India: Concern over reported unlawful killings by security personnel in Assam

http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=ENGASA200052007

News

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Public Statement

AI Index: ASA 20/005/2007 (Public)
News Service No: 017
26 January 2007

India: Concern over reported unlawful killings by security personnel in Assam

Amnesty International is concerned at reports of shootings, allegedly carried out by Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) personnel, that resulted in the death of two local businessmen near Geleki town, Sivasagar district (a town outside CISF jurisdiction in Upper Assam) on 23 January 2007. A third businessman was seriously injured.

Amnesty International would like to remind the Indian authorities that they are obliged, under both international human rights law and the Indian Constitution, to ensure that no one is arbitrarily deprived of their right to life.

According to reports, Mr Nilikesh Gogoi, Mr Bholu and Mr Arun Saikia were returning from a coal depot in Anakbati when the shooting took place. According to Arun Saikia, who is currently undergoing treatment for bullet wounds to his stomach, CISF personnel overtook their vehicle when they were returning from Anakibati, a town bordering Nagaland, at approximately 23.30 and without warning immediately opened fire on the unarmed civilians.

Amnesty International understands that a judicial inquiry into the incident has been ordered by Tarun Gogoi, Chief Minister of Assam, and that compensation to the families of the deceased has been offered. The organization understands that no action has been taken against the Deputy Commandant who is reported to have ordered the shooting. CISF constable Padum Bora, who is the personal bodyguard of Deputy Commandant and reportedly carried out the shooting on his orders, has been arrested.

India is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides for the right to life, which must be respected in all circumstances. Under the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, the intentional use of firearms is prohibited except when strictly unavoidable to protect life -- that is, in self-defence or the defence of others against whom there is an imminent threat of death or serious injury (Principle 9). Even when the use of such force is unavoidable, it must be used with restraint and in proportion to the seriousness of the offence. (Principles 4, 5 (a) and 5 (b). It is also explicitly stated that if firearms are to be used a clear warning must first be given (Principle 10). Amnesty International has information which leads it to believe that the incident which took place on Tuesday evening has violated the Principles, and the victims' right to life. Amnesty International is concerned that the Basic Principles and accompanying procedures appear not to have been adequately embedded within the CISF's training and practice.

Amnesty International would also like to remind the authorities conducting the probe to comply with the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extralegal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions which spell out in detail the obligations of governments to conduct inquiries into unlawful killings. Such inquiries should seek to determine the cause, manner and time of death, the person(s) responsible, and any pattern or practice which may have brought about the deaths. They should include an adequate autopsy, collection and analysis of all physical and documentary evidence and statements from witnesses. Those who have ordered unlawful killings or are in any other way responsible should be held to account as well as those who have carried the killings out. In accordance with Principle 17, written reports must be made within a reasonable time on the methods and findings of the inquiry. These must be made public immediately and include the scope of the inquiry, procedures and methods used to evaluate the evidence as well as conclusions and recommendations based on findings of fact and on applicable law.

Background:
Amnesty International issued a statement earlier in the month (www.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA200032007?open&of=ENG-IND) highlighting its concern at the targeting of non-Assamese labourers by the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA). The organization remains concerned that violence and tension in Assam appears to be rising and calls on the authorities to implement effective measures to protect citizens -- and that these measures firmly respect international human rights standards.

---

Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos

AFSPA to be discussed at the UN

AFSPA likely to be discussed at UN meet

http://www.kanglaonline.com/index.php?template=headline&newsid=35774&typeid=1

The Imphal Free Press

IMPHAL, Jan 10: The AFSPA issue is likely to take centre stage during discussions at the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women which is convening its 37th session from January 15 to February 2, 2007.

During the 19 day long session to be held at the UN General Headquarters at New York, USA, the Committee will discuss responses to the list of issues and questions for consideration of the combined second and third periodic report of India submitted to the UN Committee.

This is as per information provided to IFP by the Imphal based Human Rights Alert.

A statement of the HRA said the UN Committee asked India government on how Security Council Resolution 1325 is being implemented in the country and how gender perspectives are being mainstreamed in military operations in `disturbed area` and conflict areas.

The Committee also sought details on the gender-sensitization training given to armed forces operating in conflict areas.

In its concluding comments, the Committee recommended review of the prevention of terrorism legislation and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and asked government of India whether the review was conducted and if so actions taken to implement recommendations of the review.

Apart from that the UN Committee had also sought details of military personnel prosecuted under the Army Act.

In its second and third periodic report submitted to the UN Committee, India`s report said there is no `armed conflict` within the territory of India and hence the Security Council Resolution 1325 relating to Women in armed conflict in not applicable to India.

A copy of India`s response to the comment of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women is with the IFP.

The report says that Indian Army has excellent track record of protecting human rights, and is particularly sensitive to the rights of women and children, while carrying out its duties.

With regard to the mainstreaming of gender perspective in `disturbed areas`, India`s report said systematic education, training and sensitization in human rights are done in all ranks of Indian Army both during pre-commission and post-commission training.

Adequate emphasis on gender sensitization, constitutional rights and importance of human rights is placed on all important training schools and counter terrorism/counter insurgency courses, report claimed and mentioned various actions taken up by Indian Armed forces in this regard.

As regards quantification, during the preinduction training period of four weeks about 10 percent of the time is devoted to gender sensitization aspects, the report says. Gender sensitization aspects are covered under different training modules covering important provisions of constitution, salient aspects of law, including the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and human rights, it added.

With regard to UN Committee`s comment to review the prevention of terrorism act and the AFSPA, India`s report mentioned that the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) has been abolished in September, 2004 while the Justice Jeevan Reddy Commission constituted in November, 2004 to review the AFSPA, have submitted its recommendations to the government.

The report further said every allegation of sexual abuse or exploitation is rigorously enquired into and where every misconduct or crime against women are established, immediate and exemplary punishment is meted out, as per the law.

A total of 33 complaints dealing with misconduct or crimes against women were received against Indian Armed forces during the past three years, including 17 cases in 2004, nine cases in 2005 and eight cases in 2006, the report mentioned and claimed that rigorous imprisonment and dismissal from service have been awarded to those found guilty in the line with the gravity of the offence committed.

 

The Imphal Free Press

IMPHAL, Jan 10: The AFSPA issue is likely to take centre stage during discussions at the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women which is convening its 37th session from January 15 to February 2, 2007.

During the 19 day long session to be held at the UN General Headquarters at New York, USA, the Committee will discuss responses to the list of issues and questions for consideration of the combined second and third periodic report of India submitted to the UN Committee.

This is as per information provided to IFP by the Imphal based Human Rights Alert.

A statement of the HRA said the UN Committee asked India government on how Security Council Resolution 1325 is being implemented in the country and how gender perspectives are being mainstreamed in military operations in `disturbed area` and conflict areas.

The Committee also sought details on the gender-sensitization training given to armed forces operating in conflict areas.

In its concluding comments, the Committee recommended review of the prevention of terrorism legislation and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and asked government of India whether the review was conducted and if so actions taken to implement recommendations of the review.

Apart from that the UN Committee had also sought details of military personnel prosecuted under the Army Act.

In its second and third periodic report submitted to the UN Committee, India`s report said there is no `armed conflict` within the territory of India and hence the Security Council Resolution 1325 relating to Women in armed conflict in not applicable to India.

A copy of India`s response to the comment of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women is with the IFP.

The report says that Indian Army has excellent track record of protecting human rights, and is particularly sensitive to the rights of women and children, while carrying out its duties.

With regard to the mainstreaming of gender perspective in `disturbed areas`, India`s report said systematic education, training and sensitization in human rights are done in all ranks of Indian Army both during pre-commission and post-commission training.

Adequate emphasis on gender sensitization, constitutional rights and importance of human rights is placed on all important training schools and counter terrorism/counter insurgency courses, report claimed and mentioned various actions taken up by Indian Armed forces in this regard.

As regards quantification, during the preinduction training period of four weeks about 10 percent of the time is devoted to gender sensitization aspects, the report says. Gender sensitization aspects are covered under different training modules covering important provisions of constitution, salient aspects of law, including the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and human rights, it added.

With regard to UN Committee`s comment to review the prevention of terrorism act and the AFSPA, India`s report mentioned that the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) has been abolished in September, 2004 while the Justice Jeevan Reddy Commission constituted in November, 2004 to review the AFSPA, have submitted its recommendations to the government.

The report further said every allegation of sexual abuse or exploitation is rigorously enquired into and where every misconduct or crime against women are established, immediate and exemplary punishment is meted out, as per the law.

A total of 33 complaints dealing with misconduct or crimes against women were received against Indian Armed forces during the past three years, including 17 cases in 2004, nine cases in 2005 and eight cases in 2006, the report mentioned and claimed that rigorous imprisonment and dismissal from service have been awarded to those found guilty in the line with the gravity of the offence committed.

 

---

Make free worldwide PC-to-PC calls. Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger with Voice

India: Amnesty International renews its call for an unconditional repeal of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958

http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=ENGASA200342006

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Public Statement

AI Index: ASA 20/034/2006 (Public)
News Service No: 325
18 December 2006


India: Amnesty International renews its call for an unconditional repeal of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958
Amnesty International is deeply concerned that the Indian government may seek to retain provisions of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act 1958 that contravene its international human rights obligations and that continue to pose grave threats to the human rights of its people.
On 2 December, the Prime Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh, announced that the Home Ministry was working on “modifying existing provisions or inserting new provisions” in the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958 (AFSPA), so as to give “due regard to the protection of basic human and civil rights”.

A decision to amend, rather than to repeal the AFSPA would fly in the face of the most significant recommendation by the five-member Committee led by former chairperson of the Law Commission, Justice B. P. Jeevan Reddy, contained in its report submitted to the Government of India in June 2005.

Amnesty International has repeatedly expressed its concern that the AFSPA contains provisions which contravene, either directly or by granting perpetrators impunity, key human rights including the right to life, the right to be free from torture and other ill-treatment, the right to be free from arbitrary deprivation of liberty and the right to remedy and reparation. These rights are enshrined in international law and standards, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which India is a state party1. The AFSPA, which is operative in “disturbed areas”, including large parts of the Northeast region of India and Jammu and Kashmir, gives security forces wide-ranging powers, including the power to use lethal force in contravention of international standards.

In light of the main provisions of the AFSPA being in violation of international human rights law, Amnesty International fully supports the recommendation to repeal the Act and urges the Government of India to implement this part of the Committee’s recommendations.

Amnesty International is also opposed to the incorporation of the offending provisions of the AFSPA into any other piece of legislation, including the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA)2.

Amnesty International calls on the Government of India to repeal unconditionally the AFSPA and not to incorporate its offending provisions into any other legislation.

1India: Briefing on the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958 (ASA 20/0135/2005).
https://intranet.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA200252005?open&of=ENG-IND

2India: Briefing: The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) Review Committee takes one step forward and two backwards (ASA 20/029/2006)
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA200292006?open&of=ENG-IND