LAL KRISHNA Advani has belled the cat by criticising the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorist Squad for torturing Sadhvi Pragya Singh and illegally detaining her. Torture and illegal detention have no place in a civilized society, and the voice of the former Home Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and our possible future Prime Minister, is an important one on this issue.
I only wish that Mr Advani’s expression of “shock and outrage” at the treatment of the sadhvi would have extended to all Indians, and indeed anyone who is arrested or detained in India. Torture and illegal detention are themselves illegal, but have been widely practiced in this country with little or no check from the government or the judiciary.
Torture is the start point of other atrocities we should be ashamed of — custodial deaths, disappearances and fake encounters. Torture dehumanizes the person who is at its receiving end, but not many realise that it cannot but fail to do the same for the person who is inflicting it, and the system that is allowing the state of affairs to continue.
Innocent
There is scarcely a day in which we do not hear about custodial violence in the country. People are rightly outraged by this and sometimes react violently. But the onset of terrorism has led to a problem. The ruthless manner in which terrorists operate — blowing up or killing men, women and children without the slightest pity — ensures that there is no sympathy for terrorists arrested or killed.
That is fair enough, there should be no sympathy for the purveyors of mindless violence. But this has a dangerous edge. It has led to a situation where the society is ready to condone illegal acts against terrorist suspects, including torture or their summary execution by the police.
If all those tortured and killed had actually been guilty, this could at a pinch be justified, though not be legally or morally tenable. The fact is that many innocent people end up tortured, detained and killed as well. And this is unacceptable to a society based on the primacy of the rule of law, and which calls itself civilised.
Take the case that made the headlines last week when it was announced that the Andhra Pradesh government would offer compensatory loans of Rs 30- 80,000 each to 15 young men who had been among 70 picked up after the two terror attacks in Hyderabad last year.
They had been in custody for six to nine months and in this period they had been stripped, subjected to electric shocks, hung upside down and beaten. All of them were innocent. But the detention and torture were only one aspect of their suffering. They have been released, but they will bear the trauma all their lives.
Earlier this year, another case made the headlines. In January, Aftab Alam Ansari, an electrician from Kolkata, spent twenty horrific days in custody in Lucknow because of a police blunder that made him out to be a suspected explosive courier. In a bid to make him acknowledge his role in various terrorist incidents, he was beaten black and blue. He was one of the lucky ones — he got away after the police were convinced of his innocence.
In my book, everyone, even those accused of heinous terrorist acts have the right to be dealt with under the laws of the land, which most certainly do not give sanction to the kind of pre-arrest detention that Pragya says she has undergone, leave alone the beatings and abuse she alleges that the ATS has inflicted on her.
India has made great advances as a democratic country. From the outset, it set out to assist the erstwhile untouchable castes to get education and government jobs. The spread of democracy expanded to the point where many of the previously ostracized groups have become important political actors thus empowering themselves and their communities. The need to empower backward classes forms an important basis of our politics and constitution.
But one extremely important area has been impervious to governmental or judicial reform — the manner in which India’s police handles its citizens, especially those who have been taken into custody on suspicion of having committed a crime. In Mr. Advani’s own words, the system is “barbaric”.
Beating of prisoners is routine as are the more “refined” means of torture such as the roller treatment and electric shocks. Some have argued that the current trend towards narco-tests — themselves of questionable value — are a means of lessening the brutality of torture.
One of the important negative consequences of the routine use of torture by the police is that it discourages the use of forensics and scientific investigation by the police. After all it is much easier to beat a confession out of a suspect than to painstakingly build up a fool proof case that will result in the conviction of a suspect. This is why, Mr Advani, right-thinking people oppose the key provision of POTA— the recognition of the legitimacy of a confession before the police.
Failure
India’s political class, bureaucracy or judiciary have made no effort to do something about this. The judiciary understands well what “police custody” usually means. Through a 1997 observation, the Supreme Court directed the government to take all steps necessary to prevent torture in the country. But little has changed. We also have wonderful laws about the need for warrants to enter someone’s house, or the right to a lawyer and so on. Neither courts, nor the national and state human rights commissions have intervened to set the situation right.
India has very reluctantly signed the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) but has not ratified it on the claim that the domestic mechanisms — the independent judiciary, the Criminal procedure code and Indian penal code — are sufficient for preventing brutality and inhuman treatment. But this is a patent untruth.
What we need is the creation of independent groups and commissions that can investigate charges of police high-handedness and violence and obtain judicial redress. Only a zero-tolerance regime, policed by the people themselves can end this tyranny.
Challenge
Terrorism is a fundamental challenge to liberal democracy. Just how much of a challenge is borne out by what happened to the US in the wake of Nine-Eleven when it created the Guantanamo prison, tortured suspects or ensured their torture at the hands of allies. If the citadel of liberal democracy crumbled with the speed that it did, you can imagine the challenge that India faces.
Yet when the Abu Ghraib scandal exploded there was outrage across the US. Guantanamo has become a bad word in the country.
In the US and other liberal democracies, there is a public abhorrence of torture and such degrading punishment. Most actions are seen as being an aberration from the norm.
Unfortunately, in India we are yet to see a consensus around the idea that torture is inhuman and has no place in a democratic and civilised society which we assume we live in.
Leaders like Mr Advani can do signal service by sensitising the people to the illegalities being done in the name of fighting terrorism.
But he can make a difference only if he demands that all Indians — Hindu, Muslim or Christian — be treated equally before the law and with the assumption that they are innocent until proved guilty in
a court of law, not the police station.
This article was first published in Mail Today November 21, 2008
Showing posts with label Aftab Alam Ansari. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Aftab Alam Ansari. Show all posts
Friday, November 21, 2008
Friday, May 16, 2008
Why India is an easy target for terrorists
MORE THAN two decades have passed since the first terrorist strike in India but we are yet to learn how to cope with such attacks. It is not we have not learned any lessons are good at protecting our VIPs. the assassination of Indira Gandhi in 1984, the whole machinery state was revamped to ensure no VIP is killed. And, touch wood, have been successful in that mission — witness the Special Protection Group and the Z- category system that ensured that no “ protectee” has killed. as for the rest of the country, it different story.
It is true, as terrorism expert B. Raman said on his on Wednesday, that soft targets are used by terrorists to demonstrate the ability of the “ to operate without being detected by the intelligence and counter- terrorism agencies”. Anyway, Vikram Sood, former India’s external intelligence R& AW, notes that India is easy country to operate in”. He out that we have three virtually open borders, and a sea frontier is more or less unguarded. system of checks and controls by other countries is simply available in India, or doesn’t as it should.
According to A. K. Doval, a former director of the Intelligence Bureau expertise in operations, the years of fighting terrorism have their toll on our security “ The element of surprise and innovation are key weapons in the against terrorism, but I am we have run short of new at the tactical and strategic Counter- intelligence or counter- terrorism is a cat- and-mouse game that requires highly and innovative responses. we have instead is a tired security force, more worried about and emoluments than the grinding task it has been involved a generation.
The way our has been functioning is that only do they fail to solve a case ensure the conviction of the but they do so in a manner brutalises innocent people to point that they become potential recruits to the terrorist cause. resulting from over- reactions facilitates their [ terrorist] recruitment,” notes Raman.
In 1993, the authorities were able identify most of the perpetrators of the Mumbai blasts within a month and track their trail to Pakistan. But in the past couple of the security agencies have unable to tell us with certainty who has been behind, say, the October 2005 Delhi blasts in which people died. In February 2006, Delhi police filed a chargesheet naming Tariq Ahmed Dar of the Lashkar- e- Tayyeba, Mohammed Hussain and Mohammed Fazili has happened since. Most knowledgeable people believe that the case is a weak one.
But this is the story of most cases in recent times. So far there has been little evidence of forensic science being used to track terrorists. More often than not the nature of the device and its composition is found out by unexploded bombs rather than chemical analysis.
The procedure in other countries is quite stringent with the scene of the terrorist strike being cordoned off and a systematic search for clues which could range from fingerprints to tell- tale remnants of an explosive, timer or integrated circuit. Such data are invaluable in providing the “ signature” of a particular bomb- maker or group.
The US, for example, maintains a large facility in Baghdad which looks at every aspect of an IED — its dimensions, any possible fingerprints left by its makers on the parts, the nature of its trigger, its explosive. The police’s modus operandi at present is to arrest all suspects, which can mean all the Kashmiri shawl sellers following the Delhi blasts, or Muslims elsewhere.
After the Mumbai blasts of 2006, a Tablighi Jamaat missionary group travelling in Tripura was detained for a while.
Late last year Aftab Alam Ansari of Kolkata spent 22 days in jail because the UP police arrested him in a case of mistaken He faced torture and beatings and was not able to stand on his feet for more than 15 minutes after his release. Multiply this instance by a hundred and a thousand, if you will, and it is apparent that this is a recipe for creating rather than neutralising potential recruits.
Sood points to George W. Bush’s boast that the US homeland has not faced another terrorist attack since 9/ 11. He says the draconian action taken by the US, including tough laws and measures to check potential terrorists, has clearly had an effect. India, he points out, has no law to deal with terrorism. “ In fact we have several laws,” and this results in the slowing of the judicial process. It took more than a decade to convict those guilty of the Mumbai blasts of 1993, and the process has not quite ended. Mind you, these convicts were tried under the now defunct Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act. The slow judicial process ensures that the criminal justice system does not act as a deterrent for a potential terrorist. The bigger question is of political will.
There are critics like Doval who feel that India simply lacks the guts to respond to what he terms as Pakistani complicity in terrorist attacks on India. This is obviously a sensitive issue as it is linked to “ how far our adversaries think they can push us”. Political will, he points out, is critically linked to executive action. He says no national party today has a leader who can inspire our security forces and intelligence services, and fire them with the kind of zeal that is needed to combat terrorism.
This article appeared in Mail Today May 16, 2008
It is true, as terrorism expert B. Raman said on his on Wednesday, that soft targets are used by terrorists to demonstrate the ability of the “ to operate without being detected by the intelligence and counter- terrorism agencies”. Anyway, Vikram Sood, former India’s external intelligence R& AW, notes that India is easy country to operate in”. He out that we have three virtually open borders, and a sea frontier is more or less unguarded. system of checks and controls by other countries is simply available in India, or doesn’t as it should.
According to A. K. Doval, a former director of the Intelligence Bureau expertise in operations, the years of fighting terrorism have their toll on our security “ The element of surprise and innovation are key weapons in the against terrorism, but I am we have run short of new at the tactical and strategic Counter- intelligence or counter- terrorism is a cat- and-mouse game that requires highly and innovative responses. we have instead is a tired security force, more worried about and emoluments than the grinding task it has been involved a generation.
The way our has been functioning is that only do they fail to solve a case ensure the conviction of the but they do so in a manner brutalises innocent people to point that they become potential recruits to the terrorist cause. resulting from over- reactions facilitates their [ terrorist] recruitment,” notes Raman.
In 1993, the authorities were able identify most of the perpetrators of the Mumbai blasts within a month and track their trail to Pakistan. But in the past couple of the security agencies have unable to tell us with certainty who has been behind, say, the October 2005 Delhi blasts in which people died. In February 2006, Delhi police filed a chargesheet naming Tariq Ahmed Dar of the Lashkar- e- Tayyeba, Mohammed Hussain and Mohammed Fazili has happened since. Most knowledgeable people believe that the case is a weak one.
But this is the story of most cases in recent times. So far there has been little evidence of forensic science being used to track terrorists. More often than not the nature of the device and its composition is found out by unexploded bombs rather than chemical analysis.
The procedure in other countries is quite stringent with the scene of the terrorist strike being cordoned off and a systematic search for clues which could range from fingerprints to tell- tale remnants of an explosive, timer or integrated circuit. Such data are invaluable in providing the “ signature” of a particular bomb- maker or group.
The US, for example, maintains a large facility in Baghdad which looks at every aspect of an IED — its dimensions, any possible fingerprints left by its makers on the parts, the nature of its trigger, its explosive. The police’s modus operandi at present is to arrest all suspects, which can mean all the Kashmiri shawl sellers following the Delhi blasts, or Muslims elsewhere.
After the Mumbai blasts of 2006, a Tablighi Jamaat missionary group travelling in Tripura was detained for a while.
Late last year Aftab Alam Ansari of Kolkata spent 22 days in jail because the UP police arrested him in a case of mistaken He faced torture and beatings and was not able to stand on his feet for more than 15 minutes after his release. Multiply this instance by a hundred and a thousand, if you will, and it is apparent that this is a recipe for creating rather than neutralising potential recruits.
Sood points to George W. Bush’s boast that the US homeland has not faced another terrorist attack since 9/ 11. He says the draconian action taken by the US, including tough laws and measures to check potential terrorists, has clearly had an effect. India, he points out, has no law to deal with terrorism. “ In fact we have several laws,” and this results in the slowing of the judicial process. It took more than a decade to convict those guilty of the Mumbai blasts of 1993, and the process has not quite ended. Mind you, these convicts were tried under the now defunct Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act. The slow judicial process ensures that the criminal justice system does not act as a deterrent for a potential terrorist. The bigger question is of political will.
There are critics like Doval who feel that India simply lacks the guts to respond to what he terms as Pakistani complicity in terrorist attacks on India. This is obviously a sensitive issue as it is linked to “ how far our adversaries think they can push us”. Political will, he points out, is critically linked to executive action. He says no national party today has a leader who can inspire our security forces and intelligence services, and fire them with the kind of zeal that is needed to combat terrorism.
This article appeared in Mail Today May 16, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
