Representation Image
The unilateral extension of jurisdiction of the Border Security Force (BSF) in the border areas of states like West Bengal and Punjab, and without any consultation with the state governments, has yet again created a conflict scenario between the Centre and the states, with both governments opposing it vehemently. In West Bengal there have been widespread protests, including in Kolkata, and Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has openly raised the question in public spaces and in a meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Delhi recently. So much so, in a visit to the border area of Dinajpur, Banerjee called up the police to take strong action against any arbitrary action by the central para-military forces, even as locals, including farmers whose land are located in buffer zones in all the border areas, including in North Bengal, cite cases of arbitrary behaviour of the BSF.
Indeed, the killing of people, including Bangladeshis, allegedly branded as infiltrators or cow smugglers in the border areas have led to protests in Kolkata and the rest of Bengal. Filmmakers, actors, Left and civil society groups, held meetings at College Street and press meets at the Press Club of Calcutta, against the brutality.
Human rights activists argue that even while Bangladesh is a friendly country, with absolutely no history of animosity, and while people across the border share bonhomie and brotherhood besides a shared cultural and social history, then, what is the need to have such huge barbed wire borders with para military forces getting powers across 50 km in federal territory? They point out that undoubtedly there is a communal angle behind his enforced polarisation, even while there is huge resentment in Bangladesh against the continuous diatribe against infiltrators by BJP politicians, including the use of language such as ‘termites’ earlier by the Union Home Minister, Amit Shah, condemning legitimate citizens of India, even while the communal and anti-Constitutional Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) was vehemently opposed in Assam and the whole of Northeast, and the rest of India.
On December, 2021, civil society organisations came together to hold protests across the districts in Bengal and in Kolkata, and submitted deputations at regional centres of the BSF to protest the unilateral decision of the union home ministry to increase the jurisdiction of the paramilitary force. On the occasion of the 57th Raising Day of the BSF, Paschim Banga Khet Majoor Samity (PBKMS) and other organisations submitted deputations under the banner ‘Amra Simantabasi’ (We, the border people) at their regional centres in districts across West Bengal. In Kolkata, a protest march from Minto Park culminated at the paramilitary force’s Eastern Command headquarters with the submission of a petition to the commanding officer.
The union ministry on October 11, 2021 brought out a notification proclaiming an amendment of a 2014 notification to extend the jurisdiction of the BSF to 50 km inside Indian territory in the international border in Punjab, West Bengal and Assam. The paramilitary force will now be able to conduct search, seizure and arrest in an area of up to 50 km inside Indian territory which will be similar to the imposition of martial law on a large number of residents, according to human rights activists.
“We condemn the unilateral decision of the central government to infringe upon the subject of law and order which is an exclusive domain of the state government. The political leadership also did not feel the need to initiate a dialogue with the opposition as well as the civil society to discuss the need for bringing out the notification,” said the organisations.
People in the border areas have routinely complained about the alleged “high-handedness” of the BSF personnel time and again and civil society groups have brought out reported incidents of violation of human rights ranging from illegal detention to torture and violation of dignity of women. Many such cases have been widely covered in the media Bengal.
The human rights groups are therefore demanding that the paramilitary force should remain at the international border and not disrupt the normal lives of the people. The continuous presence of armed personnel in villages should be avoided. All complaints on violation of human rights by the paramilitary force should be impartially probed. As ordered by the Supreme Court of India in the Anuradha Bhasin case, Section 144 should cease to be continuously in force in the border areas. The notification of the union home ministry on the new jurisdiction of the paramilitary force should be revoked immediately. Often, the land and ponds of the farming community fall on the other side of the barbed wires. They should be allowed access to them from 6am to 6 pm. The paramilitary force should adhere to its constitutional limits and uphold the fundamental rights of the population residing in the border areas, especially the provisions of Article 14 (right to equality), Article 19 (freedom of movement in Indian territory) and Article 21 (right to life).
The organisations which stand in solidarity with these demands include Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Manch (Masum), Members of Right to Food Network, West Bengal, Shramajivee Mahila Samity, among others.
In an incident which created outrage in Bengal, three persons were killed in alleged firing by the BSF in December at a village along the India-Bangladesh frontier in Cooch Behar district. The dead were reportedly accused as cattle rustlers. The firing took place at Satbhandari village near the West Chamta border outpost in the early hours between 3 A.M and 4 A.M, according to police. The village on the border is near Sitai police station in Cooch Behar.
Sumit Kumar, the district police chief, said BSF personnel posted at the West Chamta border outpost noticed movements along the international border. The personnel challenged the men but were allegedly confronted by around 50 cattle smugglers, according to Kumar’s version, as reported to him by BSF officers. He said they attacked the BSF personnel with bricks and machetes, prompting the BSF to open fire. BSF sources said the force had no option but to fire, according to reports.
“Two bodies were found lying on the Bangladesh side of the border fence. They seemed to have been hit by bullets. They are reportedly Bangladeshi nationals. Their identities are yet to be established,” Kumar said. Another body was found in a village on the Indian side of the border. “Based on the preliminary investigation, we can say that all three have died in the course of the same incident,” the Cooch Behar police chief said.
The Indian who has died has been identified as Prakash Barman, 35, a resident of Chamta village. Chamta is around 1km from the firing spot. He was hit by a bullet in the head. Prakash’s family and neighbours said that he was a ‘dangowal’, a cowherd, and was not involved in cattle rustling.
“Some people had come to his house last night and he had gone out with them. Today morning, his family members came to know that his body had been found. We fail to understand why the BSF shot him in the head? Also, if he had gone to the border, why was his body found in Chamta, which is 1km from the fence?” asked a neighbour. Prakash is survived by his parents and wife.
Jagadish Barma Basunia, the Trinamul MLA of Sitai, has openly voiced his dissent. “The victim was a daily-wage earner and he used to also work as a cowherd at times… We want a complete investigation to know how he died. There have been earlier instances of BSF personnel entering villages that are not on the border and resorting to similar atrocities. The district police should find out the truth,” he said.
Trinamool Congress MLA from Dinhata, Udayan Guha, said, “The Centre should control the BSF, otherwise, terrible things will happen any time. I have been a witness to BSF atrocities since I was young. They continue to torture people who stay in the border area. The BSF cannot kill anyone under any circumstances. This is why we had voiced our opposition to enhancing the jurisdiction of the BSF.” Guha added, “The BSF also covers the river bank. It is their duty to stop smuggling. They patrol the area 24×7. How can someone cut the fence without their help? If our first line of defence is weak, how will the country be protected?”
He made the remarks even as Union Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla, state Chief Secretary Harikrishna Dwivedi and Bengal Home Secretary Bhagwati Prasad Gopalika had then met to discuss border-related issues. “Why did Prakash Barman die after being shot in the head? Smuggling at the border is not possible without the help of the BSF. I am the MLA of the border area. I know the problems of the people there,” the MLA told reporters at a press conference.
“I met Prime Minister Narendra Modi today over a number of state-related issues. We also spoke on the BSF’s jurisdiction extension issue and demanded that this decision be withdrawn,” Mamata Banerjee was quoted by a news agency after her meeting with Modi recently in Delhi.
Indeed, the West Bengal Assembly has passed a resolution against the Centre’s decision to extend BSF’s jurisdiction, amid opposition by BJP legislators. With outrage all over the state, a weak, divided and depleted BJP finds itself yet again on a sticky wicket. West Bengal and Punjab have passed similar resolutions on the issue.
The resolution in Bengal stated that the new BSF jurisdiction was against the country’s federal structure, as law and order is a state subject. The notification exceeded the provision of the BSF Act and would lead to coordination issues between the state police and the BSF.
“We demand that this decision be withdrawn immediately as enhancing the area of jurisdiction of the BSF is a direct attack on the country’s federal structure… We have nothing against the BSF as a force, there are many good officers, but at the same time, there are others who torture people residing near the border. This is an attempt by the Centre to control a portion of the state,” senior minister Partha Chatterjee said. Chatterjee also pointed out that if the BSF is not able to stop infiltration and illegal activities within the 15 km range, as earlier, how is it possible that it will “succeed in doing it within 50 kilometres.” He further said on the floor of the House, “We have seen the kind of atrocities that BSF perpetrates on people. A child who has witnessed his mother being touched inappropriately under the garb of frisking, when she returns from the field, can never be patriotic, no matter how many times you chant ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ in front of him. These incidents give birth to anti-social elements.”
In October this year, Masum had written to the NHRC chairman about “an incident of abduction and killing of a poor, marginalised, innocent villager from Char Rajapur Paschim Colony village under Raninagar police station area in Murshidabad district of West Bengal. The victim was doing some agrarian work in his own field located in a ‘char’ (alluvial plain on a river) across the border fencing, about 1 km from the Indo-Bangladesh border inside Indian territory when he was taken by the Border Guard of Bangladesh (BGB). The next day his dead body was seen floating in the river with handcuffs on his hand”.
The agricultural land in which he was working is located inside Indian territory but outside the fencing, the letter said. According to locals, there were other villagers working in the fields nearby when the BGB personnel came into Indian territory and abducted the victim, but they managed to escape. The incident raises questions on the safety and security of Indian citizens along the border.
In another petition to the NHRC, the human rights organisation working for decades in the border areas, has pointed another case of “brutal torture by the BSF personnel attached with Khagribari BSF Border Outpost, Battalion no. 169, on an innocent marginalised Scheduled Caste person from Satgram Manabari village of Mathabhanga-I Block and Mathabhanga police station area of Cooch Behar district in West Bengal”. Sarada Barman, the victim, was severely injured and taken to the Mathabhanga Sub-Divisional Hospital. A complaint was lodged regarding the incident on October 10, 2021.
According to Masum, Sarada Barman, a mason, sustains a family of 7 with his meagre income. His house is located near the Khagribari BSF camp. On October 24, 2021, at around 7:30 pm, he, along with his wife and younger son were sitting in their courtyard. A few BSF personnel posted near the fencing put torch lights on them. Barman, from his courtyard, asked them why they were doing so? A BSF constable, Biswajit Prakash, came to Barman’s courtyard in a motorcycle and started beating him with his baton. Barman was brutally beaten up on his forehead, ears, back, waist and fingers and suffered critical injuries. The perpetrator then pushed Barman in a pond beside his courtyard. As Barman screamed in pain, few neighbours came and helped him. Nalini Ranjan Roy, a neighbour, informed that it is a regular practice of the BSF to put torchlight on the women of the village, whenever they are seen after dark, said Masum.
Kirity Roy, Secretary, Masum, has demanded that the BSF should be posted in actual borders and not inside villages, the whole incident must be investigated by a neutral agency appointed by the commission, the guilty personnel involved must be booked and prosecuted and security and safety of the victim must be protected. Similar incidents of brutality has been reported in the local areas over the years and in recent times, including atrocities on women.
In a meeting in Kolkata, several eminent people came out against the new BSF jurisdiction. Justice Samaresh Banerjee, former judge of the Calcutta High Court, spoke about the legal aspect on the border issues. He described Article 21 of the Indian Constitution and stated that any other authority of India do not have any right to kill anyone in the name of national security. He proposed that a detailed list of the victims of torture should be drafted.
Mental health worker, Mohit Ranadip, highlighted the mental breakdown of the victims of sexual, emotional and physical torture. He constantly communicates with people in the villages in the border areas, and finds that it seems like an eternal saga of siege. Sujato Bhadra from APDR stated that it is the responsibility of the government to ensure the protection of life and liberty of each and every citizen. The government should take the initiative to organize training on human rights for police, BSF, military force personnel. He suggested forming a monitoring committee to deal with the unlawful activities of the security force.
Kartik Pal from CPI(ML) Liberation spoke about the continuous implementation of Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code for an extended period of time in the border areas, disturbing the daily life of the villagers. Academic Bolan Gangopadhyay said that as a human rights activist she has visited different erstwhile enclaves. She wrote the story of misery of the residents in leading newspapers. She suggested creating pressure on the state government to shed light on the issue of killings.
In recent five years, according to Masum, there have a total of 240 cases of BSF torture, 60 cases of extra-judicial execution by BSF and 8 cases of disappearance among which in 33 cases in which the NHRC has recommended compensation to the victims or their next of kin. If the BSF jurisdiction is increased, arbitrary detention, illegal arrest etc, will become more frequent.
Related:
Why did MHA extend BSF jurisdiction in Punjab and WB?