By Tariq Rizwan
A series of meetings that took place between the two countries top brass
led to the resumption of stalled dialogue process between India and Pakistan,
as announced by Sushma Suraj, India Foreign Minister on the occasion of Heart
of Asia Conference in Islamabad on Wednesday, 9 December, 2015. A ‘chance
meeting’ between the two Prime Ministers in Paris and surprise talks between
their national security advisers in Bangkok led to a formal meeting between
their top foreign policy officials which produced a major agreement to resume
the comprehensive dialogue process. “I
understand you all have been waiting for some big news, so we have big news for
you…. Pakistan and India have decided to resume the composite dialogue,”
India’s External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj told reporters after her
two-hour-long talks with Prime Minister’s Adviser on Foreign Affairs Sartaj
Aziz. The top Indian diplomat, who also met Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, said
the process would have a new name: ‘Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue’.
According to a joint statement issued by the Foreign Office, it would
cover peace and security, confidence building measures, Jammu and Kashmir,
Siachen, Sir Creek, Wullar Barrage/Tulbul Navigation Project, economic and
commercial cooperation, counter terrorism, narcotics control and humanitarian
issues, people-to-people exchanges and religious tourism. This has raised a
spark of activism across South Asia.
The political circles and intellectuals from both
countries have kept their fingers cross to bear the fruits in the near future.
Indeed, the human rights abuses in the Indian
Occupied Jammu and Kashmir continued unabated. It
includes mass killings, forced disappearances, rape, torture and
sexual abuses. Apart, the last few months witnessed increased level of political
repression and suppression of freedom
of speech. Indian
Army, Central Reserve Police Force and Border Security
personnel have been carrying the
worst kind of human rights abuses in the state. The number of civilian
population killed in various military operations has been estimated to the range
from 16,725 to 47,000 in Jammu
and Kashmir. The
incidents of violating ceasefire on Line of
Control have witnessed an upward trend in the recent past. Diplomatic cables
obtained by WikiLeaks revealed that the ICRC had been briefing foreign diplomats in New Delhi of brutalities but
of no avail.
Despite repeated denial from Indian Army,
human rights abuses in Jammu and Kashmir have been found “correct and motivated". Human Rights Watch regular annual reports revealed
that Indian security forces "assaulted Kashmiri civilians during search operations, tortured and
summarily executed detainees in custody and murdered civilians in reprisal
attacks". Rape was regularly used as a means to "punish and
humiliate" communities. A 2010 US State
Department report stated that the Indian Army in Jammu and Kashmir had carried
out extrajudicial killings of
civilians and suspected insurgents. The report also described killings and
abuse being carried out by insurgents and separatists. In 2010, statistics presented to the Indian government's Cabinet Committee on Security showed that for the first time since the 1980s, the number of
civilian deaths attributed to the Indian forces was higher than those
attributed to terrorist actions.
A working group to inquire into human rights
violations in Jammu and Kashmir comprising Dr. Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Associate
Professor, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New
Delhi, as Convenor; Dr. Ambrose Pinto, S.J., Executive Director, Indian Social
Institute, New Delhi, and Shri Zafar Iqbal Manhas, columnist and cultural
activist, Srinagar, as members; was constituted at the request of the Kashmir
Foundation for Peace and Developmental Studies, Srinagar. The Group visited
Srinagar, Chithisingpora, Pahalgam, Jammu, Akhnoor, Rajouri, Surankote and
Poonch and endorsed the reports about wide spread abuses in Indian occupied
J&k. The group report says that the continued misuse of this law, and the
exemption from prosecution it provides to military personnel, is a major source
of human rights violations by army formations in the State. They dedicated their
report to the long suffering of the people of Jammu and Kashmir, with the
fervent hope that it might contribute in ending of the tragedy.
The Kashmiris feel alienated from India and
its puppet state government who are viewed as agents.
State elections are generally believed to have been rigged in favour of the
ruling party, the greater part of the autonomy given to the Indian occupied
state of J&K was systematically taken away by successive Union governments.
Regional dimensions of the state and various sub-regional aspirations therein
have been always tended to be ignored or overshadowed by the priority of
national integration. The major Act that governs military action in Jammu &
Kashmir is the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 [as amended in 1972].
Human rights activists have long argued that this Act is unconstitutional and
violates international humanitarian law. The Indian Supreme Court has, like in
the earlier case of TADA, upheld the validity of the law, but in view of the
potential abuse of human rights, has laid down some detailed guidelines for its
use. Nonetheless, we believe this is a ''lawless law" which violates both
the Constitution and international law.
Experts in the UN Human Rights Committee,
which met in Geneva in March 1991, were categorical that this Act is volatile
of several Articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
to which India is a signatory. In any case, human rights activists have
consistently held that the Act is also volatile of the Constitution. It, like
TADA, violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Fundamental Rights, and is derogation
from Entry 1, List II of the Seventh Schedule. Article 13 which voids all laws
inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights is infringed. Human rights activists and others often argue,
that since the militants do not accept either the Indian Constitution or Indian
law, these do not apply to them, and as such their human rights violations, as
it were, cannot be criticized, as violations as such, since they have not
violated anything they themselves have accepted as law, or as a valid standard.
In this vein, it is argued that violations by the militants, or individual
terrorism, should not be the subject of study, since Indian law applies only to
security forces and the Indian state, who are instead guilty of state
terrorism. This betrays an ignorance of international humanitarian law all of
which applies to all combatants, militant or statist. The international legal
instruments including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Geneva Conventions, etc., which India
has signed, apply to both the Indian forces as well as to the militants.
The resumption of ‘Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue’ has provided a sigh of relief to the local populace across
Kashmir. The only real political solution to human rights atrocities is the
cessation of hostilities in Indian Jammu & Kashmir which can lead to a
peaceful plebiscite in the volatile valley. Failing that some measures are
possible that will reduce, but not completely eliminate, human rights
violations. Some of the prime confidence building measures are to withdraw the 0.7
million Indian troops from the valley, Public Safety Act and other draconian laws.
As the Armed Forces have sufficient powers under other laws to function
adequately. Hold independent referendum or plebiscite under the supervision of
international community to allow the people of Jammu and Kashmir joining either
India or Pakistan. Moreover, enable the International human rights bodies
including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and others to investigate
alleged human rights violations in the State.
The writer is a free lance journalist based
in London.
No comments:
Post a Comment