything political or communal on social media.

What triggered the ‘code of conduct’?

This is significant as recently, policemen in Gujarat had reportedly taken to social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter to demand a pay hike. Meanwhile, a case has been registered against three persons; Kamlesh Solanki, Bhojabhai Bharwad and Hasmukh Saxena, for misleading the cops to participate in the campaign.

Speaking to media persons at a press conference in Gandhinagar a day after issuing the code of conduct, DCP Jha justified the need for it saying, “Policing is not an ordinary job, but a service towards society and the country. It cannot be compared with any other government job. If someone works in the department without the feeling of service, they cannot serve the society with the best police model… Police don’t enjoy the same rights as citizens or other government personnel under the Police Forces Restriction of Rights Act, given the extremely strict departmental rules and the nature of job as a discipline force.”

Section 3 of the The Police-Forces (Restriction of Rights) Act, 1966 is reproduced below:

Restrictions respecting right to form association, freedom of speech, etc.—

(1) No member of a police-force shall, without the express sanction of the Central Government or of the prescribed authority,—

(a) be a member of, or be associated in any way with, any trade union, labour union, political association or with any class of trade unions, labour unions or political associations; or

(b) be a member of, or be associated in any way with, any other society, institution, association or organization that is not recognised as part of the force of which he is a member or is not of a purely social, recreational or religious nature; or

(c) communicate with the press or publish or cause to be published any book, letter or other document except where such communication or publication is in the bona fide discharge of his duties or is of a purely literary, artistic, scientific character or is of a prescribed nature. Explanation.—If any question arises as to whether any society, institution, association or organisation is of a purely social, recreational or religious nature under clause (b) of this sub-section, the decision of the Central Government, thereon, shall be final.

(2) No member of a police-force shall participate in, or address, any meeting or take part in any demonstration organised by any body of persons for any political purposes or for such other purposes as may be prescribed.

On the subject of the campaign for a pay hike and the charges against the three people who allegedly instigated it DCP Jha said, “Three persons have been detained for misleading policemen at a time when the state and police force are involved in the fight against coronavirus pandemic” He added, “The personnel can seek grievance redressal through proper channels in the department and not on public platforms.”
 

Indian Army bans 89 social media apps

But this is not the first time the social media use of personnel employed in government or public services has been brought under the scanner. In June 2020, the Army had come up with a list of 89 apps, banning army personnel from using them. The Print reported that apps such as TikTok, WeChat, Zoom, and even Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, had been banned. The army had justified the move terming these apps as prejudicial to sovereignty, integrity and national security.

This led Lieutenant Colonel P.K. Choudhary to move Delhi High Court seeking withdrawal of the new policy on the grounds that it was “arbitrary executive action”. On Tuesday, the Delhi HC ordered that proceedings in the matter will be conducted ‘in camera’ after the government lawyer requested it saying it was a very sensitive decision taken by the Army and the inputs cannot be made public. Following this, on directions from the bench comprising Justices Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Asha Menon who were hearing the case, only lawyers associated with the case were permitted to be on the weblink and everyone else, including media persons were removed, reported Outlook.
 

US Army guidelines for social media use

Meanwhile, in the United States, guidelines for the usage of social media as per the army’s official website (https://www.army.mil/socialmedia/soldiers/) say, “The Army encourages Soldiers and their Families to use social media to stay connected and tell the Army’s story.” However, there is a caveat, “There are security risks and regulations that Soldiers and their Families, especially those new to the Army, must be aware of before posting. Understanding this dynamic is crucial because, as members of the Army profession and family, you are expected to live the Army Values, online and offline. Soldiers and their Families are personally responsible for all content they publish on social networking sites, blogs, and other websites.”

The army guidelines further say, “It is important that all Soldiers know that when they are logged on to a social media platform, they still represent the U.S. Army. Soldiers using social media must abide by the UCMJ at all times, even when off duty. Commenting, posting and linking to material that violates the UCMJ or basic rules of Soldier’s conduct are prohibited, along with talking negatively about supervisors or releasing sensitive information.” Moreover, there are mechanisms to report online misconduct which has been defined as “the use of electronic communication to inflict harm. Examples include, but are not limited to: harassment, bullying, hazing, stalking, discrimination, retaliation, or any other types of misconduct that undermine dignity and respect.”

When it comes to commenting on politics on social media, the army’s official website says, “Soldiers are encouraged to express their opinions of the political process online and offline, as long as they are consistent with the Army values and are not expressed as part of an organized communication campaign and as a representative of the U.S. Army or as a Soldier. Such opinions must be expressed as an individual apart from the military.”

When it comes to participation in political activity, the guidelines are as follows:

Soldiers should be aware of the limitations that exist when it comes to participation in political activity as well as DOD support to political campaigns. You must adhere to the policy in Department of Defense Directive 1344.10 when posting any political content, which includes:

  • Cannot participate in any interview or discussion as an advocate for or against a party, candidate or cause.

  • Can generally express their personal views on public issues or political candidates via social media platforms much the same as they would be permitted to write a letter to the editor of a newspaper.

  • Cannot participate in partisan political activity.

  • Can “follow,” “friend,” or “like” a political party or candidate running for partisan office.

  • Cannot post links to, “share” or “retweet” comments or tweets from a Facebook page or Twitter account of a political party or candidate running for partisan office. Such activity is deemed to constitute participation in political activities.

  • Cannot communicate contemptuous words against the president, vice president, secretary of defense, deputy secretary of defense, secretary of the navy, or governor and legislature of any state in which he or she is located or performing duty in. It’s against federal law for commissioned officers to communicate in this manner.

Protected speech by US police and public servants: Garcetti v. Ceballos

Similarly, when it comes to the use of social media by police personnel and public servants in the US, the matter was visited in the Garcetti v. Ceballos case of 2006, which held, “First Amendment protections apply only to a public official’s speech in a private context rather than during the exercise of his duties.”

Here are the facts of the case as per: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/547/410/

A sheriff in the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office misrepresented facts in a search warrant affidavit. When Ceballos, who worked in the office, discovered the misrepresentation, he told the prosecutors who were working on the case. They refused to dismiss the case, even though they agreed that the affidavit was dubious. Ceballos took his information to defense counsel, who subpoenaed him to testify. He later brought a claim against his employer on the grounds that he had suffered from retaliation for cooperating with the defense, which he argued was protected by the First Amendment.

The trial court ruled that qualified immunity protected the district attorneys, but the Ninth Circuit found that it did not apply because Ceballos had been engaging in activity covered by the First Amendment protections on speech regarding matters of public concern.

Anthony M. Kennedy authored the majority opinion held by himself as well as John G. Roberts, Jr., Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito, Jr., stating, “Public employees are not considered to be speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes if they are making statements pursuant to their official duties. The First Amendment does not protect them from discipline by their employers. In this case, the employee properly received discipline because of his cooperation with the defense, which undermined his ability to carry out his official duties.”

However, John Paul Stevens authored a dissent to this and held, “The majority creates an illusory distinction between speech as a private citizen and speech in the course of employment. The First Amendment may protect a public employee from disciplinary actions based on speech made pursuant to an official duty.”

Three other justices; David H. Souter (Author), John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg also dissented saying, “While the government has an interest in efficiently implementing its policies as an employer, private individuals and the public also have an interest in preventing official misconduct that causes threats to health and safety. In some instances, those interests will be more important, and when that happens the First Amendment should protect the speech of public employees that is contrary to the policy of their employers.”

Stephen G. Breyer also authored a dissenting opinion saying, “First Amendment protections should apply to public employees when the speech involves a matter of public concern and occurs in the course of ordinary job-related duties when there is a heightened need for constitutional protection and a lower risk of undue judicial interference with government operations.”

 

Related:

Why social media sites must exercise social responsibility and nip hate speech in the bud

Is this the “Ram Rajya” promised by the BJP: Congress attacks UP govt 

By
-
0

Rahul

The attack that led to Ghaziabad-based journalist Vikram Joshi, being shot at near his home, has yet again exposed all claims of Uttar Pradesh getting safer for ordinary citizens. Father of two young daughters, Joshi (34) has died in hospital, hours after he was shot in front of his children on Monday night. 

The tragedy has also fuelled a political reaction, with the Congress leadership highlighting the deteriorating law and order status of Uttar Pradesh under the Adityanath-led Bharatiya Janata Party government.

“They promised Ramrajya, they delivered Gundaraj,” tweeted Rahul Gandhi
 

Stronger words have come from Congress spokesperson Randeep Singh Surejwala, who has said that the Prime Minister is a member of Parliament from UP, and that the state’s CM came to power over Ramrajya. That is a distant promise, said RS Surjwala.

“Adityanath Ji if only you had daughters, and a family. If only you had felt the pain of your nieces being harassed. Only then you would understand the pain of losing a family member,” he minced no words at a press conference held on Wednesday. 

“Is this the “Ram Rajya”, promised by which the BJP sat on the throne of power? 

 This is the “Gundaraja” in public. Neither journalists safe nor law keepers in UP. Then what hope does the common man have for justice? Uttar Pradesh has now become a crime state.”

 

 

There was no political response from Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Adityanath, who has now announced a ‘compensation’ of Rs 10 lakh for Joshi’s bereaved family, as reported by Zee news. 

After the journalist was shot, the UP police have arrested nine people so far, and identified them as: Vijay, Mohit, Dalveer, Aakash, Yogendra, Abhishek Mota, Abhishek, Shakir and the main accused, Ravi.  

 

 

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/nqOLyPIUKgYPB6yWx5EBEspAgQQZSH3CXVX0Fv9MnDrI6Y6fmW9EsCaonygD0aqbSgtT-YDDENSlGnoDpBihN0frec4MWdiG5mYyB_4z9i8POmU3TYxIuPhYYeoPOW5r1pccU027

However as soon as the names of the accused were revealed by the UP police, certain elements, including Right Wing affiliated social media ‘influencers’,  began to make sure the name of one of the 10 accused, who is a Muslim was highlighted in the public domain. This of course is yet another step to communalise a crime and change the narrative.

The murder and events that led to it, are in fact reflective of the law and order prepardness of Uttar Pradesh administration. A member of murdered journalist Vikram Joshi’s family too has been shown demanding that the Muslim acused be arrested. Uttar Pradesh police had already arrested the accused and others hours before this statement came.

Joshi, a journalist with a local paper who was riding his two-wheeler while returning from a relative’s place at night with his two young daughters, was waylaid, beaten up, and shot at by a group of criminals. The attack was recorded on CCTV.  Horrific visuals later released, showed the young children instinctively running away to safety when the two wheeler fell, and her father was attacked. Joshi’s elder daughter returned to see that her father had been fatally wounded. The child tried to raise an alarm, but no one came to her aid immediately. 

The journalist succumbed to injuries, early on Wednesday morning, at a local hospital. According to news reports, his family members had alleged that the Uttar Pradesh police did not investigate the initial complaint that the journalist had filed alleging that his niece was being harassed. According to a report in the Indian Express, the journalist was attacked just four days after he filed the complaint. 

The UP Police, according to IE, said Joshi, who works with Jan Sagar Today, was shot in the Pratap Vihar area of Ghaziabad, he was rushed to Yashoda Hospital in a critical condition, and later succumbed to the injuries. The news report states that according to Joshi’s family the UP Police did not not investigate the initial complaint. “They claimed a police team only enquired about the location of the accused but they were not found. The family further alleged that on July 17, a letter had been sent via post to the SSP office demanding action but nothing was done,” stated IE.

However, the police maintained that they filed a molestation complaint on June 16, and registered an FIR the same day. The IE added that Ghaziabad SSP Kalanidhi Naithani has “suspended booth incharge of Vijay Nagar police station SI Raghvendra for alleged dereliction of duty, and an enquiry has been set up under a DSP-rank officer to ascertain the delay in action.”

Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi, who had earlier clashed with the UP government over issues impacting the citizens said, “Ghaziabad is in NCR. If the law and order here is such, one can guess how it must be in the entire state. One journalist was shot because he complained against the eve teasing of his niece. How can a common man be safe in this ‘jungle raj’.”

 

 

The IE quoted the Dr Rakesh Mishra, CO 1st, Ghaziabad saying, “We are very strict when it comes to crimes against women. The family approached them with a case of molestation. The accused had also filed a counter FIR, alleging they were assaulted by Vikram’s relatives. But the policeman should have acted swiftly since it was a crime against a woman.” 

According to an IE, Joshi had been attacked by Ravi, the main accused, and his associates as they were “angered over a police complaint” filed against them by Joshi. Apparently Ravi and a few of his associates had also been arrested under preventive detention in connection with the  complaint filed by the family in March 2019, reported IE. They were out on bail.

The family later told the media that they had been facing harassment and were being abused by the accused even recently. “On the night of July 15, Ravi, Abhishek and a few others were outside our house. They hurled abuses… In 2019, during Holi, they had come to the house to create problems…,”  his sister was quoted by IE. According to police the “main accused, Ravi, also a resident of Pratap Vihar, confessed to us that he orchestrated the attack and carried it out with his accomplices.”

 

Related: 

HRDA India exposes UP Police’s tactics to muzzle voice of human rights defender Raja Bhaiyya

Bulandshahr violence accused expelled from post in PM Scheme after protests

They abused us, asked us to worship their idols: Christians attacked in UP

Man accused of killing Bulandshahr cop, gets plum role to run PM’s welfare campaign

 

 

What’s going to happen to CAA now?

By
-
0

CAA

It has been over six months since the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) was passed and the Ministry of Home Affairs is yet to put together rules for its implementation. As per parliamentary procedure the procedures as per which the act is to be implemented need to be fixed within six months.

But a variety of media reports say that this deadline has passed. According to reports in The Wire, The Assam Tribune and The Hindu, this deadline ended anywhere between June 18 and July 10, depend on when one starts calculating; day of passage of the act or day of issue of notification. In such a scenario, the next step for the MHA is to apply for deadline extension.

According to the point 11.3.1 of the Manual of Parliamentary Procedure, “Statutory rules, regulations and bye-laws will be framed within a period of six months from the date on which the relevant statute came into force. Cases in which, for any reasons, this is not possible, will be brought to the notice of the Secretary and the Minister at the earliest possible stage.”

Moreover, according to point 11.3.2 of the same manual, “ In case the Ministries/Departments are not able to frame the rules within the prescribed period of six months, they should seek extension of time from the Committee on Subordinate Legislation stating reasons for such extension; such extension being not more than for a period of three months at a time. The request should be made after obtaining the approval of the Minister.”

However, according to The Hindu, the Parliamentary Standing Committee of Subordinate Legislation is yet to receive any such communication from the MHA. Chairman of the committee and YSRCP MP K. Raghu Rama Krishna Raju told the publication, “We will be writing a letter to the MHA as there is no request for extension of time (for notifying the rules), will send them a reminder to give us a status [report]. As per norms, MHA should have framed the rules within six months or seek extension.”

It is noteworthy that at present the BJP does not have a majority in the committee. The YSRCP has already done a u-turn on its stand on CAA after supporting it in both houses. Other member os the committee are D Raja of the DMK, three members of the Congress Party, one from the Samajwadi Party, and one TRS MP (whose stand is not yet known).

Taking to Twitter about the lapsed deadline, former Finance Minister and External Affairs Minister, Yashwant Sinha said, “Did you know that the CAA rules have not been framed and notified despite a lapse of 7 months. The act cannot be implemented in the absence of rules.? Do you realise how the whole thing was just meant to fool the people and win elections?”

 

 

The controversial act has already led to multiple protests across the country for different reasons. While those in Delhi, Aligarh, Mumbai etc. focused on how by exclusively excluding Muslim refugees from its fold the act violates the Constitution, in Assam the act has added more fuel to the fire amidst a raging citizenship debate in light of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) that was updated and published in the state after a long process last August. Elections are due in Assam next year, where despite the Covid-19 outbreak and devastation caused by floods, citizenship remains such a touchy subject that five people from flood-hit villages were issued ‘foreigner’ notice and asked to appear before a Foreigners’ Tribunal to defend their citizenship.

 

Related:

100 days and counting, free Gulfisha Fatima: Activists

Gauhati HC grants Akhil Gogoi bail in three cases

Flood-victims sent notice to defend citizenship in Assam!

GN Saibaba should be shifted to hospital before it’s too late: NPRD

By
-
0

Image Courtesy:livemint.com

The National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled (NPRD), a cross disability rights organisation, has written to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) seeking its urgent intervention to help the ailing, wheelchair bound Professor G.N. Saibaba. The NPRD has asked that Prof Saibaba be shifted to “a super-speciality hospital for treatment, before it is too late.”

In Delhi, Prof G.N. Saibaba’s wife, rights activist A.S. Vasantha Kumari, told SabrangIndia that she had not heard from jail authorities yet, and did not know if they had taken any steps to help him get medical attention he needs, or even move him to a different area as someone in a jail cell nearby had already tested positive for Covid-19. That was the last bit of news Saibaba had given her when he made an ‘emergency’ call on July 11. “It is inevitable, there has been an uncontrolled outbreak of Covid-19 in Nagpur Central Prison, it’s a matter of days before it reaches me,” Saibaba  had told his wife. 

The other prisoners were very worried about Covid-19 and had refused to help Saibaba with his basic physical tasks, she had told SabrangIndia. “Even the authorities cannot assign anyone to help him,” said Vasantha, adding that Saibaba, confined to the wheelchair, has one hand limp and the other deteriorating fast. “His immunity is very low and if he gets Covid-19 it is a death sentence for him,” she had said and added she was worried that Covid-19 was spreading fast in the jail premises. Vasantha is also concerned that Saibaba’s aged mother, who herself is a cancer patient may not be able to meet her son anytime soon. “We are demanding his immediate release. His mother’s health is also deteriorating day by day and she wants to see him,” she said.

The NPRD has now raised its voice and written to Justice H L Dattu, Chairman, National Human Rights Commission, pleading with him to intervene so that G N Saibaba is shifted to a medical facility for the treatment he needs for his existing ailments and pain. They say this is an appeal to “save the life of Dr. G N Saibaba, a wheelchair user with 90 per disability, currently lodged in the Nagpur Central Jail.”

The NPRD has explained that Prof. Saibaba’s disability was initially caused by polio that has affected both his legs, when he was a child and then was compounded by “progressive and incurable conditions of the spine and nervous system.” Saibaba’s wife has also stated many times before that his health is getting worse because of the lack of proper medical treatment in Nagpur jail. The NPRD reminded NHRC of its earlier petition of June 1, 2017,  and said that as per their information, “no constructive action has been taken till date.” 

They said that Saibaba  has been facing tremendous difficulties in the Nagpur Central Jail, where he is currently lodged. The NPRD has alleged, “He is mistreated and mishandled by the police and jail staff on a regular basis. Additionally, held in solitary confinement, even the earlier assistance given to him by other inmates has been stopped since some time now, owing to which he has to live in unhygienic conditions inside the inaccessible anda cell.”

The letter updates the NHRC on Saibaba’s medical history as well, saying, “Prof Saibaba was hospitalised in Delhi in February 2017, while on bail. He was diagnosed with acute pancreatitis and impacted gallbladder-stones, and advised immediate surgery in a hospital where special facilities for treatment of people with severe disabilities is available. This was denied to him.” They stated that when on bail, Saibaba was “under pre-operative treatment when he was convicted and immediately incarcerated.”  

However his wife maintains that the family are not “demanding surgery, because it is risky due to his deteriorating  health conditions.” She is also worried about the lack of post-surgery care in jail which she says is very unhygienic. “If after surgery he is sent back to the the same, or worse conditions, it may cause further complications,” she told SabrangIndia, and added that Saibaba urgently needs “regular special physiotherapy under an expert physiotherapist” to save his arm and help his pain lessen. She said, “He needs comprehensive medical care, under expert doctors.” 

The NPRD has also stated, “The conditions in the Nagpur jail are deplorable. Apart from it being overcrowded many guards and prisoners (one even close to his cell) have been infected with the dreaded Covid-19. Given his weak physical condition, his co-morbidities, cardiac problem combined with high blood pressure as also a compromised immune system, there is every possibility that Dr. Saibaba may contract the virus. This may prove highly dangerous and fatal for him. Saibaba also requires immediate hospitalisation to get treated for various other health conditions, cited above, which he is being currently and consistently denied.”

It added that the conditions in which Prof. Saibaba was being held are “violative of his right to life, dignity, equality, protection of torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, non-discrimination including denial of reasonable accommodation and right to health. Over the years, the Supreme Court has in several cases clearly held that prisoners also have certain fundamental rights which include those stated above, which in this case are being undoubtedly and blatantly violated by the State.”

The NPRD reminded NHRC that “India is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and the UN Resolution 70/175 on Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Also known as the Nelson Mandela Rules), all of which reaffirm the right to life with dignity of prisoners.” This they said applies to the case of Prof. Saibaba, a person with disabilities. They said that the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPD Act), “which was enacted to fulfil India’s obligation under the afore-mentioned convention, are wholly applicable to his case.” 

According to the NPRD, “Under both the RPD Act and the UNCRPD the right to inherent dignity of the person is recognised as a guiding principle. Persons with disabilities are given the right to access to justice, which obviously includes prisoners with disabilities as well.” It added that “even the UN special rapporteurs on human rights had in June 2018 called for his release for the purpose of treatment.”

The NPRD highlighted  relevant Articles of UNCRPD & The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act :

Article 13 of UNCRPD states that the “States Parties shall ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others, including through the provision of procedural and age-appropriate accommodations, in order to facilitate their effective role as direct and indirect participants, including as witnesses, in all legal proceedings, including at investigative and other preliminary stages.

Article 14 states that “States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others: (a) Enjoy the right to liberty and security of person; (b) Are not deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, and that any deprivation of liberty is in conformity with the law, and that the existence of a disability shall in no case justify a deprivation of liberty.

Article 15 states that “1. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his or her free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.  2. States parties shall take all effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others, from being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 25 affirms the right of persons with disabilities to access the highest attainable standard of health without discrimination on the basis of disability under the right to health. Under Article 25(f) it states that, “Prevent discriminatory denial of health care or health services or food and fluids on the basis of disability.” In addition, in the RPD Act under Section 25(2)(j) it is stated that the State shall take measures to provide, “essential medical facilities for life saving emergency treatment and procedures.

The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016

Section 3, sub-section (1) lays down that “The appropriate Government shall ensure that the persons with disabilities enjoy the right to equality, life with dignity and respect for his or her integrity equally with others.” Further under sub-section (3) it says that “No person with disability shall be discriminated on the ground of disability….” and sub-section (4) lays down that “No person shall be deprived of his or her personal liberty only on the ground of disability.”

Section 6 & 7 of the Act provides “Protection from cruelty and inhuman treatment” and “protection from abuse, violence and exploitation”. 

“In addition to the special legislation and convention on disability the right to protection from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and the right to be treated with humanity and respect for inherent dignity for those lawfully deprived of their liberty is specified under Articles 7 & 10 of ICCPR,” stated NPRD. 

They also cite the Nelson Mandela Rules on treatment of prisoners, which has a specific mention of “measures and reasonable accommodation for prisoners with special needs for full and effective access to prison life (Rules 2(2) & 5(2)). The Rules also recognises the right to inherent dignity and protection from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment under Rule 1.” 

The NPRD details that, “On the specific issue of health-related needs of prisoners, the Nelson Mandela Rules provide for the need to give adequate nutrition to maintain the health and strength of a prisoner (Rule 22). It clearly states that it is the State responsibility to provide for the healthcare of prisoners with access to necessary healthcare services without discrimination under Rule 24. Under Sub-Rule 24(2) it specifies that continuation of treatment and care should be provided to prisoners. This is especially relevant in the present case, as when Prof. Saibaba was incarcerated he had been in hospital for treatment of gall-bladder stones amongst other medical conditions and complications. The Mandela Rules specifically provide for the attention that needs to be paid to the health needs of prisoners with special needs (Rule 25(1)), transfer to special institutions of healthcare in cases where specialised treatment or surgery is needed (Rule 26(1)) and special attention to the health of those prisoners kept in involuntary separation including solitary confinement (Rule 46).”

The rights group has appealed to the NHRC to direct that Prof Saibaba be “a speciality hospital either in Hyderabad or Delhi, where his family members are available, for treatment,” adding that “given his precarious health condition and the co-morbidities, not shifting him out to a facility for treatment will prove fatal.” 

Saibaba’s next bail hearing is due at the end of the month. 

 

Related:

Covid-19: Disabled scholar activist still in jail, while thousands others released on bail
Covid-19 a death sentence for Prof. Saibaba: Wife demands release

HRDA India exposes UP Police’s tactics to muzzle voice of human rights defender Raja Bhaiyya

By
-
0

Image Courtesy:navbharattimes.indiatimes.com

Human Rights Defenders’ Alert (HRDA) India has written to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) regarding the illegal detention, inhumane treatment, abuse, intimidation and threats to human rights defender Raja Bhaiyya by the Superintendent of Police (SP) of Chitrakoot, Ankit Mittal and the Circle Officer (CO) of Sadar police station and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) of Chitrakoot.

HRDA India said that Raja Bhaiyya had been accused of accompanying and being the source of an Aaj Tak journalist who was reporting about the alleged sexual exploitation of women and girls in Uttar Pradesh’s Banda district.

Human Rights Defenders and journalists, especially in Uttar Pradesh have become routine targets of the administration in previous years. From anti-CAA protestors like Sadaf Jafar, ex-IAS officer SR Darapuri, Mohammed Shoaib and journalists like Siddharth Vardarajan and Prashant Kanojia among others, the UP administration has constantly aimed at muzzling any voice that exposes the social rot in the state with violence, threats and intimidation to life and property. Now, the illegal detention of Raja Bhaiyya is just another example to which the state authorities will go to stop HRDs from reporting heinous incidents of violence against women in the state. The crackdown on HRDs has significantly increased during the coronavirus lockdown and increasing evidence of the police moving away from required protocol for detention has also emerged during this phase.

Chain of events

On July 11, three days after Aaj Tak had telecast a show on the alleged sexual exploitation of women and girls working in the Karwi mines at Chitrakoot, Raja Bhaiyya was picked up from his NGO Vidhyadham Samiti in Atarra by policemen who entered the office without permission. The policemen told Raja Bhaiyya that they were from the Bharatkoop police station and had come on orders of the Chitrakoot SP, who had summoned him.

Raja Bhaiyya was not given any reason, notice or warrant for being summoned and was reportedly forcefully placed in the car “like a criminal” and presented at Chitrakoot SP Ankit Mittal’s office. HRDA said that once he was there, he was asked questions which were aimed at establishing that he was the source of the story done by the journalist.

HRDA India wrote, “SP Mr. Mittal asked Mr. Raja Bhaiyya questions like, ‘Who went with Mausami Singh? (Aaj Tak reporter who did the story). Why did he go to Dafai? Why did he come to Chitrakoot? Was he the source who told the journalist and took her to the area?’ All questions were aimed at establishing his source of the news story done by the journalist on the exploitation of local women. Mr. Raja Bhaiyya replied that he knows Ms. Mausami Singh since the past 5 years and she came to the region for a story and accompanied her to the Bharatkoop area since he goes there frequently. However he was not aware of what story she was filing because she talked to the women in that area without his presence. SP Mr. Mittal intimidated and threatened HRD Mr. Raja Bhaiyya that he will file a case against him under the SC/ST Act and the POCSO Act and that he is a criminal.”

Raja Bhaiyya was then ordered to be put in a lockup. Fifteen minutes later, he was called back to the SP’s office, where the SP shouted at him and accused him of lying stating that his photo was in the video which proved that he had accompanied the journalist. Even though he clarified once again that he hadn’t accompanied the journalists while she was taking the interviews, he was threatened of physical torture (ulta latka doonga) and asked to be taken away by the policeman and torture him with “a hunter”.

HRDA India said that Raja Bhaiyya was treated like a criminal at the Sadar police station where without any seizure document, his wallet and mobile were taken away and he was put in a lockup with other detained persons. Not only this, the CO of Sadar also allegedly accused Raja Bhaiyya of having intimate physical relations with the journalist and threatened him that his wife would be informed about it. Raja Bhaiyya was verbally abused and humiliated by the CO and other policemen who refused to listen to his clarifications. He was not given any food, was not allowed to go to the toilet and not allowed to call anyone for help as well.

The next day on July 12, at around 3 AM, the station in-charge asked Raja Bhaiyya to write that ‘he knew journalist Ms. Mausami Singh and she came here to report on how government schemes are reaching people. He accompanied her to Dafai, Bharatkoop but he had no knowledge about the news story that she had filed. He too found out about her story only when he saw the TV,’ HRDA India said.

Mr. Raja Bhaiyya wrote as directed, as this was the only way he would be released and was threatened with cases under the SC/ST Act and POCSO. He was released from lockup only at around 2 PM on July 12, 2020 – more than 24 hours of illegal detention. After this, he was repeatedly approached by various local authorities for a statement in the matter of the Aaj Tak report. However, Raja Bhaiyya said that he would only respond to an official summon and soon he received a letter from the Chitrakoot SDM for an inquiry who too asked him the same questions and said that ‘his inhumane treatment and detention by the police was valid as he was a liar’.

Police action obstructs work of HRDs and journalists

Given the treatment of Raja Bhaiyya by the police, HRDA India said that the actions of the district administration and the police in this case were heinous, arbitrary and illegal. They especially showed that they were more interested in finding the source of the story instead of investigating the actual crime of the alleged sexual exploitation of women.

HRDA India also said that the illegality of the interrogation exposed the malignant intention of the police – to create obstructions in the work of HRDs and journalists and also raised a question of the freedom of speech of HRDs in the state. The police action, HRDA India said, was violative of Article 19 of the Constitution, NHRC guidelines and also of the DK Basu judgement as the illegal detention and interrogation hindered the work of the HRD and journalists and muzzled their right to free speech and expression.

Therefore, HRDA India has appealed the NHRC to –

1.       Direct an independent team (with members of the NGO core group, if possible) to investigate the matter since the SP and SDM of Chitrakoot were directly involved.

2.       Direct the DGP of Uttar Pradesh to submit urgently with the NHRC the CCTV footage of SP Chitrakoot office for July 11, 2020, and Sadar Police Station for July 11, 2020 and July 12, 2020.

3.       Direct the DGP of Uttar Pradesh to submit urgently with the NHRC the vehicle logs of Bharatkoop police station and Sadar police station for July 11, 2020 and July 12, 2020.

4.       Direct the DGP of Uttar Pradesh to take urgent action against Chitrakoot SP Mr. Ankit Mittal, Circle Officer Sadar Police station Mr. Rajneesh Kumar Yadav and immediately suspend them for their illegal actions and misuse of power.

5.       Direct the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh to take urgent action against the Chitrakoot SDM for knowing about the illegal actions of the police on Mr. Raja Bhaiyya by the police, holding it valid and refraining from initiating any action.

6.       Preserve the life and liberty of Mr. Raja Bhaiyya by urgently ordering the police and administration of Chitrakoot to desist from threatening, harassing or torturing him further.

The complete statement by HRDA India may be read below.

Related:

Human Rights Defenders’ Alert India asks NHRC to step in to probe Meeran Haider’s arrest
Webinar on rise in Human Rights violations in UP during lockdown

Odisha villagers burn couple after accusing them of practicing ‘black magic’

By
-
0

Image Courtesy:telegraphindia.com

In two shocking incidents from Odisha, an elderly couple was allegedly burnt to death on suspicion of them performing black magic and a woman was forcibly fed pig excreta to ‘exorcise’ evil spirits from her body, The Telegraph Online reported.

In the first incident, it was said that villagers of Nimapalli Surasahi, a tribal hamlet under Pingal panchayat of Jajpur district, surrounded the house of Saral Balimuchha (60) and Sambari (50) on Sunday night and set it on fire while the couple were asleep. The villagers decided to burn the couple to death suspecting them of having used ‘black magic’ to cause five to seven children in the village to take ill with fever.

Jaipur district SP CS Meena told The Telegraph Online that investigation in the matter was underway, but the officials suspected sorcery to be one of the reasons for the killing.

In the second incident which took place in Malkangiri’s MV-6 village on Sunday, The Telegraph Online reported that after Lipika Orao, wife of tribal farmer Santosh Orao fell sick she was taken to local quacks but her condition didn’t improve. She was then allegedly taken to a sorcerer who branded her with a hot iron and later forced her to eat pig excreta, claiming that he was exorcising evil spirits from her body.

However, local ASHA worker Laxmi Munda came to know about the incident and rushed Lipika to the hospital where she was treated. The police have now taken suo motu cognisance of the case and arrested the alleged sorcerer.

In a recent incident, a 42-year-old woman, Kanaben Bariya and her two minor daughters aged 12 and 17 were allegedly assaulted by their distant relatives on accusations of being a witch.

In a similar incident, in May, three women were in Muzaffarpur were stripped, tonsured and forced to consume urine and human feces by a mob which suspected them of practicing black magic, The Print reported. The women who were hospitalized said that they were performing puja (rituals) for the ailing son of one of the women. Nine people had been arrested in the matter.

In another horrifying incident, in Odisha, Budhuram Singh decapitated his 60-year-aunt, Champa Singh, suspecting her to be a witch and holding her responsible for the death of his daughter. The man walked 13 kilometers with his aunt’s severed head to the local police station to surrender himself, reported Indiatimes. He was booked for murder by the police.

It was reported by The Telegraph Online that at least 70 lives are lost every year in witch-hunting related incidents in Odisha even though the state has promoted the Odisha Prevention of Witch-Hunting Act in 2013 to check and reduce such crimes. The National Crime Records Bureau in 2016 had reported 134 people across the country for the alleged use of ‘black magic’. Ipleaders.in reported in Odisha itself 99 cases of witch hunting were reported in 2017, 83 in 2016 and 58 in 2015. Prevalent in Assam too, at least 114 women and 79 men were branded as witches and killed and 202 such cases had been registered between 2001 and 2017. In Jharkhand too where there are many cases of witch hunting reported, as many as 27 deaths took place in 2016, though the real number could still be higher.

Superstitious beliefs, lack of resources, financial and property disputes, poverty and patriarchy among others have led to witch hunting still thriving in India. The killings are perpetrated by kangaroo courts and family members and women have been the biggest victim of this injustice. Even today, witch hunting still remains a harsh reality in India’s villages. Feminism in India reported that witch-hunting is practised across 12 states in India, only 7 states have laws criminalising the practice – Jharkhand, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Assam. A large number of perpetrators are still let out on bail and there is no system in place to re-arrest them.

If one goes over newspaper reports starting January 1, 2020, at least 50 incidents of witch hunting across India can be found to have taken place. Even though these are brought to the notice of the state governments, it is alarming that not much has been done to stop these heinous and inhuman acts of injustice.

Related:

Woman, daughters attacked with sticks and axes on suspicion of practicing witchcraft
Sexism in the time of Corona: How the “Corona Dayan” took over social media
Why are women accused of witchcraft? Study in rural China gives clue

Stunned, speechless and ashamed: Lalita Ramdas reacts to NIA comments on Varavara Rao

By
-
0

Varavara Roa

Activist and writer Lalita Ramdas has slammed the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for suggesting that the nearly 80-year-old poet Varavara Rao who is now battling to survive Covid-19, and many other health issues, “is trying to take undue benefit of the pandemic and his old age and seeking bail.” The NIA made these shocking remarks in its submission before the Bombay High Court on Monday.

Reacting to this despicable accusation, Ramdas took to social media saying, “Stunned. Speechless. And Ashamed that this is happening in our greatest, largest, democracy?” She wondered how we have “ become so callous, so utterly lacking in compassion and humanity.” Ramdas has brought out a point many are missing as they follow the official apathy towards the ailing veteran poet today. She reminds everyone that “every regime has been complicit,” in this. This fact is seen in the “paralysis among all the political parties. But the brute majority in Parliament, seized by muscle and money power, has resulted in the exercise of brazenness and impunity, unparalleled in living memory…” 

Reflecting on the deeds of a heartless and vindictive regime, Lalita Ramdas shared these powerful words: 

“Dear citizens, read, share, and think about the implications of what is happening under our distracted and unseeing gaze. 

Raise your voices, write, speak, protest, stand up and say No more. 

OK, even if someone had been a member of a “banned” outfit … Does that person still not deserve due process of law, compassion, dignity and adherence to basic tenets of human rights accorded to all prisoners? 

We are living in a totalitarian, dictatorial regime, masquerading as a democracy. And the words of the German Pastor Niemoller, come to mind repeatedly:

First they came for the Jews, and I was silent, for I was not a Jew;

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I was silent……..

Then they came for the communists, and I was silent…..

And so on, pick your groups and categories,

Muslims, Dalits, Maoists, Dissenters, Anti CAA protesters, Adivasis, Migrants, Trade Unionists, Farmers, Feminists, Resisters and Protestors …………..and I was silent….I was none of those categories

And then they came for me…….. 

There was no one left to speak up for me….” 

The Hindu reported that the NIA told the Bombay High Court that “the bail application, if any, is to be decided on the facts and circumstances of each case and perusal of the incriminating material against the person,” adding that “accused P Varavara Rao, 81 under the garb of the current situation on the account of global pandemic of Covid-19 and his old age is trying to take undue benefit of the situation in seeking bail.”

According to the news report the NIA had filed an affidavit on Monday stating, “Mr Rao and other accused in the case (Bhima Koregaon) have been charged with various offences under chapter IV (punishment for terrorist activities) and V (forfeiture of proceeds of terrorism or any property intended to be used for terrorism) of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) as well as Indian Penal Code wherein the prescribed punishment is more than seven years and may extend to imprisonment for life. Therefore even though the guidelines issued by the Maharashtra High Powered committee permits an under-trial prisoner above 60 years of age merely to apply for an interim bail [and not to be granted bail mechanically]. As it is purely the discretion of the court adjudication the bail application as such the court ought to have exercised its discretion.”

Varavara Rao’s nephew, N Venugopal, who has been keeping everyone up to date with all the information he has managed to gather even as the family is denying access to the seriously ill poet shared their anguish yet again,  “Are these people human beings? Is this rule of law? An eighty-year old prisoner has been languishing in jails for the last two years. The great courts rejected his bail application four times. At last his health deteriorates and he is brought to hospital in a fatal condition. At the same time a lethal infectious pandemic engulfs the country and turns everything upside down. The court is requested to grant him bail in the obtaining situation of the prisoner’s age, ill-health and the risk of infection. The agency that is investigating his case argues that he is taking “undue advantage” of his age, ill-health and pandemic and hence he should not be granted bail.”

The Hindu reported that this 170-page affidavit was filed by Vikram Khalate, Superintendent of Police, NIA, Mumbai. It added that any bail application, “is to be decided on the facts and circumstances of each case and perusal of the incriminating material against the person. Considering the charges and totality of facts including the fact that adequate evidence has been placed on record to prove the complicity of the accused Mr Rao.” It added, “It is very clear in the findings recorded that the prison authorities responded timely and provided necessary medical aid to him. He was admitted at JJ Hospital for the complaint of giddiness on May 28, 2020 and after medical treatment he was discharged on June 1, 2020 as he was found asymptomatic and haemodynamically stable.”

The news report added the NIA conclusions stating, “Cogent evidence has come on record that Mr Rao is a senior member of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist)  and is not only involved in planning and preparing violence but was in the process of creating large scale violence, destruction of property resulting into chaos in the society and thereby destablising the government established by law to fulfil the objectives of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) a ban organisation which is listed in the First Schedule of the UAPA.”

Interestingly, even though Rao is suffering from Covid-19, the affidavit, as reported by The Hindu states, “The report submitted by the Superintendent of JJ Hospital does not suggest that he is suffering from any such ailment which necessitates him to immediately obtain treatment in multispecialty hospital from specific doctor. ‘Thus it is clear that the pleading with regard to the medical condition of the petitioner (Mr Rao) is merely a ruse to obtain an order of interim relief which is not available to him otherwise on the merits of the case.’”

According to Venugopal, it must be remembered that, “A prisoner by definition is one who is in judicial custody. A Court has all the powers to decide anything about a prisoner. Nobody else has any right to intrude. The investigating agency’s role ends at making allegations against the prisoner and gathering evidence to be placed before the court. Prisoners are not under the purview of the investigating agency. But it seems those sitting on the high pedestals of the courts do not have this simple legal knowledge. They do not seem to know their powers. They seem to be spineless. Now the question to be asked by all those who are concerned with democracy and rule of law, is whether the judges know jurisprudence, law and natural principles of justice.”

As Rao’s health further deteriorated, his family had approached the court to “at least allow them to see him and provide assistance”.  But as Venugopal says, “The honourable learned court asks the investigating agency whether the family could be allowed to see his family. In this process days and weeks roll on.  If you think you are a human being, the question you need to ask is whether these men making these arguments, decisions and procrastination, are really human beings.” 

Related:

Varavara Rao’ family demands official, and regular health updates

Only political vendetta can explain Varavara Rao’s incarceration

NHRC demands report on Varavara Rao’s health, jail condition

Does India uphold Prisoners’ Right to Health?

 

 

CJP curates and hosts Justice Hosbet Suresh Archives 

By
-
0

justice suresh

Justice Hosbet Suresh, legal luminary and a stalwart of human rights jurisprudence, continues to live on in not just our hearts, but also his work, particularly that from his post-retirement years. He provided a voice to the voiceless through a series of fact-finding missions, people’s tribunals and public hearings, enabling even the oppressed and exploited to have access to justice.

On his birthday, July 20, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) is launching an archive of his reports of all these tribunals and public hearings. These include report on an inquiry into the December 1992-January 1993 Mumbai Riots, the July 1997 police firing at Ramabai Nagar, an inquiry into the Gujarat genocide of 2002 and much more.

Explaining the motivation to collate and host this archive, CJP secretary and human rights defender Teesta Setalvad said, “There could be no greater lasting tribute to the man than ensuring an enduring and pro-active archiving of the rights jurisprudence that he pioneered with Justice Krishna Iyer as his mentor and hundreds of human rights defenders as his allies. For him justice meant justice for the most far flung and deprived sections making the values of the right to life with dignity a living and lasting principle. From the right to access public education, to dignity of a living wage, to the livelihoods of margnalised coastal communities, against torture, state targeted violence against India’s religious minorities, it was Justice Hosbet Suresh who led the way. At a time when we are being badgered by state and non state actors alike, we in the Indian human rights movement need to re-dedicate ourselves to the fight that Justice Hosbet Suresh gave so many valued years to. It is also the fight to the finish as India slides into the miasma of a majoritarian autocracy.” 

CJP has received words of encouragement from many human rights defenders for this initiative. Activist Irom Sharmila, often hailed as the Iron Lady of India, credited him with opening her eyes to injustice saying, “I came to witness the real goings-on in human rights violations due to the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in my own native state of Manipur, only after I participated in the internship based on the people’s fact-finding judiciary commission headed by Justice Hosbet Suresh.” 

Women’s rights activist Flavia Agnes of Majlis said, “If all the reports he had authored could be collected, they will form a veritable archive for future generations, to study the extent of human rights violations that had taken place during the last three decades.” She added, “The online archive will provide easy access to those who are engaged with the subject of human rights either at an academic level or as an activist on the ground. More importantly, Justice Suresh’s life and work will act as a beacon of hope for future generations, who might have to work in situations even more challenging than what we are witnessing today.” 

Senior advocate Mihir Desai said, “It is indeed highly laudable that Citizens for Justice and Peace is creating an archive of post retirement documents of Justice Suresh. That it is being launched on his birthday is doubly gratifying.” Expressing his admiration for the late Justice Suresh, Adv Desai said, “Justice Suresh, especially post retirement, was known as the man of the masses. Throwing himself into the deep end whenever and wherever there were human rights violations, doggedly participating in fact findings, people’s tribunals, and enthusiastically travelling to distant places including Kashmir, Manipur, Tamil Nadu to name just a few. He insisted on meeting victims of violations directly and interacting with them with compassion and empathy.”

 Shedding light on how Justice Suresh helped reshape the underlying principles of human rights, Sanjeewani Jain of Lok Raj Sangathan said, “Justice Suresh was an upholder of the Right to Life, which he insisted, was the Right to a Life of Dignity with access to everything that is necessary in this day and age, like sanitation, education, health services, electricity, etc. apart from food, clothing and shelter. This was a creative and vital interpretation of the Right to Life as defined in the Indian Constitution.” 

We are grateful to Justice Hosbet Suresh’s family for their support in this endeavour. His daughters; Rajini Sondur, Shalini Prasad and Malini Kanal penned a few words exclusively for us, “It didn’t matter to him that he’d have to go deep into the country, in whatever transport was available. It didn’t matter to him what facilities would be available. Regardless of his age. He took it all in his stride, with a shrug and a smile.” They added, “We were the privileged ones, for we grew up imbibing these ideals. With this website, we hope his work inspires many to follow in his footsteps!”

 Words of encouragement and testimonials are still pouring in with human rights defenders and legal stalwarts writing to us. These include senior advocate Gayatri Singh, activist John Dayal, the Coastal Action Network, the CIEDS Collective and many more. 

Today is just the beginning. We will continue to add more resources in the coming months and will also make content available in regional languages over time. We hope this archive enables CJP and all people passionate about human rights to not just walk in Justice Hosbet Suresh’s footsteps but to further develop the jurisprudence that he so eloquently pioneered.

The entire archive may be viewed at: https://cjp.org.in/justice-suresh-archives

1...949950951...2,696Page 950 of 2,696

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Join our mailing list to get the latest human rights news that matters, straight to your mailbox.

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Join our mailing list to get the latest human rights news that matters, straight to your mailbox.

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT

Email: sabrangind@gmail.com

© Sabrang | All Rights Reserved