Army Petitions Supreme Court to Close Kunan Poshpora Rape Case

June 28, 2016

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied: Six Victims of the Kunan Poshpora mass rape and torture case of 1991 have died

A quarter of a century — 25 years– after the alleged mass rape and torture at Kunan Poshpora on 23/24 February 1991, the Indian Army, through the Ministry of Defence, Union of India, has petitioned the Indian Supreme Court challenging orders of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court on investigations and compensation.

In December 2014, Government of Jammu and Kashmir had challenged the same High Court orders before the Supreme Court on the issue of compensation, and got a stay on the orders. The central government chose not to respond to this petition despite being given time and opportunity to do so and wasted one year of both the courts and survivors time.

The Supreme Court heard afresh, another petition on behalf of the Indian army on May 13, 2016, issued notice and tagged both petitions to be now heard before the court together. Besides the above two petitions in the Supreme Court, there are three petitions pending before the Jammu Kashmir High Court: one by the survivors seeking investigations and prosecution, and two by the army, against the implementation of the State Human Rights Commission recommendations in this case, and, against the police investigations ordered by the Judicial Magistrate, Kupwara on June 18, 2013.

Now, the Indian army has contended before the Supreme Court that the allegations of rape and torture are “a hoax orchestrated by militant groups”, “part of cleverly contrived strategy of psychological warfare”, to “discredit the security forces by indulging in false propaganda”, “with a view to jeopardize the conduct of counter insurgency operations…in the valley”, and that the numbers of men and women alleged to have been tortured and raped are against “natural human conduct”.

On March 3, 2016, Sabrangindia had published an account by journalist Dilnaz Boga written on the 25 year mark of the tragic events. She recalled her journey to report the incident around 2006, a decade earlier.

In this, the journalist, Boga, quotes a PRO of the Ministry of Defence in Delhi telling her around 2006 when she was exploring the story, who says “Puraney zakhm kyu khured rahey ho? (why are you bringing up old wounds?)” Shereplied that justice had not been done and the guilty were not booked. Dilnaz boga further writes, “Pushing my luck, I asked to see the files of the incident and he told me that the files were destroyed, as it had been 17 years. In the end, I explained that I was doing my job and that he should do his and hung up as his tone changed.” Finally the editor of the publication she was working for never carried the story saying it was anti-national and pro-Pakistan. The happenings in the valley, from Handwara to others, to date reveal how any effort to bring about rational discourse on the issue of human rights abuses by the Indian armed forces in Kashmit or the north east, risk being labelled as anti-national.

According to a press release issued by the Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS), the army petition before the Supreme Court is the latest attempt by the State to delay proceedings and frustrate every attempt of the survivors for justice. To date, six victims of the brutal rape and torture have died.

In their continuing struggle for justice, the survivors of Kunan Poshpora will now submit their response before the Supreme Court and seek for investigations and prosecution of the accused army personnel.

Why Bad News for One Muslim American is Bad News for All Muslims

June 28, 2016

Image: Joe Skipper/Reuters

On the morning of June 12, as details emerged from a shooting at an Orlando nightclub, Muslim Americans across the country likely reacted with horror, while secretly hoping that the shooter wouldn’t turn out to be one of them. Many had gone through the same roller coaster of emotions after the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings and the San Bernardino shootings.

Muslim Americans have become accustomed to this pattern whenever there’s an attack with a Muslim perpetrator. Media outlets will debate whether or not Islam justifies violence, while sounding alarm bells about the extent of homegrown radicalism. At the same time, politicians and pundits trumpet policies restricting the civil liberties of Muslim immigrants and citizens.

As a media psychology researcher, I’ve studied how media representations of Muslims fuel anti-Muslim hostility and policies in America. Because so few Americans personally know Muslims, media depictions of them as terrorists are especially potent, leading many to believe that all Muslims are terrorists.

The power of media

Even in coverage unrelated to terrorist attacks, Muslims get a bad rap.

Content analyses of Muslim representations in cable news, television and movies, and newspapers reveal that Muslims in American media are overwhelmingly represented as violent, terrorists, barbaric and intolerant.

At the same time, there are almost no positive portrayals of Muslims in American media.

According to social psychologists, contact with “outgroups” – social groups that we don’t identify with – can reduce prejudices. But when direct, positive contact is limited or nonexistent, studies have shown media representations of outgroups have an even greater influence on our attitudes toward members of those groups.

Since Muslims make up only one percent of the U.S. population, most Americans don’t interact with them on a daily basis. This means that what they see on the news will largely influence how they perceive Muslim Americans.

A few bad apples speak for the group

In a recent set of studies, we discovered just how influential negative news depictions of Muslims can be.

For example, we conducted an experimental study in which participants were randomly assigned to watch a negative, neutral, or positive depictions of Muslims in the news.

Next, participants completed questions assessing their perceptions of all Muslims and support for policies harming Muslims.

The front page of the New York Post on December 3, 2015, a day after the San Bernardino terrorist attack. New York Post

Participants in the negative condition were exposed to a news story discussing the 2007 attempted terror attack on Fort Dix, which was perpetuated by six Muslim men. Compared to those in the other video conditions, these participants were significantly more likely to perceive all Muslims as aggressive and violent.

In addition, we were surprised to discover how easily they were willing to impose civil restrictions on Muslim Americans, whether it was making them go through separate security lines at airports, restricting their voting rights, or allowing the government to track them.

These participants were also more likely to support military action against Muslim countries – even if civilians would be put at risk – while they also sought to reduce the influence of Islam.

It’s important to note that many of the policies supported by participants in our study bear a strong resemblance to those proposed by American presidential candidates during the 2016 election cycle.

Indeed, many political candidates have called for increased surveillance of the Muslim American community, potentially closing down mosques, requiring Muslim Americans to register within a database or carry special identification identifying their faith, and banning immigrants from Muslim countries.

The fact that many of these proposals are unconstitutional does not alleviate the anxieties and fears of Muslim Americans. Many are aware that similar actions were once taken against Japanese Americans after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Reversing the trend

On an optimistic note, my research has also shown that media representations of Muslims in a positive light – in addition to direct contact with Muslims – can produce the opposite effect.

In the same study mentioned earlier, Americans who were exposed to a news clip portraying Muslim Americans volunteering at a food shelter during the holiday season were less likely to report anti-Muslim attitudes. They were also less likely to support policies that harm Muslims domestically and internationally.

In another study (still in press), we divided American college students into two groups: those who said they had direct contact with Muslims, and those who used the media to find out information about Muslims. Students who reported having direct contact with Muslims were less likely to have anti-Muslim attitudes or support anti-Muslim policies than those who relied on media alone for their information.

These findings highlight the power of face-to-face contact with outgroups, along with more balanced media coverage.

It’s important to recognize that this research does not in any way suggest that media should not report on attacks by Muslims. Instead, this work highlights the importance of fair media representations of the Muslim-American community.

After all, there’s plenty of positive news events involving Muslim Americans to report on.

There’s the Respond With Love campaign, a project initiated by a Muslim nonprofit to support the victims of the Emanuel AME Church shooting in Charleston, South Carolina. Ibtihaj Muhammad qualified for the Olympics as the first U.S athlete to compete wearing a hijab. (She also trained while fasting during Ramadan.) During the Clean Water for Flint campaign, Muslim Americans delivered water bottles to residents of the Michigan city. And at the first ever Muslim Funny Fest, Muslim comedians used humor to tackle issues like Islamophobia.

These stories, unfortunately, don’t get nearly the same amount of coverage as a terrorist attack. Until they do, media coverage of terrorist attacks perpetuated by Muslims will continue to fuel anti-Muslim attitudes and support for policies harming Muslims.

This story was first published on The Conversation.

यूपी विधानसभा जांच समिति के समक्ष अपने किए स्टिंग का ही प्रमाण नहीं दे पाए दीपक शर्मा

June 28, 2016

मुजफ्फरनगर दंगों के स्टिंग ऑपरेशन के संबंध में उत्तर प्रदेश विधानसभा द्वारा गठित जांच समिति के समक्ष टीवी टुडे चैनल समूह के संपादकीय व प्रबंधकीय अधिकारियों ने जो साक्ष्य प्रस्तुत किए हैंं, उससे टी वी चैनलों के न्यूज रूम के भीतर के कामकाज की संस्कृति जाहिर होती है। दिनांक 17 सितम्बर 2013 को "आज तक" एवं "हेड लाइन्स टुडे" चैनलों पर मुजफ्फरनगर दंगों के विषय में प्रसारित किये गये स्टिंग ऑपरेशन में सदन के एक वरिष्ठ सदस्य/मंत्री मोहम्मद आजम खां के विरुद्ध लगाये गये आरोपों के परिप्रेक्ष्य में यह जांच समिति गठित की गई थी। जन मीडिया के सौजन्‍य से मीडियाविजिल जांच समिति के प्रतिवेदन के उस संपादित अंश को प्रस्तुत कर रहा है जिसमें न्यूज रूम के भीतर के कामकाज की संस्कृति उजागर होती है। पहली किस्‍त में स्टिंग ऑपरेशन के पीछे की राजनीति पर पोस्‍ट के बाद अब पढ़ें कि स्टिंग ऑपरेशन से जुड़े चैनल के अधिकारियों और पत्रकारों ने जांच समिति के समक्ष क्‍या बयान दिए हैं।

दीपक शर्मा
समिति के समक्ष आए साक्ष्य एवं टी.वी. टुडे नेटवर्क के विभिन्न पदाधिकारियों द्वारा किये गये अभिकथन से यह स्पष्ट होता है कि इस पूरे स्टिंग ऑपरेशन में दीपक शर्मा, एडिटर, स्पेशल इंवेस्टीगेशन टीम, टी.वी. टुडे, नेटवर्क की भूमिका अत्यन्त महत्वपूर्ण थी। दीपक शर्मा ने समिति को बताया कि वह स्पेशल इंवेस्टीगेशन टीम के हेड थे तथा हेड होने के नाते उनका पूर्ण उत्तरदायित्व था। उन्होंने यह भी बताया कि स्टिंग ऑपरेशन में कैमरामैन नहीं होते हैं, वरन् इंवेस्टीगेटर रिपोर्टर ही होते हैं। यह स्टिंग ऑपरेशन स्पाई कैमरा से शूट किया गया था।

उनके अनुसार जब किसी विषय पर स्टिंग ऑपरेशन किए जाने के सम्बन्ध में रिपोर्टर सुझाव देते हैं अथवा किसी विषय पर यदि स्टिंग ऑपरेशन किए जाने के सम्बन्ध में निर्णय लिया जाता है तो उस हेतु सम्बन्धित पदाधिकारियों से सहमति ली जाती है।

उससे यह स्पष्ट होता है कि किसी स्टिंग ऑपरेशन को करने से पहले सम्बन्धित चैनल के हेड, उसके मैनेजिंग एडिटर तथा प्रस्तुत प्रकरण में स्पेशल इंवेस्टीगेशन टीम के एडिटर द्वारा निर्णय लिया जाता है। इसके साथ ही चैनल के इनपुट हेड एवं आउटपुट हेड की भी स्टिंग ऑपरेशन सम्पादित करने तथा उसको प्रसारित करने में महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका होती है। सक्षम स्तर से अनुमोदन के पश्चात स्टिंग ऑपरेशन की टीम इसे सम्पादित करती है।

"आज तक" तथा "हेडलाइऩ्स टुडे" चैनल पर मुख्य रूप से इस प्रकार का प्रसारण किया गया कि मुजफ्फरनगर दंगों में जो मुख्य अभियुक्त गिरफ्तार किये गये थे उनको राजनैतिक दबाव, विशेष रूप से मोहम्मद आजम खां के निर्देश पर रिहा कर दिया गया। इन चैनलों पर स्टिंग ऑपरेशन के आधार पर यह भी प्रसारित किया गया कि मो. आजम खां के स्तर से सीधे थानाध्यक्ष को फोन करके यह कहा गया कि जो हो रहा है उसको होने दिया जाए एवं यह कि एक विशेष सम्प्रदाय के व्यक्तियों को गिरफ्तार न किया जाए।

स्टिंग ऑपरेशन की जो सी.डी. प्रसारित की गयी है उसके अवलोकन से यह स्पष्ट होता है कि किसी भी अधिकारी ने स्वयं मो. आजम खां का नाम नहीं लिया था। प्रकरण की इन परिस्थितियों एवं तथ्यों के परिप्रेक्ष्य में दीपक शर्मा से जब यह पूछा गया कि फुगाना के सेकेण्ड ऑफिसर से स्टिंग ऑपरेशन के दौरान रिपोर्टर द्वारा यह कहा गया कि उनके ख्याल से मो. आजम खां के दबाव में अभियुक्तों को छोड़ा गया होगा, क्या इस प्रकार का सुझाव दिया जाना उपयुक्त एवं विधिक है तो दीपक शर्मा की ओर से कोई संतोषजनक उत्तर नहीं दिया जा सका। उन्होंने मात्र यह कहा कि यह प्रश्न हरीश शर्मा द्वारा पूछा गया था। उन्होंने यह भी कहा कि इस पूरे स्टिंग ऑपरेशन के दौरान उन्होंने स्वयं मो. आजम खां का नाम नहीं लिया। यह पूछने पर कि क्या ऐसा करना उचित है एवं क्या उनको हरीश शर्मा को ऐसा प्रश्न करने से नहीं रोकना चाहिए था तो उन्होंने उत्तर दिया कि चूंकि मो. आजम खां के नाम की चर्चा हो रही थी अतः ऐसा प्रश्न पूछा गया। दीपक शर्मा इस बात का भी कोई संतोषजनक उत्तर नहीं दे पाए कि यदि मो. आजम खां के विषय में अऩ्यत्र ऐसी चर्चा की जा रही थी कि उन्होंने अभियुक्तों को रिहा कराया था तो उसके विषय में किसी समर्थित साक्ष्य का प्रसारण क्यों नहीं किया गया? दीपक शर्मा इस सम्बन्ध में भी कोई उत्तर नहीं दे पाए कि यदि मो. आजम खां के विषय में प्रसारण किया जाना था तो उनका पक्ष क्यों नहीं लिया गया?

दीपक शर्मा के साक्ष्य में उनसे यह पूछे जाने पर क्या किसी व्यक्ति द्वारा नाम लिया जाना संवैधानिक था तो उन्होंने उसको सही ठहराया परन्तु यह पूछे जाने पर कि क्या उनकी इसमें सहमति थी, उन्होंने नकारात्मक उत्तर दिया। दीपक शर्मा द्वारा अन्यत्र पूछे जाने पर यह कहा गया कि वह रिपोर्टर के सवाल से सहमत थे। उन्होंने इस बात से इंकार किया कि स्टिंग ऑपरेशन पूर्व निर्धारित उद्देश्यों से किया गया था। दीपक शर्मा द्वारा अपने साक्ष्य में यह स्वीकार किया गया है कि मो. आजम खां का वर्जन न लेने से लापरवाही हुई है।

मुजफ्फरनगर दंगों के विषय में प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट को स्टिंग ऑपरेशन के प्रसारण में दूषित (फर्जी) बताया गया। जब श्री दीपक शर्मा से इस विषय में पूछा गया तो उनकी और से कोई संतोषजनक उत्तर नहीं दिया गया कि किस आधार पर प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट को राजनैतिक दबाव में संशोधित करने की बात की गयी। स्टिंग ऑपरेशन में यह दर्शाया गया है कि कतिपय अभियुक्तों को राजनैतिक दबाव में रिहा कर दिया गया। दीपक शर्मा ने बताया कि इसमें राजनैतिक शब्द का प्रयोग गलत किया गया है। दीपक शर्मा अपने साक्ष्य में यह भी प्रमाणित नहीं कर पाये कि किसी वरिष्ठ व्यक्ति द्वारा फोन किये जाने के संबंध में उनके पास कोई ठोस एवं प्रामाणिक साक्ष्य है या नहीं। उन्होंने यह स्वीकार किया कि इस संबंध में अन्य कोई साक्ष्य नहीं है। दीपक शर्मा से जब यह पूछा गया कि उनके रिपोर्टर ने मात्र मो. आजम खां का नाम क्यों लिया तथा किसी अन्य सम्प्रदाय या अन्य राजनैतिक व्यक्ति का नाम क्यों नहीं लिया तो वह इस संबंध में कोई संतोषजनक उत्तर नहीं दे पाए।

दीपक शर्मा ने यह भी स्वीकार किया है कि प्रारम्भ में जो सी.डी. जांच समिति को रॉ फुटेज के रूप में उपलब्ध कराई गई थी वह रॉ फुटेज नहीं था तथा उसके पश्चात जांच समिति के निर्देशों पर जब पुनः इस आशय का निर्देश दिया गया तब रॉ फुटेज की दूसरी सी.डी. (सामग्री) टी.वी. टुडे नेटवर्क द्वारा उपलब्ध कराई गई थी। दीपक शर्मा द्वारा इस संबंध में टी.वी. टुडे नेटवर्क की ओर से की गयी त्रुटि को स्वीकार किया गया।

रिपोर्टर हरीश शर्मा
स्टिंग ऑपरेशन के एक अन्य रिपोर्टर हरीश शर्मा ने यह बताया कि मुजफ्फरनगर के दंगों के स्टिंग ऑपरेशन की टीम में तीन रिपोर्टर थे, जिसमें कि दीपक शर्मा हेड थे एवं अन्य सदस्यों में अरूण सिंह थे। हरीश ने यह भी बताया स्टिंग ऑपरेशन उन्होंने और अरूण सिंह ने दो कैमरों से शूट किया था। शर्मा वर्तमान में "आज तक" चैनल में कार्यरत नहीं हैं तथा वह "इंडिया टी.वी." में कार्य कर रहे हैं। शर्मा ने यह स्वीकार किया है कि मोहम्म्द आजम खां के विषय में उन्होंने प्रश्न पूछा था, परन्तु इसके साथ उन्होंने यह भी बल देकर कहा कि इस प्रश्न को पूछने में टीम के तीनों सदस्यों की सहमति थी तथा इसके बारे में पूर्व में विचार कर लिया गया था। अतः शर्मा के साक्ष्य से यह स्पष्ट है कि यद्यपि प्रश्न उन्होंने पूछा था, परन्तु इसमें दीपक शर्मा की सहमति भी थी। हरीश शर्मा ने यह कहा है कि उन्होंने मोहम्मद आजम खां का नाम इस कारण पूछा था क्योंकि ऐसी चर्चा थी। इसके अतिरिक्त शर्मा अन्य कोई प्रमाण अथवा आधार नहीं दे सके कि उन्होंने ऐसा प्रश्न क्यों पूछा। शर्मा यह भी स्पष्ट नहीं कर पाये कि मोहम्मद आजम खां की चर्चा कहां थी तथा किस अधिकारी अथवा व्यक्ति द्वारा उनका नाम इस सन्दर्भ में लिया गया था।

हरीश शर्मा ने यह भी बताया कि स्टिंग ऑपरेशऩ में वह विभिन्न तथ्यों को एकत्र करते हैं, परन्तु उनको प्रसारित करने का दायित्व उनका नहीं है और न ही इसके प्रसारण में उनकी कोई भूमिका है। हरीश शर्मा द्वारा अपने मौखिक साक्ष्य में यह स्वीकार किया गया है कि उन्होंने दीपक शर्मा से यह कहा था कि मुजफ्फरनगर दंगों में राजनैतिक दबाव अथवा किसी विशिष्ट राजनैतिक दल के विषय में प्रसारण नहीं किया जाना चाहिए, जब तक कि इस विषय में गहराई से छानबीन न कर ली जाये। शर्मा द्वारा यह भी अभिकथित किया गया कि उन्होंने दीपक शर्मा को यह भी बताया था कि मोहम्मद आजम खां के विषय में अन्य साक्ष्य भी एकत्र करने चाहिए क्योंकि स्टिंग ऑपरेशन का मुख्य उद्देश्य प्रशासनिक शिथिलता थी न कि किसी राजनैतिक व्यक्ति के विषय में। हरीश शर्मा द्वारा यह स्वीकार किया गया है कि मोहम्मद आजम खां के विरुद्ध आरोप के विषय को प्रसारण में नहीं दिखाना चाहिए था तथा पर्याप्त साक्ष्य जुटाने के बाद ही उसका प्रसारण करना चाहिए था।

रिपोर्टर अरुण सिंह
स्टिंग ऑपरेशन के तीसरे रिपोर्टर अरुण सिंह द्वारा अपने मौखिक साक्ष्य में यह कहा गया है कि उन्होंने और हरीश जी ने स्टिंग ऑपरेशन को शूट किया था। अरुण सिंह द्वारा यह भी कहा गया कि प्रसारण का निर्णय एडिटोरियल का है तथा उसमें उनकी कोई भूमिका नहीं थी। सिंह ने यह स्वीकार किया कि शूटेड मैटेरियल/रॉ फुटेज में से कौन से अंश निकाले गये हैं, यह वह नहीं बता सकते, परन्तु उन्होंने कहा कि उसमें से जरूर कुछ अंश निकाले जाते हैं। अरूण सिंह द्वारा भी इस पर बल दिया गया है कि मोहम्मद आजम खां के विषय में प्रश्न पूछने के संबंध में तीनों लोगों की सहमति थी। अरूण सिंह द्वारा बल देकर अपने साक्ष्य में यह कहा गया है कि मोहम्मद आजम खां के विषय में जो आरोप लगाया गया था, वह खुलकर सामने नहीं आया था, इसलिए उन्होंने यह सुझाव दिया था कि इसको हटा दिया जाये, परन्तु वह नहीं बता सकते कि इसको क्यों नहीं हटाया गया।

Courtesy: mediavigil.com

Lessons Not Learned from Gujarat 2002

June 28, 2016

“With a purified heart, and with proper thinking, go on resolving to do honest work. The only objective of human life is to give up bad deeds and to develop good qualities.”
– Atharvaveda, 5/3/41

“Oh men! you should not be satisfied with your present situation.
You have to move forward and have to exert with body and soul’s
strength.”
– Atharvaveda, 8/1/42

“Law is King of Kings;
Nothing is superior to law;
The law aided by the power of the King
Enables the weak to prevail over the strong.”
– Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, 14-4-2-23

“Even adversity does not prompt men of unswerving purity to do mean things.”
– Tirukkural by Thiruvalluvar, 6543

“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and Mammon.”
– Holy Bible, St Matthew, 6/25

“Oh, ye who believe! be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity and let not hatred of any people seductive that ye deal not justly.
Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah.
Lo! Allah is informed of what ye do.”
– Holy Quran, Surah-v-84

“Oh my people! Give full measure and full weight in justice, and wrong not people in respect of their goods. And do not evil in the earth, causing corruption.”
– Holy Quran, Surah-xi-855

“Lo! Allah enjoineth justice and kindness, and giving to kins folk and forbideth lewdness and abomination and wickedness.”
– Holy Quran, Surah-xvi-906

Strife in society is the outcome of inadequate amity and mutual trust among people and the resultant dispute coupled with denial of justice to individuals or groups by the elite wielding power at social, economic, political, religious, cultural and administrative realms. A healthy society is always successful in localising, containing and solving disputes germinated over private or public issues. Modern Nation States have evolved institutions, human resources, tools and procedures for smooth maintenance of the rule of law, prompt delivery of justice to the aggrieved and sound relief, reconciliation, rehabilitation and resettlement of victims of natural or man-made calamities. Segments of any vibrant society like NGOs, local residential groups, professional fraternal associations (including caste-centric groups in India), media, welfare organizations, trade, religious, commercial, political, and cultural bodies and so on, propelled by the consensus of public opinion, do effectively respond to any major threat or danger to social harmony and public order. Simultaneously, structurally organized components of the State – the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary, instantly initiate interventionist purposeful action through enabling authority for realization of tasks assigned.

Mainstream Gujarati society and wings of the State (Legislature and Executive) did not rise to the level of expectation of citizens, during and after the prolonged communal disturbances, thanks to the impact of majoritarian communal campaigns and government’s covert connivance with inflicters of savagery on their targets.

History of communal clashes in Gujarat, particularly in Ahmedabad city had started from AD 1714 and major riots took place in 1969 (600 deaths), 1985, and in 1992 but the prolonged riots in 2002 with the unprecedented highest casualty of nearly 1500 killings (including missing persons), were notorious for the criminal collaborative role of the State functionaries (Neros according to the Supreme Court) in the anti-minority pogrom with pronounced ingredients of a genocide as defined in United Nations Covenant on Genocide 1948. To illustrate, large scale killing of a specific group (761 in riots – 177 Hindus and 584 Muslims; 200 in police firing, 83 Hindus and 117 Muslims and physical destruction of socio-cultural and religious symbols of a targeted group – 302 Dargahs, 209 Mosques, 113 Madrasas, 30 temples and 3 churches; total property lost to Muslims comes to 244 crore and 31 crore to Hindus[1]).

The societal movement against riots in general was lukewarm, nominal and that too limited to cities and regional pockets and thus ineffective and directionless, though, some aid has come for organizing relief camps for the displaced, but action to reactivate the subverted Criminal Justice System (CJS), manipulating available channels of grievance redressal to the disadvantage of the riot victims, was grossly inadequate.

Except a few NGOs like Citizen for Justice and Peace (CJP), led by Teesta Setalvad and a few others like reputed artist Mallika Sarabhai, no well focused moves to depute advocates to take up major carnage cases were visible. Effective microlevel monitoring of investigation and prosecution of major carnage cases by CJP could get 120 rioters[2] – including a former state minister – (direct perpetrators of violence) convicted with life imprisonment – an unprecedented achievement for human rights activists, in history of anti-minority riots in India since 1947.

Most gruesome manslaughters took place in Godhra railway station (59 deaths), and places like Naroda Patiya (96) 190 and Gulbarg Society (69) – both in Ahmedabad city, Sardarpura (33) and Deepada Darwaja (11) – both in Mehsana district, Best bakery in Baroda city (14), Ode village (27) in Anand district and Kidiad (23) in Sabarkantha district. Thousands of internally displaced housed in relief camps were brutally driven out by the State administration in June/July 2002, to project a false picture of normalcy before the Central Election Commission, under pressure from Modi government to hold early assembly election, ostensibly to cash on the anti-minority impulse and communal consolidation of Hindus for Sangh Parivar, allegedly the main architect of genocide.

Limited protests by socio-religious, cultural and commercial organizations did not create any discernable impact, so Vajpayee government after condemnation of riots initially through public statements, had endorsed the Sangh Parivar’s stand on riots as genuine and legitimate expression of anger by majority community on the community responsible for ‘conspiring and killing Ram Bhaktas’ at Godhra railway station on 27th February 2002. The octogenarian Sanskrit scholar KK Shastri had even eulogized tormentors of Muslims, by calling them Tigers – “waghri wagh thai gai” (Waghiri – Backward community – became tigers). Gandhians also did not resort to Mahatma’s methodology of Satyagraha or fasting to generate
nationwide moral pressure on Central Government to make a leadership change in Gujarat and to correct malady in the State administration.

Pertinently most of the religious leaders of the Muslims were paralysed by fear complex and Modiphobia. Deplorably, many of the Hindu religious congregations had exhibited a mind set of deeming the anti-Muslim blood-bath as a spontaneous, uncontrollable upsurge against the community responsible for killing Ram Bhaktas at Godhra Railway Station. Corporate units owned by Muslims also did not come with any decisive, well-directed and consistent measures for ensuring effective justice delivery and substantial relief, reconciliation, rehabilitation and resettlement schemes for the riot victim survivors.

A major silver lining is the role of media, both Print and Electronic, particularly the National English Press and channels, who had graphically brought out practically all nuances of the genesis, course and aftermath of the communal holocaust. Another redeeming feature was the initiative by numerous Hindus who offered shelter, security, relief and rehabilitation to Muslims targeted by marauding Hindu brigands, even risking their lives.

Most of them are averse to any recognition or publicity for their philanthropic services lest they would incur the wrath of radical Hindus and Sangh Parivar. Society for Promoting Rationality (SPRAT) led by Hassan M Johar, risked his life and moved through rioting areas and distributed food and relief materials. Activists like Jesuit Father Cedric Prakash, Shabanam Hashmi, Harsh Mander, Jagen Sethi, have also been doing a lot of ameliorative service to the riot affected.

Some miscreants, brain-washed to nurture deep-rooted hatred against Muslims, through prolonged indoctrination had acted like programmed robots butchering and plundering their ‘enemy community’. Extremists among Muslims have also been equally devilish. This was possible due to long inertia of the secular civil population whose socio-religious, political and cultural bodies remained sluggish and unresponsive to the trends of de-spiritualisation and politicisation of Hindu- Muslim religious institutions.

This gave fillip to the process of saffronisation and exclusivism of Hindus, Jihadism and Arabisation of Muslims. Through well-designed deliberate actions, areas of cooperation and collective joint activities between Hindus and Muslims were increasingly brought down by radical sectarian activists in both communities. Alienation of Muslims from local culture, conventions, customs and costumes, etc, in the name of assertion of Islamic identity to counter alleged danger to Islamic way of life, has adverse impact on social amity and fraternity between communities. Ram Janmabhoomi movement, Advani’s Rath Yatra, mass migration of Kashmiri Pandits from the valley (5 lakh – largest migration from ones native place since Partition), demolition of Babri Masjid and subsequent riots, rise of terrorizing Muslim underworld under the political and police patronage in Gujarat cities like Abdul Latif in Ahmedabad city, etc, have pushed sizable number of traditional secularists to the camp of Hindu majoritarianism.

Renaming places with Hindu names, installation of images of Hindu deities in government premises, identification of Muslim trade and commercial establishments for targeted attack during communal riots (exemplified by the destruction of showrooms of Bata, Pantloons, Metro Shoes, hotels bearing Hindu names but owned by Muslims in 2002 riots), government servants participating in Sangh Parivar sponsored programmes for their ‘career advancement’ and so on, became quite prominent since late 1990s. Why did secular sections not take any pro-active, counter active or remedial measures at suitable time and place against the divisive trends in the society? No demonstrative action by secular groups – sociopolitical and cultural – and even Hindu bodies like Ramkrishna Mission with its clear image of equal respect to all religions – Sarva Dharma Samabhavna, took any substantial action against communal movements. Gradually most facets of community life came under the grip of dominant sectarian groups in both communities. Should we learn anything from this suicidal indifference of civil society during the long gestation period in the pre-riot era, duration of riots and post riot days in Gujarat?

The secular political elite at national level also did not launch convincing campaigns exposing the Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s grave omissions like,

1. Not disassociating his government from VHP sponsored bandh in Gujarat on 28/2/2002,
2. Not warning of strict actions against all bandh enthusiasts,
3. Tasking ruling party leaders (MLA, MP) to initiate action at grass root level to maintain public order and normalcy by touring in their areas of influence,
4. Discouraging bureaucrats and police from implementing government regulations for achieving normalcy, and
5. Slackness to plan and implement meaningful schemes for relief, rehabilitation, reconciliation and resettlement of riot victims in the pre-riots ambience.

Significantly, local political leaders who refused to actively support the anti-Muslim agenda of CM like Suresh Mehta of Kutch, Kashiram Rana of Surat, Vallabh Kataria of Rajkot and Haren Pandya of Ahmedabad city (who was later killed in suspicious circumstances), were ill-treated, cold shouldered and all had gradually disappeared into political wilderness.

Of the three wings of the State, the Legislature and the Executive had failed to become an effective fortress for the targeted citizens, for saving them from the rioters. No legislator had mobilized their supporters in the party in favour of the Muslims. The Executive component consisting of the police, the executive magistracy and many in statutorily empowered government departments to maintain public order, take ameliorative measures after any disaster, etc, had unabashedly betrayed criminal negligence culpable under Sections 166, 186 and 187 IPC, by not implementing architecture of SOP designed by Central and State Governments. As narrated earlier, most of the facilitators of targeted violence were rewarded and intrinsic law enforcers were punished.

Higher judiciary had shown clear indications about their displeasure on Modi administration through many observations and orders.

The solution lies in implementation of police reforms in the recommendations of Padmanabhaiah and Ribeiro committees and the Supreme Court orders in Prakash Singh’s case. Creation of bodies suggested by the court could have resulted in their effective intervention to prevent officers from becoming collaborators to rioters, through acts of omission and commission. This would have prevented the democratically elected State Government from carrying out its covert illegal anti-minority agenda through mobocracy. Concept of command responsibility of senior officers up to the Chief Secretary has to be enshrined in the administrative jurisprudence urgently.

The area of discretion to the field officers in implementing statutory directives on prevention, control and containment of riots should be reduced to the minimum. The exact operational role of each police officer and the Executive Magistrate at different rungs of hierarchy, viz DGP to
Constable and Home Secretary to Mamlatdar, in handling disturbances, have to be standardized and compiled on the pattern of the much admired ‘Blue Book’ on VIP security. This should contain unambiguous Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for each officer and specific drill manuals, with situation wise directives. Intentional non-implementation and serious acts of omission and commission vis-a-vis SOP be made punishable acts of crime as in the case of Civil rights Act and Prevention of Atrocity on SC/ST Act.

India is yet to establish sacrosanct conventions of ethical norms like political executive demitting office whenever serious allegations are made against him, as in matured western democracies. The danger of crookish Indian elite at the helm of affairs devising ingenious contrivances to bypass any well-designed legal and administrative structures cannot be discounted.

Strangely, many in the State administration, since 1990s have deviated from their constitutional obligations and acted as part of the collateral wing of the Sangh Parivar to get favours from the government and for career advancement. Thus during 2002 riots in areas of genocidal mass violence, government officers did not adequately respond to distress calls from the minorities under brutal assault by armed Hindu communal gangs.

Finally, the civil society has to plan and implement area-specific and issue based schemes to arrest the debilitating trends of de-spiritualisation and politicisation of religious bodies, and the communalisation of all facets of public life. Any act of government functionary going against the
requirements of the rule of law, democracy and secularism, from the highest to the grass root level, be checked and corrected through legal channels and collective public action. All available fora – administrative, legal, political, social and cultural – be moved to make persons in authority, accountable, perform and deliver, as per the concept of command responsibility. Indian civilization, having a heritage of 5,000 years, has vitality, inner strength to withstand any crisis. Many would be unobtrusively endeavouring for achieving the ideals in the inspiring last hymn from the Rigveda,7 burning high with flame of a unified and collective aspiration.

“Come together, all of you, speak in one voice, know with one mind, even like the Gods, who, of yore, knew with one mind and together had their share of enjoyment.

“Together may they utter the mantra, may they unite together, may their mind be one, their consciousness mingle. I utter the same mantra with you all, with you all equally I make the offering:.

“May your yearning be one, may your hearts be one, may your mind be one, so that your union may be perfect.”

Lessons of Gujarat riots are quite loud and clear. Will we go down in history as people endowed with knowledge but bereft of wisdom and will power to correct our course of action?
Panchatantra, the ancient compendium of aphorisms exhorted thus –

“Wisdom shows herself in actions;
A Minister’s in forging friendships;
A physician’s in heeling life threatening illness.
Who is not wise when everything goes right.”
– Panchatantra, Chapter 1, 968

Rigveda (1500 BC) is the most enlighteningly ennobling component of earliest Indian heritage. Let us hope that God Almighty will respond to the following Rigvedic Prayer:

“Resplendent God, let the deceitful and tyrannous people be defeated by honest people through their clever strategy. May they (virtuous and honest) be rewarded by you with abundant wealth and food.” – Rigveda, 1-11-79

(This appears as CHAPTER 12, Lessons of 2002 Gujarat Riots, Gujarat, Behind the Curtain https://sabrangindia.in/readings/gujarat-behind-curtain)

Notes
1. Vedamurti Taponishtha Pandit Sreeram Sharma Acharya, Divine Message of Vedas, published by Yug Nirman Yojna (Mathura), p 270.
2. Ibid, p 72.
3. VR Ramachandra Dikshitar (Eng trans), Tirukkural by Thiruvalluvar, Adayar Library, Chennai, p 135.
4. Mohammad Marmaduke Pickthall (trans), The Holy Quran, Madhur Sandesh Sangam, p 97.
5. Ibid, p 171.
6. Ibid, p 201.
7. Sampat and Vijay (eds), The Wonder that is Sanskrit, Mapin Publishing, Ahmedabad, p 118.
8. Chandra Rajan (trans), Panchatantra, Penguin Books, p 37.
9. Swami Satya Prakash Saraswati and Satyam Vidyalankra (Eng trans), Rigveda Samhita, Veda Pratishthana, New Delhi, p 31.

[1] These figures are only the official ones collated in 2002; they have been since revised

[2] A total of 137 convictions to life imprisonment has been assured in the cases where CJP has helped with legal assistance to the survivors

In June, 7 Drought-Hit States Short Of Water

June 28, 2016

Of 11 states ravaged by drought in 2016, seven—Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh—had less than average water in their reservoirs in June 2016.

Levels in dam reservoirs were no more than 10% of capacity for four of the 11 states as June ended, according to the reservoir data with the Central Water Commission. This is despite the fact that eight of the 11 had normal rainfall in June; rains were 30% short of normal in Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Odisha and Jharkhand.

Telangana reservoirs are at 2% of capacity, Maharashtra’s at 5.6%, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka at 9.5%, which means South Central India is particularly short on water. Maharashtra, with reservoirs at 5.6% of capacity and a 33% deficit in June rainfall, was the worst-hit state at the end of June.

The situation in 2016 is a reminder of the 2009 drought that wreaked havoc with India’s economy by pushing inflation to double digits. But much will depend, experts said, on how the monsoon progresses over the next three months.

Although reasonable rainfall was reported from Maharashtra’s central and southeastern Marathwada region, a traditionally drought-prone area, reservoir levels remain at 1% of capacity—as they have been since a month—an unprecedented situation.

Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh were four of 11 drought-hit states that reported more-than-average water in their reservoirs.

Source: Central Water Commission

The southwest monsoon hit India eight days late, breaking over Kerala on June 8, 2016, instead of June 1. It reached Mumbai on June 20, 10 days later than normal.

Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh are the drought-hit states that received more than average June rainfall till June 23, according to India Meteorological Department data.

Source: Hydromet, India Meteorological Department; unit – mm)

While monsoon rains are underway in southern and eastern India, and most of the central plains, Gujarat and Rajasthan have got little or no rain.

Despite higher-than-normal rainfall in June 2015, all states reported uniform shortfalls over the 2015 monsoon season, indicating that June rainfall is not a harbinger of what might happen.

Source: Hydromet, India Meteorological Department.

If the two water indicators—reservoir levels and rainfall (in June)—are taken together, Maharashtra, as we said, is the worst-affected state in India.

Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, both equally affected by the drought and with water in their reservoirs at less than 10%, have benefitted from above-normal June rainfall.

Lowest water levels in Maharashtra reservoirs in eight years: Govt

While the CWC data covers only major reservoirs in Maharashtra, the state government water resources department puts water levels in Maharashtra dams at 9% of capacity, the lowest in eight years.

June rainfall in 2014 was a fourth of normal; in 2016, it was half of normal. The northern and eastern areas of the state, the Vidarbha region, were worst hit in 2009, sparking a wave of farmer suicides.

“If we consider the four-month rainfall—June, July, August and September—as important for agriculture, a delayed monsoon will undoubtedly reduce the June rainfall,” Ranjan Kelkar, former Director General of India Meteorological Department (IMD) told IndiaSpend. “That tells us nothing about rainfall in the remaining three months; it all depends on how strong the coming monsoon winds are.”

In April, the Met forecast above-normal monsoon rainfall for the June to September 2016 season, standing by its forecast in June. As Kelkar said, it all depends on the next three months.

(Waghmare is an analyst with IndiaSpend.)

Courtesy: IndiaSpend.com

Spare a Moment for the Victims of Torture

June 27, 2016

International Day in Solidarity with Victims of Torture, June 26

From Horror to Healing
As the world observes June 26 in solidarity with victims of torture, the pervasive existence of torture within India is a crime deserving of the fullest condemnation and punishment. Torture is a pervasive practice that has to be recognised as such and abolished immediately and completely. It goes against India’s international obligations and our Constitution and amounts to a denial of the right to a life with dignity. There must always be assured punishment for perpetrators. For those who survive the humiliating ordeal of torture there must be assured restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. This is the right of every citizen.

Attended by lawyers, doctors, activists, academics and representatives of national human rights institutions (NHRIs) that included the National Human Rights Commission and the National Commission for Backward Classes, participants strongly affirmed the repeated demand that India should without further delay ratify the Convention against Torture (CAT). This has been pending since 1997. Adhikar, National Foundation for Dalits, Citizens for Justice and Peace, People’s Watch, PVCHR, SICHREM, NCDHR, Human Rights Alert, HAQ were among the organisations who had co-hosted the initiative.

Second, that Parliament immediately enact the Prevention of Torture Bill, incorporating within it the recommendations of the Select Committee of Indian Parliament. This too has been pending since 2010.

Third, India must immediately pass comprehensive statutory scheme for reparation and rehabilitation of torture victims.

Fourth, India must facilitate the visit of the Special Rapporteur on Torture whose request has been pending for many years.

As the world observes today, June 26 in solidarity with victims of torture, the pervasive existence of torture within India and South Asia as a source of continuing threat to the basic right to life and this needs to be recognised and condemned. For those who survive the humiliating ordeal of torture practices, there is denial of a right to a life with dignity. Torture is the systemic use of violence and is a practice that needs to be abolished, completely.

Indian criminal jurisprudence and the Indian criminal justice system, despite statutory safeguards and some checks and balances, continues to afford a chilling impunity to the use of torture not just as a means of ‘investigation’ during prolonged periods of incarceration but as a means of humiliation and domination over voiceless and marginalised sections of the population. These include vast sections of the Indian population from states in the north eastern periphery, Jammu and Kashmir, migrant labour, construction workers, workers in the unorganised sector, Adivasis and indigenous peoples, Dalits and India’s religious minorities who bear the additional burden of being often wrongfully associated with acts of terror. Within this women and children are especial targets of these practices.

As India is signatory to the Convention against Disability, that also addresses the issue of disabilities caused by torture, a logical and necessary corollary is that India immediately ratifies CAT.
There is now strong evidence of widespread impunity for illegal and appalling actions as a primary means of investigation when in custody and control of state actors and of torture being used as a means of coercing and subduing dissent amongst voiceless and vulnerable populations. These include large sections in the North Eastern region, Jammu and Kashmir, migrant labour, construction workers, unorganised workers, Adivasis and indigenous peoples, Dalits and India’s religious minorities who bear the additional burden of being often wrongfully associated with acts of terror. Within this women and children are especially vulnerable targets. Indeed, it is seldom recognised that children are victims of torture, often in the name of ‘disciplinary action’ in educational, care and custodial institutions

In its comprehensive outcome statement the National Convention appealed to Parliament, state assemblies and the executive to take multiple, specific and practical steps to ensure both the abolition of torture and put in place,at the earliest, effective reparation schemes. It called upon the many monitoring agencies across the country including the courts, special commissions such as the National and state human rights commissions and police complaints authorities to take strong and initiatives required by their mandates to ensure accountability from the perpetrator individuals and institutions. It called upon the police and armed forces in particular to acknowledge the practice and take all steps to eliminate it and punish perpetratos.

Appeal by the National Convention to the Media
Media functions as the fourth pillar of our democracy. We urge it to disseminate the information that there is an absolute prohibition against torture and join in the fight for its elimination. We urge it not to be swayed by shrill slogans of carefully crafted campaigns by perpetrators that are designed to demonise and defame victims and human rights defenders who represent them but to recognise that our Constitutional framework and international obligations require nothing less than the total elimination of this heinous practice against the rule of law to which India is committed.

Detailed Document:

Reparation

Providing torture victims with access to justice involves two key components: The access to an effective remedy and reparation for the victim. Two decades after India became a signatory to the Convention against Torture it has the obligation to criminalise torture, to investigate all allegations and to prosecute perpetrators.

Reparations broadly comprise the range of individual and collective measures that may be taken to address wrongs suffered by victims of human rights abuses. There are five widely acknowledged forms of reparation: restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition.

Parliament immediately enact the Prevention of Torture Bill, incorporating within it the recommendations of the Select Committee of Indian Parliament. This too has been pending since 2010.

Recognising these factors and deliberating intensively on the National Convention has formulated these issues that need to be recognised and acted upon on, urgently.

The aim of rehabilitation is to empower the torture victim to resume as full a life as possible.
Rebuilding the life of someone whose dignity has been destroyed takes time and as a result long-term material, medical, psychological and social support is needed. Rehabilitation should be:

Holistic, employing different treatment approaches, taking into account the victims’ individual needs, as well as the cultural, social and political environment;
Available, appropriate, accessible and provided in a way that guarantees the safety and personal integrity of the victims, their family and their caretakers;
Provided at the earliest possible point in time after the torture event, without a requirement for the victim to pursue judicial remedies, but solely based on recommendations by a qualified health professional;
Provided in close consultation with the victim and tailored to meet the specific needs of each individual victim;
Adequately funded by the government.

Reparation and Accountability

This is a collective responsibility of the Governments, Courts, Human Rights Institutions, Medical and Legal Professionals and Media.

Collectively, the Indian Government, Parliament, the NHRIs, especially the NHRC, state governments and the media together have an obligation to address the issue of the widespread culture of impunity around the prevalence of torture as a means of humiliation, subjugation and domination and need to issue advisories, have awareness programmes and trainings within India’s institutions to ensure that this shifts and changes. It is this shift that will help operationalizing the various measures mentioned here.
The Indian Government at the national level and state governments at the provincial levels need to enact a Comprehensive and Statutory Scheme for the Reparation of Victims of Torture.

Central Government

1. The Indian Government needs to Formulate, Debate and Enact a Comprehensive and Statutory Scheme for the Reparation of Victims of Torture.

As long as victims are present, assistance needs to be provided. The provision of such assistance is not charity. It is a legal obligation of the government under international law (enshrined in article 14 of the Convention against Torture). Despite the legal, moral and social arguments in support of the provision of redress to victims of torture, India has yet to acknowledge and put in practice the right to rehabilitation for victims of torture and their families.

2. India must ratify the Convention against Torture (CAT).

3. The Indian Government must ensure the passage of the Prevention of Torture Bill in Parliament, incorporating within it the recommendations of ICJ and the Select Committee of Indian Parliament.

4. The Indian Government must ensure that the visit of the UN Special Rapporteur Torture is facilitated at the earliest

5. The Indian Government must issue advisories to all State Governments to Implement the use of Section 176 of the CRPC in amended form, forthwith to ensure due diligence in the conduct of inquiries/investigations into custodial deaths that occur due to the widespread use of torture.

Under existing criminal law, it is section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that binds the lowest rung of the Indian judiciary, the judicial magistrate to investigate independently any case of death in custody, independently and as a matter of course. Inevitably these deaths occur due to the use of torture. In 2009, the Indian government amended this section, finally passed in 2010 that compelled this investigation to be conducted by the judicial magistrate not the executive magistrate as was happening. In practice, however this amendment is not necessarily being implemented with rigour.

6. The Indian Government and Parliament needs to substantively debate repealing of this statutory impunity for public servants, inserted under colonial rule but which no government has removed from the statute books. Section 197 of the CRPC (except in cases related to monetary corruption has been a persistent hurdle for victims and human rights defenders successfully prosecuting perpetrators of human rights abuses, including torture.

7. The Central government must also ensure that the Whistle Blowers Protection Act as passed by the parliament in 2014 should be implemented forthwith

Parliament

The Indian Parliament needs to deliberate and actively formulate a Comprehensive and Statutory Scheme for the Reparation of Victims of Torture.
India must immediately ratify the Convention against Torture (CAT) and Indian Parliament must discuss and ensure this.
Indian Parliament must immediately enact and pass the Prevention of Torture Bill, incorporating within it the recommendations of ICJ and the Select Committee of Indian Parliament.
The Indian Parliament must debate and ensure that the Indian Government facilitates the visit of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture at the earliest
The Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA) must be amended to bring paramilitary and armed forces under its jurisdiction. Section 19 of the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA) should be repealed to ensure this.
Human Rights Courts in all districts must be established as required under the PHRA and the Parliament must debate and ensure this.
A Comprehensive and Urgent need for a Witness and Victim Protection programme is essential to guard against the use of Torture. Several judgements of the Supreme Court and Recommendations of the Law Commission urge this; Indian Parliament needs to ensure active and urgent debate on this.
Women and children and HRDs: torture in custody should become non-bailable offence
The Indian Government and Parliament needs to substantively debate repealing of this statutory impunity for public servants, inserted under colonial rule but which no government has removed from the statute books. Section 197 of the CRPC (except in cases related to monetary corruption has been a persistent hurdle for victims and human rights defenders successfully prosecuting perpetrators of human rights abuses, including torture.
This National Convention in Solidarity with Victims of Torture comes in a year when the accreditation of the NHRC will be discussed and debated before the ICC. It is an opportune time to ensure that in terms of composition, action and output this institution that was set up in 1991 with much hope on addressing prevalent human rights standards is assessed with due rigour within the country.
Especially relevant to Parliament, that is concerned with the Rule of Law and the Basic Rights and Dignities of the Indian people, are issues related to a) Scrutiny of the composition of the NHRC especially related to presence of police officers within; b)the status and functioning of the Police Complaint Authority (PCA) mandated to accept all complaints on misdemeanours and dispose them of within 180 days

Courts
It is the Indian judiciary, at the highest level, held up for its independence and as a panacea for deliverance against the overreach of the executive, that needs to come forward, boldly and unequivocally on the issue of the abolition of Torture and on Reparation for Victims and Accountability to the Perpetrators whether they belong to the police, paramilitary or armed forces. An unequivocal message from the higher judiciary to the lower echelons of this august institution could go a long way in inculcating an appreciation of how widely prevalent this practice is as also in operationalizing section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that statutorily requires inquiry/investigation into deaths in custody, given that these are in a vast majority of cases, deaths caused by torture.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court judgement that comprehensively looks and deals with torture and is a speaking testimony of what institutions must ensure for the perpetrators has been stayed and is pending before the Supreme Court. The hearing needs to be expedited.

Section 197 of the CRPC (except in cases related to monetary corruption) has been a persistent hurdle for victims and human rights defenders successfully prosecuting perpetrators of human rights abuses, including torture. Indian Courts needs to substantively assess the impact of this section that acts as statutory impunity for public servants, inserted under colonial rule but which no government has removed from the statute books.

State Governments

State Governments must enact State Laws banning Torture and enact State level Comprehensive and Statutory Schemes for the Reparation of Victims of Torture
State Governments must initiate a dialogue with the High Courts in respective states for the Legal Services Authority to set existing bodies up, a special cell within themselves to deal with the cases of torture. This includes that section 41, 41 D, which provides for competent lawyers to be provided for arrestees to be effectively ensured.
State Governments must ensure that the recent Maharashtra High Court judgment that directs that all police stations have CCTVs in all police stations is implemented effectively in all states.

NHRIS

the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) should without delay issue guidelines on the Prevention of Torture based on the minimum standard of APF. This would be in In keeping with their non-negotiable obligations to promote, propagate and implement international human rights law and standards, NHRIs, most especially
A 2010 NHRC Advisory to states against the speedy and effective implementation of the 2009-2010 amendment to section 176 of the CRPC (that ensured that the inquiry/I investigation into custodial deaths must be by a judicial magistrate) needs to be accessed, wily discussed and withdrawn. It is strange and shocking that the NHRC, obliged to prevent the abuse of basic human rights did issue such an advisory and the NHRC needs to assess this at the highest level.
The NHRIs, especially the NHRC must actively intervene through actions, statements and advisories to the executive, governments and Parliament to ensure that witness protection and rehabilitation of victims of torture happens in association with civil rights groups, women’s groups and non-governmental organisations.

Medical practitioners and Business professionals

Manufacture of torture tools should be banned.
Doctors, forensic officials must be accountable to medical councils and health directorates on the issue of Torture especially in assessing for the police, paramilitary and army the brutal effect of torture practices.

Law for Protection of Journalists and HRDs: Draft Circulated

June 27, 2016

Image: indianexpress.com

The 2-day Citizen’s Convention on Press, People & State concluded yesterday, june 26 with the finalisation of the ‘Draft Law’ for the Protection of Journalists & Human Rights Defenders, incorporating almost all the amendments suggested during the first day of the Convention by the participants ranging from lawyers, former judges, journalists, writers, leaders of various political parties and trade unions, social movements, people’s organisations, NGOs and Social Action Groups.

The Draft Law was finally released for public debate, providing space for receiving comments and suggestions from various concerned groups and individuals, before submitting it to the State government of Chhattisgarh through its Chief Minister as also to the Speaker of the State Assembly (Vidhan Sabha). The Draft Law would also be submitted to the Governor of Chhattisgarh, and the leader of the Opposition in Vidhan Sabha. Efforts are under way to introduce it in the forthcoming Monsoon Session of Vidhan Sabha on July 11, 2016.

The final draft was presented by advocate Sudha Bhardwaj, General Secretary, PUCL, Chhattisgarh, who has played a significant role in its drafting along with advocate Shalini Gere. A concerted campaign would now be carried out throughout the state by participating organisation to build a firm public opinion in its favour.

Remembering Emergency Rule in India ( 1975-77), the Chhattisgarh PUCL celebrated the hard earned Freedom of Press by Felicitating several journalists at this occasion with the "Nirbheek Patrakarita Samman " (Honour for Fearless Journalism) underlining their courage and commitment to free and fearless reporting in a rather hostile environment created by various repressive measures of the BJP Government in Chhattisgarh.

Those who were felicitated are:
Rajkumar Soni (Raipur), Uttam Kumar (Durg), Nitin Sinha (Raigarh), Devsharan Tiwari (Bastar), Pushpa Usendi Bakda (Beejapur), Malini Subramaniam (Jagdalpur), Dinesh Soni (Raipur), Sovjeet Bagchi (Kolkota), Anil Mishra (Raipur), Prabhat Singh (Bastar), Linga Ram Kodopi (Dantewada), Alok Putul (Raipur), Kranti Rawat (Udaypur) , Tameshwar Sinha (Raipur) and Deepak Jaiswal (Bastar).

The reality of repression of journalists who reported fearlessly against the un-constitutional and criminal activities of the state machinery, illegal activities by the corporate sector and communal organisations have been the focus of national debate; two of the journalists felicitated had been released on bail just a few days ago, and had joined the felicitations coming straight from prison: Prabhat Singh and Deepak Jaiswal.

Those who felicitated these journalist included: Sri Anand Swaroop Verma, senior journalist and Chief Editor of Samkaleen Teesri Duniya, New Delhi, Sri Anand Mishra, a well-known Socialist leader from Bilaspur, Sri Chittaranjan Bakshi, senior leader of the CPI, Sri Nand Kumar Kashyap, senior leader of CPI(M), Soni Sori of Aam Aadmi Party, Dr. Lakhan Singh, President, Chhattisgarh PUCL, Sri Arvind Netam, former cabinet minister, etc.

Earlier in the Session, Emergency Rule in India was remembered on its 41st Anniversary by Sri Anand Mishra, a MISA detainee, and many others drawing parallel to the present day reality of undeclared Emergency Rule in the country, being ruthlessly imposed by a criminal combine of Corporate-Fascist-Dictatorial regime, hitting at the very root of Secular-Democratic-Socialist Republic as enshrined in the Constitution of India.

A pledge to fight for the Freedom of the Press with vigour was taken by all present. Liberation songs and poetry against fear and repression also formed integral part of the day’s celebrations.

Prof Mahesh Guru Walks Free to Face Suspension from Mysore University

June 27, 2016

Is criticising Prime Minister Modi now a crime?

B.P. Mahesh Chandra Guru walked out of the jail late on the evening of June 24 after getting bail only to receive a suspension order from the Mysore University administration that cities his ‘criticism of Prime Minister of India, HRD Minister and Vice Chancellor in foul and derogatory language” as the reasons for the action against him. Inquiries made by SabrangIndia reveal that this is the matter before a judicial enquiry that is pending.

Here is a timeline of several campaigns, critical to the evolving Dalitbahujan discourse, that clearly appear to have irked organisations committed to a upper caste Hindu theocracy:
On June 17, a Mysore court had remanded Prof Guru in judicial custody in a one-and-a-half-year-old case. A Hindutva organization had lodged a complaint against Professor Guru on January 3, 2015 saying that he had “insulted Lord Ram”. Taking note of another old case, the court had turned down his bail application on June 20. That brought into limelight the earlier complaint against him by C.H. Ramu, vice-president of the SC Morcha of Karnataka BJP. He was accused of abusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Union Human Resources Development Minister Smriti Irani. According to media reports, it was a meeting of the university syndicate on June 21 that took a decision to suspend professor Guru.

The issue that is critical to the debate is whether, a professor and an academic who was present in court needed to be sent to jail. It is clear that a hegemonic and authoritarian regime at the centre is not able to tolerate the growing dissent from those sections of the Dalit Bahujan intellengentsia who stand clearly against the RSS’ aim of a Hindu thoercratic state. This is even as RSS makes all out attempts to co-opt both Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar and his followers, Dalits.

In the budget session of parliament, a big row kicked up by the Union Human Resources Development Minister over the so-called “insult of Goddess Durga” in Parliament.In Hyderabad, Prof Kancha Ilaiah was booked for “hurting the feelings of Hindus” and an attempt was made to arrest him. In Manpur town of Chhattisgarh, Vivek Kumar, central convener of All India Mulnivasi Central Sangh, was arrested after he posted a comment on Devi Durga on his Facebook wall. Hinduvadi miscreants had indulged in vandalism on the issue and called for a bandh. The police picked up Vivek Kumar saying it feared an eruption of violence. He was released on bail recently after a 70-day incarceration. And now has come the harassment of Prof Guru.

What are the cases against professor Guru?
A professor of media studies, professor Mahesh Guru has been part of many academic institutions and commissions in Karnataka besides being a well-known rationalist and social activist. He has been active on many fronts against both religious hypocrisy and what he has analysed as Brahmanical mythology. This has led to the registration of the three cases against him.

Recently, professor Guru, who describes himself as a protagonist of Bhim Raj, had criticised Ram (the Indian mythological character and God for many caste Hindus) while speaking on “Media and Human Rights” at a UGC-sponsored workshop for teachers in Mysore University on January 3, 2015. He had said, “The Ram of Ramayana had violated human rights. He suspected the fidelity of Sita, who was pregnant, and harassed her. I consider this a violation of human rights.” He had added, “The media was presenting Ram as an ideal character, which was not right for the people.” It was after this speech that Karnadu Sarvodaya Sena lodged an FIR against professor Guru. Incidentally, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar’s famed work, Riddles in Hinduism makes the same trenchant critique of Hindu mythology and beliefs.

Opposing the Gita
In February 2015, Professor Guru had participated in a programme organised by some social activists in which the Bhagwad Gita was to be burnt. On this occasion, he had said that the Gita sanctified the Varna (caste) system and was a “treatise of exploitation”. He had qualified this by saying that simply ignoring the scripture and not attaching any importance to it would be better than burning it, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) had a case of “hurting religious sentiments” registered against him and three other professors.The Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha (BJYM) also held a protest demonstration against Prof Guru, Prof Bhagwan, Prof Arvindamgatti and Prof Bangere Mahesh. It was when this case was brought to the court’s notice that it had refused bail to Prof Guru on July 20.

Statement against Modi and Smriti Irani
In January 2016, at a meeting organized to protest against those responsible for the suicide of Dalit research scholar Rohith Vemula, professor Guru described Narendra Modi and Smriti Irani as anti-Dalit and called upon the Dalit students to struggle for justice. He had also criticised India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. This had led to C.N. Ramu, a Dalit BJP leader, and then general secretary and the present vice-president of the BJP State SC Morcha, lodging a a complaint against him with Benguluru Police. Later Ramu claimed that that he had merely sent a written complaint against professor Guru to the police commissioner of Bengaluru and governor of the state and that he didn’t have a case filed against him. When asked why, despite being a Dalit, he was opposing the anti-Brahmanism campaigns of Guru and the professor’s efforts to secure justice for Dalit students, Ramu said, “Dalit intellectuals should not issue statements which spread animosity in society.”

Mahishasur Martyrdom Day celebrations
In 2015, Professor Guru organized the celebration of Mahishasur Martyrdom Day in Mysore. Describing Mahishasur as a Buddhist ruler, Guru told the gathering that Mysore was called Mahisha Mandala in the past and that he considered Mahishasur his ancestor. This had also antagonised organisations who are strong votaries of Hindutva. According to Prof Guru, “Mysore has also been referred to as Mahisha Mandala, Mahishuranadu, Mahishanadu and Mahishapura. A predominantly agrarian state, Mahisha Mandala had a large number of buffalos that were used for cultivation, dairy and other purposes. Hence, Mysore was also called Erumaiyuran, which means a land of buffalos. The Buddhist and Hoysala literatures contain a lot of information about Mahisha Mandala.”

It was this advocacy of Dalitbahujan traditions that has turned Hindutva organisations against professor Guru. After his release from jail, Dalitbahujan thinkers of Mysore held a big reception for him.

1...2,5202,5212,522...2,697 Page 2,521 of 2,697

Army Petitions Supreme Court to Close Kunan Poshpora Rape Case

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied: Six Victims of the Kunan Poshpora mass rape and torture case of 1991 have died

Why Bad News for One Muslim American is Bad News for All Muslims

The power of media

A few bad apples speak for the group

Reversing the trend

यूपी विधानसभा जांच समिति के समक्ष अपने किए स्टिंग का ही प्रमाण नहीं दे पाए दीपक शर्मा

Lessons Not Learned from Gujarat 2002

In June, 7 Drought-Hit States Short Of Water

Spare a Moment for the Victims of Torture

International Day in Solidarity with Victims of Torture, June 26

Law for Protection of Journalists and HRDs: Draft Circulated

Prof Mahesh Guru Walks Free to Face Suspension from Mysore University

Is criticising Prime Minister Modi now a crime?

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

JOIN OUR MAILING LIST

Important Links

Other Links

CONNECT