"Indian Troops in Kashmir not Accountable"– Amnesty International
July 11, 2015, 7:22 pm
by Rajeewa Jayaweera
Hot on the heels of India's unilateral decision to send in Para Commandos to kill NSCN (K) insurgents camped out in Myanmar, an independent sovereign country, a recent report by Amnesty International (AI) has exposed "grave human rights violations" and "a long history of impunity by Indian security forces" in the Indian Administered Kashmir.
For the benefit of readers not familiar with the Kashmir issue, the writer would first like to provide some background information. Indian Independence Act of 1947 recognized the right of the states to choose whether to accede to India, to Pakistan or to remain outside them. The Maharaja of Kashmir Hari Singh, a Hindu governing a predominantly Muslim population, remained undecided. After a Muslim revolt in Poonch and Mirpur, the Maharaja sought assistance from India who insisted Kashmir accede to India in order to receive military assistance to which the Maharaja had no choice but to agree. The Government of India recognized the accession of Kashmir and sent in her troops who succeeded in driving away the revolting tribesmen though not from the whole of Kashmir.
Pakistan took the stand that Hari Singh did not have the right to call in the Indian army on grounds that his dynasty were not hereditary rulers but had been appointed by the British after the defeat of then ruler Ranjith Singh in the first Anglo-Sikh war in 1845-46. Based on this theory, Pakistan first sent in Pashtun tribesmen and then ordered its army in to Kashmir but the order was not obeyed by the Chief of Pakistan Army, General Sir Douglas Gracey, on grounds both armies had taken an Oath of Allegiance to King George VI. By the time Pakistan overcame the problem and sent in her troops, the Indian army had occupied around two thirds of the disputed area.
Pakistani troops occupied Gilgit and Baltistan which had acceded to Pakistan on October 6, 1947.Nehru decided to take the issue to the UN Security Council and a UN brokered ceasefire came into effect on December 31. 1947. Non-binding Resolution 48 adopted in parts by the UN Security Council with no vote taken on text as a whole, after hearing submissions from both India and Pakistan stated that "accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan should be decided through a democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite". Such a plebiscite is yet to be held to allow the people of Kashmir to determine their destiny. India even today is totally opposed even to the discussion of the issue at any forum.
Sheikh Abdullah, first Prime Minister of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) after its accession to India in 1947 till 1953 and later Chief Minister from 1974 till 1982 opted to align J&K with India. He felt the Sufi Muslims of J&K would enjoy greater autonomy from secular India rather than from Islamic Pakistan. He successfully obtained Special Autonomous Status for J&K from India which was guaranteed under Article 370 in the Indian Constitution. It required India to obtain consent of J&K's state legislature before passing any legislation impacting J&K except in the areas of Foreign Affairs, Defense and Communications. A change in status quo requires the consent of J&K's Constituent Assembly and cannot be implemented unilaterally by the Indian Parliament.
The area known as Indian Controlled Kashmir consists of the Kashmir Valley, Jammu and Ladakh. The population is predominantly Muslim but two thirds of the Jammu's population belongs to the Hindu faith.
Trouble in J&K erupted in 1987 during the disputed state elections. The roots for the conflict lie in the struggle for autonomy by Kashmiri separatists and efforts by India in containing the separatists. India sent 500,000 soldiers to J&K starting after 1987 elections. It also introduced the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) in 1990 and termed J&K as a 'disturbed area'. AFSPA considered as 'draconian' by activists, protects members of security forces from prosecution for alleged Human Rights abuses and empower security forces to search, detain and use lethal force against any person acting against the law.
The PDP who formed a coalition government with the BJP after the recent elections pledged a revocation of AFSPA. However, no action seems to be forthcoming. A senior BJP leader Jitendra Singh recently stated, "I seriously believe the last word on this should not come from political functionaries but from security experts and security agencies". However Indian army spokesman Colonel Nitin Nihar Joshi recently stated "the issue of withdrawal of AFSPA from Kashmir is a matter to be decided by the Regional and Federal governments and the army has no say in the matter". It is a clear sign that elections pledges notwithstanding, AFSPA will not go away any time soon. Interestingly, the newly elected Chief Minister of J&K, Mufti Mohd Sayeed, was the Union Minister for Home Affairs in 1990 when AFSPA was enacted.
The last election for the J&K Legislative Assembly was concluded in December 2014. Despite a call to boycott elections by hardline separatist All Parties Hurriyat Conference led by Syed Ali Shah Geelani arguing that "India has been holding elections in the Valley using the power of gun and so such an exercise is not legitimate" and an appeal to the youth in particular not to vote during elections in view of sacrifices rendered by the people need be safeguarded, the 65.2% voter turnout was the highest in elections held during last 25 years and an indication in change of attitude of Kashmiris and a tilt towards a political rather than an armed solution for their problems. It is believed that around 800,000 soldiers and para military forces are currently deployed in Indian Administered Kashmir.
According to previous AI and other reports, cases of torture, death in custody, extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances in J&K goes back to early 1990s. Not a single member of Indian security forces has been tried in civilian courts even though a few cases have been taken up in military courts. Even though the Indian army claim it has a zero tolerance policy for human rights abuse by its troops, activists claim 96% of complaints in the past have been dismissed by the military authorities as being 'baseless or having ulterior motives'. Activists complain of the lack of transparency in trials held by military courts and lack of available information of such trials despite India's Right to Information Act. A recently released report by AI refers to a "long history of impunity by Indian Security Forces in the region". 2005 Nobel Peace Prize nominee Parveena Ahanger states "Indian military courts are unreliable and dishonest".
A case in point is an incident narrated by Kashmiri activist KhurramParrezz, which took place on February 23, 1991 in a village in J&K. Over 40 women were raped and male members of the village tortured by 125 members of security forces. After numerous investigations, the matter ended in courts. The army obtained an injunction from the High Court thus effectively blocking any further investigations. As a result of such incidents, faith in GoI's judicial process amongst J&K's population is virtually non-existent. Former Indian Foreign Minister Salman Kurshid, during a visit to J&K referred to this incident as an "act of shame".
It is believed that since 1987, more than 70,000 persons have lost their lives, over 3,600 have been killed by security forces, over 8,000 have disappeared without a trace and a large number of mass and unmarked graves discovered in Indian Administered Kashmir.
Notwithstanding anti-government activities by the likes of Syed Ali Shah Geelani and his followers in the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, it is believed that separatism in J&K has been in the decline since 2004. The high voter turnout may be an indication that younger generations may be opting for a political rather than an armed solution. The onus is on India to build on that mind set rather than frustrate their ambitions. The danger in not doing so is the possibility of younger generations, disappointed with the lack of a positive response to their choice of a political solution reverting to an armed solution as followed by earlier generations. AI has repeatedly highlighted the availability of required mechanisms to investigate abuses and violations of Human Rights but remain unused by India. It points towards the lack of political will on the part of India to address contentious issues. The present cry by those in J&K is not to secede from India. It is for greater autonomy, the revocation of AFSPA, to retain clause 370 of the Indian Constitution with no changes in view of some such suggestions in New Delhi, for the unbiased implementation of India's own laws in the state of J&K and for the rule of law.
Prime Minister Modi, while addressing our Parliament lectured Sri Lanka on Cooperative Federalism. He would do well to first practice what he preaches in his own back yard.
The writer is reminded of the proverb 'what goes around comes around'. India who actively and openly promoted terrorism in Sri Lanka and harbored Tamil terrorists some three decades ago is now beset with terrorist problems. India who voted for UNHRC Resolutions against Sri Lanka on several occasions accusing Sri Lanka of Human Rights violations and war crimes by members of its armed forces now stand accused by AI and other Human Rights activists of Human Rights abuses in J&K by its own armed forces. Considering the stand adopted by India when repeatedly voting for UNHRC Resolutions against Sri Lanka, perhaps Pakistan being a Muslim majority nation should seriously consider spear heading a Resolution in UNHRC on Human Rights violations in J&K by Indian troops with the support of other Muslim nations and demand for a credible and transparent investigation with international monitors.
We now hear of Indian intelligence agencies having made regular payments to militants and separatists, along with mainstream politicians and political parties in Indian Kashmir to compete with Pakistan's spy agency ISI, as narrated by one time Chief of RAW AS Dalat, as India funded LTTE terrorists in the past. Speaking to NDTV's Barkha Dutt, he stated "so what's wrong? What is there to be so shocked or scandalised by. It's done the world over". Indian Defence Minister Manohar Parikar recently stated "we will use terrorists against Pakistan to our own advantage". An unnamed senior intelligence official recently stated during an interview "even if we have to arm our assets with small nuclear devises, we will do that".
These are but a few pointers for India's neighbours to ponder over the advisability of befriending India at the expense of other powerful nations in the east.http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=128117
__._,_.___
Posted by: Pramod Agrawal <pka_ur@yahoo.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic () |
KERALITES - A moderated eGroup exclusively for Keralites...
To subscribe send a mail to Keralites-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.
Send your posts to Keralites@yahoogroups.com.
Send your suggestions to Keralites-owner@yahoogroups.com.
To unsubscribe send a mail to Keralites-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.
Homepage: http://www.keralites.net
To subscribe send a mail to Keralites-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.
Send your posts to Keralites@yahoogroups.com.
Send your suggestions to Keralites-owner@yahoogroups.com.
To unsubscribe send a mail to Keralites-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.
Homepage: http://www.keralites.net
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment