The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has, in a strongly worded statement, condemned the government of Rajasthan, Home Department, and the State jail authorities at all levels, for having not protected the life and liberty and giving a safe space to 22 year old Sajid, who was lodged in Bikaner Jail, u/s 308, IPC (attempt at culpable homicide).

In a statement issued by Bhanwar Meghwanshi, president, Rajasthan PUCL, Anant Bhatnagar, secretary and Pragnya Joshi, PUCL Rajasthan Jail Initiative Coordinator, the civil liberties platform has demanded comprehensive accountability from jail authorities.

Sajid was reportedly killed by a 40–45-year-old sec 302 convicted prisoner, Budhram, a patient of depression and had been put into a restricted access, special ward with 17 other prisoners, which included Sajid. Budhram picked up a stone slab covering a water drain in the barrack and smashed the head of Sajid in the early hours of  November 15.

This murder in Bikaner Jail should have sent shock waves in all the prisons of Rajasthan, with the 25,000 population of prisoners feeling extremely unsafe as such a murder is a serious compromise in the systems of safety and security put into place by the Bikaner Jail authorities and the state Jail authorities. Immediate counselling is needed for the prisoners who were in that Barrack and in the rest of the Jail says the PUCL statement.

Mental Health of Prisoners mostly neglected in Jails of Rajasthan

This incident clearly shows the failure of proper care of mentally disturbed patients by the Bikaner Prison authorities. This incident could have been avoided if proper medication and care protocols were taken care of. The PUCL through its jail monitoring work is aware that patients with depression or mentally disturbed ailments hardly undergo proper screening and medication.

It is well known that the jails of Rajasthan are mostly devoid of psychiatrists in the Jail hospitals, so was the case here. Our Jail for the last two decades or more in Rajasthan has shown that Patients are taken rather infrequently to the City hospital and their medication is also irregular.

What is shocking is that ten years ago in 2013 too, a mentally disturbed patient had killed  three prisoners, with almost the same tool, which was a brick.

Similarly in Jaipur jail in February 2019 a Pakistani prisoner was also stoned to death by inmates. 

What have the jail authorities learnt from these incidents which were serious lapses of safety protocols? Asks the statement.

Lack of sufficient staff due non appointments

This incident also shows the failure of the state to meet even the minimum standards of staffing in our state jails. The deficit in Bikaner at the constabulary level is 50 %, it is almost one constable manning two wards, making protection of prisoners, if fights broke out between prisoners practicably impossible. This, states the PUCL statement, is a serious lapse of the state in provisioning safety for prisoners. The total deficit in Rajasthan is 25 % of the required staff according to the NCRB data. Why are budgets of Jails not raised by governments?

Deaths due to Custodial violence in Rajasthan are high. According to a TOI news report,  in response to a question asked by the BJP MLA Satish Poonia, more than 159 prisoners had died in Jails in Rajasthan, ( 80 Prisoners died in 2021 and 79 in 2022). Of which magisterial enquiry into the death of only 52 prisoners had been completed till March 2023 under section 176 CrPC. Until now nobody has been charged with any breach in rules leading to death. Rajasthan has as many as 25,000 prisoners  in jails.

The PUCL demands

• a compensation of Rs 50 lakhs to the family of Sajid as he was killed for no crime of his doing.
• an independent enquiry of academics and other citizens, into this murder in Bikaner Jail so that all angles including the communal angle can be examined.
• the immediate appointments of psychiatrists and clinical psychologists in all jails including adherence to care protocols for all mentally disturbed prisoners.
• Immediate appointment of the deficit Jail Staff needs to be done and it should be a priority of the next Government.

The post Rajasthan: PUCL condemns killing of 22 year-old jailed prisoner, demands payment of Rs 50 lakhs compensation & independent inquiry into incident appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Addressing the issue of undertrial inmates languishing in jails even after having been granted bail, due to their failure to fulfill the conditions set in the bail order or for other reasons, the Supreme Court issued a number of guidelines to deal with the same. The guidelines are as follows:

“1)The Court which grants bail to an undertrial prisoner/convict would be required to send a soft copy of the bail order by e-mail to the prisoner through the Jail Superintendent on the same day or the next day. The Jail Superintendent would be required to enter the date of grant of bail in the e-prisons software [or any other software which is being used by the Prison Department].

2) If the accused is not released within a period of 7 days from the date of grant of bail, it would be the duty of the Superintendent of Jail to inform the Secretary, DLSA who may depute para legal volunteer or jail visiting advocate to interact with the prisoner and assist the prisoner in all ways possible for his release.

3) NIC would make attempts to create necessary fields in the e-prison software so that the date of grant of bail and date of release are entered by the Prison Department and in case the prisoner is not released within 7 days, then an automatic email can be sent to the Secretary, DLSA

4) The Secretary, DLSA with a view to find out the economic condition of the accused, may take help of the Probation Officers or the Para Legal Volunteers to prepare a report on the socio-economic conditions of the inmate which may be placed before the concerned Court with a request to relax the condition (s) of bail/surety.

5) In cases where the undertrial or convict requests that he can furnish bail bond or sureties once released, then in an appropriate case, the Court may consider granting temporary bail for a specified period to the accused so that he can furnish bail bond or sureties.

6) If the bail bonds are not furnished within one month from the date of grant bail, the concerned Court may suo-moto take up the case and consider whether the conditions of bail require modification/ relaxation.

7) One of the reasons which delays the release of the accused/ convict is the insistence upon local surety. It is suggested that in such cases, the courts may not impose the condition of local surety.”

Following discussions with ASG K. M. Nataraj, the three Amici Curiae, Advocates Gaurav Agrawal, Liz Mathew, and Devansh A. Mohta, presented extensive and comprehensive suggestions to the court. The above-mentioned directions are a part of the same, as has been reported by the LiveLaw.

The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka further stated in the ruling that the Government of India should negotiate with NALSA whether it would provide secured access to the e-prison portal to the Secretaries of the SLSAs and DLSAs, allowing for improved follow-up with jail authorities. ASG KM Nataraj informed the bench that giving permission would not be a problem, but that he would obtain instructions and report to the court on the next hearing date, as provided by the LiveLaw.

Previous directions given by the SC- Disposing cases through Plea Bargaining, Compounding of Offences and Probation of Offenders Act

In September 2022, the Supreme Court had issued the following guidelines for disposal of criminal cases by resorting to the triple method of plea bargaining, compounding of offences and under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

1. “As a pilot case, one Court each of Ld. Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ld. ACJM or CJM, and Court of Sessions in each district may be selected.

2. The said courts may identify cases pending at pre-trial stage, or evidence stage and where the accused is charge sheeted /charged with offence(s) with a maximum sentence of 7 years’ imprisonment. The Ld. Court would exclude cases mentioned in Section 265A Cr.P.C., namely offences notified by the Central Government vide notification dated 11.07.2006 or offences committed against women or child/ children less than 14 years.

3. The identified cases can thereafter be posted on a working Saturday or any other day which is suitable to the court with notice to the Public Prosecutor, complainant and the accused. The said notice would indicate that the court proposes to consider disposing of those cases under Chapter XXIA of Cr.P.C. plea bargaining, Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 or compounding i.e. Section 320 Cr.P.C. The notice will also indicate that the accused/complainant would be entitled to avail legal aid and details of the District Legal Services Authority would be made available in the said notice. It would also be made clear that the accused has to remain present with his/ her advocate and the complainant may also remain present with his/her advocate.

4. The Public Prosecutor would be required to ascertain the criminal antecedents of the accused. Only cases of first time offenders would be taken up.

5. On the date fixed, the court can inform the accused of the provisions of plea bargaining. The Court can also persuade the parties to compound the offence (if the offences are compoundable). The Court can also inform the accused of the benefits of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The services of panel lawyers from District Legal Services Authority would also be made available to the accused/ Complainant.

6. The Court may give time to the accused/complainant to think over the matter and give another date.

7. In cases where the under trial is in judicial custody, the trial court may explain to the accused and the learned counsel appearing for the accused to explore the possibility of plea bargaining or compounding or benefit of Probation of Offenders Act. The accused can be given time to consider the matter. The services of panel lawyers of District Legal Services Authority can also be made available. For this purpose, a list of such accused can be furnished to the Secretary, DLSA to depute the panel lawyers of sufficient seniority to explain the provisions to the accused, who are in custody.

8. It is suggested that a brief training session may also be organised for the Ld. Judicial Officers in the Judicial Academies.

9. A timeline of 4 months may be fixed to carry out this exercise namely:- i) Training of Judicial Officers & Identification of cases – 1 month ii) Notice to the parties – 1 month iii) Consideration of the matter – 2 months”

The above guidelines formed a part of the detailed and comprehensive suggestions submitted to court by the three Amici Curiae viz. Advocates Gaurav Agrawal, Liz Mathew and Devansh A. Mohta, after discussion with ASG K. M. Nataraj.

The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S. Oka had also observed that High Courts may depute a Nodal Officer of the rank of the Registrar in each of the Courts to carry out the monitoring of the above. It had added the following two caveats:

“(a) Instead of prescribing only one Court in each District, as specified in clause 3.1 above, we leave it to the administrative side of the High Court to prescribe such number of Courts as may be considered practical by each of the High Court.

(b) In matters where time bound schedule has been laid down by the High Courts or Supreme Court of India, that schedule should not be disturbed so as to avoid delay in those cases.”

The complete order can be read here.

Related:

Siddique Kappan to finally walk out of Jail!

Siddique Kappan directed to furnish 2 sureties of Rs 1 lakh each for Bail Proceedings under PMLA

1.9 lakh POCSO cases pending in Fast Track Courts: Ministry of Women and Child Development

UAPA: 11.7% rise in cases pending trial, shows MHA data

SC exists to protect personal liberty: CJI DY Chandrachud 

The post Directions issued by the SC to prevent Delay in Release of Prisoners appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a significant move batting for Right to Health of prisoners, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the state government to establish Primary Health Centres (PHC) in prison premises to maintain the health of prisoners. 

The bench of Justices Sheel Nagu and Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava made this observation while dealing with the request of a convict to extend his suspension of sentence so that he can get good medical care for his ailments. The court found that many such application were being filed before it for want of good medical facilities in prisons and it has thus vouched for better health care facilities in prisons while upholding the human rights of prisoners.

This is the fourth application filed by the appellant under section 389(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for grant of suspension of his sentence. He was convicted for murder in 2017. His sentences was suspended in June for 90 days and that period effectively ending on September 11, he was seeking extension of the same. His counsel argued that he was 65 years old and suffering from heart ailment that required further treatment. He submitted that continuous treatment and monitoring for his heart ailment is necessary which is not available in prison. He also stated that effective transport system for seriously ill patients (prisoners) from jail to hospital is also not available.

The court thus granted him the extension of another 90 days. However, the court also observed that many such applications were being filed mentioning grounds for medical treatment for releasing prisoners. The court observed that the ratio of doctors in prisons is very low. It also observed that primary healthcare facilities are not available in jail dispensaries and also secured transportation to hospital outside jail premises is not available.

The court has thus advised the state government to provide primary health services to the prisoners by keeping their records up-to date and to ensure that at least one primary health center should be established in jail campus having facilities to treat the ailments relating to heart, kidney, liver etc. The court has also asked the state to ensure that Specialist/Experts relating to aforesaid various ailments be provided in such primary health center to the prisoners.

The court also drew attention to the Supreme Court judgement in Parmanand Katara vs. Union of India & Ors.[AIR 1989 SC 2039] whereby, various directions have been given for the betterment of medical facilities in jail custody.

“Under the Constitution of India, role of judiciary in protecting the rights of the prisoners has been specified and judiciary has an obligation and a constitutional role to protect human rights of citizen as per the mandate of the Constitution. The prisoners are also human beings and their human rights are required to be safeguarded, as observed in the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar:[AIR 1979 SC 1369],” the court observed.

The court has sought a detailed report from the state on these lines and the matter has been listed for first week of October.

The complete order may be read here:

Prisoners and right to health

The Model Prison manual, 2016 released by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) enumerates rights of prisoners which includes health under ‘right to basic minimum needs’ which states that prisoners have “Right to fulfillment of basic minimum needs such as adequate diet, health, medical care and treatment, access to clean and adequate drinking water, access to clean and hygienic conditions of living accommodation, sanitation and personal hygiene, adequate clothing, bedding and other equipment.” Under the heading of “housing”, the manual states that “All accommodation provided for use of prisoners, particularly for sleeping, will meet basic requirements of healthy living.”

Under section 4.07.4, it puts the onus of medical care and health of prisoners on the medical personnel within prisons. It states that the medical personnel must “ensure the maintenance of minimum standards of hygienic conditions in the prison premises”. Medical care includes preventive care, curative care as well as general care with respect to admission in prison hospital. In Chapter VII titled “Medical Care”, the manual gives detailed guidelines on management of prison hospitals and what speciality of doctors should be available in such hospitals.

Under various sub-headings, the manual deals with the duties of the Chief Medical Officer which includes daily visits to prisons, attending to special needs of aged prisoners, treatment of drug addicts, control of diets and so on.

The complete analysis on Prisoners’ right to health may be read here.

Related:

Does India uphold Prisoners’ Right to Health?
Release Political Prisoners: CJP to Maharashtra CM
Right to health: Obligations of the State

The post MP High Court bats for prisoners’ right to health, calls for setting up PHCs in prisons appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Mansukh Mandaviya, the Minister of Health and Family Welfare, has provided state-wise details of prisoners vaccinated as on August 4, 2021. Only 22,345 prisoners have been fully vaccinated across all 37 states and Union Territories (UT). The Prison Statistics of India report released by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) in 2019 has revealed that a total of 4,78,600 prisoners have been confined in various jails across the country, as on December 31, 2019. Arguably, the number will be way higher taking into account all arrests made in the last one year.  

Out of the total 1,87,453 doses administered, only 1,65,108 prisoners have received their first shot. 15 states and UTs don’t have a single prisoner who is fully protected against Covid-19. They are-Andamans, Andhra Pradesh, Chandigarh, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu, Delhi, Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Ladakh, Lakshadweep, Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Puducherry and Tripura. Shockingly, the National Capital has only 2 prisoners who have received their first shot!

Madhya Pradesh has the highest number of prisoners who have been fully inoculated (as of August 4, 2021) at 2,826, followed by Uttar Pradesh (2,789), Rajasthan (2,368), and Gujarat (2,237). Uttar Pradesh (24,230) has the highest number of prisoners who have received their first dose, followed by Maharashtra (21,868) and Bihar (17,626).

Mandaviya’s answer also read, “Covid-19 vaccination is an ongoing and dynamic process, which is being guided by the National Expert Group on Vaccine Administration for Covid-19 (NEGVAC) on the basis of concurrent scientific evidence. It is expected that eligible beneficiaries aged 18 years and above, including prisoners, will be vaccinated by December 2021.”

Earlier during the budget session, the Home Affairs Ministry had failed to provide data about the number of prisoners who have tested positive for the virus and succumbed to it, reported SabrangIndia. Approximately 70 percent of Indian jails consist of undertrials, and despite orders from the Supreme Court to release inmates on interim bail to decongest prisons, a rough total of 1,92,125 undertrials have continued to languish in jails, against 1,38,416 inmates who have been released on parole/bail over the last one year.

The answer may be read here:

Related:

Almost 2 lakh undertrials languishing behind bars since the outbreak of Covid-19!
No data on number of prisoners testing Covid positive: MHA
Over 1.3 lakh illiterate, 1 lakh Dalit prisoners in India: Centre to RS

The post 4.7 lakh prisoners, but only over 22,000 fully vaccinated! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

After the High-Powered Committee submitted its recommendations, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has recently directed the release of all convicts and undertrial prisoners on interim bail of 90 days, who were asked to surrender this year after their release on interim bail last year, amid Covid-19.

A Division Bench of Justices C Praveen Kumar and Lalitha Kanneganti said, “Taking into consideration of the recommendations made by the High Power Committee in its meeting on 12.05.2021 and the order passed by the Division Bench, we not only direct the Principal Secretary, Home Department, to issue directions to the Director General of Police and to Station House Officers of State of Andhra Pradesh to scrupulously follow the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar referred to above while arresting offenders in relation to the offences punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend up to 7 years or less but also direct release on interim bail all convicts and undertrial prisoners who have been released on interim bail pursuant to resolution of the HPC on 26.03.2020 and 28.03.2020 and have been re admitted to the prison, unless otherwise they are disqualified.”

They have also directed the release of other convicts and undertrial prisoners who are in custody in connection with offences punishable for a term which may extend up to 7 years or less, and qualified for such release as per the resolutions of the HPC, except those who are either second time offenders or convicted or facing trial for the offence of rape.  

“We further direct that the interim bail granted pursuant to this order, shall be for a period of 90 days”, said the Bench. Further, the court held that an undertaking shall be taken before the release of the convict or undertrial prisoner that he/she shall remain in home quarantine, for a period of 14 days under the surveillance of a doctor or the Police, as the case may be, and in case of any violation, the interim bail granted will be cancelled.

The Bench has also requested the Principal Secretary, Home, and the Director General of Prisons to ensure adequate transport facilities to the convicts released, enabling them to return to their respective native places considering the Covid guidelines and the restrictions imposed on the movement by the Government.

The High Court has instructed the Director General of Prisons to upload the prison capacity and occupancy in all the jails in the State of Andhra Pradesh on the website of the Jail Department and to share the data with the Andhra Pradesh State Legal Services Authority (APSLSA) and such data shall also be uploaded on the websites of the APSLSA and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

The court has also kept the option open for prisoners who don’t want to be released fearing the virus. “In case of prisoners who are not willing to get themselves released, having regard to the social background and fear of becoming victims of virus, the jail authorities are directed to ensure that proper medical facilities are provided to all prisoners in case of them getting infected with covid”, noted the Bench.

These directions are to remain in force for the next 8 weeks and the matter will be heard after 6 weeks.

The order may be read here: 

Related:

Maharashtra: HPC directs re-release of prisoners amid Covid-19
SC orders re-release of prisoners from jail amid Covid-19 surge

The post Andhra Pradesh HC orders re-release of prisoners on Covid bail amid second wave appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Bombay High Court has observed that prisoners have a right to their medical records under right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The vacation bench of Justices SJ Kathawalla and SP Tavade said that medical records include test results, prescribed medicines and upon such request made by the prisoner, prison officials should provide the same.

This observation was made by the bench while hearing a petition filed seeking medical attention for lawyer and activist Sudha Bharadwaj, accused in the Bhima Koregaon case. The bench further stated that prisoners should be allowed to make a phone call to an approved family member after any hospital visit.

Advocate Yug Chaudhry informed the court that after filing the petition, Bharadwaj had received medical attention, and thus, was not pressing for interim bail. Bharadwaj’s daughter, Maaysha Singh had filed the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution stating that her 60 year old mother had diabetes, hypertension, ischemic heart disease and pulmonary tuberculosis history, and that 3 of her co-prisoners had tested positive Covid-19. The family had also raised grievance that they were not given access to Bharadwaj’s medical records and neither were they allowed to speak to her after hospital visits.

Chaudhry brought to the court’s notice that this situation was faced by all prisoners, and if medical records are provided on request, it would cut down litigation as well. While ASG Anil Singh appearing for NIA submitted that it was for the state government to take the decision, he said that such facility should be extended only to Bharadwaj and not all prisoners.

The court, however, ordered that Bharadwaj’s family be given access to her medical records and she be allowed a phone call with a family member after hospital visit and also observed that all prisoners were entitled to the same as it is part of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The order may be read here:

Related:

Father Stan Swamy to remain in Taloja jail till June 7
Transfer Hany Babu to Breach Candy hospital by tomorrow: Bombay High Court
Covid-19 a virtual death sentence, new persecution tool against Bhima-Koregaon accused

The post Prisoners have right to access medical records under Article 21: Bom HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

An order has been passed by the Supreme Court for all prisoners across the country who were released last year due to the pandemic and were subsequently asked to surrender in view of better conditions. They are now eligible for immediate release in view of the deadly second wave.

The Bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana has issued a slew of directions to decongest prisons in the matter In Re: Contagion of Covid-19 Virus in Prisons.

No arrest against the Arnesh Kumar Judgment

The Supreme Court has held that the Police will not make arrests against the guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar, which had held that arrests should be an exception in cases where the offences are punishable with less than 7 years imprisonment.

The court said, “This Court, being the sentinel on the qui vive (watchful guardian) of the fundamental rights, needs to strictly control and limit the authorities from arresting accused in contravention of guidelines laid down by this Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (supra) during pandemic.”

Instructions for High Powered Committees

The Bench also directed the HPCs constituted by the State Governments/Union Territories to consider the release of prisoners by adopting the guidelines followed by them last year, at the earliest. The States that have not constituted such committees were directed to do so at the earliest.

It also said, “Commissioner of Police, Delhi shall also be a member of the High Powered Committee, Delhi.”

It accepted the suggestion provided by Senior Counsel Colin Gonsalves to decongest prisons and held that the High­ Powered Committee, in addition to considering fresh release, should forthwith release all the inmates who had been released earlier pursuant to the Supreme Court’s order dated March 23, 2020, by imposing appropriate conditions.

The inmates who were released on parole due to Covid, have been directed to be out on temporary bail for minimum 90 days, pursuant to this said order.

Overcrowded Prisons

The court observed that currently, there are more than four lakh prisoners in India, and that prisons are overburdened beyond optimal capacity. It said, “we may notice that the requirement of de congestion is a matter concerning the health and right to life of both the prison inmates and the police personnel working. Reduction of impact of Covid-­19 requires this Court to effectively calibrate concerns of the criminal justice system, health hazards and rights of the accused. From limiting arrests to taking care of Covid­19 Patients, there is a requirement for effective management of pandemic from within the prison walls so as to defeat this deadly virus.”

The Supreme Court also ordered that information about prison occupancy should be uploaded on the website consistently. “..the fight against the pandemic is greatly benefitted by transparent administration. In this regard, our attention was drawn to an example of Delhi, wherein the prison occupancy is updated in websites. Such measures are required to be considered by other States and should be adopted as good practice. Moreover, all the decisions of High­ Powered Committees need to be published on respective State Legal Service Authorities /State Governments/High Courts websites in order to enable effective dissemination of information”, said the Bench.

Sanitisation

The Bench also directed that regular testing should be done in the prisons, for inmates and also the jail staff. “It is necessary to maintain levels of daily hygiene and sanitation required to be improved. Suitable precautions shall be taken to prevent the transmission of the deadly virus amongst the inmates of prisons”, ordered the court.

The Court also noted that some prisoners might not be willing to be released in view of their social background and the fear of becoming victims of the deadly virus. To this, the court said, “In such extraordinary cases, the authorities are directed to be considerate to the concerns of the inmates. The authorities are directed to ensure that proper medical facilities are provided to all prisoners who are imprisoned.”

The order may be read here:

Gauhati HC seeks data on number of children in prisons in Assam
Delhi HC directs tele calling, video calls, Covid vaccination for Tihar jail inmates
No prisoner to be denied vaccination for not registering on COWIN portal: Odisha HC
PIL in Delhi HC for release of prisoners on Covid bail

The post SC orders re-release of prisoners from jail amid Covid-19 surge appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Following Madhya Pradesh government’s silence over National Human Rights Commission’s (NHRC) recommendations for legal action against Bhopal Central jail authorities for alleged physical and mental torture of 28 prisoners allegedly from the banned outfit SIMI, the organisations demanded a response from Chief Secretary Iqbal Singh Bains within next six weeks, reported the Indian Express on April 13, 2021.

Two weeks after the NHRC’s letter, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) member Madhuri Krishnaswamy, Innocence Network’s human rights activists Wahid Shaikh and Fawaz Shaheen, and Coordination Committee for Indian Muslims member Masood Ahmed met Bains and Director General (Prisons) Arvind Kumar, to push for NHRC’s recommendations.

A three-member investigation team had written these recommendations after the NHRC conducted a spot inquiry to ascertain the veracity of the complaint made in May 2017, by Nazma Bi and nine other relatives of 21 undertrial prisoners. Victims’ kin alleged that they were subjected to constant torture after eight prisoners escaped in October 2016 and were subsequently killed in a police encounter the following day.

The team asked for legal action against jail authorities directly and indirectly involved in beating, torture, criminal intimidation and denial of basic human rights. The NHRC report also recommended action against the prison doctor Premendra Sharma, for failing to record injuries and the history of assault and torture incidents in prisoners’ medical tickets.

Further, the NHRC called for a high-level committee under a secretary rank officer to: address grievances of convicts; relax their solitary confinement to the extent possible, ensure adequate food, clothing, water, access to magazines, newspapers; ensure that prisoners are not forced to raise religious slogans.

Krishnaswamy pointed out that despite three years of waiting, the government remains reluctant to follow NHRC’s recommendations that only provide basic rights to convicts. In response, DG Kumar said the administration is “studying the jail administration’s response” and will respond to the letter in due time.

NHRC’s attention to the matter came after the DIG (Jails)’s claim in February 2021, that inmates were illegally demanding facilities such as uninterrupted movement in the campus, collective reading of namaz, individual newspapers. Seven inmates were on a hunger strike since September 2020 for these demands.

Meanwhile, family members like Haidar Hussain Nagori told the Indian Express how his brother Safdar Nagori was frisked 28 times at night and forced to chant “Jai Shree Ram” if he wanted food. Similarly, Kamaruddin Nagori’s brother talked about how his sibling lost 14 kg in the past 45 days. Further allegations claimed that prisoners are not given warm clothes even when sent from home. Farhad Khan’s brother, Arshad Khan claimed that the Holy Quran was frisked and checked twice a day and thrown on the ground. He further alleged that jail authorities tried to adopt ways to communally incite prisoners, who are subsequently beaten up.

The NHRC had detailed such events in its report but the City Central Jail’s SP denied all allegations. However, a later complaint by the Jamia teachers Solidarity Association stated that the torture intensified following the Commission’s visit.

The NHRC has asked the state government to probe the serious allegations and asked the Chief Secretary to submit an appropriate response.

Related:

Uttarakhand HC slams State for submitting ‘vague’ affidavit on prison conditions
Easter at Taloja Jail: Stan’s Cross
Punjab: Life convicts can avail remission under revised remission policy
Why is Natasha Narwal not allowed to register for PhD semesters at JNU?

The post NHRC asks MP Chief Secy Bains to report on the 28 tortured prisoners in six weeks appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) was questioned by Aparajita Sarangi of BJP, representing Bhubaneshwar, Orissa on how many prisoners contacted Covid-19 until now, and how many of them died due to it. The MoS, MHA G Kishan Reddy however, said it had no data on the same.

Sarangi also raised questions on overcrowding in prisons, and the number of undertrials in each state. The Ministry relied on the National Crime Records Bureau’s Prison Statistics Report of 2019 which showed that 21 out of 36 States and UTs had over-crowded prisons, meaning they housed more prisoners than they had the capacity for. Uttar Pradesh reported the highest overcrowding (167.9%) followed by Uttarakhand (159.0%), Meghalaya (157.4%), Madhya Pradesh (155.3%), Sikkim (153.8%), Maharashtra (152.7%) and Chhattisgarh (150.1%).

Data on undertrials was also presented from NCRB report which showed that as of 2019, there were over 3.3 lakh undertrials on a national scale; with Uttar Pradesh housing over 73,000 undertrials in its prisons.

The Supreme Court, on March 23, 2020 in one of its first Covid related orders, had directed all States and UTs to constitute a High Powered Committee to determine as to which class of prisoners can be released on parole or interim bail, for such period as may be thought appropriate by them.

The answer may be read here.

Related:

Orissa High Court directs state to pay Rs. 5 lakhs for negligence causing custodial death
Faizan police brutality case: Delhi HC directs police to file affidavit on working CCTV cameras
Joe Biden orders end of use of private prisons

The post No data on number of prisoners testing Covid positive: MHA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The release on November 6 of two Jordanian nationals, Heba al-Labadi and Abdul Rahman Mi’ri from Israeli prisons was a bittersweet moment. The pair were finally reunited with their families after harrowing experiences in Israel. Sadly, thousands of Palestinian prisoners are still denied their freedom, still subjected to all sorts of hardships at the hands of their Israeli jailers.

Despite the jubilant return of the two prisoners, celebrated in Jordan, Palestine and throughout the Arab world, several compelling questions remain unanswered: why were they held in the first place? Why were they released and what can their experience teach Palestinians under Israeli occupation?

Throughout the whole ordeal, Israel failed to produce any evidence to indict Labadi and Mi’ri for any wrongdoing. In fact, it was this lack of evidence that made Israel hold the two Jordanian nationals in Administrative Detention, without any judicial process whatsoever.

Oddly, days before the release of the two Jordanians, an official Israeli government statement praised the special relationship between Amman and Tel Aviv, describing it as “a cornerstone of stability in the Middle East”.

The reality is that the relationship between the two countries has hit rock bottom in recent years, especially following US President Donald Trump’s advent to the White House and the subsequent, systematic dismantling of the “peace process” by Trump and the Israeli government.

Not only did Washington and Tel Aviv demolish the region’s political status quo, one in which Jordan featured as a key player, top US diplomats also tried to barter with King Abdullah II so that Jordan would settle millions of Palestinian refugees in the country in exchange for large sums of money.

Jordan vehemently rejected US offers and attempts at isolating the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah.

On October 21, 2018, Jordan went even further, by rejecting an Israeli offer to renew a 25-year lease on two enclaves in the Jordan Valley, Al-Baqura and Al-Ghamar. The government’s decision was a response to protests by Jordanians and elected parliamentarians, who insist on Jordan’s complete sovereignty over all of its territories.

This particular issue goes back years. Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty in 1994. An additional annex in the treaty allowed Israel to lease part of the Jordan Valley for 25 years. A quarter of a century later, the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty failed to achieve any degree of meaningful normalization between both countries, especially as neighboring Palestine remains under Israeli occupation. The stumbling block of that coveted normalization was – and remains – the Jordanian people, who strongly rejected a renewed Israeli lease over Jordanian territories.

Israeli negotiators must have been surprised by Jordan’s refusal to accommodate Israeli interests. With the US removing itself, at least publicly, from the brewing conflict, Israel resorted to its typical bullying, by holding two Jordanians hostage, hoping to force the government to reconsider its decision regarding the Jordan Valley.

The Israeli strategy backfired. The arrest of Labadi – who started a hunger strike that lasted for over 40 days –  and Mi’ri, a cancer survivor, was a major PR disaster for Israel. Not only did the tactic fail to deliver any results, it further galvanized the Jordanian people, and government regarding the decision to reclaim Al-Baqura and al-Ghamar.

Labadi and Mi’ri were released on November 6. The following day, the Jordanian government informed Israel that its farmers will be banned from entering Al-Baqura area. This way, Jordan retrieved its citizens and its territories within the course of 24 hours.

Three main reasons allowed Jordan to prevail in its confrontation with Israel. First, the steadfastness of the prisoners themselves; second, the unity and mobilization of the Jordanian street, civil society organizations and elected legislators; and third, the Jordanian government responding positively to the unified voice of the street.

This compels the question: what is the Palestinian strategy regarding the nearly 5,000 Palestinian prisoners held unlawfully in Israel?

While the prisoners themselves continue to serve as a model of unity and courage, the other factors fundamental to any meaningful strategy aimed at releasing all Palestinian prisoners remain absent.

Although factionalism continues to undermine the Palestinian fight for freedom, prisoners are fighting the same common enemy. The famed “National Conciliation Document”, composed by the unified leadership of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails in 2006, is considered the most articulate vision for Palestinian unity and liberation.

For ordinary Palestinians, the prisoners remain an emotive subject, but political disunity is making it nearly impossible for the energies of the Palestinian street to be harnessed in a politically meaningful way. Despite much lip service paid to freeing the prisoners, efforts aimed at achieving this goal are hopelessly splintered and agonizingly factionalized.

As for the Palestinian leadership, the strategy championed by Palestinian Authority leader, Mahmoud Abbas, is more focused on propping up Abbas’ own image than alleviating the suffering of the prisoners and their families. Brazenly, Abbas exploits the emotional aspect of the prisoners’ tragedy to gain political capital, while punishing the families of Palestinian prisoners in order to pursue his own self-serving political agenda.

“Even if I had only one penny, I would’ve given it to the families of the martyrs, prisoners and heroes,” Abbas said in a theatrical way during his United Nations General Assembly speech last September.

Abbas, of course, has more than one penny. In fact, he has withheld badly needed funds from the families of the “martyrs, prisoners and heroes.” On April 2018, Abbas cut the salaries of government employees in Gaza, along with the money received by the families of Gaza prisoners held inside Israeli jails.

Heba al-Labadi and Abdul Rahman Mi’ri were released because of their own resolve, coupled with strong solidarity exhibited by ordinary Jordanians. These two factors allowed the Jordanian government to publicly challenge Israel, leading to the unconditional release of the two Jordanian prisoners.

Meanwhile, thousands of Palestinian prisoners, including 500 administrative detainees continue to languish in Israeli prisons. Without united and sustained popular, non-factional mobilization, along with the full backing of the Palestinian leadership, the prisoners are likely to carry on with their fight, alone and unaided.

Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of The Palestine Chronicle. His last book is The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story (Pluto Press, London) and his forthcoming book is These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons (Clarity Press, Atlanta). Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA), Istanbul Zaim University (IZU). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net.

Courtesy: countercurrents.org

The post A Lesson for the Palestinian Leadership: Real Reasons behind Israel’s Arrest and Release of Labadi, Mi’ri appeared first on SabrangIndia.