Home Blog Page 2122

Three More Muslim Youth Fall Victim to Mob Hatred: UP, Assam

0

Bulandshahr, Assam: Media reports that a 45-year-old man was beaten to death allegedly by members of a Right-wing militant group.The victim was identified as Ghulam Mohammad, a resident of Sohi village that falls under the Pahasu Police Station here. Meanwhile BBC reports that in Assam too, over the past two days two Muslim men have been lynched to death. Both state governments are headed by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh(RSS)-led Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The victims of Sunday's attack in Assam's Nagaon district have been identified as Abu Hanifa and Riyazuddin Ali, police said.

 

Image Courtesy: GettyImages

Shockingly, in UP, in what amounts to almost a justification of the violence, Additional District Magistrate (ADM) Arvind Kumar Mishra said a 19-year-old man named Yusuf from Sohi had allegedly kidnapped an 18-year-old Hindu girl, a resident of Fazalpur village, also in the Pahasu area, on 27 April. Yusuf was a distant relative of Ghulam, the victim.
 
Mishra said the activists saw Ghulam in a mango orchard, then dragged him to a secluded spot and beat him to death. Should Ghulam have been a victim for the alleged crimes of Yusuf? And do we have Mob Rule in the country that justifies the Mob taking ‘Law’ into their own hands?

The ADM further added that the said the men wanted to know about the whereabouts of Yusuf. Despite the ASM clearly knowing who and what the murderers wanted, the SP (city) Man Singh Chauhan said an FIR had been lodged only against the "unidentified activists".

Police in India say two Muslim men have been lynched by a mob which accused them of trying to steal cows for slaughter.

The killings in the north-eastern state of Assam are the latest in a series of attacks blamed on religious tensions over the treatment of cows.A section of Hindus alone consider cows sacred and killing them is illegal in several states.

Human Rights Watch report last week said at least 10 Muslims had been killed over the issue since May 2015. "They were chased and beaten with sticks by villagers who said the two men were trying to steal cows from their grazing field," news agency AFP quoted senior police official Debaraj Upadhyay as saying.

"By the time we took them to the hospital at night they had succumbed to their injuries."A murder case has been registered and two people have been detained for questioning, police said.

The Human Rights Watch report says that since the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party formed India's federal government in 2014, attacks against Muslims and Dalits (formerly known as untouchables) have risen over rumours that they sold, bought or killed cows for beef.

The BJP now also governs Assam and is in power in 11 states on its own and in another four as an alliance partner with others. Those killed in the violent vigilante campaign against beef consumption in India include a 12-year-old boy.Many states are now actively enforcing bans on cow slaughter and in March, the western state of Gujarat passed a law making the slaughter of cows punishable with life imprisonment.

Worse still than the majoritarian government bans, vigilante groups who portray themselves as protectors of cows have also been active in several states. The groups routinely check vehicles and often beat up cattle traders.

 

SC Rejects GOI’s attempts to Grant Armed Forces Immunity, Verdict Has Profound Implications

0

Rejecting a Curative Petition filed by the government of India, the Supreme Court recently upheld its earlier order in which it had said that the
Army cannot use excessive force.

1,528 alleged encounters

Days ago, the Supreme Court rejected a curative petition filed by the government of India. This dismissal, by a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court of an appeal by the Central government for recall of an earlier ruling by a smaller bench of the same court in the case of 1,528 alleged fake encounter killings in Manipur is a historic verdict. Force, torture amidst a culture of impunity has governed the way India’s military and paramilitary have functioned in conflict zones like the north east of India and Jammu and Kashmir.

Hence this dismissal will also have implications for the future of counter-insurgency strategies. The outline of such a force was quite distinctly visible in the dialectic between the government’s curative petition and the wording of its dismissal by the Supreme Court bench. Very briefly, the petition argued that the matter was urgent as the morale of the forces would drop if they were subject to investigation by the local police after every incident. The arguments by the state emphasised that the army needed freedom to use whatever means in its command to tackle what was described as “war-like” situations, actions then should not be open to judicial review.

The judgment rejected the argument that “war-like” situations warrant a free hand to the army, noting that “democracy would be in danger” if the armed forces were permitted to kill citizens on the mere suspicion that they were enemies of the state. It was categorical that there would be “no absolute immunity” from legal prosecution for armed forces personnel on counter-insurgency duties if they are suspected to have caused deaths by the use of excessive and disproportionate force.

The problem is, if this was war, it would imply a conflict of states, thereby giving the insurgents a status that all states would normally avoid. Moreover, if this was war, rules of war, such as the Geneva Conventions and the Hague Conventions, would be deemed applicable, again a prospect no state would concede to. From the government’s point of view, insurgency is therefore definitely not “war”, the noun, but “war-like”, the adjective. But would such semantic acrobatics warrant the use of unaccounted force, as in war? The Supreme Court has said no, urging, instead, all stakeholders “to find a lasting and peaceful solution to the festering problem.”

It was in 1977 that international combat laws attempted to address the grey area created by “non-international armed conflicts” and the Geneva Conventions Protocol II was conceived. The protocol is aimed at bringing violence by non-state forces under the purview of international humanitarian laws. But few states with internal conflicts have ratified it. India, too, though a signatory to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, refused to sign this additional protocol. The ambiguity as to whether insurgencies are “wars”, or merely law and order problems, remains. The use of the military in civil unrest situations, as is being done under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), also remains controversial.

In many ways, the Manipur police commandos, a unit responsible for a great number of the alleged 1,528 fake encounter killings, is one such entity. Although they are not covered by the AFSPA, they still came to be affected by the climate of impunity introduced by prolonged exposure to the AFSPA.

Before the July 2009 photo expose by Tehelka magazine on how a captured former insurgent, Chongkham Sanjit, was eliminated in broad daylight, reporters of local dailies in Imphal would vouch that there were practically daily body counts of suspects killed by the government forces, often police commandos. Some even have frightening anecdotal stories of how they may have saved some would-be encounter victims. In those days, commandos even called up newspaper offices to send someone to cover encounter sites where alleged insurgents had just been shot. After the Sanjit killing expose, and the judicial probe that followed, everything quietened down, suddenly. Practically no more encounters, much fewer gallantry awards, and surprisingly less insurgent activities too.

If the police is often more brutal than the military, when charged and prosecuted it has to answer to the law. In the Sanjit case has demonstrated how much this one attribute can be a check on the impunity of the forces.


Image Courtesy: NDTV.com
 

Horrific Rape & Police Torture of Minor Tribal Girls Rampant says Women Jailer: Chhattisgarh

0

Varsha Dongre, who deleted her post later, called for introspection.

 
Varsha Dongre, Deputy jailer of the Raipur Central jail recently wrote a Facebook post (subsequently deleted) that spoke of the torture of minor girls in Chhattisgarh. She urged introspection on how the state was treating young girls and women
 This woman official, known for her uprightness has irked the authorities in the government of Chhattisgarh with a Facebook post raising questions about a model of governance that allows for alleged harassment of tribal people in the state.

"I am a witness to the torture of minor tribal girls … In the police stations, women personnel have stripped and tortured girls as old as 14 and 16 … They were given electric shock on their hands and breasts. I have seen the marks … I was horrified … Why third-degree torture on minors? I have given directions for their treatment", Varsha Dongre, deputy jailer of Raipur Central Jail, recently wrote in a post in Hindi.

"We need to introspect, because those who are getting killed in either side of this war in Bastar are our own people. The capitalist system is being forced on Bastar, tribals are being pushed out of their lands, their villages are being burnt, women raped — all this to grab land and forests. All this isn't being done to end Naxalism", she added.

Coming in the wake of the Maoist attack on CRPF jawans in Sukma district of the state, her comments were shared widely on social media. The jail department was forced to order of a probe, based on her allegations.

"The tribals can't leave this place as it is their land but when law-enforcers target women and minor girls and false case are registered, where do the victims go for justice?" she went on. "The CBI report says it, the court says it — this is the reality. When human rights workers or journalists tell the truth, they are sent to jail. If everything is fine in tribal lands, why government is so afraid and why people are not allowed to go there?"

Dongre invoked India's constitution to say it doesn't allow anyone the right to harass and torture another citizen. "A particular kind of development can't be thrust on the adivasis," she said. "Farmers and jawans are brothers, they shouldn't kill each other."

Known to be an upright officer, Dongre had approached the Chhattisgarh High Court in the PSC scam case in 2007. Based on a Right to Information application filed by her, action against top PSC officials, accused of irregularities and corruption.

After her post drew attention and caused a controversy, Dongre has now been taken off. However, talking to media persons later, she said that she had merely exercised her right to freedom of expression.

Meanwhile, a probe has been ordered by the jail authorities. "A top jail official has ordered an inquiry in this regard", a prison department official said. A DIG-rank officer would conduct the probe, sources said.

The full post in Hindi, now deleted, may be read below.