Human Rights News

International
Source: Human Rights Watch Magazine

Thailand: Alleged Torture Victim Denied Redress

Ruling Raises Questions about Thais' Protection against Torture
(Bangkok) The Royal Thai Government should comply with its international human rights
obligations to provide remedies and reparation to victims of torture or other ill-treatment, the
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International
said today.
On October 7, 2014, the Pattani Provincial Court in the countrys restive deep South ruled
that Hasan Useng, an alleged victim of torture or other ill-treatment, was not entitled to
judicial remedies and reparation as his claim had been made under Article 32 of Thailands
2007 Constitution, which the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) terminated after
the military staged a coup on May 22, 2014.
A petition filed by Hasan Usengs sister on May 2, 2014, before the 2007 Constitution was
abrogated by the military, alleged that on April 13, 2014, police and military personnel
detained Hasan Useng and searched his house in Narathiwat province. He was then taken to
the Inkhayuthaborihan Military Camp in Pattani province where military personnel allegedly
kicked him and ordered him to do several hundred push-ups and jumping jacks on the hot
concrete in his bare feet.
This ruling is inconsistent with Thailands obligations under international law to prohibit
torture or other ill-treatment and to provide victims with effective remedies and adequate
reparation, said Ian Seiderman, the ICJs legal and policy director. The effect of the Courts
ruling flies in the face Thailands international legal obligation to ensure access to an
effective remedy for torture or other ill-treatment at all times and in all places, even under
Martial Law.

Iraq: Forced Marriage, Conversion for Yezidis

Victims, Witnesses Describe Islamic States Brutality to Captives
OCTOBER 12, 2014

(Dohuk, Iraq) - The armed group Islamic State is holding hundreds of Yezidi men, women,
and children from Iraq captive in formal and makeshift detention facilities in Iraq and Syria.

The group has systematically separated young women and teenage girls from their families
and has forced some of them to marry its fighters, according to dozens of relatives of the
detainees, 16 Yezidis who escaped Islamic State detention, and two detained women
interviewed by phone. They said the group has also taken away boys and forced captives to
convert to Islam.
The Islamic States litany of horrific crimes against the Yezidis in Iraq only keeps growing,
said Fred Abrahams, special adviser at Human Rights Watch. We heard shocking stories of
forced religious conversions, forced marriage, and even sexual assault and slavery and
some of the victims were children.

None of the former or current female detainees interviewed by Human Rights Watch said
they had been raped, though four of them said that they had fought off violent sexual attacks
and that other detained women and girls told them that Islamic State fighters had raped them.
One woman said she saw Islamic State fighters buying girls, and a teenage girl said a fighter
bought her for US$1,000.
The systematic abduction and abuse of Yezidi civilians may amount to crimes against
humanity, Human Rights Watch said.

Hong Kong: Protect Rights to Peaceful Protest

End Use of Excessive Force; Investigate Alleged Violence, Sexual Assault
OCTOBER 6, 2014

(New York) Hong Kong Chief Executive C.Y. Leung should urgently assure the public of
their rights to peaceful assembly and expression in advance of his deadline that city streets be
cleared by October 6, 2014, Human Rights Watch said in a public letter today.
Human Rights Watch urged Leung to take three steps to meet Hong Kongs compliance with
international human rights law: ensure that security forces abide by the United Nations Basic
Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms; ensure maximum respect for ongoing peaceful
demonstrations; and swiftly investigate and fairly prosecute all those responsible for violence,
including sexual assault, against protesters.
C.Y. Leung needs to act urgently or confidence in the Hong Kong governments
commitment to human rights and the rule of law will be deeply compromised, said Sophie
Richardson, China director. Leung has considerable authority to ensure peaceful outcomes
that accommodate the views of many in Hong Kong, but will he use it?

Indonesia: Acehs New Islamic Laws Violate Rights

Same-Sex Relations Banned; Whipping Imposed as Punishment
OCTOBER 2, 2014

(Jakarta) Indonesias central government and the Aceh provincial government should take
steps to repeal two Islamic bylaws in Aceh province that violate rights and carry cruel
punishments, Human Rights Watch said today.
On September 27, 2014, the Aceh provincial parliament approved the Principles of the
Islamic Bylaw and the Islamic criminal code (Qanun Jinayah), which create new
discriminatory offenses that do not exist in the Indonesian national criminal code (Hukum
Pidana). The bylaws extend Sharia, or Islamic law, to non-Muslims, which criminalize
consensual same-sex sexual acts as well as all zina (sexual relations outside of marriage). The

criminal code permits as punishment up to 100 lashes and up to 100 months in prison for
consensual same-sex sex acts, while zina violations carry a penalty of 100 lashes.
The two new bylaws deny people in Aceh the fundamental rights of expression, privacy, and
freedom of religion, said Phelim Kine, deputy Asia director. Criminalizing same-sex
relations is a huge backward step that the Indonesian government should condemn and repeal.
Whipping as punishment should have been left behind in the Middle Ages.
Under national legislation stemming from a Special Status agreement brokered in 1999,
Aceh is the only one of Indonesias 34 provinces that can legally adopt bylaws derived from
Sharia. Human Rights Watch opposes all laws or government policies that are discriminatory
or otherwise violate basic rights. Acehs parliament drafted the Principles of the Islamic
Bylaw while the provinces official Islamic Affairs Office drafted the Islamic criminal code.
These bylaws apply not only to Acehs predominantly Muslim population, but to about
90,000 non-Muslims residents, mostly Christians and Buddhists, as well as domestic and
foreign visitors to the province.
Acehs new criminal code prohibits liwath (sodomy) and musahaqah (lesbian). It also
contains provisions that allow Islamic courts to dismiss charges against rape suspects who
take sumpah dilaknat Allah (an Islamic oath), asserting their innocence. The Islamic oath
provision allows rape suspects who declare their innocence up to five times to be eligible for
automatic dismissal of charges should the court determine an absence of incriminating other
evidence.
The enforcement of existing Sharia laws in Aceh has infringed on human rights. A 2010
Human Rights Watch report Policing Morality: Abuses in the Application of Sharia in
Aceh, documented human rights abuses linked to enforcement of Sharia bylaws prohibiting
adultery and khalwat (seclusion), and imposing public dress requirements on Muslims.
The khalwat law makes association by unmarried individuals of the opposite sex a criminal
offense in some circumstances. While the dress requirement is gender-neutral on its face, in
practice it imposes far more onerous restrictions on women with the mandatory hijab, or veil
and long skirts. These offenses are not banned elsewhere in Indonesia.
The Principles of the Islamic Bylaw violate the right to freedom of religion enshrined in the
Indonesian constitution and international law by requiring all Muslims to practice the Sunni

tradition of Islam. The bylaw imposes the Sunni school of Shafii as the provinces official
religion, while permitting three other major Sunni traditions Hanafi, Maliki, and Hambal
only on the condition that their followers promote religious harmony, Islamic brotherhood
and security among Muslims. The law excludes Acehs sizable Shia and Sufi minorities as
well as the Ahmadiyah Muslim community.
The Principles of the Islamic Bylaw also impose ambiguous, excessive, and discriminatory
restrictions on the content of published materials and broadcasts in Aceh that will undermine
media freedom throughout the country. The bylaw obligates the media, including those that
originate elsewhere in Indonesia, to ensure that their content is not contrary to Islamic
values. The bylaw also authorizes the provincial government to establish ethical
guidelines for media.
The two new bylaws violate fundamental human rights guaranteed under core international
human rights treaties to which Indonesia is party. The International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, which Indonesia ratified in 2005, protects the rights to privacy and family
(article 17), and freedom of religion (article 18) and expression (article 19). The covenant
prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, religion, and other status such as sexual
orientation (article 2). It also prohibits punishments such as whipping that could amount to
torture or cruel and inhuman punishment (article 7).
Acehs provincial legislature should repeal both bylaws, Human Rights Watch said. In the
meantime, Aceh Governor Zaini Abdullah should stop the provinces Sharia police from
arresting and detaining people suspected of these crimes. The authorities should investigate
any wrongdoing in enforcing the legislation. In 2009, then-Governor Irwandi Yusuf refused
to sign an earlier version of the Aceh criminal code, which included stoning for adultery. This
led the Aceh legislature to rewrite the criminal code over the last five years.

Under Indonesian law, the home affairs minister can review and repeal local bylaws,
including those adopted in Aceh. Incoming President Joko Widodo (Jokowi), who takes
office on October 20, should direct the home affairs minister to revoke the new bylaw.
Because other local governments in Indonesia have looked to Acehs laws as models, it is
important for the new administration to act promptly against laws that are discriminatory or
are otherwise unlawful, Human Rights Watch said.

Indonesias incoming president should treat Acehs abusive new bylaws as an opportunity to
demonstrate a commitment to human rights, and have them repealed, Kine said. People in
Aceh should enjoy the same rights and freedoms as all Indonesians.

Bangladesh: Revoke Draconian Media Policy

Raises Fears of Increased Censorship, Criminal Penalties
SEPTEMBER 3, 2014

(New York) The Bangladeshi government should immediately revoke a new media policy
that imposes draconian restrictions on media freedom, Human Rights Watch said today.
Donors should make it clear to the Bangladeshi government that limits on freedom of
expression that violate international law are unacceptable.
The policy was published in the official government gazette on August 6, 2014. It contains
overly broad language and imprecise definitions that appear aimed at significantly curtailing
critical reporting. The policy would, for example, ban speech that is anti-state, ridicules
the national ideology, and is inconsistent with Bangladeshs culture, and would restrict the
reporting of anarchy, rebellion, or violence.
This policy exemplifies how little appreciation the government has for free speech,
said Brad Adams, Asia director. This vague policy will allow the government to take
arbitrary action against those it sees as its political opponents and could be a precursor to
legislation that would lead to censorship and criminal penalties.
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasinas veiled threats in defense of the media policy are of particular
concern. Speaking with reporters on August 28, she warned journalists not to cross the line
set down in the new guidelines, local media reported. She was quoted as saying: [D]ont try
to cut off the branch you are sitting on. You too will fall. I think a hint is enough for the
intelligent.
The policy has broad application. It defines broadcast as the processes through which
audio, video, audio-visual content, like programs, news, advertisements etc. are transmitted.
It would include any method of transmission, including cable and satellite, and would apply
to all programming, news, and advertisements on all media platforms.

In its introductory paragraph the policy states that it is necessary for the government to create
a framework for determining whether broadcasts are consistent with the history, ideology,
and spirit of the countrys 1971 Liberation War and Bangladeshs social, cultural,
geographical, and political tradition and values. The clause restricting the reporting of
anarchy, rebellion, or violence seems aimed at limiting reporting of opposition protests.
Bangladesh has a long history of mass protests led by all the main political parties.
Because none of the key terms are defined, media would be susceptible to arbitrary
enforcement.
This policy is a frontal assault on media freedom, which is essential as a check on
government power, corruption, and human rights abuses, among many other issues, Adams
said. It empowers an increasingly authoritarian state with tools to go after critics. It needs to
be revoked if the government is serious about its commitment to freedom.
The policy states that a broadcast commission will be formed by law, and that the
commissions duties include monitoring compliance with the broadcast policy.
Bangladesh is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and is
therefore required to protect and uphold the right to freedom of expression, which includes
the right to seek, receive, and impart information. The UN Human Rights Committee, which
interprets the covenant, has stated that states may not prohibit criticism of institutions, and
that A free, uncensored and unhindered press or other media is essential in any society to
ensure freedom of opinion and expression.
Hasina claimed that the media policy was modelled on the BBC media policy guidelines. But
the foundations underlining the BBC policy are absent from the Bangladeshi policy.
Fundamental to these differences, for example, is the BBCs commitment to independence,
impartiality, free expression, and a plurality of opinions concepts that are wholly
undermined by the Bangladeshi governments attempts to control media content.
Human Rights Watch noted that the slippery slope allowed by the media policy could have
broad-ranging effects and that no media area is exempt from its reach. On September 3, 2014,
the government issued a ban on English titles in local movie productions. The media policy
includes a provision that instructs broadcasters to be careful about pure Bengali

pronunciation, and the contamination of Bengali language, distortion and pronunciation of

Bengali to the tune of foreign languages have to be avoided.
The new media policy appears to be little more than an attempt to establish a state ideology
and set a trap for critics, Adams said. Its almost like the government is living in a bygone
era when it could tell people what to think, watch, and read. The government should realize
that in the digital age those days are over.

Source: Amenesty International

Bahrain must release activist charged with insulting security

forces on Twitter
9 OCTOBER 2014

The Bahraini authorities must immediately and unconditionally release human rights activist
Nabeel Rajab, Amnesty International said today after he was formally charged with publicly
insulting official institutions on Twitter.
Amnesty Internationals Secretary General Salil Shetty has written to the King of
Bahrain expressing the organizations grave concern over the detention of Nabeel Rajab and

the charges brought against him.

He urged the Bahraini authorities to uphold the right to freedom of expression.
The Bahraini authorities must stop locking up peaceful critics who express opinions they do
not like, said Said Boumedouha Deputy Director of the Middle East and North Africa
Programme at Amnesty International.
The charges levelled against Nabeel Rajab violate Bahrains international obligation to
respect freedom of expression. He should be released immediately and the charges against
him dropped."
Nabeel Rajab posted tweets on 28 September commenting on members of Bahrains security
forces who had joined the armed group calling itself the Islamic State.

Two complaints were lodged against him over the tweets one from Bahrains Ministry of
Interior and the other from its Ministry of Defence. He was arrested on 1 October.
Nabeel Rajab remains in detention and a first hearing on the case has been set for 19 October
at a lower criminal court in Manama. If convicted he would face up to three years in prison.

Haiti: The truth must not die with Jean-Claude Duvalier

7 SPETEMBER 2014

The death of former Haitian ruler Jean-Claude Duvalier must not halt the investigations and
prosecutions owed to thousands of people killed, tortured, arbitrarily arrested and disappeared
under his regime, said Amnesty International today.
The death of Jean-Claude Duvalier must not be used to brush away the crimes committed
under his regime. An entire network of volunteer militia and state authorities are also
suspected of perpetrating human rights violations under Duvalier's command. These people
too must be investigated and, if there is sufficient admissible evidence, prosecuted in fair
trials, said Erika Guevara Rosas, Americas Director at Amnesty International.
This is not the final chapter in this horrific episode of Haitis recent history. Instead it should
be a reminder that there are thousands of victims who still deserve justice, truth and
reparation for the human rights violations they suffered.
In response to news of the death, Haitis current President Michel Martelly has spoken of
reconciliation and called Jean-Claude Duvalier a true son of Haiti. In the past, President
Martelly has hinted in several public statements at pardoning the former leader. Despite being
investigated for embezzlement charges, Jean-Claude Duvalier was issued with a diplomatic
passport in 2013, and participated in several official ceremonies and events.
Whereas President Martelly could have expressed compassion for the thousands of victims
of Duvalierism and participated in forging memories about the crimes committed at that time,
he willingly decided to express sadness and sympathy only for Duvaliers family. This is a
slap on the face for human rights and the victims struggle to justice, said Erika Guevara.

During Jean-Claude Duvaliers presidency between 1971 and 1986 -- prisons and torture
centres claimed the lives of hundreds of victims. Arbitrary arrests, torture, deaths in custody,
enforced disappearances and political killings were regularly reported.
Haitian authorities singled out political leaders, journalists, trade unionists and those
suspected of being opponents of the government. Illegal detention was also rampant.
Detainees were kept incommunicado for long periods of time and were frequently subjected
to torture and ill-treatment.
A key weapon of control in Duvaliers arsenal was the use of National Security Volunteers or
tonton macoutes (bogeymen) as they became known. This volunteer militia took on
many of the tasks of the army and police force and were responsible for extreme brutality as
they killed, tortured, arbitrarily imprisoned or forcibly disappeared people with impunity. In
the mid-1980s, there were an estimated 9,000 tonton macoutes at work.
For 15 years, Jean-Claude Duvalier ruled Haiti with total disregard for the rights of the
Haitian people. The grave human rights abuses perpetrated during those years still remain
shrouded in absolute impunity. Now, more than ever, Haitian authorities must show political
will to investigate those suspected of criminal responsibility for human rights violations,"
said Erika Guevara.
Background
In 1971 Jean-Claude Duvalier inherited control of Haiti from his father Franois Duvalier
after supposedly being endorsed by the Haitian people in a vote of 2,391,916 to zero.
In 1986 he fled the country into self-imposed exile in France.
In January 2011 he returned to Haiti after an earthquake that devastated the country. Upon his
return the authorities re-opened a criminal case against him, facing charges of crimes against
humanity and serious human rights violations such as murder and torture of political
opponents, and of corruption.
In January 2012, an investigating judge ruled that Duvalier should stand trial before a lower
court only for misappropriation of public funds. Both the human rights victims and Duvalier
appealed the decision.

On 20 February 2014 the Port-au-Prince Court of Appeal reversed the January 2012 ruling by
stating that there can be no statute of limitations for crimes against humanity and that these
can be prosecuted under Haitian law.
It also recognized that the proceedings had so far wrongly focused only on Jean-Claude
Duvalier.
It ordered that those identified by the plaintiffs as collaborators should be heard by the court,
and that others suspected of being responsible for abuses should also be identified.
The Court appointed one of its sitting judges to further investigate the allegations of crimes
against humanity committed by Jean-Claude Duvalier and his collaborators. However, until
now the authorities have failed to provide additional resources to the judge and disclose
official documents which could be useful in the proceedings.

National
Source: Human Rights Watch Magazine

India: Stop Harassing Anti-Nuclear Protesters

Repeal Colonial-Era Law Misused to Curb Freedoms
SEPTEMBER 23, 2014

(New York) Authorities in India should stop using sedition and other laws against activists and
protesters who have peacefully opposed a nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu state, Human Rights
Watch said today. In the latest incident, immigration officials on September 16, 2014, prevented the
environmental activist S.P. Udayakumar from traveling out of the country because of various cases
filed against him for leading protests at the Kudankulam nuclear power plant.
The Indian parliament should repeal the colonial-era sedition law, which has been repeatedly misused
to harass activists and peaceful protesters.
Since October 2011, police in Tamil Nadu state have filed thousands of complaints against local
residents peacefully protesting the Kudankulam plant, accusing them of sedition and other serious
crimes. While formal charges have rarely been brought, the complaints leave those targeted at risk of
perpetual harassment by the authorities.

Indian authorities are misusing the sedition law to intimidate local residents and others who oppose
the Kudankulam nuclear plant, said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director. The Supreme Court
has repeatedly ruled that the sedition law should only be applied when there is clear incitement to
violence. So instead of bringing weak cases to court, the authorities are just filing complaints as
harassment.
Villagers from fishing and other communities concerned about adverse effects on their health and
livelihoods have protested against the plant in Tamil Nadu. Their fears were exacerbated by the
meltdown of the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan in the wake of a tsunami in 2011, since many in
Tamil Nadu had experienced the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.
Instead of allaying their concerns, authorities have accused over 50,000 people of sedition, waging or
abetting war against the state, disrupting harmony, insulting national honor, criminal trespass, and
unlawful assembly. Over 300 police First Information Reports (FIRs) were filed, but after two years,
Tamil Nadu police have brought charges in only two cases. Police have yet to file charges in any of the
sedition cases.
While the police reports accuse several people by name, thousands are unnamed, allowing the
authorities to abuse their powers by arbitrarily adding other names later. In just one example, FIR
195/12, filed on May 7, 2012, lists S.P. Udayakumar and 25 others by name, and 2,225 unnamed
people as the accused.
On May 6, 2013, the Supreme Court, even as it gave a go-ahead to the nuclear plant, said that,
Endeavour should be made to withdraw all the criminal cases filed against the agitators so that peace
and normalcy be restored at Kudankulam and nearby. In April 2014, ahead of Indias national
elections, the Tamil Nadu government announced it would drop 248 out of 349 cases. In an affidavit
before the Supreme Court, the state government said it could not withdraw the remaining 101 cases
because they related to serious crimes such as sedition, and attacks on private individuals and public
officials.
A report by an independent fact-finding team in September 2012, which included a former judge of
the Bombay High Court, a senior journalist, and a writer, concluded that the government had used
disproportionate and unjustified force against peaceful protesters, including violence against women,
children, and the elderly. The fact-finding team concluded: If people who have resisted and protested

peacefully for a year can be charged with sedition and waging war against the nation in such a cavalier
way as has been done here, what is the future of free speech and protest in India?
Udayakumar, convener of the Peoples Movement Against Nuclear Energy (PMANE), was on his way
to Nepalon September 16 to participate in a United Nations consultation on human rights, but was
detained and interrogated at the New Delhi airport for over five hours. At 7 p.m., immigration officials
released Udayakumar but told him that he should not try to leave the country. They said that Tamil
Nadu authorities had put his name on a lookout notice, thereby restricting his travel.
Instead of addressing the communitys anxieties over the nuclear plant, the authorities are using the
machinery of the state to crack down on free speech and peaceful assembly, Ganguly said. Stopping
Udayakumar from traveling abroad is only the latest example.
Indias sedition law, section 124A of the Penal Code, prohibits any words, either spoken or written, or
any signs or visible representation that can broadly cause hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts
to excite disaffection toward the government. In a landmark ruling in 1962, Kedar Nath Singh v.
State of Bihar, the Supreme Court said that unless the accused incited violence by their speech or
action, it did not constitute sedition, as it would otherwise violate the right to freedom of speech
guaranteed by the Constitution. However, over the years various state governments have disregarded
the ruling and accused human rights activists, journalists, writers, and a political cartoonist under the
sedition law.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India ratified in 1979, prohibits
restrictions on freedom of expression on national security grounds unless they are provided by law,
strictly construed, and necessary and proportionate to address a legitimate threat. Such laws cannot
put the right to free expression itself in jeopardy.
The Indian authorities are clearly missing the bitter irony that a law used by the British to imprison
Gandhi is being used against those who disagree with the government, Ganguly said. The sedition
law has no place in an independent India and should be repealed.

Source: Times of India

State Human Rights Commission investigates custodial deaths

TNN | Oct 11, 2014, 02.18AM IST

COIMBATORE: The State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) conducted an inquiry into
complaints of alleged human rights abuse by police officials in the western region in
Coimbatore city on Friday. SHRC member K Baskaran probed the complaints and later
visited Coimbatore central prison to investigate a prisoner's suspicious death. A few of the
witnesses were also questioned by the judge and the next hearing has been fixed on
December
19.
SHRC received 28 complaints from the western region of the state. To ensure easy access to
the petitioners, police officials and other government officials, it conducted the probe at the
Circuit House located at Red Fields on Friday. Petitioners and police officials from
Namakkal, Salem, Tirupur, Coimbatore and Krishnagiri districts gathered at Circuit House to
attend
the
probe.
R Mohanraj, 31, from Selvalakshmi Nagar in Tirupur, engaged in garment trading, was
picked up by Tirupur police on September 3, 2012, in connection with a murder case and died
in custody at Tirupur rural police station.
Police detained Mohanraj for inquiry. He fell unconscious after policemen allegedly beat him
up. Police claimed that Mohanraj tried to escape from their custody by jumping over a wall.
Unfortunately, he fell on ground and died. But family members of the accused allege that he
died
because
of
police
torture.
Following the custodial death, Mohanraj's relatives approached SHRC, telling them that
Tirupur assistant superintendent of police (Now SP - Erode) Sibi Chakaravarthi and the
inspector Kumar beat him to death. Both Ramesh and Kumar were interrogated by SHRC
member Baskaran. Sibi Chakaravarthi was asked to appear in the next hearing.
Baskaran and his team visited Coimbatore central prison on Friday afternoon where they
recorded the statements of a few inmates in connection with a convicted prisoner C Kumar's
suspicious death inside the prison complex. Kumar, 29, from Kallikattu Valavu village in
Salem district, murdered his father Chinnasamy. He was arrested by Salem rural police and
lodged at Coimbatore central prison in 2005. The Principal district judge court in Salem had
awarded a life sentence to Kumar. Later, he appealed before the Madras high court which
reduced
the
life
sentence
to
seven
years
rigorous
imprisonment.
On August 9, 2010, Kumar allegedly committed suicide at the library hall in Coimbatore
central prison after he came in contact with live wire. Prison officials claimed that it was a
suicide. However, the SHRC has taken the case as suo motu and started the investigation.
Baskaran visited the library hall and cell where Kumar had been lodged. He conducted an
inquiry with other inmates who spent time with Kumar.

Source: India Today Magazine

Judicial panel slams Army for human rights violation in Manipur
New Delhi, October 5, 2014 | UPDATED 10:22 IST
SC had told the UPA government last year that AFSPA could result in extra-judicial
killings and it has to end if Manipur needs to be fully integrated with India.Damning
reports submitted to the Supreme Court by two panels of judges have confirmed that armed
forces personnel were involved in rapes and killing of innocent people in Manipur "under the
cover" of the controversial Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA).
The reports, one of them submitted by the Manipur government to the apex court two weeks
ago, have triggered fresh demands from rights activities for a probe by a special investigation
team into "nearly 1,700 extra-judicial killings in the past 35 years" and withdrawal of the
AFSPA from the northeastern state.
"Crimes against women, more particularly relating to sexual harassment committed by armed
forces, are now increasing in some states like ours. They (armed forces) think themselves
placed at the elevated status of impunity by the legislation and think wrongly they are given
licence to do whatever they like," said the latest report on incidents during 2004-08 that was
compiled by a group of serving and retired judges of district courts in Manipur.
The cases
A probe by M. Manoj Kumar Singh, District Judge of Imphal East, confirmed the rape of a
15-year-old schoolgirl by two army personnel on October 4, 2004. She committed suicide the
same day. Upendra Singh, a retired district judge, reported the death of Amina, a young
mother who was shot by CRPF personnel while putting her baby to sleep at home. The report
said Amina died when a CRPF team, chasing a criminal, entered Naorem village, surrounded
her home and fired indiscriminately.
In another report, Judge Manoj Kumar Singh investigated the shooting of Yumnam Robita
Devi, 52, on April 9, 2002 as she waited for a bus at Pangei Bazar. A passing convoy of

CRPF personnel was ambushed by insurgents. "In retaliation", the report said, "the personnel
turned to the civilians and fired indiscriminately. Ms Devi, who ducked on the floor of the
market, was spotted and shot dead."
In April 2013, a commission headed by former Supreme Court judge Santosh Hegde inquired
into six killings by armed forces and police and found the allegations to be true.
It had concluded that seven victims in the six cases, including a 12-year-old boy, did not have
criminal antecedents and were not involved in any insurgency related matter. The report
pointed out that "four out of these six cases shockingly followed an identical pattern".

Source: Human Rights Watch

Indian PM Modi summoned to answer human rights lawsuit in New York
Friday 26 September 2014 17.12 BST
American Justice Center filed suit on Thursday, with plaintiffs accusing Modi of failing to
stop religious riots in Gujarat 2002
The legal case will be an annoyance to Modi but is unlikely to have a significant impact on
his visit
A federal court in New York has summoned Indias prime minister to respond to a lawsuit
accusing him of human rights abuses, casting a shadow over the Indian leaders first trip to
the US. on Friday as head of government.
The lawsuit against Narendra Modi stems from long-standing allegations that he didnt do
enough to stop devastating religious riots in his home state of Gujarat in 2002, when he
served as chief minister there. The human rights group American Justice Center filed the suit
Thursday in Manhattan federal court on behalf of two unnamed survivors of the violence.
The plaintiffs are seeking monetary and punitive damages and a judgment that Modis
conduct amounted to genocide when he was chief minister of Gujarat.

The legal case will be an annoyance to Modi but is unlikely to have a significant impact on
his visit.
Milan Vaishnav, an associate on South Asia at the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace, said from his understanding its a pro forma summons, and theres no judges ruling
of prima facie evidence on complicity in the Gujarat violence.
He said U.S. courts also issued summons against previous Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
and former ruling party leader Sonya Gandhi when they visited the U.S. in response to
cases filed by another U.S.-based rights group that have not gotten anywhere.
Theres no question its precisely the wrong foot on which to begin Modis visit to the
United States, Vaishnav said, but predicted it would just get a brief flurry of attention. I
dont expect it in any material way to affect any of his engagements in the United States,
either with private citizens or private industry in New York or in Washington with the U.S.
administration.
Modi was elected prime minister in May. He was scheduled to arrive in New York on Friday
with a welcome normally reserved for rock stars a sold-out appearance at Madison Square
Garden on Sunday.
Modis five-day trip is tightly packed: He will be meeting President Barack Obama and a
slew of top American officials, addressing the U.N. General Assembly and interacting with
the heads of major U.S. companies and influential Indian-Americans. He is also scheduled to
meet privately with Mayor Bill de Blasio later Friday.
Modi has denied any role in the violence, and Indias Supreme Court said there was no case
to bring against him. But suspicions were enough for the United States to refuse him a visa in
2005. As it became clear that Modi would become prime minister, however, the U.S. made it
clear that there would be no issue with travel to the United States.
Bizay Sonkar Shastri, a spokesman for Modis Bharatiya Janata Party, criticized the lawsuit,
saying Modi has been cleared of suspicion in India.

Our court and our public have given clean chit to (Modi) and he became prime minister,
Shastri said. So how is it possible that another countrys man or authority is issuing a
summons?
Dnyaneshwar Mulay, the Indian consul general in New York, referred questions to the Indian
Embassy in Washington, whose spokesman didnt immediately respond to an email and
phone call.
The lawsuit says, There is evidence to support the conclusion that Minister Modi committed
both acts of intentional and malicious direction to authorities in India to kill and maim
innocent persons of the Muslim faith.
The plaintiffs said the suit was filed in a U.S. court because it is clear that justice for the
plaintiffs cannot be had in India because of the condoning of this genocidal act of statesanctioned terrorism against the Muslim people.
The American Justice Center planned a news conference to discuss the lawsuit late Friday
morning in Manhattan.
Obama was among the first Western leaders to call and congratulate Modi when his Hindu
nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party swept into power in May.
Still, Modis critics worry the ascendance of his Hindu nationalist party could worsen
sectarian tensions with Indias minority 138 million Muslims.
Although he won the election decisively on promises of economic growth, Modi remains a
divisive figure in the country of 1.2 billion people in large part because of the Gujarat
riots.
Allegations that he was complicit in devastating religious riots in 2002 have haunted him for
years.
As chief minister of Gujarat state, he was in command in 2002 when Hindu mobs rampaged
through Muslim neighborhoods, towns and villages. More than 1,000 people, most of them
Muslims, were killed. It was some of the worst religious violence India has seen since its

independence from Britain in 1947. The riots erupted after a fire killed 60 passengers on a
train packed with Hindu pilgrims.
Source: Times of India
High court rejects Jayalalithaas bail, says corruption amounts to human rights
violation
PTI | Oct 7, 2014, 06.15PM IST
BANGALORE: The Karnataka high court on Tuesday rejected Jayalalithaa's bail plea in the
disproportionate assets case, saying there was no ground to grant her the relief.

The order by Justice AV Chandrashekhara came after special public prosecutor Bhavani
Singh told the court he had no objection to granting conditional bail to Jayalalithaa, who is in
prison

here

since

her

conviction

by

the

special

court

on

September

27.

In his order pronounced in a packed court room, the judge said there "are no grounds" to give
bail to the former Tamil Nadu chief minister and observed that corruption amounts to
"violation of human rights" and leads to economic imbalance.

Source: Times of India

Obama, Modi put human rights on the backburner
Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN | Oct 1, 2014, 04.46AM IST
WASHINGTON : Dancers and demonstrators jostled for attention as Prime
Minister Narendra Modi engaged President Obama in the White House on Monday and
Tuesday, drawing attention to the divide that surrounds what many pundits have described as
one of the most polarizing figure in Indian politics.

Security and police kept both groups at a distance from the Blair House (across from the
White House) where Modi is staying for 24 hours as a state guest. The honor clearly signaled

that the Obama administration has put its strategic embrace of India well ahead of any human
rights complaints against both Modi and more broadly New Delhi.

But for what it is worth, overseas Pro-Pakistani-Kashmiri groups and Khalistani-Sikh

sympathisers had their say, although for a change, overseas Indian nationalists and pro-Modi
partisans eclipsed them with a colorful show of dancing and singing. Echoes of ras garba
drowned out the protest slogans, as the two sides bumped up against each other.
In an effort to put human rights on the agenda during the talks, Amnesty International USA
surprisingly pressed for both leaders to raise HR issues in each other countries (including
urging Modi to raise treatment of blacks and minorities in the U.S and the denial of justice to
Bhopal gas tragedy victims). But the two sides, evidently determined to sidestep contentious
issues and putting strategic engagement on top of the agenda, ignored the plea.
In fact, the vision statement issued by the two sides explicitly suggested that the Obama
administration was very much in a clinch with the Modi government, regardless of past
reservations about human rights issues and the contretemps surrounding the revocation of his
visa.
"The advent of a new government is a natural opportunity for to broaden and deepen the
relationship," the two leaders wrote in a joint op-ed in the Washington Post, a clear
endorsement by Obama of the Modi dispensation despite all the toxic reports about his
human rights record.
Although the pro-Modi sentiment -- a subset of the larger overseas nationalism that has
seized NRIs both nostalgic and bullish about India -- clearly trumped the marginal protests,
sections of the U.S media and a few American lawmakers tried to inject it into the discourse
the disaffection of the dissenters. "The specter of what many think will be left unspoken human rights and civil society issues - hangs over the visit," the Washington Post reported,
although the subject wasn't anywhere in sight and Obama pulled out all stops to erase any
unease with personal touches such as greeting him in Gujarati and walking with him around
the MLK memorial.
Modi's human rights record, the Post said, "could present an awkward juxtaposition Tuesday
as the Obama administration attempts to present a united front." But no disunity was evident
going by the manner in which the two sides, and the two men, engaged each other.