India ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: L'Inde

By Praful Bidwai, 09 August, 2006, Frontline

A crass and hysterical nationalism is taking hold among a section of the Indian middle class in response to the Mumbai blasts. This nationalism is paranoid. It considers India uniquely vulnerable to terrorism because its state is exceptionally soft, pusillanimous and "cowardly". At the same time, it wants a militant response - armed attacks on Pakistan. Its votaries say it is not enough just to suspend India-Pakistan talks; India must teach Pakistan "a lesson". Some advocates of this view have strong sympathies for Hindutva and harp on the "timidity of Hindus", a phrase the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) fondly uses to explain why India has been repeatedly subjugated by "aggressors". But even if the communal element is excised from this view, its essential content remains unaltered. It advocates a particular model unfolding before our eyes - namely, Israel's aggression in Gaza and Lebanon, after the arrest of one-third of the Palestinian Authority's Cabinet. India would be "effete", unlike Israel, if it fails to respond to threats to its security with all-out punitive attacks.

This view was encouraged by the state's confused initial response to the Mumbai blasts. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's address to the nation did not reflect the gravity of the destruction in Mumbai, which is of the same order as Madrid 2004, the world's worst recent terrorist incident, next only to 9/11. In a recent English-language television programme in which I participated, the anchor asked whether India should follow Israel's example. While the participants argued against this on differing grounds, 94 per cent of the audience agreed with the proposition through email and SMS responses. In keeping with such extreme opinions, the government hardened its stand and cancelled the Foreign Secretary-level meeting, issued belligerent statements, rounded up hundreds of Muslims, and mindlessly banned access to blogs on the Internet.

It is of vital importance that we view the Mumbai blasts in perspective and formulate a rational response that defends the interests and security of the Indian people. To start with, it is not at all clear that the attacks exposed India's "exceptional" vulnerability. A similar attack could well have occurred on suburban trains in Paris, New York, Moscow or London and produced similar damage. True, the Mumbai suburban rail system is even more crowded than the New York subway. But it is nearly impossible to prevent such attacks altogether. Beyond a point, no state can anticipate such events, screen passengers, check all unattended baggage, and so on. The very pace of metropolitan life makes such checks impracticable.

India lags behind in quickness of response, in sounding warnings and providing emergency services. We have failed to create the infrastructure necessary to deal with mishaps such as train coaches falling on tracks, which need to be quickly cleared, and so on. There is a strong case for installing inexpensive closed-circuit television cameras at important transport hubs. But this is not a watertight guarantee that terrorist attacks will never occur. No state, however powerful, especially a democratic one, can provide 100 per cent security or guarantee absence of violence. It can take precautionary measures, be more vigilant, and improve police efficiency and procedures. That is where India fails badly.

Secondly, the response of the Mumbai and railway police was tardy and meagre. Citizens themselves had to rush victims to hospitals and arrange for blood much before the state acted. There was public anger that the state was not doing enough or being responsive. This grievance is legitimate.

However, a rational long-term response to terrorist violence can only be based on systematic investigation to establish the identity of the culprits, their motives, and their internal and external links. Only thus can a responsible government conclude that the terrorists received encouragement or help from abroad - in the present case, Pakistan. But senior officials, including National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan, rushed to judgment and selectively briefed the media alleging that the Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Students Islamic Movement of India and other organisations allegedly supported by Pakistani clandestine agencies were involved. Most national newspapers duly echoed such views based upon mere guesswork and speculation.

The assessment that Pakistan was behind the Mumbai attacks is open to doubt on two grounds. In the past too, similar allegations were made. Yet, in no major case have the culprits' identity or links with Pakistan been fully established and convictions secured (an exception being the Parliament building attack case, now under appeal). Accusations about their links with "sleeper cells", or agencies operating through Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal remain unsupported under Indian laws of evidence.

The second reason pertains to recent developments in Pakistan and in India-Pakistan relations. General Musharraf is under tremendous pressure from the U.S., other Western powers and China to demonstrate that he will take on jehadi groups and comply with the anti-terrorist commitments he made in 2004. It is hard to believe, at this point in the evolution of the India-Pakistan dialogue, that it makes sense for Pakistani agencies to risk wrecking the dialogue process by encouraging or instigating gross violence such as the Mumbai bombings.

It is possible that some "rogue elements" of the Inter-Services Intelligence could have done this. But the central issue is Manmohan Singh's assessment that the sheer scale of the attack points to external involvement. Any number of Indian groups with no live contact with foreign agencies is capable of getting hold of explosives and planting them. Such groups learn by watching others in different parts of the world. Enough hatreds and injustices exist in Indian society, which can explain the kind of ideological pathologies that encourage them to visit violence on innocent civilians. It is a terrible, very sick, pathology. But such groups exist.

India has a huge amount to gain from the peace process with Pakistan. It would be foolhardy to make it a hostage to speculation about Pakistani involvement in terrorist violence. In any cultural, economic or social interaction, India stands to gain more than Pakistan. Apart from launching bus and train services, India has received an assurance from Musharraf that the Kashmir issue would be discussed on condition that there can be no redrawing of boundaries. The more we blame Pakistan, the more obsessively we look for "the foreign hand", the farther we get from the task of looking inwards, to examine what is wrong with our police, intelligence agencies and criminal justice system so that we can address some of the cesspool of grievances in which violence and extremist ideologies flourish.

The "hit-Pakistan-teach-Pakistan-a-lesson" clamour is a complete negation of any reasonable, balanced, mature and sober approach to the Mumbai blasts - just as was the 10-month-long military mobilisation after the Parliament building attack, which achieved nothing. What gives the demand a dangerous edge is the advocacy of Israel-style militaristic approaches. Its proponents admire Israel for unleashing high levels of violence upon its adversaries when threatened. But, to start with, Israel is not a state that respects international law. It has the longest history in the world of violation of Security Council resolutions, such as 242 and 338, as well as the World Court judgment on the apartheid wall. India cannot and should not emulate it. This will encourage terrible lawlessness and violence in our own neighbourhood.

Secondly, what Israel is now doing is illegal, immoral and politically disastrous. The roots of the current conflict go back to Israel's recent liquidation of Abu Jamal Samhanada, newly appointed security-chief of the Interior Ministry of the Palestinian Authority. This was calculated, as many past Israeli actions, to provoke. It brought on retaliatory attacks from pro-Hamas militants with crude home-made Qassam rockets which inflicted minimal damage. In response, Israel launched devastating attacks on civilians, including a picnicking family of eight. The ensuing violence eventually led to the killing of two Israeli soldiers and the capture of one.

Under international law, it is perfectly legitimate for people under occupation to militarily target occupying military personnel, although not to abduct them. But Israel has itself practised abduction and kidnappings and made hostage-prisoner swaps, as in 1968, 1983, 1985 and 2004. In June, it took one-third of the Palestinian Cabinet hostage. It escalated its attack on Hamas with a view to destroying its entire military infrastructure. Israeli troops cut off Gaza's water and power supply and inflicted collective punishment on civilians who were in no way responsible for the earlier attacks or abduction. Cutting off electricity means cutting off refrigeration - and people's food supplies.

Israel has since invaded Lebanon, in response to a Hizbollah raid on its forces. One need not justify Hizbollah's actions to note the sheer disproportion of the violence Israel unleashed on civilians. More than 380 were killed in 10 days. The number of Israeli casualties is not even one-tenth this number. Israel targeted civilian installations in Beirut and devastated its infrastructure. Israel hopes to weaken decisively the Hizbollah militarily and further the objective of establishing a Greater Israel, which annexes large parts of the West Bank.

This objective can only be achieved if Israel destroys all regional challenges and unilaterally draws - for the first time ever - its national boundaries after dividing up Palestinian territory into a series of Bantustans through the apartheid wall. To do this, it must claim that there is no Palestinian agency with which it can negotiate. Israel's withdrawal from Gaza even while continuing with the colonisation of the West Bank must be seen in this perspective. To these ends, Israel has inflicted cruel forms of collective punishment, as well as large-scale violence, upon non-combatant civilians. Collective punishment is impermissible under international law, as are sieges of cities, which starve them of food and water - the state of Beirut today after 15 years of recovery and revival as one of West Asia's liveliest cities. Israel's unconscionable military offensive is an act of international brigandage linked to expansionism. Those who want India to emulate Israel assign the most obnoxious motives and purposes to our state. Obviously, they see nothing wrong with expansionism, aggression, occupation, disproportionate force, hostage-taking and outright assassination of suspects - actions that are punishable under international law.

India is being asked to follow Israel's bellicose, lawless and brigand-like conduct on the presumption that "shock-and-awe" methods, although excessive, disproportionate and immoral, successfully deter future terrorist attacks. However, this presumption has been repeatedly falsified. Israel's coercion has failed to deter adversaries or generate security for Israeli citizens. In fact, the moral force of the first Intifada derived from the determination that Palestinian youth showed when fighting the mighty Israeli military with nothing more than stones.

Israel is one of the world's most militarised societies: more than 576,000 of its 6.5 million people serve in its armed forces. The country probably has the world's highest density of surveillance equipment such as X-ray machines, closed-circuit cameras and explosive detectors. And yet, suicide-bombers infiltrate populated high-security areas and kill. Such is the deep sense of injustice, injury, insult and resentment that Israel's excesses have created among its neighbours; that its own citizens cannot remotely hope to become secure in the absence of a just settlement of the Palestinian question.

It should be demeaning for India even to think of following a model based on devotion to violence and cultivation of hatred and prejudice. It is a sign of the moral and political degeneration of the Indian elite that it has stooped to clamour for attacks on Pakistan, without even establishing its complicity in the Mumbai carnage.

It is incumbent upon all those who value sanity, sobriety and principle in public life to counter such crass and extreme militarist nationalism. Such extremism is the stuff of fascism.

Copyright © 2006, Frontline.

C.R .Shridhar

The Ruling elite of our nation is in the grip of delusions of grandeur. The GDP growth rate of 8% is trotted out as a sign that India is on the threshold of becoming an economic superpower. A bright future awaits India with its revitalized economic policy of liberalization, privatization and an open door policy of attracting foreign capital. A new animal energy is infusing corporate India, which is headed for gigantic growth propelled by innovation and its ability to create anything from nanoparticles to giant rockets. It appears that India's tryst with destiny is unstoppable.

To the less gullible, the picture appears less rosy as India is in the throes of a shocking agrarian crisis fuelled by falling returns from agriculture coupled with debt and crop failure. More disturbing is the violence that the State inflicts on its citizens through encounter killings, police torture and custodial deaths.

Though the Left party has questioned the gains of the new economic policy formulated by the UPA government, there appears to be very little concern about gross human rights violations, which occur throughout the country. While there have been impassioned debates for the Washington consensus favouring MNC's in the media, there has been at best a token concern for the marginalized poor facing police brutality on a day to day basis. There is deafening silence in our media about the fact that though India has signed the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), there has been no ratification on the pretext that existing laws have adequate provisions to prevent torture, in addition to constitutional safeguards.

Respect for human rights is the sine qua non of any civilized society and the disrespect for human rights is inimical to civil liberties granted to its citizens by the state. By this standard, the Indian State lamentably fails and is a cause for concern for those who value civil liberties. The prevalence of torture and other human rights violations occurs both in communist and non-communist states in India. Both the states of West Bengal and Kerala have witnessed police brutality even with the Left parties in power.

The Amnesty International in its report dated 10-08-2001 about torture in West Bengal observed, "Police are being urged to use whatever means necessary to deal with crime and are often allowed to use torture as a substitute for investigations, while action is rarely taken against the perpetrators. This system of policing is having little if any impact on crime." CPI (M) leader Benoy Konar, defending police brutality once said, "It must be viewed whether police is carrying out torture with a correct aim or an incorrect aim...In a class divided society, the police has the duty of carrying out repression.... You [journalists] have the pen in your hands, the police has the stick." Hence, it would be a mistake to view human rights abuse from an ideological perspective.

The wide prevalence of encounter deaths or extra-judicial killings at the hands of the police has been documented by human rights organizations and remains a part of our dark history in post independent India. A study conducted by the Asia Pacific Human Rights Network noted that encounter killings were not isolated incidents but occurred throughout India. They are part of a "deliberate and conscious state administrative practice" for which successive Indian governments must bear responsibility. Indeed, successive Indian governments have adopted a de facto policy sanctioning extra-judicial killings by members of the police forces, army and security personnel.

The most horrific examples include the operations against Naxalite movements in West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh and the operations against Punjab extremists. Tamil Nadu and Kerala committed the excesses of encounter killing during the days of Emergency. The Vimadlal Commission took the lid off so-called encounters in Andhra Pradesh during the mid-1970s. Uttar Pradesh is noted for it's encounter deaths and this has assumed alarming proportions in recent times. The paramilitary operations in Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur and Assam cause grave concern as human rights activists report wide spread instances of encounter killings, rape and torture of militant suspects.

The complicity of State and Central governments in encounter killings could be gleaned by the fact that they do not vigorously conduct prosecution of the guilty nor is the investigation thorough to bring the guilty to book. The National Human Rights Commission has not proved very effective in checking encounter killings, as it's recommendations are not implemented by the State and Central governments. The guidelines issued by the NHRC in matters regarding encounter killings are rarely followed. The long delays in courts in prosecuting the guilty police personnel creates a climate of impunity for such crimes to flourish. The governments also reward policemen or paramilitary personnel, which actually encourage encounter killing. The compensation paid to the surviving members of the victims murdered by the police personnel remains a pittance.

The use of torture and third degree methods against suspects in police lockups remains standard operating procedure in post-Independence India. Human Rights organizations note that torture is used against secessionist groups, against suspects belonging to the poorer sections of our society for extracting confessions and bribes and also used as extra-legal punishment (teach you a lesson).

In areas such as Jammu & Kashmir, there exist a number of detention cells where militant suspects are beaten and electric torture is meted out as routine punishment and to extract confessions or information. The methods of torture vary. For instance, in Assam, Jammu & Kashmir and Punjab (particularly in areas where the Punjab police or Punjab paramilitary units operate) dislocation of ball and socket of the suspect appears to be the preferred mode of torture. Sometimes the choice is more eclectic with a judicious combination of aeroplane treatment (tying the hands of the suspect behind his back and suspending him over a beam, leading to shoulder dislocation), electric torture with cattle prod and roller treatment (crushing the muscles of the suspect with a wooden log being rolled on his leg). Of course, beating of suspects with belts and lathis is standard fare in most police lockups. Human Rights groups have recorded cases involving rape and sexual humiliation of woman suspects.

While the reported cases of custodial deaths are increasing in India, statistics are difficult to come by, as there is government apathy to transparency. However, on 12th May 2006, The Indian Evidence (Amendment) Bill, 2006 was introduced in the Rajya Sabha with a view to curb custodial deaths. The amendment provides the presumption that when a suspect dies in police custody it is presumed that the police have caused the death and the onus of proof rests on the policemen to prove their innocence. While the amendment is certainly a welcome change in official attitude towards custodial deaths, it remains to be seen whether it would be effectively implemented in the courts.

Human Rights activists have also warned against Anti-terrorism and security laws in India as facilitating human right abuse by primarily targeting lower castes and minority communities. The security laws abuse specially targeted groups by prolonging detention without trial and by inflicting torture, which is responsible for custodial deaths. On September 25, 2006, the Committee on International Human Rights of the New York City Bar Association released a report, Anti-Terrorism and Security Laws in India, calling on the Indian government to limit its application of anti-terrorism laws. The report notes "Attentiveness to these human rights concerns is not simply a moral and legal imperative, but also a crucial strategic imperative. As the Supreme Court of India has recognized, 'terrorism often thrives where human rights are violated' and 'The lack of hope for justice provides breeding grounds for terrorism.'"

The report chillingly concludes that the sweeping powers given to the authority in such enactments as TADA [Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act], POTA [Prevention of Terrorism Act], and UAPA [Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act], were used predominantly not to prosecute and punish actual terrorists, but rather as a tool that enabled pervasive use of preventive detention and a variety of abuses by the police, including extortion and torture. Another unpopular act called the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act has been sharply criticized for its 'oppression and high-handedness' by the Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee and has asked for the scrapping of this draconian law. This act (AFPSA) was the rallying point of widespread protests in Manipur and in other parts of North East as it offered immunity to the army personnel guilty of indiscriminately killing innocent people.

Legislation to eradicate torture, encounter killings and custodial deaths may be effective up to a point and may decrease human rights abuse marginally. But laws need the backing of robust public opinion to be fully effective. Here, Sunshine India is seriously flawed. The middle class and the upper class seem to be totally self-absorbed in greed creed and its consumerist pretensions. Moreover, there is wide acceptance of 'tough police tactics' by the middle and upper classes. The issues of liberalism, values for a just and humane society do not resonate well with this class. Instead there is, in the words of Praful Bidwai, a social commentator, "growing illiberalism and intolerance... lack of moral clarity among large sections of middle class on issues of justice, fairness, pluralism, secularism and other constitutional values, leave alone compassion for the underprivileged."

With public opinion fragmented, human rights violations would continue unchecked with the brunt of abuse borne by the marginalized poor. A prospect, which we must admit, bodes ill for our Republic.

DesiCritics.ORG

An Urgent Appeal for Action : Free Hebal Abel Koloy !

On October 26, 2006 at around 9.30am, Mr. Hebal Abel Koloy, Chairman of Borok People's Human Rights Organisation – BPHRO – (an organisation fighting for the rights of indigenous peoples of Tripura against all forms of state terror), Tripura, India, was asked by the police of Jirania police station of West Tripura district, to accompany them to the Jirania police station and later was taken to Manu police station, Dhalai district. He accompanied them and was detained there till 8 a.m. (27 October, 2006) without any reasons. By 8.30 a.m. of October 27, 2006 he was declared arrested. The Manu police registered a case against him [Case no.37/06, U/S 396/353/307/IPC and 27 of the Arms Act and 120(B)] under the Indian Penal Code.

On October 27, 2006 Hebal Koloy was produced in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kailashar and the Manu police station appealed to the court for 10 days remand in the police custody. However, the court granted allowed custody for 3 days – i.e. October 27-30, 2006. On October 30, 2006 he was produced in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kailashar and the court found no evidence of charges brought against him by the police but in spite of his being proved innocent was not given bail and was sent to the Kailashar Jail, Kailashar district for 3 more days.

It is pertinent to mention here that Mr. Koloy is the principal of Khumpui Academy which is run by the Tripura Tribal Areas District Council. His official residence was ransacked in search operations that were carried out on October 28, 2006 from 3.00 -3.50 p.m. But no incriminating documents were found there. On October 29, 2006 a search operation was carried out from 11.15 a.m. to 12 noon in the office premises of the BPHRO, located in the Place Compound, Agartala, Tripura and in the search operation nothing illegal was recovered according to the police's own version. They seized identity card forms (which are issued to all the members of the BPHRO), donors' registrar book, membership fee book and other organisational document.

They also took the computer belonging to Mohan Debbarma (General Secretary of BPHRO) which was being used for the office of the organization as they do not have any computer of their own.

Hebal Koloy has been an active member of the human rights fraternity in Northeast India . He has presented cases of human rights violations against the indigenous peoples of Tripura at the 22nd session of the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations in 2003 and has also ceaselessly appealed for justice and transparency in Northeast India. We are convinced that his detention is meant to silence the voice of oppressed indigenous people of Tripura and is part of a larger campaign waged by the state to malign and obstruct people's movements working for justice and dignity of indigenous peoples. We are also convinced that as long as he is police custody he is danger of losing his life. Such events are not uncommon in Northeast India's gloomy world of human rights violations and complicity of the organs of the state in these violations.


Yours truly,

Arup Jyoti Das

On behalf of North East Peoples' Initiative (NEPI)

4, Dwaraka Path, Oil Pipe Line
Hatigaon Road, Dispur
Guwahati-781006

Ph: 0361-2222019 (o), 098641-39312 (m)

E-mail: nepinitiatives@gmail.com


Official brief on the Arrest of Mr. Hebal Koloy , Oct 29, (PTI)

Human rights activist arrested for involvement in ambush

Agartala, Oct 29: Prominent human rights activist Hebal Abel Koloy has been arrested for alleged involvement in an ambush on Tripura State Rifles personnel at Sindhukumarapara in Dhalai district, police said today.

Officials said they had definite proof about the involvement of Koloy, the principal of a school, in insurgency and this would be placed before court in course of time.

Police detained Koloy, chairman of the Borok People's Human Rights Organisation, last Thursday from near his school, Khwumpui Academy, at Khwumulung, 30 km from here. He was taken to Dhalai district for interrogation in connection with the ambush carried out by militants on Thursday.

He was arrested yesterday and later produced before the Kamalpur SDJM's court, which remanded him to police custody for three days.

Police said Koloy met some insurgents in Dhalai district on October 22 and allegedly hatched the plan for the ambush on TSR personnel, who were assigned to protect employees of the North Eastern Frontier Railway laying railway tracks to connect Agaala with the rest of the country.

Koloy visited different places in Southeast Asia in his capacity as a rights activist and met different anti-India agencies for collection of funds, they alleged.

Related reference on the web

Experiences on Autonomy in East and North East:

A Report on the Third Civil Society Dialogue on Human Rights and Peace

By Sanjoy Borbara, Kolkata- 2003