When the law kills
(Part – 1)
Teesta Setalvad
More than a month ago,
on the same bloody Tuesday, April 7, 2015, in the newly formed Telangana and
Andhra Pradeh brutal killings took place. Two incidents, when lawmakers became
the killers. ‘Extra judicial killings’ (and enforced disappearances) are issues
of gross human rights violations where our Courts have spoken, albeit in a very
delayed a diluted form.
Within five to six weeks
of these ghastly killings (that did not make it to the private television
networks for any rational or human rights based discussions) none less than
India’s defence minister justified a trigger happy attitude in the armed forced
in Jammu and Kashmir, when in an interview to the TOI, he said, “ Our proactive attitude is to identify
terrorists and then effectively neutralise them. Every case is handled firmly
with clear-cut intelligence for targeted kills, ensuring minimal if any
collateral damage.” While there was suitable outrage at the remarks and the
Communist Party of India (Marxist) – CPIM issued a strong statement through its
polit bureau, the overall lack of accountability in our law and order machinery,
unlawful killings and disappearances especially when it comes to margialised
sections, our poor, our Muslim minority, our Dalits and Adivasis raises serious
questions of humane governance and accountability in our democracy.
The
two most recent unlawful incidents took place in the Warrangal district of
Telangana where the police
escorting five under-trial prisoners shot them dead on the pretext that one of
them tried to snatch a firearm from one of the escorts in a bid to flee police
custody; and the second incident where 20 men alleged to be smugglers of red
sandalwood were shot dead in the Seshachalam forest of Chittoor district in a
joint-operation conducted by the Andhra Police and Forest Officials.
It is worse how the head
of the Andhra Police, Director General of Police, J V Ramudu when questioned by
journalists, whether the police in the Chittoor incident could have shot the
deceased in the legs to avoid such a large number of deaths is alleged to have
replied: "Is there a law that you should shoot on the legs? Dont ask nonsense
questions(sic)". Readers may check this news item at this link: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/andhra-government-defiant-continues-to-defend-chittoor-encounter/article1-1335343.aspx. This denila of their basic functioning and
accountability sums up, in a nutshell, the attitude of the law to it’s
citizenry.
The Andhra Pradesh
Police Manual mentions the following norms regarding the use of force in
relation to smugglers who are categorised under 'Organised Crime:
"J Organised Crime:
543-1-B. Organised crime
is committed against property, persons or human welfare, engineered by a leader
with members professing fierce loyalty. Organised crime in a large measure
affects law and order and public order...
D. Boot legging,
prostitution, gambling, manipulation of bids or tenders in auctions and
contracts, land grabbing, illegal possession or dispossession of property,
protection money, rigging elections, loan sharking (usury), extortion,
kidnapping for ransom, drug trafficking, illicit trade in fire arms,
explosives, smuggling, thefts of antiquities and cultural properties,
trading in animal skins and human organs are some of the activities of criminal
groups, which are some times small outfits and sometimes large...
546-3-A-D. The resistance to arrest is likely
in such cases. In effecting arrest
no force than what is permissible under the law should be used. All
guidelines regarding arrest should be complied with." (Vol. 2, Chapter 29
accessible at:http://apstatepolice.org/jsp/appm/appm/appm/manch/c30.htm#30543)
954-1-A. Police
are expected to work within the framework of law and are not expected to take
law into their own hands on the plea that the existing law is not sufficient.
They cannot play that role of lawmakers and judiciary. It is for the
other wings to take care on the point of sufficiency or insufficiency of law.
Police are only expected to play the role of an enforcing agency.
Reasons for violation
of human rights by police
950-1. Some of the reasons for violation of
human rights by police can be attributed to the following,
A. Lack of interrogation techniques.
B. Lack of scientific temper and professionalism.
C. Lack of knowledge of criminal law and procedures for investigation.
D. Unrealistic public expectation for results.
E. Political and official pressures for quick results.
F. Misconception that laws are not sufficient to achieve results legally.
G. Sadistic pleasure on the part of some police officers.
B. Lack of scientific temper and professionalism.
C. Lack of knowledge of criminal law and procedures for investigation.
D. Unrealistic public expectation for results.
E. Political and official pressures for quick results.
F. Misconception that laws are not sufficient to achieve results legally.
G. Sadistic pleasure on the part of some police officers.
Code of conduct for
the police to avoid allegations of violation of human rights
954-1-B. The
police in establishing and enforcing law must as far as practicable, use the
methods of persuasion, advice and warning. When use of force is inevitable, it
must be as per the procedure and to be the bare minimum. (Vol. 2,
Chapter 54 accessible at: http://apstatepolice.org/jsp/appm/appm/appm/manch/c54.htm#3v54951)
Right of Private
defence
740-3. In the matter of dispersal of unlawful
assembly the right of private defence
can be exercised to protect the life and property of public or to protect
themselves. This right can be exercised by using force as much as is necessary
and as long as it is necessary. This
right extends even to the causing of death in certain cases as laid down in
section 100 IPC as against body and in section 103 IPC as against property. The
police should exercise this right cautiously. Any amount of exceeding the right
may make them liable for penal action as per law. Therefore, the police
officers must make a judicious use of this right, only in dire need to save the
life and property, when occasion arises as shown in sections 100 and 103 IPC." (See
Vol. 2, Chapter 39 at: http://apstatepolice.org/jsp/appm/appm/appm/manch/c39.htm#2v39740)
Not once, not twice but thrice does the Andhra Pradesh Police's own
operations manual require reasonable restraint in the use of lethal force. The
DGP's alleged statement is in complete violation of the norms and standards
laid down by the police for themselves. I am not even going into the
international standards on the use of force and also what has recognised by
Courts in India to buttress my argument as they only strengthen this position.
The National Human
Rights Commission (NHRC) and the High Court in Hyderabad have sought reports
about the Chittoor incident from the Government. The district administration
has ordered a magisterial inquiry into the Warangal incident while the NHRC has
issued notice demanding a report of the incident from the Telangana Government.
In Telangana and Andhra Pradesh there is outrage. But not much seems to have
affected the establishment.
Worse is the statement
of the Defence Minister. It is almost a sanction for unilateral killing if the
Intelligence decides that someone is a terrorist. Notorious for its mis-judgements
and misdemeanors this wing of our state law and order apparatus, (the IB and
RAW) are not accountable to Parliament even, years after operations are
‘planned’ and ‘executed.” Besides be it in the Hashimpura case (in which a
trial court recently acquitted 16 persons in probably India’s worst ever case
of extra judicial/custodial killings, the paramilitary, military and army have
been virtually held completely unaccountable and let off the hook.
Despite judgements of the Supreme Court that,
under Articles 142 and 144 of the Indian Constitution become the law and need
to be implemented, impunity rules. And the Indian people suffer at the hands of
an increasingly unaccountable state.
Ends
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.