Chowdhury Zafor Sadque :
(From previous issue)
Ghulam Mohammad’s son Abdul Hamid Dar was arrested on the 29th of December, 1995 by the army, and they later confirmed he was being held at the Sheeri camp in Baramulla. When he was allowed to meet Abdul Hamid at Boniyar camp on the 8th of January, they were allowed to see him from a distance, and his body seemed to be propped up on a bench, unmoving. Ghulam Muhammad believes that his son was killed by the army and it disposed off his son’s. body when the police station refused to accept it. Ghulam Muhammad tried filing an FIR at Sheeri police station, but it was not filed until six months later. Subsequently. Ghulam Muhammad filed a habeas corpus writ in the High Court, and the court ordered a judicial enquiry.
Ghulam Muhammad and his family never got to know the contents of the report. Neither were they informed about the outcome of the judicial proceedings. They were offered compensation to settle but they did not. The investigation was then taken up by the State Home Department, which sought the Centre’s permission to execute two army personnel, which was denied in December 2011. All through this, Ghulam’s Muhammad family was kept out of the loop, and they eventually decided to give up the case.
After facing harassment and trauma during the investigations as seen above, the lack of adequate financial compensation to families adds insult to their injurics. Most of the times, the victim is the sole breadwinners in the families. In spite of this fact, procedures for access to compensation remain weak. For instance, families are often intimidated by the concerned authority to withdraw cases by offering them compensation.
Many don’t take compensation viewing it as a tacit bargain to withdraw their cases. In addition, conditions are placed on eligibility for financial relief like, not being involved in militancy which in the first place is the allegation to be proved. Another condition is that the death certificate of the victim has to be furnished. This is impossible in cases of enforced disappearances since the victims are declared dead only after 7 years of the disappearance.
Recommendations:
The provisions of prior sanction for prosecution from the State and Central authorities must be removed from AFSPA and criminal procedure code to ensure that trials are independent and fair in civilian courts. In the meanwhile, the families and applicants seeking sanction to prosecute must be informed about the status of their application.
Make information regarding the proceedings and verdicts conducted in court martials public by making more accessible through RTI/online.
n Repeal AFSPA in order to ensure compliance with UN Principles for the Prevention of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions and other instruments India is signatory to.
n Definitions of torture and disappearance in Indian should be consistent with the ones mentioned in UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Prnishment and International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.
n Become parry to international instruments/conventions against torture and enforced disappearances. More importantly, national laws should be framed accordingly and implemented effectively.
n Right to truth will be upheld by keeping families informed about the procedures and status of applications even when the inquiry is led by the National Human Rights Commission.
n Review the provisions of compensation ex gratia to the families of victims where there is no impossible conditionality and threats or intimidation from the authorities. Compensation should be adequate and ensured especially to survivors of sexual violence.
On a concluding note, one can only hope that the State will take notice of this Report and implement its recommendations in the light of the recent unrest and protest happening in Kashmir which reflects the disaffection of the people stemming from years of violations of their human rights.
(Concluded)
