Wayzata World Factbook 1996/The World Factbook - 1996 Edition - Wayzata Technology (3079) (1996).iso/pc/text/humanrts/india.txt

Text File | 1996-01-04 | 29KB | 565 lines

TITLE:  INDIA HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES, 1994
AUTHOR:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DATE:  FEBRUARY 1995

                             INDIA


India is a longstanding parliamentary democracy with a free
press, civilian-controlled military, independent judiciary and
active political parties and civic associations.  Competitive
elections produce regular changes of leadership at the
national, state, and municipal levels.

Although the 25 state governments have primary responsibility
for maintaining law and order, the central Government provides
guidance and support through use of national paramilitary
forces.  The Union Ministry for Home Affairs controls the
nationwide police service, most of the paramilitary forces, and
the internal intelligence bureaus.  Paramilitary forces are
deployed throughout India and have committed significant human
rights abuses, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir.

India has a mixed economy.  The private sector is predominant
in agriculture, most nonfinancial services, consumer goods
manufacturing, and some heavy industry.  The Government
continued economic liberalization and structural reforms begun
in 1991.  India's economic problems are compounded by rapid
population growth of 2 percent per year with a current total
well above 900 million.  Income distribution remained very
unequal.  Forty percent of the urban population and half the
rural population live below the poverty level.

There continue to be significant human rights abuses, despite
extensive constitutional and statutory safeguards.  Many of
these abuses are generated by intense social tensions, the
authorities' attempts to repress violent secessionist
movements, and deficient police methods and training.  These
problems are acute in Kashmir, where the judicial system has
been disrupted both by terrorist threats including the
assassination of judges and witnesses, and by judicial
tolerance of the Government's heavy handed anti-militant
tactics.

Serious human rights abuses include:  extrajudicial executions,
torture, and reprisal killings by security forces fighting
separatist insurgents in Kashmir and northeast India; political
killings, kidnaping, and extortion by militants; extrajudicial
executions by police in Punjab; torture, rape, and deaths of
suspects in police custody throughout India; incommunicado
detention for prolonged periods without charges under special
security legislation; government failure in most instances to
prosecute and appropriately punish police and security forces
implicated in abuse; widespread intercaste and communal
violence; legal and societal discrimination as well as
extensive violence, both societal and by police and other
agents of government against women; infrequent prosecution of
"dowry deaths" (wife murder); and widespread exploitation of
indentured, bonded, and child labor.

Beginning in late 1993, the Government sought to address human
rights concerns by establishing a National Human Rights
Commission (NHRC) with powers to investigate and recommend
policy changes, punishment, and compensation in cases of police
abuse.  The Commission began to establish a record as an
effective advocate for human rights when it examined security
forces abuses committed in November 1993 in Bijbehara,
Kashmir.  One international human rights group commended the
Commission's reports as "hard hitting."  The steadfast work of
local human rights groups and the contribution of the NHRC
helped bring about a public acknowledgement of serious human
rights abuses and the need for official steps to deal with them
(see Section 4).

RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including
          Freedom from:

     a.   Political and Other Extrajudicial Killing

Political killings by both government forces and militant
terrorists continued at a high rate, particularly in Jammu and
Kashmir, and the northeast, where separatist insurgencies
continued in 1994.

The security forces continued to commit extrajudicial killings
of suspected militants in Kashmir.  Human rights monitors
maintain they have documented the names, dates, and
circumstances in scores of extrajudicial killings each month.
Typically, those killed were detained by security forces, and
their bodies, bearing multiple bullet wounds and often marks of
torture, returned to relatives or were otherwise discovered the
same day or a few days later.  While there is little
information to corroborate individual cases, press reports and
anecdotal evidence leaves no doubt that the pattern exists and
is extensive.  Security forces claim that these killings, when
they acknowledge them, occur in armed encounters with militants.

Deaths in Kashmir, particularly of security forces and
militants, increased in 1994 compared with the previous year.
Press reports indicate that 1,296 civilians, 175 police
personnel, and 1,630 militants died in insurgency-related
violence in Kashmir.

In Punjab, instances of terrorist violence virtually
disappeared in 1994, and the number of Sikh militants killed
diminished considerably from 1993.  The NHRC, visiting the
state in April, concurred with a widespread public perception
that Punjabi militancy was at an end and that police excesses
could no longer be explained as a response to an emergency.  In
a report issued in August, the NHRC strongly recommended that
the Punjab state government take steps to restore the normal
functioning and oversight of the police.  During 1994, 76
alleged Punjabi militants were reportedly killed in armed
encounters, including only 4 in the last 6 months of the year,
compared with more than 583 such killings in 1993.  No police
or other security personnel were killed in such encounters in
1994.  The fact that no police died underscored the
implausibility of police claims that militants were killed in
"crossfire."

Punjab police hit teams again in 1994 pursued Sikh militants
into other parts of India.  On June 24, Punjab police shot and
killed Karnail Singh Kaili, a man they identified as a Sikh
terrorist leader of the Bhindranwale Tiger Force (BTFK) in West
Bengal.  The government of West Bengal claimed that it had not
been informed of the presence of the Punjab police in West
Bengal, seized Kaili's body and weapons, and barred the
departure of the police team until the Punjab Chief Minister
apologized.

In Bihar, human rights groups claim police continued to kill
Naxalites in faked "encounter killings."  In one case in April,
police allegedly killed 11 suspected Naxalites in cold blood
and then claimed the deaths had occurred in an encounter.
During their August visit to Andhra Pradesh, representatives of
the NHRC heard complaints of abuses committed by both Naxalites
and police.  The NHRC asked the Bihar government for details of
nine alleged faked encounter killings by the police and
recommended the payment of compensation to the relatives of the
Naxalite killings, and also to the relatives of the victims of
faked encounter killings.

There is evidence that the practice of faked encounter killings
has spread to Bombay.  The previous year's pattern persisted in
1994.  There were over 60 alleged criminals reported as killed
in armed encounters with the Bombay Police during the first 7
months of the year.

While state authorities continued to tolerate extrajudicial
killings in areas buffeted by separatist insurgencies, the
press and courts paid increasing attention to deaths in police
custody and faked encounter killings.  The Supreme Court
directed active investigation and prosecution of custodial
deaths and other cases of police abuse and negligence.  In one
case, murder charges were brought against Punjab policemen for
a faked encounter killing.  In another case, a High Court judge
in July recommended murder charges for 11 Punjab policemen in a
faked encounter killing and compensation to the victim's family.

In September the Supreme Court strongly criticized the Punjab
police, including the Director General K.P.S. Gill, for
inaction following the abduction by police in 1991 of 7 members
of a family, none of whom has been seen since.  In October the
Supreme Court ordered the prosecution of 58 police officers
accused in the 1991 murders of 10 Sikh youths in Uttar
Pradesh.  The NHRC is investigating 25 cases of suspected faked
encounter killings.

Deaths of suspects in police custody continued to occur as a
result of torture during interrogation.  One such case was that
of Madan Lal who died in November 1993 within hours of being
picked up and released by police.  In June the NHRC recommended
the award of $1,700 to compensate Lal's family, the transfer of
the investigation from the Delhi Police Department to the
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and the initiation of
proceedings against a police officer who had threatened
witnesses.  The Government accepted the recommendations.

The press reported that police arrested Mahesh Paswan in the
Hajipur District, Bihar on the evening of February 19 and that
Paswan died in custody early the next morning.  The victim's
father filed charges against four policemen suspected of
causing his son's death.  The authorities suspended one
officer, and the district magistrate initiated an inquiry.

According to press reports, Bapula Das died in police custody
in the Khandagiri Police Station in Orissa April 27, hours
after he was detained.  Two men who had been detained with Das
told a local human rights group that the police tortured the
three of them with electric shocks.  The Orissa Government
reportedly suspended three police officers, initiated a
judicial inquiry, and paid the victim's family $800 in
compensation.

On August 29, Kashmiri journalist Ghulam Mohammad Lone and his
young son were shot dead in their home.  He had received a
death threat from an army officer in connection with a story
reporting corrupt practices in the military.  At year's end,
the authorities had not charged anyone in the killing.

Terrorist attacks accounted for hundreds of deaths.  As in the
past, Kashmiri militant groups carried out politically
motivated killings on a wide scale, targeting progovernment
politicians, government officials, alleged police informers,
civilians and members of rival factions.  Examples included:
the shooting death of Wali Mohammad Itoo, a National Conference
leader and former state minister; the killings of former state
assembly member Abdul Majid Pandey and a police inspector in
separate incidents on July 15; and the killing of three
passengers on two buses stopped by militants in the Doda
District May 20.  On June 20, militants allegedly shot and
killed the Dr. Qazi Nissar, the Mirwaiz (Muslim religious
leader) of South Kashmir, for speaking out against militancy.
The Government estimated that 70 persons, including 35
militants, were killed in clashes between militant factions in
the first 3 months of 1994.

Maoist revolutionary Naxalites continued to commit many
killings in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, and Orissa.  Naxalites held
"people's courts" in which village headmen and others were
condemned to death and summarily executed as "class enemies"
and "caste oppressors."  In Bihar during 1993, 300 persons were
estimated to have been killed in clashes between security
forces and Naxalites, and between Naxalite factions.

Extensive, complex patterns of violence continued in the seven
states of northeastern India.  Numerous killings can be
attributed to conflicts in each of the following categories:
between indigenous peoples, usually Buddhist or animist, and
immigrant groups, usually Muslim or Hindu; between tribes of
indigenous peoples; between security forces and militants of at
least 18 insurgent groups; among factions of insurgent groups.
Large numbers of security personnel were among the victims of
the violence of the northeast.

     b.  Disappearance

There were widespread reports of disappearances again in 1994.
There are credible reports that police throughout India often
do not file required arrest reports.  As a result, there are
hundreds of unsolved disappearances in which relatives claim an
individual was taken into police custody and never heard from
again.  Police usually deny these claims, countering that there
are no records of arrest.

Security forces acknowledge that they detained more than 10,000
in Jammu and Kashmir from 1990 to mid-1994 and that they
released over 7,000 of them.  The Government made public a list
of more than 3,000 detainees in more than 20 detention centers
in Jammu and Kashmir in 1994.  However, human rights groups
maintain that the Government does not acknowledge holding
without charge as many as 7,000 additional persons in
incommunicado detention.

The Government maintains that screening committees run by the
state government provide information about detainees to their
families.  However, other sources indicate that families are
able to confirm the detention of their relatives only by
bribing prison guards.  The Kashmir Bar Association reports
that bodies bearing marks of torture of persons detained weeks
earlier have been found or returned to the victim's families.

Amnesty International (AI) published a report in December 1993
on disappearances in Jammu, Kashmir, and Punjab.  The
Government's response to the report shed little light on cited
cases.  The response indicated that the Government of Pakistan
and militant groups bear the responsibility for creating
circumstances in Kashmir that "created possibilities of what
may be perceived as excesses."  The response indicated that the
Government had completed inquiries on 75 disappearances:  35
were dismissed on the grounds that no missing-person reports
were filed with local police authorities.  That is, the
relatives did not file reports with the authorities whom they
believed perpetrated or condoned the abductions.  Investigation
continued in 12 cases, and in 10 cases the authorities released
disappeared individuals from detention.  The Government offered
other explanations for the remaining cases.

Problems with the absence of police arrest records is
particularly common in Punjab, where a number of disappearances
were reported.  A noteworthy case is that of Sukhwinder Singh
Bhatti, a defense lawyer for accused Sikh militants.  On May
12, plainclothes police officers arrested Bhatti; he has not
been seen since.  In a letter to the Chief Justice, a group of
Punjab lawyers pointed out that Bhatti's case was the fourth in
3 years in which the police kidnaped a defense lawyer for
accused terrorists.  On June 17, the Haryana and Punjab High
Court ordered a CBI investigation into Bhatti's case; and on
July 22, the NHRC summoned the Punjab state Home Secretary to
provide explanations for the disappearances of the four
lawyers.  The NHRC reported that the cases are under
investigation or before the Supreme Court.

Militants in Kashmir and the northeast have increasingly
resorted to kidnapings to sow terror, seek the release of
detained comrades and extort funds.  According to the
government, Kashmiri militants conducted 368 kidnapings in
first half of 1994, including those of an American citizen and
5 British nationals, all of whom were released unharmed or
freed unharmed by police.

     c.  Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading
         Treatment or Punishment

The law prohibits torture, but there is credible evidence that
it is common throughout India.  The authorities often use
torture during interrogations.  In other cases, they torture
detainees to extort money and sometimes as summary punishment.
Police officials in West Bengal acknowledged in press
interviews that torture is a routine practice in interrogation.

Human rights groups continue to report numerous cases in which
police and paramilitary forces have used torture during
interrogations in Kashmir, Punjab, and Assam.  Commonly
reported methods include:  beatings, rape, burning with
cigarettes and hot rods, suspension by the feet, crushing of
limbs with heavy rollers, and electric shocks.  Because many
alleged torture victims die in custody, and others are afraid
to speak out, there are few first-hand accounts, although the
marks of torture have often been found on the bodies of
deceased detainees (see Sections 1.a. and 1.b.).  The
prevalence of torture by police in lockups throughout India is
borne out by the number of cases of deaths in police custody.

The rape of persons in custody is part of the broader pattern
of custodial abuse.  According to the Home Minister, 54 cases
of custodial rape occurred in 1991, 79 in 1992 and 45 in 1993.
A report published by the People's Union for Democratic Rights
(PUDR) in May detailed 24 cases of alleged custodial rape
between 1989 and 1993 in Delhi.  The PUDR noted that there have
been no convictions and that the authorities reinstated three
of 10 policemen dismissed in connection with these cases.

In Madras, there were three publicized cases of gang rapes of
the wives of prisoners in police stations in 1994; a number of
policemen have been suspended in connection with these cases.
In late December, an official investigation recommended
official charges against policemen who allegedly raped seven
women in a melee that occurred when the police blocked the
movement of demonstrators near Muzaffargarh on October 2.
There were also many reports of rapes committed by security
forces and militants in Kashmir and the Northeast.

Confessions extracted by force are generally inadmissible in
court.  Under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities
(Prevention) Act (TADA), a confession made to an officer above
the rank of superintendent of police is admissible as
evidence--provided the police believe the confession was
voluntary.  However, the use of torture to obtain confessions
under TADA is common.

Prison guards have abused inmates for reasons unrelated to
interrogation.  In one particularly serious case, 7 prisoners
died and 27 were injured as a result of beatings by guards in
Pilibhit Jail on the night of November 8.  Criminal charges
have been brought against guards and other officials involved.

Although custodial abuse is deeply rooted in police practices,
there is evidence of growing public awareness of the problem.
The NHRC has identified torture and deaths in detention as one
of its priority concerns.  It has directed district magistrates
to report all custodial deaths within 24 hours and stated that
failure to do so will be interpreted as an attempted coverup.
Magistrates appear to be complying with this directive.

The courts also have been more active in prosecuting cases of
custodial abuse.  Many cases are old and illustrate the
slowness of the judicial system in custodial cases.  Early in
the year, five Delhi constables were sentenced to 5 years'
rigorous imprisonment for illegally confining and beating to
death Kamal Kumar in July 1979.  In January the Supreme Court
sentenced three Uttar Pradesh policemen to imprisonment and
fined two CBI inspectors for beating a suspect on the steps of
the Supreme Court.  In April the Punjab High Court ordered
$1,700 in compensation to 4 women who had the word "pickpocket"
tattooed on their foreheads by Punjab police.

There are three classes of prison facilities.  Prisoners are
not classified by the nature of their crimes, but by their
standing in society.  Class "C" prisoners are those who cannot
prove they are college graduates or income taxpayers.  Their
cells are overcrowded, often have dirt floors, no furnishings,
and poor quality food.  The use of handcuffs and fetters is
common.  Class "B" prisoners--college graduates and
taxpayers--are held under markedly better conditions.  Class
"A" prisoners are prominent persons, as designated by the
Government, and are accorded private rooms, visits, and
adequate food, which may be supplemented by their families.
Class "A" prisoners are usually held in government guest
houses.  The authorities do not always follow this
classification:  following their arrest in October 1993,
Kashmiri political leaders Abdul Gani Lone and Syed Ali Shah
Gilani were held for months as class "C" prisoners before they
were moved to a guest house (see also Section 1.e.).

According to a statement in Parliament by Minister of State for
Home Affairs, P.M. Sayeed, New Delhi's Tihar Jail, considered
one of the best-run in India, housed in March 8,577
prisoners--in facilities designed to hold 2,487.  According to
Sayeed, 7,505 detainees awaited the completion of their trials,
while 672 others have been in trial for 3 years or longer.

The Government does not allow NGO's to monitor prison
conditions.  Nevertheless, prison conditions are a subject of
press reports and have received greater attention from human
rights groups.  Press accounts of prison conditions include
reports of sexual abuse of prisoners, the use of prisoners by
prison officials as domestic servants, the sale of food and
milk for prisoners on the black market, the sale of female
prisoners to brothels, and the marketing and export of
prison-made goods.

Women constitute 2 to 6 percent of the total prison population,
according to the 1987 Justice Krishna Iyer Report.  Although
Parliament passed a Children's Act in 1960 to safeguard young
prisoners against abuse and exploitation, and a Juvenile
Justice Act in 1986 provides that boys under 16 and girls under
18 are not to be held in prison, most states have not
implemented these Acts.  The Supreme Court has criticized the
state governments for not providing reformatories and separate
detention facilities for children.

     d.  Arbitrary Arrest, Detention, or Exile

Over the past decade, the Government implemented a variety of
special security laws intended to help law enforcement
authorities fight separatist insurgency.  There are credible
reports of widespread arbitrary arrest and detention under
these laws.

The Constitution requires that detainees have the right to be
informed of the grounds for arrest, have the right to be
represented by counsel, and, unless the person is held under a
preventive detention law, the right to appear before a
magistrate within 24 hours of arrest.  At this initial
appearance, the accused must either be remanded for further
investigation or released.  The Supreme Court has upheld these
provisions.  An accused person must be informed of his right to
bail at the time of arrest and may, unless he is held on a
nonbailable offense, apply for bail at any time.  The police
must file a charge sheet within 60 to 90 days of arrest; if
they fail to do so, court approval of a bail application
becomes mandatory.

The Constitution permits preventive detention laws in the event
of threats to public order and national security.  These laws
provide for limits on the length of detention and for judicial
review.  Several laws of this type remain in effect.

The National Security Act (NSA) of 1980 permits detention of
persons considered security risks; police anywhere in India
(except Kashmir) may detain suspects under NSA provisions.
Under these provisions, the authorities may detain a suspect
without charge or trial as long as 1 year on loosely defined
security grounds.  The state government must confirm the
detention order, which is reviewed by an advisory board of
three High Court judges within 7 weeks of arrest.  NSA
detainees are permitted visits by family members and lawyers
and must be informed of the grounds for detention within 5 days
(10 to 15 days in exceptional circumstances).  Nationwide, more
than two-thirds of the 16,000 people detained under NSA since
1980 have been released by order of the state government or an
advisory board.

The Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act (PSA) of 1978 covers
corresponding procedures for that state.  In May the
authorities released and immediately rearrested Kashmiri
political leaders Abdul Gani Lone and Syed Ali Shah Gilani, who
had been detained under the PSA in October 1993.  The move
followed a decision by the Supreme Court which ruled that the
authorities did not have sufficient grounds to detain Lone and
Gilani.  However, they and 376 other Kashmiri detainees were
released in October.  Over half of the detainees in Jammu and
Kashmir are held under the PSA.

The TADA was enacted in 1985 to fight insurgency in Punjab, but
has been invoked by almost every state, including those in
which there is no insurgency (see also Sections 1.c. and
1.e.).  TADA stipulates that those found guilty of terrorist
and disruptive acts, or membership in a terrorist gang, may be
sentenced to no less than 5 years.  It also carries the death
penalty for certain terrorist crimes.  Disruptive activities
are defined broadly to include speech or actions that disrupt
or challenge the sovereignty or territorial integrity of India.

The TADA extends the period to 60 days during which a detainee
may be held in police custody after remand by the court, and it
allows administrative detention up to 180 days (1 year in
special circumstances).  Suspects held under TADA must be
presented within 24 hours before an executive magistrate who
reviews the detention order, but human rights groups say this
requirement is frequently ignored.  The TADA was extended for 2
years in May 1993, at which time an amendment was added
requiring authorization from a state police inspector general
before a court takes cognizance of a TADA case.

According to the Government, there were 8,742 TADA arrests in
21 states in 1993, the latest year for which information is
available.  In May the Home Ministry informed Parliament that
61,843 persons had been detained under TADA since the law's
enactment in 1985, and 48,502 had been released on bail.  While
the Ministry said it did not maintain information on the
numbers of cases that resulted in conviction, the Minister of
State conceded that the number was very low.

Press reports claim that, on the basis of official figures, 626
persons have been convicted under TADA in all of India since
1986.  According to a study by one human rights group, 18 of
11,957 detainees arrested under the TADA have been convicted in
the state of Gujarat, even though that state has not
experienced any insurgency.  The vast majority of TADA
detainees are eventually freed on bail or released without
charges being filed.

There are widespread accusations that the special security laws
have been misused in states not experiencing civil unrest as a
convenient way to hold people without trial.  These accusations
are borne out by government data showing TADA and NSA arrests
by state.  In 1993 more persons were detained under TADA in
Gujarat and Maharashtra than in Punjab, which was the Act's
original target.  The authorities in Gujarat detained 2,902
persons under TADA in 1993--roughly one third of the nationwide
total.  Detentions under NSA in 1993 were highest in Gujarat
and Uttar Pradesh.

Public opposition to TADA rose after a Supreme Court decision
in March upheld the Act's constitutionality.  The press, human
rights groups, and lawyers' organizations criticized the
decision.  The National Minorities Commission and prominent
Muslim members of the Ruling Congress (I) Party, including a
sitting minister, claimed that TADA is used disproportionately
against minorities, Muslims in particular, and called for its
repeal.  In July the Supreme Court issued another decision that
restricted the use of TADA to terrorist crimes and called for
the release of those detained under TADA after 180 days if no
charges have been brought.

The Home Minister acknowledged that there has been widespread
abuse of TADA and directed the chief ministers of the states to
correct these practices.  The pace of releases subsequently
accelerated and, by the end of November, the nationwide total
of persons detained under TADA was reduced to 6,432.  The
largest number of those still held are in Kashmir and the
northeastern states in Maharashtra, where religious riots
occurred in January 1993.

The Minister of State for Home Affairs stated in July that the
Government might not renew TADA when it expires in April 1995,
if the Government found that the states have misused the Act.
The NHRC announced in August that it would ask the Supreme
Court to review its March decision.  In September the NHRC
entered a plea before the Court challenging one of TADA's
provisions.  The Court denied NHRC's standing but allowed its
lawyer to advise the Court.

The court system is overloaded.  The result has been the
detention of persons awaiting trial for periods longer than
they would receive if convicted.  Prisoners may be held months
or even years before obtaining a trial date.  According to a
reply to a parliamentary question in July, more than 111,000
criminal cases were pending in the Allahabad High Court, the
most serious case backlog in the country, of which nearly
29,000 cases had been pending for 5 to 8 years.